Tell Me :
Talk
The translation sure was dodgy and said something to the effect of their "success shaken the United Kingdom" five years after the Beatles, which implies the Stones didn't really break in the UK until 1968.
But technically, yes, the Beatles started out five years before: Lennon, Macca, Harrison first convened in 1957, first home recording 1958, backing Tony Sheridan and studio recording in summer 1961, when Jagger/Richards Little Boy Blue and the Blue Balls home recordings were still months away... otherwise the explaining of the Stones phenomenon purely in terms of musical DNA and finances falls short, as does the July 2 date given for the first Marquee gig. Perhaps the article makes more sense in French.
The article says : "Ils se sont en fait inspirés du modèle des Beatles, dont le succès a secoué le Royaume-Uni cinq ans avant le leur." Which could be translated as : "They (Jagger & Richards) got inspired by the Beatles model, whose success shook England five years before their own success. "
Didn't Beatles mania start in 1962 with the release of their first single?
To me it looks like someone who had a quick look at wikipedia...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-22 20:07 by kowalski.
No, the mania aspect of the Beatles' success started in March 1963 with the release of their first album Please Please Me. Perhaps the "five years" in the article is a typo. Perhaps they meant five months? Which would make more sense, as the success of the Stones took off later in 1963 with the release of the Lennon/Mcartney song I Wanna Be You Man.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Stones Business
Posted by:
toomuchforme
()
Date: June 22, 2012 13:02
yes MJ business Limited for unlimited profits.
Well done
[www.lenouveleconomiste.fr]
"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"
Well done
[www.lenouveleconomiste.fr]
"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"
Re: Stones Business
Posted by:
kowalski
()
Date: June 22, 2012 15:34
Thanks for the link. Really weird article though.
Many factual errors (Stones started 5 years after the Beatles own start?), misspellings ("a biger band tour"??), many shortcuts that leads to weird assumptions (there's no ego conflict in this band and the reason is because Jagger and Richards write songs together!) or conclusions drawn from nothing...
Some pure financial facts are interesting though but it's more like a mishmash than a careful analysis of some financial model...
Many factual errors (Stones started 5 years after the Beatles own start?), misspellings ("a biger band tour"??), many shortcuts that leads to weird assumptions (there's no ego conflict in this band and the reason is because Jagger and Richards write songs together!) or conclusions drawn from nothing...
Some pure financial facts are interesting though but it's more like a mishmash than a careful analysis of some financial model...
Re: Stones Business
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: June 22, 2012 18:17
Quote
kowalski
Stones started 5 years after the Beatles own start?
The translation sure was dodgy and said something to the effect of their "success shaken the United Kingdom" five years after the Beatles, which implies the Stones didn't really break in the UK until 1968.
But technically, yes, the Beatles started out five years before: Lennon, Macca, Harrison first convened in 1957, first home recording 1958, backing Tony Sheridan and studio recording in summer 1961, when Jagger/Richards Little Boy Blue and the Blue Balls home recordings were still months away... otherwise the explaining of the Stones phenomenon purely in terms of musical DNA and finances falls short, as does the July 2 date given for the first Marquee gig. Perhaps the article makes more sense in French.
Re: Stones Business
Posted by:
kowalski
()
Date: June 22, 2012 19:18
Quote
stonesnow
Quote
kowalski
Stones started 5 years after the Beatles own start?
The translation sure was dodgy and said something to the effect of their "success shaken the United Kingdom" five years after the Beatles, which implies the Stones didn't really break in the UK until 1968.
But technically, yes, the Beatles started out five years before: Lennon, Macca, Harrison first convened in 1957, first home recording 1958, backing Tony Sheridan and studio recording in summer 1961, when Jagger/Richards Little Boy Blue and the Blue Balls home recordings were still months away... otherwise the explaining of the Stones phenomenon purely in terms of musical DNA and finances falls short, as does the July 2 date given for the first Marquee gig. Perhaps the article makes more sense in French.
The article says : "Ils se sont en fait inspirés du modèle des Beatles, dont le succès a secoué le Royaume-Uni cinq ans avant le leur." Which could be translated as : "They (Jagger & Richards) got inspired by the Beatles model, whose success shook England five years before their own success. "
Didn't Beatles mania start in 1962 with the release of their first single?
To me it looks like someone who had a quick look at wikipedia...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-22 20:07 by kowalski.
Re: Stones Business
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: June 22, 2012 19:52
Quote
kowalski
Quote
stonesnow
Quote
kowalski
Stones started 5 years after the Beatles own start?
The translation sure was dodgy and said something to the effect of their "success shaken the United Kingdom" five years after the Beatles, which implies the Stones didn't really break in the UK until 1968.
But technically, yes, the Beatles started out five years before: Lennon, Macca, Harrison first convened in 1957, first home recording 1958, backing Tony Sheridan and studio recording in summer 1961, when Jagger/Richards Little Boy Blue and the Blue Balls home recordings were still months away... otherwise the explaining of the Stones phenomenon purely in terms of musical DNA and finances falls short, as does the July 2 date given for the first Marquee gig. Perhaps the article makes more sense in French.
The article says : "Ils se sont en fait inspirés du modèle des Beatles, dont le succès a secoué le Royaume-Uni cinq ans avant le leur." Which could be translated as : "They (Jagger & Richards) got inspired by the Beatles model, whose success shook England five years before their own success. "
Didn't Beatles mania start in 1962 with the release of their first single?
To me it looks like someone who had a quick at wikipedia...
No, the mania aspect of the Beatles' success started in March 1963 with the release of their first album Please Please Me. Perhaps the "five years" in the article is a typo. Perhaps they meant five months? Which would make more sense, as the success of the Stones took off later in 1963 with the release of the Lennon/Mcartney song I Wanna Be You Man.
Re: Stones Business
Posted by:
phd
()
Date: June 22, 2012 23:24
Great article. It's a financial point of view which over the years seems very accurate. It is outlined that 1)when it comes to money, nothing transpires from The Rolling Stones Limited, 2) Mick reckons that The Stones Trademark is much powerful than His, 3) Keith measures that Stones involvement goes far beyond His and 4) The Stones have restructured Rock so that they became The Rock institution ( with the money pouring in).
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
bauk77 , bonddm , daytime , fortilix , Glam Descendant , its good to be anywhere , Jimmer , josef , JumpinJackOLantern , LookoutMountain , MILOCAMPO421 , MisterDDDD , MJRocksoff , NoPanic , OneHit , Paulhanrahan , sabata , TeddyB1018 , THE DON , Thrylan
Guests:
163
Record Number of Users:
51
on June 18, 2013 01:23
Record Number of Guests:
241
on June 18, 2013 01:00
