Posted in industry | music on March 21, 2007

Beatles cup"Paul McCartney was introduced Wednesday as the first artist signed to Starbucks Corp.'s new record label.

The former Beatle made an appearance via a video feed from London at the company's annual meeting.

The world's largest specialty coffee retailer announced earlier this month that it was partnering with Concord Music Group to launch the Los Angeles-based Hear Music label." [CNN]

---

      

Tags: The Beatles

Comments (22)

wow, that almost would seem like a joke if i didn't know any better. seems sorta fitting though, overpriced douchebag coffee company starts a record label and the first one they go and sign is the guy who ruined one of the greatest bands ever. in the words of lennon, "those freaks were right when they said he was dead"

Posted by marc | March 21, 2007 6:05 PM

the lawsuit wasn't even the single event that ended the beatles, let alone "ruined" them.

but agreed that the paul/starbucks combo is most unfortunate.

Posted by jif | March 21, 2007 7:10 PM

noooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Posted by Justin | March 21, 2007 7:21 PM

starbucks is so wrong on so many levels, coffee wise mainly.

Posted by Anonymous | March 21, 2007 7:23 PM

This sounds like a good business decision for both Paul and Starbucks. Paul's a smart man.

Get over yourselves with this Starbucks kneejerk complaining. And grow up. Starbucks is no different than a million other companies that you patronize or buy products from or that you work for. If you want to be completely "pure" then quit your job and go live on a mountaintop somwhere while you chant to hare krishna. Good luck.

Unless a musician/band is planning on spending their career playing in crummy dives and barely making enough money to eat, they quickly learn that music is a BUSINESS.

Signing a deal with Starbucks is no worse than signing a deal with any other record label. Money talks and bullshit walks, kids. It's just bidness. ;)

Posted by Dave | March 21, 2007 9:26 PM

Do Starbucks shops sell any non-vegetarian items? After all, Sir Paul is a staunch vegetarian (if not vegan).

Posted by me | March 21, 2007 9:35 PM

Last I heard, Starbucks doesn't sell meat, me@9:35.

Being a vegetarian myself, rest assured that coffee and cake are considered vegetarian products. Vegan is another matter.

BTW, what difference does that make? Do you only do business with someone who shares your food preferences or religious beliefs or whatever? Paul's selling a CD not looking for lunch! Geesh.

Posted by dave | March 22, 2007 12:39 AM

Yes, actually, I only read BV because he's a vegan. If he advocates the slaughter of innocent animals I'm out of here.

Posted by me@9:35 | March 22, 2007 1:03 AM

Actually, Starbucks now sells warm breakfast sandwiches that have ham, eggs, bacon, etc. in them.

http://www.starbucks.com/retail/nutrition/Zone016_SBUX_Food_Nutrition.pdf

Back on topic, while it's disappointing, I can't say this is all that surprising. Once you're a bobble head, there really isn't any selling out left to do.

Posted by Anonymous | March 22, 2007 1:32 AM

How many folks here are old enough to even remember seeing the Beatles on TV? Raise your hands high. I bet not many.

One more time, folks. You are most likely not Paul's target audience. You are too young. You are...um...irrelevant to this man's future career plans.

Paul has made his money and etched his name in the rock and and roll history books.

His target audience now has a family, kids, a nice house and is driving a volvo and shops at Starbucks.

Enjoy the Artic Monkeys, the White Stripes and whatever. The world doesn't totally revolve around you. You'll figure this out as you put a little more mileage on yourselves.

Posted by dave | March 22, 2007 9:26 AM

I'm pretty sure Paul McCartney isn't too busy worrying about only being able to play dive bars and not having enough money to eat, but obviously since I'm not like, seventy years old, what do I know?

Posted by Anonymous | March 22, 2007 9:55 AM

I believe McCartney's "target audience" would be the human race, at this point. Limiting him to a certain age group is a disservice. And limiting Starbucks to a specific age group is just stupid.

Posted by Anonymous | March 22, 2007 10:16 AM

Starbucks...Capitol , Warners , Sony.....whats the difference ?
Why are you people pretending that Paul has any of his soul intact?
He hasnt made a good record since the Nixon Adminstration anyway..

Posted by rt | March 22, 2007 11:26 AM

I dont admire either too well, but Im sure both Paul and Starbucks will come out on the good end of this deal.

Posted by Kristi | March 22, 2007 12:02 PM

rt:

Flaming Pie is a great album. Other than that, I completely agree with you.

Posted by birdboy | March 22, 2007 12:24 PM

tickets for patti smith at hiro ballroom on 4/18 are onsale now on ticketweb!!

Posted by miguel | March 22, 2007 12:38 PM

Well said, dave. Let the hipster doofuses worry about what's in vogue at Pianos and let people with some sense of musical history buy their music wherever it's available.

McCartney has always had a head for business. And working with Starbucks on this album is a wise move. If it backfires somehow, it won't be difficult for the guy to find another label to call home.

I'll still never use the word "grande" when ordering coffee, though.

Posted by thechairguy | March 22, 2007 1:10 PM

More people on earth would rather see Paul McCartney perform (even at age 64) than the number of people COMBINED who would prefer to see Arctic Monkeys, White Stripes, Radiohead, Arcade Fire or Sufjan Stevens. But, of course, hipsters are far more important than "most people".

Posted by realitybites | March 22, 2007 1:54 PM

chairguy said: "I'll still never use the word "grande" when ordering coffee, though."

Me neither. I just say large and it's the barista's job to figure it out!

Posted by dave | March 22, 2007 7:25 PM

Here's the deal, Capitol/EMI screwed up when they didn't promote his last record,knowing that his contract was up. If you were Paul why go to another major record label when none of them are going to promote to your audience (the baby-boomers) anyways. Also,there's no difference between Starbucks and a Major Label. I take it back, the difference is there is probably more artistic freedom at Starbucks.

Posted by jeff | March 22, 2007 7:53 PM

Yea he should sell himself to Nike and Haliburton as well while he's at it (free markets rule!). Like Dave said, what's the big deal? Maybe Raytheon needs some tunes for their commercials!

Look I'm sure Paul really needs the money - cut the guy a break, right?

Posted by Anonymous | March 24, 2007 12:16 AM

Most of you people need to do a little more research on Paul McCartney... You make a very deep person out to be shallow and arrogant. It's insufferable. However, it is your right to remain ignorant and completely obtuse. The man is a genius. Any age group with a remote bit of intelligence is aware of this fact. Bless you all.

Posted by Amanda | September 17, 2009 4:33 AM

Leave a Comment