$1.5 Million per show!?

[dave_is_vh]

I think the sisters own the name / band Van Halen and being partners with Dave might somehow give Dave partial legal ownership of the name / band. The sisters want to avoid this at all costs. That being said I seriously doubt that Dave would agree to a deal where he would not make nearly as much in salary as he would as a partner. Dave wants to get paid fairly. The sisters want to retain control / ownership.

[Mezro]

For the last time, Dave is compensated like a partner but does not have an ownership stake in the Van Halen corporation.

Mezro...Dave is a highly paid employee...nothing more, nothing less...

[dave_is_vh]

Mezro how do you know this for sure? Are you an industry insider? Are you David Lee Roth?

[dave_is_vh]

And Mezro when you say he is paid like a partner does that mean 25%?

[Vinnie Velvet]

Originally posted by Mezro
For the last time, Dave is compensated like a partner but does not have an ownership stake in the Van Halen corporation.

Mezro...Dave is a highly paid employee...nothing more, nothing less...

I think Dave owns more than that.

In fact, I'd say he OWNS the original VH logo which is now being used after all those years with the gay Hagar rings logo (the rings logo was still being used when Cherone joined as well).

Dave also owns part of the publishing rights to all CVH songs (see c. Diamond Dave Music).

Dave also gets a cut from the original videos when they get played or are featured on a DVD (like VH video hits) (Jump, Panama, etc) -- since he pretty much directed them.

In fact, I'd say that Ed and Al would have to get Dave's input and approval over ANY old CVH footage being released on video.

[dave_is_vh]

Originally posted by Vinnie Velvet
In fact, I'd say that Ed and Al would have to get Dave's input and approval over ANY old CVH footage being released on video.

Maybe that is why we are still waiting for DVDs - the sisters are too cocky to put themselves in a position where they need something from Dave, especially his approval.

[Mezro]

Originally posted by Vinnie Velvet
I think Dave owns more than that.

In fact, I'd say he OWNS the original VH logo which is now being used after all those years with the gay Hagar rings logo (the rings logo was still being used when Cherone joined as well).

Dave also owns part of the publishing rights to all CVH songs (see c. Diamond Dave Music).

Dave also gets a cut from the original videos when they get played or are featured on a DVD (like VH video hits) (Jump, Panama, etc) -- since he pretty much directed them.

In fact, I'd say that Ed and Al would have to get Dave's input and approval over ANY old CVH footage being released on video.

BZZZZZZZZ on the logo Vin. E.L.V.H Inc. owns it. Just to back it up: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?...ate=kf1luf.3.3

Mezro...yeah, Dave does have a stake in anything involving the old stuff (he helped create it)...but that has nothing to do with the terms of his agreement to do this tour...

[Mezro]

Originally posted by dave_is_vh
Mezro how do you know this for sure? Are you an industry insider? Are you David Lee Roth?

Yeah...I am fucking David Lee Roth

Mezro...got to get my matador outfit ready for tonight...

[Mezro]

Originally posted by dave_is_vh
And Mezro when you say he is paid like a partner does that mean 25%?

It means 25% or close to it; I doubt the brothers lowballed Dave.

What I am not sure about is what his percent is for merch and what sort of points he has (if any) on the back end of any DVD/ live CD etc that comes from this tour.

Mezro...Sam took a similar deal last time around...Sam in 2004 and Dave in 2007 are paid employees...

[dave_is_vh]

I am sure the sisters low balled Dave but Dave didn't go for it. That is why we had to wait 23 years.

I would not be surprised if Dave gets nothing from merch. But any new stuff including a DVD I would bet Dave gets 25%.

Mezro how are you so confident about what is happening? Are you in the industry?

[dave_is_vh]

Originally posted by Vinnie Velvet
In fact, I'd say he OWNS the original VH logo which is now being used after all those years with the gay Hagar rings logo (the rings logo was still being used when Cherone joined as well).

That is interesting. I did not know that they changed the logo 1986 because of Dave's partial ownership of the rights to the original logo. I though the logo was changed for "marketing" reasons.

[Vinnie Velvet]

Originally posted by dave_is_vh
That is interesting. I did not know that they changed the logo 1986 because of Dave's partial ownership of the rights to the original logo. I though the logo was changed for "marketing" reasons.

I read somewhere very recently that Dave designed the original, winged logo that is featured on the first album and is now being used to promote the tour.

Now I am making the assumption that they altered the logo in 86 not only to signify their new era with Sam but also because Dave had ownership rights to the original one, hence avoiding any legal squabbles with him if they still went with the winged version.

[naturochem]

Originally posted by dave_is_vh

Mezro how are you so confident about what is happening? Are you in the industry?

Mezro is none other than Dave's financial backer, Tony Sopprano...

[Loons The Great]

Got basic skrillah, the kind that chillsah!!