Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
kaiser

Robert Plant on his Led Zeppelin royalties...

Recommended Posts

From what I read when Bonzo passed away he never left a will. Did that put Led Zeppelin in financial limbo when they broke up. He might have arranged to sell royalties to Atlantic on the provision they made royalty payments to his children but giving him freedom to movie on. He Had enough cash on his own in the mid to late 80's to loose hundreds of thousands of pounds on the failed financing of Wolverhampton Wanderers shares. He still owns farms and his London property must be worth something, the interview from the late 80's early 1990's threw me when he said he was sleeping in his car again after another break up. I also cannot see him messing with his kids and Maureen financially after what they all went through.

Much of this might have been down to how bogged down the bands financers were after Bonzo passed. The Beatles took years to financially extricate themselves from each other. It might have been the same from LZ perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you ever doubted Plant is a genuine Wolves fan: putting money into Wolverhampton Wanderers FC in the late 80s was like burning money. They were in the third division (albeit about to be promoted) and had almost gone bankrupt a few years earlier. Only a really genuine Wolves lover would have put that cash in!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elvis sold his artists rights in 1973: 

In March 1973, Elvis and and his manager, Colonel Tom Parker, went to the record company proposing that Elvis get a large lump sum payment in lieu of all his future artist's royalties for ongoing sales of anything he had recorded up to that time. The deal was made. RCA paid $5.4 million, which Elvis and the Colonel split 50-50. That meant Elvis no longer got (EPE today does not get) his artist's royalties for the ongoing sales of any recordings created before the March 1973 deal. However, Elvis did continue (EPE today continues) to get his artist's royalties on sales of recordings created after the March 1973 deal.

Totally separate from the ownership of Elvis' recordings is the ownership of the songs themselves. Elvis recorded over 700 songs. Elvis, throug

Elvis did not sell his publishing interests.

The 1973 deal regarding Elvis' artist's royalties had no effect on his publisher's royalties. Elvis continued to get (EPE still gets) his publisher's royalties on sales of recordings of songs he had publishing interest in, no matter what date they were recorded.

Maybe Plants deal was something similar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haven't been on here in eons and waves

really suprised at this thread.....havent read all of it..just the beg and last....

zep head since 5th grade!!!   okay.....so i used to be on a maj label music board

years ago,,,,02-11 and i brought this topic up and there was a bit of discussion

i went outside of the board to a contact, who was a secretary in the uk, i think

it was Plants manager at the time, possibly, but she was a total insider

 

cant beleive i'm not seeing it on this thread.....but who knows

HE SOLD ALL OF HIS RIGHTS to the OTHER THREE but retains a "VOTE" for any

collective act that would effect the legacy of Zep

 

I always said and brought it up with all the 07 mania that that was why he would never

go back......AND I always said the band SHOULD OF SOLD HIM BACK HIS RIGHTS and charged him interest

 

he sold the rights because he wanted to fund his solo career

 

you'll probably never hear about this cuz it tarnishes the others...but think about it...obviously one could say he 

didnt have "foresight" to assess his future losses.....the others would say "a deals a deal"

the bottom line is he was obviously, as they, but probably moreso....grieving over loss of family, ie. Bonzo included

and we make bad decisions.....so I think the likely FACT cuz who knows the truth, right, but I think the likely fact

is that because they didn't offer to give them back to him and charge a surcharge/fair interest-inflation rate or something

is just totally immoral,,,,,because its his families rightfull legacy to hold, not others..sooo I would say the "reboot" Part Deux

was instead a royal third finger,,,coupled with a creative way to "recreate" what he has and repackage it according to his life

style....and again....I'm just going on my understanding....but if any of the above is true...its sad that they didnt do this for him

 

I'm a peon nobody but a rawk star for a few and my partner gtrst and i have always agreed that it all comes down to the voice, period

no band "happens" without that voice....cuz that's the light that brings em on in and its kindah funny the subtle annoyance witnessedin the 

press by a couple of the others about his "non compliance".....only a fool in the rain wouldn't of been able to figure out the above an how to 

make it all work

 

......money changes everything,,,,and everyone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 2/8/2010 at 11:27 PM, Janet said:

I am under the impression that he sold them to Mr. Jimmy Page.

 

On 2/9/2010 at 12:10 AM, kaiser said:

 

"Rumors" indicate they were sold to Atlantic, not Jimmy. Once again "rumor".

I figure if he sold them to Page, Page would probably be richer than Plant, yet that's not the case, so...

