Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 6291470" data-attributes="member: 19675">Even so, the growth in his estate has exceeded the benchmark you suggested- the ROI for stocks over the long term.Plus, his estate has grown much faster and larger than other deceased musicians of similar stature and shortness of career, like Ritchie Valens and Janis Joplin.&nbsp; And it has done so in a way that it has become a model for doing likewise for guys like SRV.I know a little about business values at that time and the structure of entertainment contracts of the day.&nbsp; Were talking a few million at best, probably about half of the $7m you suggest.Yes, the net increase was extraordinary.&nbsp; Even though the increase to $80m by 2002 is on pace with other investments from 1970, the fact is most of that gain was accumulated in just 13 years.&nbsp; Most of the major posthumous releases from his estate came after 1989, and the question of the value &amp; ownership of his image didn't get decided until @2000.&nbsp; IOW, his estate kept pace after giving the rest of the investments in the world a 19 year head start.And part of the reason for this is that the estate was tied up in litigation.&nbsp; It wasn't just about who got to control the estate, but also about what actually composed the estate.&nbsp; When the suit was filed in Washington, there was a genuine question of conflicting state laws (mainly WA vs NY) about controlling his image, etc.&nbsp; Companies don't like making contracts when they don't know who they're going to have to pay, and how much.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 6291470, member: 19675"] Even so, the growth in his estate has exceeded the benchmark you suggested- the ROI for stocks over the long term. Plus, his estate has grown much faster and larger than other deceased musicians of similar stature and shortness of career, like Ritchie Valens and Janis Joplin. And it has done so in a way that it has become a model for doing likewise for guys like SRV. I know a little about business values at that time and the structure of entertainment contracts of the day. Were talking a few million at best, probably about half of the $7m you suggest. Yes, the net increase was extraordinary. Even though the increase to $80m by 2002 is on pace with other investments from 1970, the fact is most of that gain was accumulated in just 13 years. Most of the major posthumous releases from his estate came after 1989, and the question of the value & ownership of his image didn't get decided until @2000. IOW, his estate kept pace after giving the rest of the investments in the world a 19 year head start. And part of the reason for this is that the estate was tied up in litigation. It wasn't just about who got to control the estate, but also about what actually composed the estate. When the suit was filed in Washington, there was a genuine question of conflicting state laws (mainly WA vs NY) about controlling his image, etc. Companies don't like making contracts when they don't know who they're going to have to pay, and how much. [/QUOTE]

Verification