When did the Hooky Cash in start?

Tock wrote:

The Paradise Man wrote: These songs will one day be available in a more affordable edition anyway.

You dont know that for certain and Hookys "people" have had the oppurtunity to clear that up but have yet to do so.

I must admit my opinion has partly changed since this (mass)debate started. Hey! Democracy works! Anyway, I also thought the tracks would eventually come out but now Im not so sure. As it says above if there were plans in place to release the tracks later it could've been announced to partly apease some of those on here. The fact that this hasnt happened could be for two reasons; 1) they wont be released seperately or 2) they might be but announcing it now could damage any prospective sales.

Im not sure I like what either option represents.

He is but a step away from Ready-Steady-Cook.

you know if you don't like the price you don't have to buy it. I'm surprised Hooky has not been attacked on the street about this...

also, you should start worrying if Hooky starts selling Hacienda china plates on his new TV show

Exeter wrote: you know if you don't like the price you don't have to buy it....

This is it.

As a young person who was born only 10 years before the Hacienda closed, I do not really want to get the impression that the Hacienda was all about FAC numbers or yellow/black stuff. I'm not angry and I'm not anti-Hooky either, but that's how I honestly feel.

The Teacher wrote:

GlasVegas wrote:

The Teacher wrote:

Or if Tina Weymouth, Chris Stein or somebody started doing Talking Heads or Blondie tours?

Learn your music history gobshite.

Erm... they did their own songs! Bit of a difference.

From the article....

Furthermore, a live CD/video of the first tour was planned, featuring performances of songs originally recorded by Talking Heads reinterpreted by the album's guest artists. However, David Byrne sued the band[1], asserting that their name and presentation was too evocative of Talking Heads, and put an end to those plans.

it just shows you rubbish things get when successful bands split up

GlasVegas wrote:

The Teacher wrote:

GlasVegas wrote:

The Teacher wrote:

Or if Tina Weymouth, Chris Stein or somebody started doing Talking Heads or Blondie tours?

Learn your music history gobshite.

Erm... they did their own songs! Bit of a difference.

From the article....

Furthermore, a live CD/video of the first tour was planned, featuring performances of songs originally recorded by Talking Heads reinterpreted by the album's guest artists. However, David Byrne sued the band[1], asserting that their name and presentation was too evocative of Talking Heads, and put an end to those plans.

And on top of that, let's look at what you said earlier on in this thread:

Billy Corgan playing as The Smashing Pumpkins is a joke, which is why I refused to go.

Yet Corgan has released two albums of new material and an EP. So how can he still be a joke if he's doing new stuff, considering that it's generally acknowledged that he wrote the bulk of the Pumpkins catalogue.

leather_girl wrote: As a young person who was born only 10 years before the Hacienda closed, I do not really want to get the impression that the Hacienda was all about FAC numbers or yellow/black stuff. I'm not angry and I'm not anti-Hooky either, but that's how I honestly feel.

It was certainly no place for a 10-year old. I was in my 20s and it used to terrify me!

Pablo Bastardo wrote:

leather_girl wrote: As a young person who was born only 10 years before the Hacienda closed, I do not really want to get the impression that the Hacienda was all about FAC numbers or yellow/black stuff. I'm not angry and I'm not anti-Hooky either, but that's how I honestly feel.

It was certainly no place for a 10-year old. I was in my 20s and it used to terrify me!

Younger people may get an even more stereotypical image of the Hac w/ these items and events. That's what I'm trying to say. I didn't experience it, and I don't think the Hacienda was Godlike, but it has a lot more history (and maybe notoriety) than just those FAC numbers and that yellow/black design (the design that Hooky seemed to use for the bass guitar).

I agree that Hooky can do whatever he wants---but some things do come across as 'cheapening' the legacy (even if he doesn't intend to do that) of the Hacienda and Factory Records. That was not really a criticism---more of an observation. I can only imagine how some of the older fans may feel about this. And I shall shut up because I've made my point very calmly and as objectively as possible.

Personally i think it is entirely up 2 hooky what he does.it is none of our business.you are all getting so worked up as if its the end of the world!whilst u r all moaning think of the poor people in pakistan who have lost everything in the flood.some of u really need 2 put things in perspective!if u don't agree with what hooky is doing don't buy it & don't moan either!

Can i just say that this is all very entertaining!

It's threads like this that keep me coming back for more. Love it.

Denholm Reynholm wrote:

Joanne Bailey wrote: Personally i think it is entirely up 2 hooky what he does.it is none of our business.you are all getting so worked up as if its the end of the world!whilst u r all moaning think of the poor people in pakistan who have lost everything in the flood.

Awesome. The Pakistan flood distaster used totally and completely out of context to justify the flogging of a four thousand pound "product" by a millionaire rock star and why the fans are bastards for daring to question it.

Like I mentioned previously, a lot of this whole debate seems to be underpinned by the assumption that ex members of New Order are somehow rolling in cash and don't need to earn a living on a day to day basis. From my somewhat limited knowledge of the industry in general and the band/band members in particular I can say quite confidently that this isn't the case. Millionaire rock stars don't need to go out and DJ in clubs or drag a backing band and crew on the road for what are, comparitively, small fees.