Edited by Little Robert Anthony II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2018 at 9:09 AM, musedeva said:

haven't been on here in eons and waves

really suprised at this thread.....havent read all of it..just the beg and last....

zep head since 5th grade!!!   okay.....so i used to be on a maj label music board

years ago,,,,02-11 and i brought this topic up and there was a bit of discussion

i went outside of the board to a contact, who was a secretary in the uk, i think

it was Plants manager at the time, possibly, but she was a total insider

 

cant beleive i'm not seeing it on this thread.....but who knows

HE SOLD ALL OF HIS RIGHTS to the OTHER THREE but retains a "VOTE" for any

collective act that would effect the legacy of Zep

 

I always said and brought it up with all the 07 mania that that was why he would never

go back......AND I always said the band SHOULD OF SOLD HIM BACK HIS RIGHTS and charged him interest

 

he sold the rights because he wanted to fund his solo career

 

you'll probably never hear about this cuz it tarnishes the others...but think about it...obviously one could say he 

didnt have "foresight" to assess his future losses.....the others would say "a deals a deal"

the bottom line is he was obviously, as they, but probably moreso....grieving over loss of family, ie. Bonzo included

and we make bad decisions.....so I think the likely FACT cuz who knows the truth, right, but I think the likely fact

is that because they didn't offer to give them back to him and charge a surcharge/fair interest-inflation rate or something

is just totally immoral,,,,,because its his families rightfull legacy to hold, not others..sooo I would say the "reboot" Part Deux

was instead a royal third finger,,,coupled with a creative way to "recreate" what he has and repackage it according to his life

style....and again....I'm just going on my understanding....but if any of the above is true...its sad that they didnt do this for him

 

I'm a peon nobody but a rawk star for a few and my partner gtrst and i have always agreed that it all comes down to the voice, period

no band "happens" without that voice....cuz that's the light that brings em on in and its kindah funny the subtle annoyance witnessedin the 

press by a couple of the others about his "non compliance".....only a fool in the rain wouldn't of been able to figure out the above an how to 

make it all work

 

......money changes everything,,,,and everyone

Come back when you can write remedial English. My God. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/23/2017 at 11:55 AM, TheStairwayRemainsTheSame said:

I really think they've not been that big here in the UK for decades. The general population hasn't got a clue who they are.

Page and Plant's names aren't in the same stratosphere as a Jagger, Lennon, or Townshend etc. (From what I can tell from acquaintances).

That is so, so unbelievable....

Edited by paplbojo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, paplbojo said:

That is so, so unbelievable....

I think it was the negligence of them to the press and playing concerts here and after they turnt huge huge (73-) they didn't really play here much. I know they did the club tour in 73 but it wasn't masive was it. Earls Court and Knebworth however were but were very sporadic and probably didn't stick in the countries mind. When people think of Knebworth gigs here they think of Oasis or Robbie Williams 

I've talked to people of many generations in the UK and you will be hard pushed to find anyone who actually knows them that isn't in the rock scene.

Edited by TheStairwayRemainsTheSame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually listened to Zep probably for the first time ever in recent years because I enjoyed Roberts solo work. Growing up in the UK the band had little interaction with the press, no Old Grey Whistle Test tv gigs; that mistake is huge as you see Bowie (just before he broke with The Spiders from Mars) , Bob Marley and Talking Heads gigs  played on a regular basis. As for the financial aspect, who knows if that is true then he obvious had to make his solo career work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TheStairwayRemainsTheSame said:

I know they did the club tour in 73 but it wasn't masive was it. Earls Court and Knebworth however were but were very sporadic and probably didn't stick in the countries mind. When people think of Knebworth gigs here they think of Oasis or Robbie Williams

Bear in mind there were hardly any large (20,000+) venues in the UK then. Apart from the Empire Pool (Wembley Arena) & Earls Court which are both London. In touring terms, Zeppelin couldn't play arena type venues across the UK because they just weren't there. City Halls (usually 2-3,000 capacity) was the upward limit. They weren't playing small venues cos of a lack of popularity in the UK. Even ITTOD went no 1 in the UK album charts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Could they have played football grounds in the UK or were they deemed unsuitable at the time. Also was there ever any talk of Glastonbury and other festivals in the mid 70's

Edited by anniemouse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, anniemouse said:

Could they have played football grounds in the UK or were they deemed unsuitable at the time. Also was there ever any talk of Glastonbury and other festivals in the mid 70's

The odd rock gig took place at a football ground in that era, e.g. The Who at Charlton. But I think the club owners had such a problem with hooliganism at the time there was a feeling of "don't let another bunch of hooligans in". Which is daft cos the average Zep crowd, firecrackers or no, was probably a lot more peaceable than the crowd for Man Utd v Liverpool.

