Tuesday, July 02, 2019

Blind Item #2

This foreign born A list singer who frequently works with this A+ list singer hasn't publicly supported her because he is trying to work with a different A+/A list singer who works with someone else and doesn't want to upset them.

69 comments:

Tricia13 said...

Ed sheeran/Taylor/Katy Perry?

Tricia13 said...

Or Ed/Taylor/Kenny Chesney

MDAnderson said...

Ed Sheeran and Ariana Grande??

DWelsh said...

Sheeran, Swift and someone else. Can't be the pride thing with Katy because she would be all over that.

Trisha13 said...

Yes I'm sure Ed Doesn't want to piss off Kenny Chesney, or bieber, or Jesus or whatever

Trisha13 said...

It's Ed, Bieber and scooter

Trisha13 said...

Tay wasn't getting Ed laid so he jumped ship

Tricia13 said...

https://tasteofcountry.com/kenny-chesney-tip-of-my-tongue/

Do Tell said...

It's astonishing to me that nobody seems to be on Taylor's side in all of this. I'm neither here nor there, but a similar thing happened with David Bowie, and luckily he had the biggest successes of his career after his contract with MainMan expired.

Erin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Do Tell said...

Wouldn't Scooter be the manager nobody wants to upset right now?

Trisha13 said...

Absolutely he just paid 300 million for Tay's catalogue

Flashy Vic said...

Trish, is someone fucking about with your account?

Trisha13 said...

Why because I can spell?

Flashy Vic said...

Not you, fuckstick, the real one.

Do Tell said...

Because you have a different avatar.

Guesser said...

Ed has a hit with Bieber,he has worked with him many times The answer is Ed Sheeran,Ariana,with Scooter being the person he does want to upset.

Flashy Vic said...

It's Del, Do tell.

Hey, almost a poem!😁

Trisha13 said...

Oh you are the pathetic "fangirl" hanging off the coattails. Fuck off ya blimey cunt

Do Tell said...

Have no idea who that is.

Flashy Vic said...

Oh I'm so hurt, Derek.😁

How can you be so beastly?!

Well from a Tintin haired ansl polyp with obsessive stalking tendencies and mommy if not grandmommy issues, quite easily it seems.

J said...

We can't expect girls like Taylor and Kesha to live in a regular world of contract law.

They're pretty.

Do Tell said...

Except if she kept asking about buying back the rights to her songs and they tied it in to her re-signing a contract with them, which she didn't want to do, that is very different.

Vita said...

I agree with ed, ariana, scooter

Rosie riveter said...

Omg seriously

YummyBoogers said...

The reason no one is on Taylor's side is because she was caught fabricating and embellishing a "woe is me" story that she's using for the purposes of posturing, virtue signaling, to gain sympathy, and to incite online harrassment....ALL AHEAD OF AN ALBULM RELEASE (which curiously doesn't seem to be as high anticipated as her prior efforts). Girl went so far as to drag as MANY names into this mess as she could. I think she's truly fearful that her most successful days are behind her, and she has good reason for concern - as IMO, her glory days ARE over. She's unlikely to see the success she previously had. It sucks, but pop radio simply isn't very welcoming to women once they hit 30. There are exceptions here and there of course, but overall Top 40 skews toward the SUPER young. I bet Taylor is feeling a bit insecure that the public is more receptive to output from artists like Billie Eilish or even Ariana more so than they are to Taylor.

Insecurity is no excuse to accuse people of sexism and bigotry simply because one desperately desires to generate headlines and virtue signal, however. It's all very disingenuous because it's prior to a record release.

Do Tell said...

Sorry, the label big in this case comes across as a douchebag.

YummyBoogers said...

Her getting her masters was contingent upon signing a 10 year contract. Upon execution of the contract, she would have immediate possession of the masters. It's not like she had to wait until the 10 years ran out BEFORE gaining access to them. Also, she was either mistaken or outright lying when she said she would have to "earn them back, one by one". Take your pick.

J said...