I'll say it again, if you think being one quarter of New Order would leave you in a position that you never have to go out and earn money again then you're wrong.

Denholm i didn't say the fans are bastards for daring to question it - u did. U r entitled 2 yr opinion jst as i am entitled 2 mine.as i said b4 if what hooky does offends u that much don't buy it .no one is forcing u 2.i am saying keep things in perspective. We can argue with each other in our cosy water tight homes with all mod cons, spare a thought 4 the victims of this disaster who have lost everything & would probably love 2 swop places with us

Denholm Reynholm wrote:

GlasVegas wrote: Like I mentioned previously, a lot of this whole debate seems to be underpinned by the assumption that ex members of New Order are somehow rolling in cash and don't need to earn a living on a day to day basis. From my somewhat limited knowledge of the industry in general and the band/band members in particular I can say quite confidently that this isn't the case. Millionaire rock stars don't need to go out and DJ in clubs or drag a backing band and crew on the road for what are, comparitively, small fees.

I'll say it again, if you think being one quarter of New Order would leave you in a position that you never have to go out and earn money again then you're wrong.

I wasn't alluding to that type of justification there.

I just found it slightly odd someone was comparing a bunch of complaints about a guitar made out of a dancefloor to a big flood disaster in another country.

Yeah I understood that and I agree. But still, there seems to be this persistent lack of awareness among folks that Hooky and all the rest of them need to earn money as do 99% of all musicians, even the ones who've once been in successful bands. There's a defineate moral undertone to many of the arguments in this thread that seems to go along the lines of 'how dare Hooky try and earn money from something that's so precious and revered'. Yes it is precious and it is revered by us all but ultimately for Hooky and the rest of New Order it is/was a career, a way to earn a living.

So if Hooky creates something, be it music, t-shirts or Unknown Pleasure's panty-girdles, then, as the license holder, he's got the right to go out and try and earn a pound note from it. As the consumer, we've all got the right not to buy it. Question the appropriateness of some of it and the credibility of Hooky for getting involved in it by all means but avoid moralising and speaking of being 'ripped off'. He can only 'rip you off' if you actually buy any of his stuff.

Paying £20 to see the abomination that is Bad Lieutenant left me feeling 'ripped off' so when Freebass rolled into town, having heard that they were even worse, I learned my lesson and didn't bother going. Dead easy.

Agreed glasvegas

Chris Nash wrote:

GlasVegas wrote:

Yeah I understood that and I agree. But still, there seems to be this persistent lack of awareness among folks that Hooky and all the rest of them need to earn money as do 99% of all musicians, even the ones who've once been in successful bands. There's a defineate moral undertone to many of the arguments in this thread that seems to go along the lines of 'how dare Hooky try and earn money from something that's so precious and revered'. Yes it is precious and it is revered by us all but ultimately for Hooky and the rest of New Order it is/was a career, a way to earn a living.

So if Hooky creates something, be it music, t-shirts or Unknown Pleasure's panty-girdles, then, as the license holder, he's got the right to go out and try and earn a pound note from it. As the consumer, we've all got the right not to buy it. Question the appropriateness of some of it and the credibility of Hooky for getting involved in it by all means but avoid moralising and speaking of being 'ripped off'. He can only 'rip you off' if you actually buy any of his stuff.

Paying £20 to see the abomination that is Bad Lieutenant left me feeling 'ripped off' so when Freebass rolled into town, having heard that they were even worse, I learned my lesson and didn't bother going. Dead easy.

My answer is simple:

Can we now get onto more important discussions, like drowning people in Pakistan?

Can we now get onto more important discussions, like drowning people in Pakistan?

I did cringe the other day during the England - Pakistan test match when the commentator was saying it was a 'tragedy' that it was raining in Birmingham.

He offered no opinion on Kevin Petersens cricket bat made out of original pieces of the Hacienda.

EdelBrock wrote:

Can we now get onto more important discussions, like drowning people in Pakistan?

My opinion is that drowning people in Pakistan (or anywhere) would be bad thing.

One wonders at this juncture how much of the Hacienda dancefloor that has been wasted on fretboards could instead have been used to crucify Mr Hook?

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: One wonders at this juncture how much of the Hacienda dancefloor that has been wasted on fretboards could instead have been used to crucify Mr Hook?

I was waiting for the above comment. you have to be creative with your hate people!

Exeter wrote:

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: One wonders at this juncture how much of the Hacienda dancefloor that has been wasted on fretboards could instead have been used to crucify Mr Hook?

I was waiting for the above comment. you have to be creative with your hate people!

Or, indeed, creative with your wearily facetious remarks. Still, thanks for the kind words. Is that a piece of the Hacienda dancefloor in your pocket, or are you just glad to see me?

Clayhead Liberation Faction wrote: One wonders at this juncture how much of the Hacienda dancefloor that has been wasted on fretboards could instead have been used to crucify Mr Hook?

I think a boat for Pakistan would have been in order.