Lightfoot!

[Wesley]

Perhaps this was discussed before but what was the trouble between Lightfoot and managements and UA that caused his first LP to be released in 1966 to years after it was recorded? I'm reading Wayne Francis' Site and it just says securing a satisfactory record deal? Don't know if anyone else has more info on this?

Also in that time how did Warner Brothers end up being the company releasing I'm Not Saying/Ribbon of Darkness since he was already under contract with UA?
http://www.lightfoot.ca/single60.htm

[Affair on Touhy Ave.]

Perhaps this was discussed before but what was the trouble between Lightfoot and managements and UA that caused his first LP to be released in 1966 to years after it was recorded? I'm reading Wayne Francis' Site and it just says securing a satisfactory record deal? Don't know if anyone else has more info on this?

Also in that time how did Warner Brothers end up being the company releasing I'm Not Saying/Ribbon of Darkness since he was already under contract with UA?
http://www.lightfoot.ca/single60.htm

[Borderstone]

Lightfoot did not come out in the US until '66 due to mishandling by UA. UA's thinking was,don't release any LP'ss in America until he has a following there.

The thing of it is,forthe few places Gordon did play in the US,he "did" have a following. In factby the time he left UA in 1969/70,he discovered he had a loyal American following for nearly 5 years! They just did almost nothing to bolster his sales here.

So,justifiably angry,he signed with WB/Reprise (re-prees). He offered $500,000 for the rights to his UA output but they said no. (He's gotten them back since).

That's why when IYCRMM broke into the top 10 here,UA & K-Tel hopped on the wagon of his popularity and released "Classic Lightfoot" (and many a variation of it over the years.)

[Mist O' The Morn']

timetraveler, I generally enjoy conspiracy theory-based explanations, but this one is a bit weak even for me, only because I’ve never come across a suit from a record company who didn’t want to make “more” money and maximize profits, and frankly, do anything to attain that goal, including sacrificing the artist, if necessary. So, I would think UA would want fans to get their hands on all the music possible; after all, the music was never going away, Lightfoot was not going away; besides the likes of Ian & Sylvia, Peter, Paul & Mary, and other noted folk artists had begun to embrace Lightfoot’s works. I can’t comment on, nor would I speculate about, the relationship between UA and Lightfoot, but I do feel comfortable thinking that it was gross incompetence on UA and its management’s part in the way it dealt with their young artist, Lightfoot.

[walls]

timetraveler, I generally enjoy conspiracy theory-based explanations, but this one is a bit weak even for me, only because I’ve never come across a suit from a record company who didn’t want to make “more” money and maximize profits, and frankly, do anything to attain that goal, including sacrificing the artist, if necessary. So, I would think UA would want fans to get their hands on all the music possible; after all, the music was never going away, Lightfoot was not going away; besides the likes of Ian & Sylvia, Peter, Paul & Mary, and other noted folk artists had begun to embrace Lightfoot’s works. I can’t comment on, nor would I speculate about, the relationship between UA and Lightfoot, but I do feel comfortable thinking that it was gross incompetence on UA and its management’s part in the way it dealt with their young artist, Lightfoot.