Do Tell, if they did something illegally, she should sue them.

If they negotiated in a completely-legal manner which hurt her precious feelings, that's 1000x worse. She's so pretty, you see.

Do Tell said...

That's one side of the story. Her side says that they kept dragging it out, offering one album back at a time. As you said, take your pick, there are two sides. I really doubt someone as career-oriented as Taylor Swift would give up a chance to reclaim control over her work.

Also, her contract expired in 2018, so it isn't as if she broke it.

Do Tell said...

well, J, if she was supposed to get her masters back on completion of her ten year contract, which she has completed, not broken, then yes, they did stab her in the back. Yet they sold her stuff to Scooter Braun.

So I think the story about fulfilling the ten year contract and getting her masters back isn't quite what's going on.

YummyBoogers said...

@Do Tell, you are mistaken. Had she signed the new 10-year contract, she would have been given immediate access to her masters. It was not required that she wait for the 10 year period to expire first.

J said...

Legal or illegal?

Is she an empowered millionaire businessperson capable of handling things, or is she a little crying girl we all need to rush in and protect?

I know the answer - it all depends on what she wants at the moment.

YummyBoogers said...

@DoTell...NO ONE is accusing Taylor of breach of contract here. She fulfilled her original contract, which did not provide access to her masters. This is NOT out of the ordinary, btw.

She and her label were trying to renegotiate for her to renew her contract once it expired. Her wish was for her to have access to her masters. The contract proposal by Borchetta PROVIDED TAYLOR IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO HER MASTERS UPON EXECUTION/SIGNATURE. So if Taylor had re-signed with Borchetta on 6/30/2019 for a period of 10 full years...TAYLOR WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO HER MASTERS IMMEDIATELY, AS IN - RIGHT NOW. 2019

Do you understand?

Chillax said...

Team Taylor on this one.

When scooter put his wife Yael up to post in his defense and airing the dirty laundry I laughed out loud.

Although, they both will be fine and this won’t ding either of them long term.

Drewholtaus said...

Cant blame this one on society. Tay tay cat lady is just speedily and quickly aging out of her prime demos! Katy perry is still hanging in there and staying relevant

Chillax said...

My theory is Taylor posted this to raise awareness for other young artist to PAY ATTENTION to the fine prints on contracts.

Of course lots of egos are involved but this just raised the awareness that the behind the scenes music people can be really powerful and record contracts don’t really benefit the artist. Remember TLC?

AListDiva said...

I have a really hard time believing that she wasn't aware in the slightest capacity this was going to happen! First they say her father knew, then she said he didn't! If she was offered the chance to pay for it but didn't can she really cry foul here? For as much as she hates Kimmode she sure knows how to use the same PR "victim" charade they always roll out!

Do Tell said...

The rights to her masters should not have been contingent at all on her committing the next ten years of her life to them. She gave them ten years and made plenty of dough for them. The label bigs are assholes.

Do Tell said...

As per Taylor Swift,:

"I was given an opportunity to sign back up to Big Machine Records and ‘earn’ one album back at a time, one for every new one I turned in"

So we were both off. It wasn't contingent on her finishing her last contract and she would not have gained immediate access to all her rights with a new ten year contract.

Swift should have been given an opportunity to buy her rights outright with no contract commitment.

J said...

And pretty flowers. She should have been given flowers.

And teddy bears.

SHAME on those naughty people doing something completely within their rights which wasn't what li'l Taylor wanted.

YummyBoogers said...

Many contracts do not provide access tk masters at all, so this offer was quite reasonable. Also, the proposed contract was not tied to album releases, but rather for a specific duration of time. Taylor could have released 1 album in that 10 year period, and lived solely off the income from having access to her masters - and NOT have been in breach.

Again...it was VERY reasonable, and VERY MUCH tilted in Taylor's favor - however, Taylor wanted to shop around and see if other labels might offer her more money. She found one that would, and made the decision to leave her past behind. This was corroborated by BOTH Taylor AND Scott Borchetta.

But try again.