I wonder if the 90/10 split put them off too. Wembley was quite happy to put on any old nonsense in the 70s (Evel Knievel jumping over buses and suchlike) but those people allowed more than 10% of the gate, perhaps they just felt they wouldn't make enough cash from a Zeppelin show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2018 at 1:08 PM, 76229 said:

The odd rock gig took place at a football ground in that era, e.g. The Who at Charlton. But I think the club owners had such a problem with hooliganism at the time there was a feeling of "don't let another bunch of hooligans in". Which is daft cos the average Zep crowd, firecrackers or no, was probably a lot more peaceable than the crowd for Man Utd v Liverpool.

I wonder if the 90/10 split put them off too. Wembley was quite happy to put on any old nonsense in the 70s (Evel Knievel jumping over buses and suchlike) but those people allowed more than 10% of the gate, perhaps they just felt they wouldn't make enough cash from a Zeppelin show.

A huge part of this is the fact the playground that the USA was for them made them just not bother wanting to play here. You can even hear on the Liverpool 73 tape Robert say how strange it is to be back and everything shuts at 10' o Clock.

Why swan around this boring place that has naff all when you can live like kings and stroll down LA,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/04/2018 at 10:57 PM, anniemouse said:

Could they have played football grounds in the UK or were they deemed unsuitable at the time. Also was there ever any talk of Glastonbury and other festivals in the mid 70's

Glastonbury in the 70s was a very small scale affair. There was the Reading festival but maybe by then Zeppelins thought they were too grand to play on a bill with lesser known acts, and it wouldn't have been "their" event

The Knebworth festival was started with the principal aim of getting Zeppelin on board. Maybe they should have played there in 75 or 77

I'm prteyy sure I read that they considered Wembley, or maybe it was offered to them. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how a topic on planty's royalties ended up where it has

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jsj said:

The Knebworth festival was started with the principal aim of getting Zeppelin on board. Maybe they should have played there in 75 or 77

Ironic given what happened around Knebworth when they did play. Bet Freddie Bannister regrets that.

 

On topic, someone once posted here (possibly earlier this thread) that Plant told him in the 80s that he signed all his Zep royalties over to Maureen! Seems unlikely. Maybe we'll just never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 76229 said:

Ironic given what happened around Knebworth when they did play. Bet Freddie Bannister regrets that.

Very much so. He went bankrupt after the Zeppelin show. His book "there must be a better way" is a revealing account of how far gone Peter Grant was to deal with at that time. And how much time Freddie spent courting them to appear there. I think 74 was the first year he almost got them to sign to play there, but news of it leaked and Grant was livid and pulled out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jsj said:

Very much so. He went bankrupt after the Zeppelin show. His book "there must be a better way" is a revealing account of how far gone Peter Grant was to deal with at that time. And how much time Freddie spent courting them to appear there. I think 74 was the first year he almost got them to sign to play there, but news of it leaked and Grant was livid and pulled out. 

It was a sad read, that book, as I felt Freddie was an old school gentleman, and genuinely honest.  Grant was in his worst condition around this time and clearly bullied/threatened Freddie into a financial situation that effectively bankrupted him.  All that stuff with aerial photos of the crowds and "experts" giving opinions on attendance numbers.  It was the pre-digital days of concert management, and cash was how it ran.  Sad.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NealR2000 said:

It was a sad read, that book, as I felt Freddie was an old school gentleman, and genuinely honest.  Grant was in his worst condition around this time and clearly bullied/threatened Freddie into a financial situation that effectively bankrupted him.  All that stuff with aerial photos of the crowds and "experts" giving opinions on attendance numbers.  It was the pre-digital days of concert management, and cash was how it ran.  Sad.  

The rubbish about NASA having analysed the photos shows how far gone Grant was then. As if they didn't have better things to do...

That said, I've seen a picture of the 4th Aug crowd in a Chas & Dave doco (!) and unscientific as the naked eye may be, it looks like more than 105,000. But that may be because many people pushed the fences down and bunked in. Doubt it was as high as the claimed 210,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freddie bannister knew how much land space was available and used a reckoning of how many people could potentially fill it and it was impossible for as many as Grant thought was unless they were standing on other people's shoulders. The official crowd size is, give or take a few 1000, what it was. It's sad that Grant couldn't accept that they couldn't sell out the two dates and should have stuck with one only. Cocaine paranoia and power aren't a good mix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/14/2018 at 3:09 PM, musedeva said:

HE SOLD ALL OF HIS RIGHTS to the OTHER THREE but retains a "VOTE" for any

collective act that would effect the legacy

Who are the other three...?

Bonzo was dead when Plant stsrted his solo career...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, boylollipop said:

Who are the other three...?

Bonzo was dead when Plant stsrted his solo career...

The Bonham estate is still legally represented by family members.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×