RE: SP on Open25 Nov 2020 23:06
That makes perfect sense Glenn. I had previously suggested that some or all of the $44m creditors would be written off as part of the deal, or used as leverage in some other attractive way to the artists and their producers (eg preferential placement for artists, better rates going forward, better security/guarantees for payment). This would be attractive if there was hitherto no other feasible way of Napster making the payments and the artists getting paid. If so, this all lends to the theory that Napster had no choice but to sell to us, possibly through third party pressures, but for the greater good of all concerned. You are well researched here. What’s your take?