Vita said...

Do Tell-- I agree, the way I'm understanding it, she was balking at their ridiculous conditions, no real "sale" was offered to her, and they weren't accepting anything she would offer.

I think this has to do with an artist wanting to own their work, and not feel powerless about the future of those works. Like her or not, I think Taylor everyone can agree controls her image enough that she would not want others to have the rights to her music, if she could avoid it. I truly dont believe this has anything to do with the release of her album (the timing of the one single for Pride Month WAS TOTALLY a PR move). I also dont think it matters that she already is rich. It was a shifty deal, handled shittily, and she has the right to be mad and hurt.

I'd like to see this be the end of 5+ album album w/ company outright owning songs type of new artist contracts.

Vita said...

Yummy- a whole new album to get one old album's rights...that would be another another seven albums...most artists dont have seven albums in their entire career. I dont think that's particularly generous.

YummyBoogers said...

@DoTell....do you honestly believe anything Taylor says after the lies she pulled with Kanye re 'Famous'?!?

At this point, unless what Taylor says is corroborated by at least one other individual (but preferably more), then I simply have a hard time believing her at face value. Taylor is now an OFFICIAL, DOCUMENTED LIAR. Moreover, Taylor has a well-documented history of bullying and inciting hate whenever she sees fit - via her song lyrics, online antics, music videos, and conduct during interviews.

Taylor is faker than Kim Zolciak's busted @ss trout lips, and only takes to virtue signaling or posturing when she thinks it will benefit her significantly to do so. The album release is what is motivating Taylor to throw this latest tantrum, because she is scared at not matching her prior success. Guess she's been used to getting her way since birth, having grown up in such privilege. *barfs*

YummyBoogers said...

@Vita...I am having difficulty understanding HOW you and @DoTell are having SUCH a hard time understanding the terms of the proposed 10 year contract that Borchetta offered to Swift. Like, I am FLABBERGASTED this is not sinking in...*eye roll*

Taylor either LIED about having to "earn her masters back one by one", or she was severely misunderstood/confused. Scott Borchetta refuted her claims in entirely, and produced receipts. Taylor's proposed contract would have given her IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO ALL OF HER MASTERS. As in, Taylor would have gotten her masters AS SOON AS THE INK DRIED AFTER SHE SIGNED. Do you read me?!? Is this clear?!?!

Also, the proposed contract was NOT TIED TO ALBUM RELEASES, per Borchetta. So...Taylor could have released as little or as much as she would have liked during the 10-year term, it would have had ZERO bearing on her access to her masters AND SHE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN BREACH.

Ultimately, it all came down to money. Taylor wanted to shop around to other labels. She choose not to renew with Borchetta, and freely opted to walk away from her past (and her masters).

These are not difficult concepts to grasp. I am beginning to wonder if you are both purposefully refusing to accept these truths because they don't fit your preferred narrative as die-hard Swifty fans....

yepthatsme said...

Oho, people having a net worth of 100s of millions of dollars are fighting with people having a net worth 10s of millions of dollars? So people having 1000s of dollars yearly income are fighting for them?
SCREW THEM BOTH!

Thia said...

Is anyone else creeped out that Derek Harvey is now using Tricia's name? I bet he's just purchased a blowup doll and has named her Tricia. Seek help, Derek. You are officially creepy now.

YummyBoogers said...

Is Derek Harvey the user who had David Bowie as his avatar? Or am I getting him mixed up with someone else? I always assumed Derek was the user who always replied under the revealed blinds with "NAILED ITTTTT!!!" Is this the same person? If so, what happened to him exactly? Was he banned? Lol.

Thia said...

Yes, "Nailed it" was Derek who them morphed into other users such as DontQuitYourDayJob. He is one disturbed MFer. I'm curious if his makes wind chimes out of the bones of his victims. It's gone from troll to just this side of Silence of the Lambs level of creepy.

Weekittylass said...

Derek wants to make a skin suit out of Tricia and wear her. Taytay needs to grow the fuck up.

