Kanye West has been at crosshairs with his business partners and associated brands for several months. The final straw that broke the camels back were a series of offensive and anti-Semitic comments. This resulted in a total of eight companies cutting ties with YE, with Adidas as the latest company to terminate the partnership.
The reality, however, is that YE has been in a protracted boardroom and ideological battle with these companies. Kanye, for example, had cemented a manufacturing and distribution landmark deal in 2016 between an Athletic Brand and Non-Athlete. However, with the passage of time YE realized that having no ownership and control for his creative and entrepreneurial work limited his power and leverage from a business perspective. This ongoing tension was revealed in a media statement by Adidas that categorically stated that ‘adidas is the sole owner of all design rights to existing products as well as previous and new colorways under the partnership’. This sums up the nub of YE’s battle with all his partners - the deal structure(s) simply makes no sense for him anymore.
In a recent interview with Piers Morgan, YE expanded on where the boardroom and ideological battle lay. It became clear that he fundamentally believes that the sports and entertainment industry leaders do not engage in fair play. He was scathing of the talent and contract management in the industry and even suggesting that there’s racial discrimination. As such, he insists on an open review of the top 10 contracts within the sport and entertainment industry. Off course, Kanye knows that such a review will never take place. It is the kind of information you get by engaging with industry colleagues and connecting your own dots.
Here is where the entire story gets puzzling; Kanye is a music, fashion and creative icon. He wields tremendous personal and brand power. That gives him superior leverage in any boardroom that he enters. Moreover, the US is the leader in the business of sports and entertainment industry. Therefore, you would think that there’s sufficient industry know-how and expertise to assist in structuring mutually beneficial deals for talent at his level.
This begs the question; how has YE entered into business deals where he is the lead designer, creator and visionary yet owns nothing?
It is one thing for creative talent in Africa to enter into poorly structured deals. It is something else for Kanye West to enter into deals where his intellectual property and ownership status are not secured. Or maybe it not the case that artist are structuring and accepting sub-optimal deals. It might be that industry leaders and the system view creative talent as a means to an end rather than an end in themselves.