Morrissey Central "MANAGEMENT" (September 19, 2024)

Morrissey has severed all connections with Red Light Management/Pete Galli Management.

MANAGEMENT - MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY - MORRISSEY CENTRAL - MANAGEMENT

MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY

www.morrisseycentral.com

---

Related item:

• Morrissey-solo: Morrissey is now being managed by Pete Galli of Red Light Management (February 12, 2024)

 

[Bonaparte Shandy]

We agree - listening to Dog in those weird early-covid days makes it the last interesting work he's done

 

[gashonthenail]

The only thing holding Morrissey back is Morrissey.

Exactly the point I was making. Because he keeps saying what he wants to say. And that is not allowed.

 

[Roman Holiday]

Exactly the point I was making. Because he keeps saying what he wants to say. And that is not allowed.

Of course it’s allowed. Try That In A Small Town was a no. 1 single recently, so at least in the U.S. “anti-woke” is viable and permissible, if that’s something Morrissey is committed to. There is nothing stopping Morrissey from self-releasing his music or finding a suitable independent label. No one is owed a major label record deal.

Isn’t Rayner living in Nashville and married to Johnny Cash’s granddaughter? I’m sure he could rustle up some session musicians for a country-rock album. Morrissey can enter his Gram Parsons period (musically) and his political period (lyrically) with songs like Try That In Area C Of The West Bank and Tavistock Clinic Disaster 2017.

 

[gashonthenail]

Of course it’s allowed. Try That In A Small Town was a no. 1 single recently, so at least in the U.S. “anti-woke” is viable and permissible, if that’s something Morrissey is committed to. There is nothing stopping Morrissey from self-releasing his music or finding a suitable independent label. No one is owed a major label record deal.

Isn’t Rayner living in Nashville and married to Johnny Cash’s granddaughter? I’m sure he could rustle up some session musicians for a country-rock album. Morrissey can enter his Gram Parsons period (musically) and his political period (lyrically) with songs like Try That In Area C Of The West Bank and Tavistock Clinic Disaster 2017.

Would be interesting to see how Bonfire of Teenagers would do as a single in the UK. I think it would sell well. But there's the rub, Aubs. No major label, in the UK at least, seems to want to release it. Too 'controversial'. I think the UK is much more sensitive to saying anything critical of Islamism than the US.

 

[The Alchemist]

You think he'd prefered to stay with him in 94 instead of touring the world? He even managed to make only 1 video for 3-4 singles in 1994. A handful of record-store signings and 1 appearance @TOTP hardly filled his calendar.

Yes, I spoke to Howie Klein at the time, of Sire records, and he told me that for years and years Morrissey was angry with them for not promoting his work well enough. ‘I sell out the Hollywood Bowl faster than the Beatles, I sell out all my US shows, I’m at every big US tv show and yet you can’t get any of my songs on the radio or in the Billboard-charts. You’re useless.’

To which Sire replied that the KU and YA singles were not really suited for the US pop market. They said: Morrissey, if you give us a song we can work with, a solid pop/rock-song, we will get you a top 40-hit. So Morrissey returned with The More You Ignore Me and everyone at Sire went crazy. ‘You did it, this is it, congratulations, a great single, we will get you all over MTV and on the radio. This is your US top 40-hit, all you have to do is this and this promotion and a tour.’

To which Morrissey replied: I’m not doing anything. This time you do all the work.

So that was really the end of that story. Still he was quite positive about Morrissey as an artist, just concluded that he often let himself down and was his own worst enemy.

And here we are

Wasn't he actually just really busy having 'breakfast in bed' ?

 

[CrazyFaceGenes]

Would be interesting to see how Bonfire of Teenagers would do as a single in the UK. I think it would sell well. But there's the rub, Aubs. No major label, in the UK at least, seems to want to release it. Too 'controversial'. I think the UK is much more sensitive to saying anything critical of Islamism than the US.

There's not much money in the record business and an "alternative" artist that alienates a good chunk of his natural audience is not an attractive product for a major label. His record sales are mediocre and his attitude to the music business sucks(from their pov), they wouldn't care about the controversial nature of Morrissey if their was a big enough financial return.

He's a small label or self release artist level at the moment.

