On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Carissa Tintinalli wrote:
> On one hand I agree that talking about fees can be tacky. But on the other > hand, Derrick may have felt he needed to say exactly WHY Kraftwerk wouldn't > be at Movement. Derrick shouldn't be answering to anyone. He;s putting on a festival and people will go. I'd have a lot more respect if he just stayed out of the fray. 'Coulda, should, woulda, didn't' is not a flattering stance. > Like someone else said, they've always been considered the > "ultimate booking" for this festival and a lot of people are wondering why > it hasn't happened yet. > > But you know someone will say that it's still Derrick's fault for not being > able to get enough sponsorship dollars to pay for Kraftwerk. It seems like > he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. well- it is derrick responsibility ultimately. if he wanted kraftwek to play he should have found the money somewhere. or just let it go. airing you business laundry is tacky, and believe me- its going to make lots of big acts, not just kraftwerk, think twice before taking his phonecalls. like i said up top- i'd much rather derrick just stay above it all. pandering to the haters and doubters by offering up excuses just weakens the festivals position > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >i guess the one nice thing about being kraftwerk is that you don't owe > >anyone anything. there's no such thing as a favor gig. > > > >on the other hand, i do thing it was rather tacky to call kraftwerk out > >like that. derrick gave me an actual dollar amount a month ago in an > >interview and I choose not to print it. > > > >derrick isn't making things any easier on himself by airing $$$ issues in > >public. > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines > >
