I read up somewhere about Blue Monday of course being the successful 12 inch record.....
but they never saw a penny from it....
If its true who screwed them over? Wonder why NO is uptight about money.
Dates
· UTC
who ****ed NO?
Archived16 replies · 961 views
This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.
← Back to Digital Republic
17 posts
Traditionally, the blame is put on Fac Records' graphics designer, Peter Saville, for designing such a 'lavish' and 'ornate' vinyl sleeve for the single, the ubiquitous full-size floppy disk thing. The design was apparently so overdone and costly to mass produce that it cost the band and Factory a few P for every record sold.
Similar or equal blame could be laid upon pseudo-intellectual/artfart Tony Wilson or the band themselves for approving the monstrosity.
PS: This will be required knowledge for the 'Factory Records Nerd' aptitude test.
There is an interview somewhere where Wilson nearly explains the story. I can't remember the exact maths but it went something along the lines that Factory got 82p for every copy sold. The vinyl cost 30p and the sleeve cost 50p, therefore profit on each sale was 2p. That was split between band and record company - 1p each. However, out of their 1p profit, Factory had to pay 5p royalties hence they lost 4p.
So it appears that New Order did make money out of Blue Monday, but Factory didn't.
New Order lost all their money through The Hacienda, but that is another story entirely.
Old Blue wrote:
There is an interview somewhere where Wilson nearly explains the story. I can't remember the exact maths but it went something along the lines that Factory got 82p for every copy sold. The vinyl cost 30p and the sleeve cost 50p, therefore profit on each sale was 2p. That was split between band and record company - 1p each. However, out of their 1p profit, Factory had to pay 5p royalties hence they lost 4p.
So it appears that New Order did make money out of Blue Monday, but Factory didn't.
New Order lost all their money through The Hacienda, but that is another story entirely.
Is this an advert for 24HPP? 
it's a nice story but undoubtably not quite true, this breakdown of costs will only apply to the initial pressing with the cut-outs and silver sleeve (both expensive features), all the later copies without some or all of these features will have cost notably less to manufacture. so 90% of the sales of "the best selling 12" ever" would have made money.
From the New Order Discography @ http://www.niagara.edu/neworder...
Q: I hear that Factory lost money on Blue Monday because of the floppy sleeve, is that true? A: "[...] this is incorrect and a common misconception. The sleeve of the 12" cost so much that it denied Factory an extra profit of just under a penny (UK) on each copy sold. Peter was determined to keep the 'floppy' sleeve and convinced Factory to go with the idea. However, demand and production cost and timings meant that the sleeve became progressively more simple with each repressing. The profits from the sale of 'Blue Monday' were large to say the least [...]"
T.
Just found the audio clip - Wilson is definitely shite at adding up, no wonder they went under...
Good link BLUE.What about their fans that went bankrupt collecting records though!Not me mind.I was skint since the GREAT MILK crash in JUNIOR 2.Milk monitor MICHAEL selling free MILK.A kid has got to make a LIVING!
Of course the final profits were large, otherwise Factory wouldn't have survived until True Faith, the Mondays and Technique... Blue Monday was a huge fund for all the other artistically great but money-wasting projects of the mid 80s...
with the situation with BM and John Denver suing them over Run, no wonder why they told Jerry Lee Lewis to fuck off when he wanted 10000 pounds for a duet on one track
Yeah Blue Monday was a bit of a Factory cash cow. Blue Monday '88 was done mainly to finance NO's infamous Technique sessions.
Farthouse more like