 

[gashonthenail]

There's not much money in the record business and an "alternative" artist that alienates a good chunk of his natural audience is not an attractive product for a major label. His record sales are mediocre and his attitude to the music business sucks(from their pov), they wouldn't care about the controversial nature of Morrissey if their was a big enough financial return.

He's a small label or self release artist level at the moment.

I don't know if that is entirely true. I think there are some labels who, even if they thought Bonfire was going to sell relatively well, just wouldn't want to be associated with its 'message'. Many labels would see it as not in keeping with their 'values'. And there is evidence that such things can have an impact on investment decisions. There is a reason why big companies are signed up to the DEI agenda, even if it puts customers off, e.g. Budweiser, Nike.

 

[Roman Holiday]

Would be interesting to see how Bonfire of Teenagers would do as a single in the UK. I think it would sell well. But there's the rub, Aubs. No major label, in the UK at least, seems to want to release it. Too 'controversial'. I think the UK is much more sensitive to saying anything critical of Islamism than the US.

I don’t know enough about the precise situation in the UK, but I would assume that if a product has the potential to sell well, someone would be willing to sell it. If the major labels are passing on sensitivity concerns, a daring independent label would fill the need (that is, after all, their purpose). And if they all pass, then this is 2024 and Morrissey can release it himself. Like the Billy Bragg song goes, “start your own revolution and cut out the middle man.”

 

[gashonthenail]

I don’t know enough about the precise situation in the UK, but I would assume that if a product has the potential to sell well, someone would be willing to sell it. If the major labels are passing on sensitivity concerns, a daring independent label would fill the need (that is, after all, their purpose). And if they all pass, then this is 2024 and Morrissey can release it himself. Like the Billy Bragg song goes, “start your own revolution and cut out the middle man.”

Agreed. He's only 'not allowed' to say those things if Morrissey allows it to happen by relying on a major label.

 

[Roman Holiday]

I don't know if that is entirely true. I think there are some labels who, even if they thought Bonfire was going to sell relatively well, just wouldn't want to be associated with its 'message'. Many labels would see it as not in keeping with their 'values'. And there is evidence that such things can have an impact on investment decisions. There is a reason why big companies are signed up to the DEI agenda, even if it puts customers off, e.g. Budweiser, Nike.

Budweiser had to do damage control after the Dylan Mulvaney incident blew up on them. Companies are ultimately more committed to their bottom line than they are to ideological fads.

 

[Roman Holiday]

Agreed. He's only 'not allowed' to say those things if Morrissey allows it to happen by relying on a major label.

Right. So the poster who said only Morrissey is stopping Morrissey was correct.

 

[The Alchemist]

Right. So the poster who said only Morrissey is stopping Morrissey was correct.

Can't help but think he needs to give himself a break before he breaks down...

 

[Eldritch]

Would be interesting to see how Bonfire of Teenagers would do as a single in the UK. I think it would sell well. But there's the rub, Aubs. No major label, in the UK at least, seems to want to release it. Too 'controversial'. I think the UK is much more sensitive to saying anything critical of Islamism than the US.

I disagree. Like I've said before, if a label is willing to see past his acrimonious history with any label he has been on, his declining sales, his artistic decline, his toxic reputation, his unwillingness to do promo and his history of cancelling concerts and tours with no explanations and so on, I'm sure they would have no problem of releasing an anti-terrorism song from him. This "too controversial" is just a handy excuse for Morrissey and his fans.

 

[The Alchemist]

I disagree. Like I've said before, if a label is willing to see past his acrimonious history with any label he has been on, his declining sales, his artistic decline, his toxic reputation, his unwillingness to do promo and his history of cancelling concerts and tours with no explanations and so on, I'm sure they would have no problem of releasing an anti-terrorism song from him. This "too controversial" is just a handy excuse for Morrissey and his fans.

I actually think you're onto something.

 

[Phranc & Open]

Wasn't he actually just really busy having 'breakfast in bed' ?

He red the paper. Later.

 

[Dirk Blaggard]

I don't know if that is entirely true. I think there are some labels who, even if they thought Bonfire was going to sell relatively well, just wouldn't want to be associated with its 'message'. Many labels would see it as not in keeping with their 'values'. And there is evidence that such things can have an impact on investment decisions. There is a reason why big companies are signed up to the DEI agenda, even if it puts customers off, e.g. Budweiser, Nike.

