mja6758 said
Ironically, The Beatles recordings never cost Apple a penny because they were never actually on Apple themselves. The Apple label was merely a vanity exercise that EMI allowed them. You only need look at the catalogue numbers, they are all Parlophone numbers.
This further underscores a big part of Apple's many problems, it's structure (or, lack thereof) mirrors that of The Beatles & their Associates inexperience to establish a strong foundation on which to build. Was Apple Records just a "subsidiary" of EMI? Was EMI a "distributer" of Apple Records? or, did the Apple take part in "merely a ...