Jeez, sense-of-humour bypass! That was a joke! Anyway, people are going to have to make assumptions about UR especially when all those involved are so bloody secretive and "mysterious".
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:58 PM To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: RE: (313) UR Shocker... Good Lord, some people just want to twist the facts, Like I said no one here knows the story nor what took place because of it and I am in no postion to explain things that were shared with me in confidence. If you wish to continue being ignorant and making false assumptions about things that you have no clue about, then by all means continue making an ASS out of yourself. Peace... Sometimes I wonder why I got back on this list... On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:30:13 -0000 Robert Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So are you saying that Mike Banks washed his > hands of the record because it > might have interfered with UR's underground > status? Now that IS underground. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:24 PM > To: 313@hyperreal.org > Subject: RE: (313) UR Shocker... > > > The problem here is everyone here is making > assumptions about what UR did. > No > one here knows anything about what happened to > that track and what it's > popularity caused. > > Mike Banks relinquished that record when it > became major. At first it was > cool > but then things just got ugly and Mike decided > to drop the record from the > UR > catalogue and give it over to 430 West who > marketed it all over the place. > Which is good and bad depending on how you look > at it. UR is far from being > that much in the spotlight and UR is not > responsible for the licensing of > that > record anymore. Ask 430 West as, I am sure they > have legitimate reasons for > it. > > BEFORE YOU(ANYBODY) MAKES ASSUMPTIONS... Know > the FACTS!!! > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:32:09 -0000 Robert > Taylor > wrote: > > > No-one is knocking the track, or the fact > that > > it's popular, but merely UR > > making a big song and dance about being > > independent and underground and then > > licensing the track to major labels. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ja'Maul Redmond > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 1:27 PM > > To: 313@hyperreal.org > > Subject: RE: (313) UR Shocker... > > > > > > Why is this a "Shocker"? The reason jaguar > was > > so popular is that everyone > > played it despite of their genre' of choice. > > I've heard it on many weird > > obscure mixes, including trance and > Progressive > > house mixes. The track , in > > my opinion, isn't a deep underground sounding > > track anyway. I would expect > > it to be licensed out to more mainstream > > outlets. it's taking advantage of > > the full potential of the song. Actually, I'm > > more suprise that I haven't > > heard it in a commercial. > > > > Ja'Maul Redmond > > > > PERKINS & WILL > > 1130 East Third Street, Suite 200 > > Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 > > > > (704) 343-9900 > > (704) 343-4935 ext.202(direct) > > (704) 343-9999 (fax) > > jamaul.redmond @perkinswill.com > > http://www.perkinswill.com/ > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: rob webb > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:37 AM > > To: 313@hyperreal.org > > Subject: RE: (313) UR Shocker... > > > > > > Robert Taylor: > > > > >If they were stick to their principles, they > > wouldn't sell any of their > > >records to the big chainstores. But of > course > > they do. > > > > Submerge have no control over their records > > ending-up in chainstores. > > that's down to the distributor. they know > > their records are carried by HMV, > > > > Tower et al, and they can't do anything about > > that, but they still want ppl > > to support "Mom and Pop" stores in preference > > to the majors. > > > > with regard to the licencing, personally i > see > > no harm in it... without the > > success of Jaguar would Submerge have had > their > > new building, would there be > > > > so many wicked new records coming out of > their > > operation, would Submerge be > > able to support and nurture talented ppl who > > otherwise might not get a > > chance? > > > > Submerge make a point of being true to > > themselves, being "underground" as we > > > > like to perceive it. in my eyes there's a > > difference between working within > > > > the confines of the industry in order to > > survive, develop, and grow, and > > working within the industry in order to buy > > yourself a penthouse in Monte > > Carlo. > > > > maybe you don't see a distinction there... > but > > i do. > > > > > > > > rob > >
