Marsh. |
24-08-2011 11:07 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zee
(Post 4503516)
Sure it's ****ty for Heidi but she should have spoken up about how she felt several years ago, before Mutya even left the band; if Keisha had been sacked and it had been Mutya and Heidi looking for a new member, and then Mutya had left after a while, Heidi could still have been in a credible band. She doesn't deserve the rights more than anyone. Siobhan and Mutya were friends, Mutya brought her friend Keisha along and a clever man with a business head stuck the three of them together as a group. All three are talented singers, but they are also three teenage girls, and after two years, Siobhan ended up not being able to take it anymore and left the band. Regardless of how long she's been in the band, Heidi was not there from the beginning, so public perception will always be that she doesn't have any real right to the name. Mutya didn't "decide she was too good", she had a baby and just grew up, she didn't want to be standing on stage singing about things like "'cause I'm cooler than the red dress" anymore. If you invented something, would you be happy seeing somebody else taking credit for it? For most people I imagine that would be a resounding no, so why is this any different? I'm pleased she's won. I like the new Sugababes song but I've been of the opinion that they should have changed their name right away for a long time. Clean break, new start, and perhaps people would take them a little bit more seriously if they did.
|
It doesn't matter really. You can't believe they have more right just because they were there at the start. If Mutya gave a **** she wouldn't have left in the first place. As for Siobhan, can't really call her a member or a founder as she was there for about 5 minutes and moved on.
Heidi's been a part of the band for nearly 10 years (longest serving), as well as giving the "brand" all that time, worked to earn it the money it has. Siobhan wasn't there. Public perception would react to a picture of Heidi as a Sugababe, and a picture of Siobhan as "Who's that?".
So, when it comes to Heidi "taking credit" for something someone else "invented" doesn't ring true.
I agree Mutya should still own a percentage of the brand (as she probably already did anyway) but taking away any rights from Heidi is not in the slightest bit fair.
Quote:
Sure it's ****ty for Heidi but she should have spoken up about how she felt several years ago, before Mutya even left the band; if Keisha had been sacked and it had been Mutya and Heidi looking for a new member, and then Mutya had left after a while, Heidi could still have been in a credible band.
|
I don't understand what you're saying here. Are you suggesting Keisha was the reason Mutya quit and therefore Heidi should have sided with Mutya and pushed Keisha out earlier "if she cared enough". It's nothing to do with their personal relationships but ownership of the brand.
The order in which Mutya and Keisha left the band doesn't change the situation.
|