What was the final price on this?

tia

Derek

What was the final price on this?

tia

Derek

link

Please tell me Im wrong!

The ice release was released some time after the mercury release. If thats the case then its a reissue and why would anyone want to pay silly money for it!

I think there is 2 years between the 2 releases Correct me if Im wrong

Edited June 16, 200520 yr by Ernie Andrews

Please tell me Im wrong!

The ice release was released some time after the mercury release. If thats the case then its a reissue and why would anyone want to pay silly money for it!

I think there is 2 years between the 2 releases Correct me if Im wrong

link

You're wrong Steve

There was a thread a while ago.

Jist is it should have been released on ICE first, but there was 'legal stuff' with Eddy Grant and Mercury released it in 77. When the wrangling was sorted, ICE finally released it in 78.

ICE is the rarer copy, ask Mr Trout

Jamie

You're wrong Steve 

There was a thread a while ago.

Jist is it should have been released on ICE first, but there was 'legal stuff' with Eddy Grant and Mercury released it in 77. When the wrangling was sorted, ICE finally released it in 78.

ICE is the rarer copy, ask Mr Trout 

Jamie 

link

Neither issue is rare at all

Derek

Anyway does anyone know what the mercury issue auctioned on manship's site that finished yesterday went for?

Derek

Neither issue is rare at all 

Derek

link

One of your pet hates this, isn't it Derek

Jamie

One of your pet hates this, isn't it Derek 

Jamie 

link

Not so much the record but the attempt to make out it's rare, it really isn't. Indemand no doubt but rare no.

Derek

Neither issue is rare at all 

Derek

link

Neither issue is any good either IMVHO

You're wrong Steve 

There was a thread a while ago.

Jist is it should have been released on ICE first, but there was 'legal stuff' with Eddy Grant and Mercury released it in 77. When the wrangling was sorted, ICE finally released it in 78.

ICE is the rarer copy, ask Mr Trout 

Jamie 

link

So even though I was ayear out if it has had 2 releases which was the reissue?

So even though I was ayear out if it has had 2 releases which was the reissue?

link

Well the Mercury issue did come out first so i'd say it was even though the Ice issue was supposed to come out first.

Derek

I don't think the Ice label even started up until 1979

Well the Mercury issue did come out first so i'd say it was even though the Ice issue was supposed to come out first.

Derek

link

So the question is- If it has had 2 uk releases is the second a reissue?

Please answer!

Therefore on this occasion why (Whichever it is ) is going for silly money?

And if I find the birdy song on a ebony uk label which was part of RCA and it was released after its main release does that mean its a reissue even though it is rare and if it was popular is that the reason to say it is worth #500 quid.

This rarity issue and demand issue is now becoming a joke because it depends on some bloody idiot who decided he had more money than sense! :angry:

I don't think the Ice label even started up until 1979

link

I beg your pardon, it was indeed 1977, at least that's when their first ALBUM came out.

So the question is- If it has had 2 uk releases is the second a reissue?

Please answer!

Therefore on this occasion why (Whichever it is ) is going for silly money?

And if I find the birdy song on a ebony uk label which was part of RCA and it was released after its main release does that mean its a reissue even though it is rare and if it was popular is that the reason to say it is worth #500 quid.

This rarity issue and demand issue is now becoming a joke because it depends on some bloody idiot who decided he had more money than sense! :angry:

link

Its generally much harder on Ice. Must be rarer than on Mercury???

Its generally much harder on Ice. Must be rarer than on Mercury???

link

Derek

It went for £150

Tony Darkin

F**K what label is harder, the record is wonderful.................

ps....Ice is harder.............

One of those records you either love or hate.

Personally detest it.

Bid £15 on one on eBay to sell on, finally went for £130+

Insane.

They should have stuck to Reggae.

One of those records you either love or hate.

Personally detest it.

Bid £15 on one on eBay to sell on, finally went for £130+

Insane.

They should have stuck to Reggae.

link

Defo one of the worst records on the scene, sounds like some drunk at a karaoke night, bloody awful!

Defo one of the worst records on the scene, sounds like some drunk at a karaoke night, bloody awful!

link

Anybody with sound file thingy?,sick of hearing bout`this would be nice to know what the fuss is about......

Defo one of the worst records on the scene, sounds like some drunk at a karaoke night, bloody awful!

link

Once again.....the subjectivity of music raises it's ugly head......your not right and neither is Pikey........in my opinion.......but in yours ......you are 100% correct.

why oh why do we constantly have to preach on topics about records we "loathe", it's so negative that it brings the subject matter to a meaningless.....yeah--- no debate.

FOR GODS SAKE SAY SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE IN THE DEBATE.....ie what reasons (ie. in depth what you don't like about the record).......(Like a school teacher here)....the vocal, the rhythm, the percussion etc............

Once again.....the subjectivity of music raises it's ugly head......your not right and neither is Pikey........in my opinion.......but in yours ......you are 100% correct.

why oh why do we constantly have to preach on topics about records we "loathe", it's so negative that it brings the subject matter to a meaningless.....yeah--- no debate.

FOR GODS SAKE SAY SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE IN THE DEBATE.....ie what reasons (ie. in depth what you don't like about the record).......(Like a school teacher here)....the vocal, the rhythm, the percussion etc............

link

His vocals are weak.

The lyrics are dire.

The backing is wishy washy in the extreme.

It's a bag-o-shite and a perfect example of 'Emporers New Clothes'

Constructive enough?

Now.....your learning Joe........

I don't think it deserves that kind of vitriol. It's catchy, it's simple - can't understand what all the fuss is about

Jamie

Anybody with sound file thingy?,sick of hearing bout`this would be nice to know what the fuss is about......

link

Edited June 17, 200520 yr by Simon T

I think it's excellent. Unfortunately for me I can't spend £50 on a record let alone £150, so the chances of me getting a copy are somewhat remote.

I've only heard it played out once, I don't go out often enough to be sick of it.

I've recently been playing it on the computer (Soul Club) and my mate who thinks all my records are shite (or rip-offs of something else), actually likes it.

Edited June 17, 200520 yr by Supercorsa

Defo one of the worst records on the scene, sounds like some drunk at a karaoke night, bloody awful!

link

Better than The Futures though Lenny

soulmac

Once again.....the subjectivity of music raises it's ugly head......your not right and neither is Pikey........in my opinion.......but in yours ......you are 100% correct.

why oh why do we constantly have to preach on topics about records we "loathe", it's so negative that it brings the subject matter to a meaningless.....yeah--- no debate.

FOR GODS SAKE SAY SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE IN THE DEBATE.....ie what reasons (ie. in depth what you don't like about the record).......(Like a school teacher here)....the vocal, the rhythm, the percussion etc............

link

YES SIR!, now lets start with the vocals, awful, the arrangement, awful, the group, awful, the label, awful, the hype, bloody unbelievable :angry: hope thats cleared up any misunderstanding on this record.