Oomph!

The ONLY thing you have 'sourced' is a few little pens and t shirts. And I explained already how pens and t-shirts does mean a band is selling out or compromising thier sound.

And we aren't here to file a report or write a term paper, it's supposed to be opinion and deduction and observation/experience.

What the f*** do you know? That they sell pens? How many of thier songs have you heard? And if any which ones?

It's an adobe file or whatever
http://www.texasheritagemusic.org/sp...as%201.pdf

It says that the record company owns the music completely and expects the band to sell merchandise (they essentially have a quota and if you don't pay them they take everything from you until you do), the band has little to no choice.

Essentially, the band technically has the right to not sell merchandise, but if they don't thier lives are going to be raped which really means it's not that much of a choice. The companies expect a lot of money and it will rarely be fulfilled without selling merch.

sleepy jack

You were going on about how you'd never seen an Oomph t-shirt to which you were disproven. See what I mean about stumbling over contradictions?

You're making claims about their contract to which you know nothing about, thats not something thats an opinion.

How is me having heard songs even relevant? I listened to one, boring garbage.


Thats not THEIR contract though is it?

__________________

Urban Hat€monger ?

Yes they do and it's already been said , sign with an independent.

If their music isn't on TV or Radio or is only known by fans of that genre like you have already stated , then it has to be said that major label is doing nothing for them.

__________________

Oomph!

No crowquill, you did not prove that I have never seen an Oomph t-shirt (other than my own), try again.

I was speaking of contracts in general. And all of this merchandise talk is irrelevent, I've already said it doesn't mean the band has to compromise thier sound to sell pens and t-shirts.

Because you said you know more about them and it isn't true. I know more about them because I LISTEN to them. And thier sound is probably the most importaint aspect in this whole discussion. Also, I couldn't care less that you think they are boring garbage after hearing one song, I don't value your opinion toward them and you probably did like them and just don't want to admit it.

No, just MOST of them. Where is your source that proves thier contract was different than this?

sleepy jack

You haven't read the contract you can't judge it. Neither can I thats why I haven't said what is or isn't on it. Is this too hard of a concept for you to grasp? Should I use smaller words? I would argue the rest of your points but I don't feel like digging up your posts in the pop thread where you say the total opposite. As soon as someone proves you wrong you jump to a completely new point and ignore what you said. You're full of contradictions and have this tendency to make up things where they suit you best. This getting tedious and ridiculous.

__________________

Oomph!

It not like signing with an independant isn't a free ride they are still going to ask for money (just not as much).

But as you just said in the second sentance of your post, they are with a big label and they aren't selling that much merchandice.

Oomph is too talented to be with an indie label, but they aren't a corporate powerhouse, they arent a chart monster.

sleepy jack

Oomph had a number 1 song for over a month, they're a chart topper.

__________________

Oomph!

No I think your saying that i'm making stuff up and blabbing and whining in place of a substantial counter-argument.

Smaller words huh? I sampled the last 3 of each of our posts and found that my posts are about 4 points higher on the FOG index than yours. Mine being about 13, yours 9.

Oomph!

Yes, one time, in Germany. And they didn't need to be whores to do it either.

Urban Hat€monger ?

Please explain this further , i'm dying to hear this.

__________________