WeHoShrink said...

I'm just here for the yummy boogers.

Brayson87 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brayson87 said...

Oh awesome, looks like they sent a real shill to CDAN today. It's always fun when screen names you've never seen before start launching one giant paragraph after another. I don't give a sh!t about Tay Tay and her career that daddy bought her, but shills are scum.

Brayson87 said...

At least CDAN has earned the half educated shills nowadays, they finally stopped sending the bots and chinglish/engrish writers that you see on other sites after we kept laughing at them.

YummyBoogers said...

@Thia, any idea what led Derek down the path to insanity? Insane jealousy of Tricia? Or something more?

AuntBee said...

Took me a minute to notice the two different spellings of Tricia/Trisha. Disturbing indeed.

Do Not Lie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Do Not Lie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Thia said...

@Ymmy - I'm trying to remember. I first came here in either 2013 or 2014. Someone I followed on Twitter retweeted Enty and it instantly caught my eye so I went down the rabbit hole and Derek was already gunning for her. He seemed irritated that she'd post first or guess correctly before he did. Tricia clearly has some insider knowledge and that just seemed to make him mad. Tricia engaged with him much more back then and really put him in his place a few times. Now she just ignores him, which obviously makes him more mad. She's also become a fan favorite and has been for quite some time because she's clearly a nice person and has interesting stories and that, I think, it what sent him over the edge. Remember last year when Enty did reader photos. He just about lost his mind. It's just so odd that a random internet person can get so angry with another random internet person. I don't get it. (Anyone reading, feel free to correct if I'm remembering wrong). I also remember Sandy from back then and he's super nice as well.

Lissette said...

I thought Derek was the guy who looked like Jason Bateman? I have been on here for so many years and don't remember such animosity. There were a few here and there, but this anger....wow!

Krissie said...

did Taylor go on a rant or something? is that what Bieber's whole weird Instagram post was about?

AmesR09 said...

that leprechaun ed Sheeran and Ariana Grande,.

Enthusiasm Quotes said...

Very Nice And Interesting Post, thank you for sharing
Exam Quotes
Excellence Quotes - Positive Life Quotes
Train Hard Quotes - Decent Images
Future Quotes - Anuj Somany
Super Successful Quotes
Good Exam Quotes - Quotes Words

NicQuerica said...

...Annnd somewhere in the swirl of all this, Todrick Hall, buddy of Taylor Swift, inadvertently OUTED her. Sure did.
I just read the timeline. Swift is once again playing up the 'victim' role. Two possible reasons:1. Shes got a new album coming out in August 2. This is an attempt to strongarm Scooter Braun into giving her the master tapes on HER terms. To go public like this was a mistake. What she should have done was try to become a major shareholder (as her father is) of the company that owns the masters.

longtimereader said...

So the asshole won't support the person who helped break him in the US and provided endless support while the Jonas Bros. and even Brandon Urie can? what a gutless loser. Even Styles and Ri-Ri who both hate her guts showed support because they understand the bigger picture.

longtimereader said...

It's not as if the ENTIRE $300m price was contingent upon Swift's back catalogue, on about 80-90%. BMG's entire fortune was based upon Swift's work, they were a tiny micro indie Country label and Swift was their first artist. She did offer to pay full price but was turned down. She has a $300m+ fortune herself, her dad is in finance and could asily raise more capital. Scooter had to goto the people behind the KUshner's to get the money. That's the insider detail, a lover's tiff with Kloss. Her ex- stabbed her in the back.

BayAreaGirl said...

As a corporate attorney, I just want to add that not only do they have iron-clad NDA’s on those shareholder calls, but disclosing non-public info that you learn on those calls is technically a felony in most states. Even if Taylor’s dad attended the conference call, he wouldn’t have been allowed to tell her anything. Probably why he chose not to attend. I would have advised him to do the same.

Thot Crimes said...

There should be more concern about where Derek is getting the materials for his Trisha skin suit.

Advertisement

Popular Posts from the last 30 days