Quote:
Originally posted by Queen_Madonna
I know and I agree that it's not true. Although historically other people have been given budgets that big (like Michael Jackson)
I'm just saying that everyone is saying it's a lie based on the fact the examiner has lied in the past (especially that writer) it's all based on historical "evidence" no one actually has any proof. Unless you count what gaga says as proof but to me, what she says is sketchy at best. I'm keen for the DWUW video TBH - Could turn this era around!
|
MJ's 30 million budget was for the entire album I think and that was still a disaster, plus that was his choice not his labels. Artpop's supposed 25mill was just for promo and was originally written just to accuse her of Payola.
The Promo for Artpop was nothing next to BTW, Most of it was performances that Gaga would be payed to do not pay to do or ad deals like the O2 or the commercials thing that again Gaga wouldn't be paying for coz she was advertising them also in fact again they may have paid her.
It hardly had much in the way of billboards and tv ads either.
A massive Hollywood blockbuster movie may spend 25 mill on promo maybe but not a record label that is just silly.
Much of gaga's Promo isn't even payed for by Interscope like the Artrave for example that cost 3 mill but it was payed for by sponsorship, it was even in the news because the original sponsor pulled out and she had to find another.
Interscope wouldn't make 25 million anyway even if Artpop opened with BTW numbers so it doesn't make any sense, why would they set themselves up to make no money?
Think of all the other costs that come with putting an album out? How much was this supposed price tag for Artpop then?
I don't think Interscope made a loss at all they probably still made a profit because this album has been reasonably successful.
The person who wrote this was using a fake profile on a blogging site. Where did they get this info from? The Examiner is not a legit news site yet this "Journalist" claims to have insider information that no other journalist seems to have.
Also your comment about proof and evidence. This is not why it works, I don't have to disprove wild assertions made against me. The one making the assertion has to provide proof and evidence.
If I were to say I saw you raping a llama and gave no evidence would you be able to disprove that entirely? Should you even be expected to try?
You may find Gaga's word sketchy but I find the word of a made up person sketchier.