NO recording cost/time for London vs Factory ... discuss.

Its a common myth/truth that the cost and duration of recording Republic contributed to the terminal lack of funds at Factory in 1992... overall appalling situation notwithstanding.

Do you suppose they are more budget conscious when recording for London - who they would no doubt need to treat more, erm, respectfully than Wilson & co?

They certainly seem to get the recordings down more quickly.

It would be interesting to compare the recording duration and overall cost to produce each album.

Dennis R www.factoryrecords.info

It would indeed. It is fairly well documented that the Technique era rather stretched a lot of things, budget, patience of band members, tolerance to MDMA-based tablets, and the whole Madchester period had a huge impact. It took two full years to write the Technique songs, then a further six months to get them from the written to the released stage. Eight months of gigging Technique turned their heads considerably, to the extent that they no longer wanted to work together on new material. I think Factory was already doomed before the recording of Republic, with the rather strange decision to send the Mondays to Barbados with a bottomless pit of drug money, coupled with the Hacienda's problems and the collective lack of sense of business acumen and perspective all combining to form a deadly cocktail of failure. New Order were under pressure to save Factory and themselves with a blockbuster new album, yet couldn't really stand to be in the studio at the same time, which is why half of the album sounds like a load of Electronic out-takes precisely because they were. It was all too late.

If you compare the times it took them to get the other albums out:

Movement - songs written July 80-March 81 released November 81 PC&L - songs written February 82-December 82 released March 83 Low Life - songs written December 83-December 84 released May 85 Brotherhood - songs written April 85-July 86 released October 86

In terms of product delivery versus time spent on project, it would appear as though it was Technique that broke them (and Factory).

For sure. Certainly to-ing and fro-ing between Bath and Chester today can't compare with putting the younger, more hedonistic band up in Summer-of-Love-era Ibiza to record an album. In the highly corporate environs of Warners they'd have different pressures on them and nowhere near the status or budget to run amok.

:\pimp3:

I'm sure the real question should be why the Hacienda couldn't turn a profit, despite being full every night with the highest cover charge in town? That place was 'losing' money (the saddest euphemism of the whole affair) at many times more than the combined forces of New Order and the Mondays could spend it on their extended holidays. The problem with the Technique and Yes Please sessions was that Factory desperately needed new album sales to provide the cash to subsidise the Hac. At the rate that money was disappearing, the best they could have achieved was a stay of execution. The reasons for the Monday's delay were simple, but I sometimes wonder whether problems with the club and the business were not a major factor in New Order's reluctance to finish the job and go home. The Hacienda had become too dangerous for most people to enjoy by then anyway, and other clubs had caught up to the extent that it was no longer the force it once was. A massive property crash, compounded by rising interest rates, was the killer blow. Like many individuals and companies at the time, the scale of the negative equity and the size of the mortgage payments were too great. A very un-rock and roll end to the story, but a more accurate one than "the acts pissed all the money up the wall".

Indeed. From several accounts I've read, the massive devaluing of the property market landed a fatal blow on The Hac. They were struggling to turn an operating profit for reasons as simple as poor venue management and the same issue that plagues nightclubs throughout the world these days: dwindling drink sales as punters neck more and more pills. Nightclub prosperity is traditionally all about drink sales so even if you're packing punters to the rafters, if they're not drinking, you're not turning a buck.

:\pimp3:

DC, violence and intimidation killed the club's atmosophere and the gangs took all of the money. The management may have been a little chaotic at times but so are a lot of small busineses in all industries, let alone nightclubs. There was no way that place was trading at a loss. Seeing it close was like seeing a beloved pet die after a long illness.

Umm ... Not sure I understand your point here, Oiler.

You asked above why The Hac wasn't turning a profit despite being constantly packed and now you're saying it was well fairly run and couldn't have been running at a loss?

Dave Haslam once said that almost every night they opened, they lost money. Hooky claimed they may've been better off just giving all the punters ten quid and sending them home.

If, as many accounts suggest, gangs were fleecing the door and they were selling bugger all drinks behind the bar, that would equate to running pretty unprofitably, no?

:\pimp3:

I was very drunk last night, so there was very little chance of anything I wrote this morning making any sense. Sorry about that. I have considered editing my post so that it makes more sense, but have decided to leave it there as a warning to any children who may be reading.

Don't mix Stella and red wine, kids!

My point was simply that the nightclub was targeted by groups of people who took massive amounts of money by dishonest and brutal means. I briefly dabbled in nightclub promotion in Manchester during this period, so gained some insight into the practices and have a fair idea of the amounts of money involved. My opinion is that this was the primary reason for the failure of the nightclub, and ultimately of the company. Certainly, there would have been a much better chance of surviving the challenges presented by rising interest rates, dishonest and inept staff, increasing media focus on drug use and the resultant battles with the licensing authorities if there had not been the added pressure of the armed men who entering the premises, injuring and intimidating staff and customers, demanding huge amounts of money not to do it again, then doing it again regardless.

I apologise again for my earlier post, I hope you didn't waste too much time attempting to decipher it. I’m still feeling quite awful, and I apologise if this one is no better.

Understood Oiler!

Interested to hear you were in amongst it all at the time. Surely there are tales to be told.

:\pimp3:

depthcharge wrote: Understood Oiler!

Interested to hear you were in amongst it all at the time. Surely there are tales to be told.

:\pimp3:

My favourite thing is to get drunk and talk about things like this. I was certainly not anything to do with the Factory people, in case you have that impression.

I think the production efforts for this new album have been really huge, the production is excellent and they called some top names. The promotion also is likely to have its good cost. It's just that Warners can spend a lot more money than Factory. Even if the overall gain of the sales won't be high, as someone here wrote that Warners today still keep and push New Order for the credibility and prestige a legendary band like that gives to the label. Rather than the soldiers in the battle, New Order are the flag.