George & Paul's relationship in the 80s

[Crisstti]

i think so. it must have happened when the band was still intact.

I don't think that the 1985 (1986?) lawsuit had anything to do with that. That 1969 thing had to do with the royalties (or ownership, I don't know) for the Lennon/McCartney songs. I think.

I think that the 80's lawsuit had something to do with a deal between Paul and Capitol...

But I don't really know...

[chris]

i have to be honest...i didn't know there was an issue between the boys regarding a deal with paul and capital records.

but i have to ask...what could an agreement between capital and mr mccartney in the 80's have anything to do with george, john and ringo? i'd think anything new(ish) shouldn't affect the "band" in any way.

but seriously, what do i know?

[Crisstti]

Well, I don't erally know either. I asked in the google Beatles forum why hadn't Paul gone to The Beatles induction to the Rock and Roll Hall of fame, and they said something about a deal between Paul and Capitol about Beatles royalties.

I still don't really know what's that about.

[Cologne girl]

It's like when I drive our car in my husband's presence- I got my driving licence 18 years ago, but he still wants to tell me when to shift gears.

That's quite normal, isn't it??

Yeah, I suppose it must be a standard deficiency located on the "Y" chromosome

[Cologne girl]

but i have to ask...what could an agreement between capital and mr mccartney in the 80's have anything to do with george, john and ringo? i'd think anything new(ish) shouldn't affect the "band" in any way.

On the other hand, why should George "all of a sudden" be cross about a 1969 issue just then? As I said, there would have been plenty of time to get that sorted out before, when John was still alive.

[Harrythebannister]

It's like when I drive our car in my husband's presence- I got my driving licence 18 years ago, but he still wants to tell me when to shift gears.

That's quite normal, isn't it??

Yeah, I suppose it must be a standard deficiency located on the "Y" chromosome

[Mini]

but i have to ask...what could an agreement between capital and mr mccartney in the 80's have anything to do with george, john and ringo? i'd think anything new(ish) shouldn't affect the "band" in any way.

On the other hand, why should George "all of a sudden" be cross about a 1969 issue just then? As I said, there would have been plenty of time to get that sorted out before, when John was still alive.

The Paul shares thing happened in 1966.

George , Paul and Ringo almost had this sorted out in 1973 or 74 but at the last minute John declined because the stars were not right. He was with Yoko in a hotel across the road. I believe they were in either Los Angeles or New York. When George found out he got very upset and wanted to kick John's ass.

I don't care what anyone says, Yoko got in the way of those guys and John just couldn't see it.

[bobrocks]

George might have also meant Paul negotiating a bigger Beatles royalty from Capitol in the early 80's. I heard Paul talk about that years ago. He made it sound like George and Ringo were angry, like he'd done something behind their backs.
But the fact was he was up for renegotiations with Capitol, they desperatley wanted to keep him, so he negotiated a larger royalty for himself for all the Beatles records.
He was totally within his rights to do so. And like he said it wasn't like they were actually a band anymore.

[Cologne girl]

George might have also meant Paul negotiating a bigger Beatles royalty from Capitol in the early 80's. I heard Paul talk about that years ago. He made it sound like George and Ringo were angry, like he'd done something behind their backs.
But the fact was he was up for renegotiations with Capitol, they desperatley wanted to keep him, so he negotiated a larger royalty for himself for all the Beatles records.
He was totally within his rights to do so. And like he said it wasn't like they were actually a band anymore.

What you are saying seems to make sense. I suppose the others (well, at least George because Ringo in terms of royalties surely did not get much anyway??) could also have re-negotiated with Capitol, had they chosen to. Only that probably Macca, due to his commercial success, was in the best position to do so.

[Crisstti]

George might have also meant Paul negotiating a bigger Beatles royalty from Capitol in the early 80's. I heard Paul talk about that years ago. He made it sound like George and Ringo were angry, like he'd done something behind their backs.
But the fact was he was up for renegotiations with Capitol, they desperatley wanted to keep him, so he negotiated a larger royalty for himself for all the Beatles records.
He was totally within his rights to do so. And like he said it wasn't like they were actually a band anymore.

Yeah, I think that is what happened.

As for the shares buying thing, I don't think it's even clear it happened.