On Tue, 23 May 2000, Stuart Bruce wrote:
> No, Cheeky still exists- there's more info on it in this article, but
> here's the gist. Cheeky is essentially too small an outfit for a big
> band such as Faithless, because Cheeky only has so much money to go
> around whereas major labels get bulk advertising deals etc. So in this
> article Rollo describes Cheeky as "inhibitive" to Faithless, or a word
> to that effect. A major commercial release like the third Faithless
> album will be on a major label. But Cheeky will continue to release all
> the other material that it's so far put out.
I haven't read the article, but this sounds bogus to me. Cheeky is only
responsible for selling Faithless in the UK, AFAIK; Intercord is
responsible for the EU, Festival for AU/NZ and Arista for the US. If
Cheeky could get Faithless seven Top 20 hits in the UK (SM, Insomnia, DL,
Reverence, GIADJ, TTLWH, BMFB), how in the world is this inhibitive? If
anything, Arista's failure to market Faithless in the US shows that the
idea that a major label can do more for a band is only a myth.
Something else is going on here. The delayed and then cancelled release
of "Why Go?", the failure to update the website, the Dusted release on
Go! Beat, the failure to release Dido in the UK, the interminable delay on
releasing the Pauline Taylor solo album in the UK, the pathetic release
for Skinny's "Friday" single (did it even chart?), the disappearance of
Rob D from the face of the planet -- all of this reeks of disorganization,
mismanagement, and general trouble.
The most charitable answer is that the money which Cheeky made from
Reverence and its singles got spread way too thin on the other acts in the
Cheeky family, and now Cheeky can't afford to distribute product at a high
level -- it's becoming nothing more than a boutique label for Rollo fans.
best,
m
--
This message was sent through the Faithless Mailing-list.
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
UNSUBSCRIBE FAITHLESS in the body of the message.