I think some people maybe listen to too many podcasts by paid fecks like PJW (nearly all these people are paid by right-wing think tanks, of some sort )PJW is a pathetic little man, such a creepy weak chinned little man
If anyone thinks M is not signed to a label due to being "edgy " then they not only have no idea how the industry works but they have not been following M that closely
Music labels, do not care how edgy you are, as long as you make bank bitch and M has never been that that much of a draw in terms of record sales. I heard he lost, most labels he was on, money. I don't know if that is true. I did hear it though

The proof that BOT is not being censored is the fact a major label was going to release it and he wouldn't re-do the Cyrus track and he was very very fecking rude about a lady that works there, a lady that actually fecking tried to help him.
M has said the label tried to change the title track, that is not true at all. The title of the lp and song of the same name were there until the end. They wanted him to redo the Cyrus song, but he wouldn't re do it and he wouldn't re do it, because he was hoping that one song would save his career.

 

[Dirk Blaggard]

I disagree. Like I've said before, if a label is willing to see past his acrimonious history with any label he has been on, his declining sales, his artistic decline, his toxic reputation, his unwillingness to do promo and his history of cancelling concerts and tours with no explanations and so on, I'm sure they would have no problem of releasing an anti-terrorism song from him. This "too controversial" is just a handy excuse for Morrissey and his fans.

Thats right
Fecking too right mate. It's a way for childish man-boys to seem "punk"
They miss out the part that M was on a major and that the only reason the LP tanked was due to the Cyrus song. It had nothing to do with silencing him
A mate had a theory that M was always going to crash his career like this, as he can't cope with accepting he isn't that popular, so he would find an excuse to and blame it all on that.
I can definitely see why she thought that

 

[Fact Checker]

Music labels, do not care how edgy you are, as long as you make bank bitch and M has never been that that much of a draw in terms of record sales. I heard he lost, most labels he was on, money. I don't know if that is true. I did hear it though

But is that just down to the unique way that the US record industry counts money, or at least how it used to do in the 80s and 90s? Steve Albini had an article about that.

I can believe the last few albums sold feebly, but I don't think they would have existed if he hadn't made a few quid in the early 90s and mid 00s. And maybe one reason he's awfully bitter is that he didn't get such a big slice of the pie he made them.

 

[Eldritch]

But is that just down to the unique way that the US record industry counts money, or at least how it used to do in the 80s and 90s? Steve Albini had an article about that.

I can believe the last few albums sold feebly, but I don't think they would have existed if he hadn't made a few quid in the early 90s and mid 00s. And maybe one reason he's awfully bitter is that he didn't get such a big slice of the pie he made them.

Since Morrissey has always been something of an acquired taste, he has never been a truly big seller. Remember Savage Garden? Neither do I really, but their two albums still sold over 23 million copies. That must be more than all Morrissey's solo albums from nearly three decades. That's because in the late nineties there was a window, when "everybody" liked Savage Garden. Morrissey has never had and will never have that window, no matter how much he thinks he should have it.

 

[gashonthenail]

I think some people maybe listen to too many podcasts by paid fecks like PJW (nearly all these people are paid by right-wing think tanks, of some sort )PJW is a pathetic little man, such a creepy weak chinned little man
If anyone thinks M is not signed to a label due to being "edgy " then they not only have no idea how the industry works but they have not been following M that closely
Music labels, do not care how edgy you are, as long as you make bank bitch and M has never been that that much of a draw in terms of record sales. I heard he lost, most labels he was on, money. I don't know if that is true. I did hear it though

The proof that BOT is not being censored is the fact a major label was going to release it and he wouldn't re-do the Cyrus track and he was very very fecking rude about a lady that works there, a lady that actually fecking tried to help him.
M has said the label tried to change the title track, that is not true at all. The title of the lp and song of the same name were there until the end. They wanted him to redo the Cyrus song, but he wouldn't re do it and he wouldn't re do it, because he was hoping that one song would save his career.

And yet the UK wasn't included in the licensing agreement.