When Did You Know It Was Very Likely To Be 'Over'

Stone Roses Discussion
Scotstone
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue May 23, 2017 10:43 am

Re: When Did You Know It Was Very Likely To Be 'Over'

Post by Scotstone » Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:21 am

Awful One wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:36 pm
Regan 2.0 wrote:
Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:41 am
Mcc wrote:
Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:46 am


I know this has melted into accepted truth, what with the quip at the Presser re: Ryder. But surely divorces don't clean folk right out. Lets say she got half, it still leaves him with ..... half. And I reckon he probably had a few bob given his successful solo years.

Although Brown's solo career was relatively successful his albums would hit the charts high in the first week then drop off rapidly so, other than his core fan base, his sales must have been quite modest. He was also very generous with co-writing credits from his first album onwards, meaning the majority of his royalties were probably split 2 or 3 ways. Also, although he toured consistently over the duration of his solo career, he had quite a big band and crew at times all of whom he had to pay for their time, so I doubt he was as well off as you may think. He was clearly a wealthy man, but I don't think he was rolling in money.
Probably just a guess, but would not be surprised if about right. I would say be earned about half of his money since the reunion (again a guess)...

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cele ... h/%3famp=1
5 foot 7?????? He's a bit bigger than that i would have thought. I'm 5"9 and that makes me feel like a fuckin hobbit

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests