Forgetting Someone?

[Ron]

The similarities between the Beach Boys and their touring and membership issues is so similar to the country band "Alabama".  All of those guys hate each other, and on any given day whenever they do something 1 or 2 or 3 of them may show up... even to the point where they cut one of the dudes out of the old pictures, so nobody remembers that there's 4 members. 


What it comes down to is, if Mike kept touring with Brian he probably felt like sh*t was going to get ugly again and didn't want that.  Mike is all about money, and he would have made more money touring with Brian... but yet doesn't want to.  That tells us something.  I don't think they had any issues, I just think that they're different people and too much is too much sometimes.  In Mike's band everybody's his bitch, in the BB's Mike is a rockstar but so is Brian.  Brian travels with an entourage and while Mike has massive love and respect for his cousin I'll bet he doesnt' have an ounce of it for the assistants. 

[Pretty Funky]

The cynic in me says Brian and Al have increased the license value by merely implying they want a full group to continue.

[Ron]

Definately could be.  Brian's manipulative as sh*t.  Maybe the royalty has been stuck at the same figure for 10 years and they wanted a raise, lol. 

[Don Malcolm]

Someone (quite possibly someone who posts here...) was quick to point out the oversight in the Yahoo article in the comments section. While it was certainly disappointing, ultimately it just doesn't matter that much...and I hope that such slights can be sloughed off in the wake of the good things that happened in 2012. Mike isn't the devil and Brian isn't a saint--but we had a great, great year even with the messed-up headlines in October. Time to turn the other cheek, smile when your heart is breaking, let any chips just slide off the shoulder, and be grateful for all of the unexpected treasures that slipped on through in spite of the BB's penchant for discord and intrigue.

What John Cale sung in his 70s hommage to BW ("Mr. Wilson") is still true today: we "believe ['em] anyway." And that's never going to change, now, is it?? 

[The Shift]

But Mike and whoever else is in charge of that sort of thing at BRI should have had the good sense to know not to book shows so far in advance when he was already part of something that was bigger and more profitable than any of that.  And with his reputation, he couldn't have thought that something good could have come out of the way it was handled.  If anything, he should have canceled those dates with his band and had consulted thoroughly with Brian and Al before making any further plans.

Way I see it is that the re-union was never a dead-cert to run its full course. These are the Beach Boys after all and on past performance Brian could have pulled out any time, Mike and Al might have fallen out, Bruce could have been offered a better paying job writing advertising jingles and Dave could have seen sense.

With their history, Mike was more than sensible to plan ahead. Don't forget, after all, it's his day job, this was just a sabbatical.

Not sure he would have been any better paid on the C50 tour either as the big money there would be split between five principals, while on his BBs tour it goes two ways (if Bruce is lucky!).

Further, Mike has a band, a bloomin' good band established over many years. Disbanding that would be senseless as, when the C50 outfit loses its novelty value and goes the way of all things Beach-Boys, it might be impossible to re-assemble once everyone's gone their own way.

And just maybe he didn't want to make his band members redundant; just maybe they're friends, and he cares for their livelihoods.

How many of us here, granted a fun but unstable six-month sabbatical with a better-paying rival employer likely to collapse at any moment while your main, steady employer holds your job open for your return, would be daft enough to tell that stable employer to go swing?

[Ron]

I honestly, seriously, call me a moron think you're onto something about him wanting to keep his buddies employed.  I own a business but have no employees... but I've worked for people that owned small businesses... and in my case, the owner of the company, believe it or not, was incredibly protective of his employees.  The guy was rich as hell, but if anybody that worked for him had an issue or a problem, or a medical scare or something, that guy would move heaven to help them out.  We had one guy have a stroke, the owner was on vacation, he caught a private plane to the employees town that night so he could visit him at the hospital the next morning.  When I turned in my notice I was leaving, he called me on the phone and told me he was mainly concerned that my new job might not work out, and that I wouldn't earn a good living for myself.  He was probably an anomaly but it's not a stretch, I don't think to believe that Mike is definately concerned about the livlihood of his band members. 

[HeyJude]

I honestly, seriously, call me a moron think you're onto something about him wanting to keep his buddies employed.  I own a business but have no employees... but I've worked for people that owned small businesses... and in my case, the owner of the company, believe it or not, was incredibly protective of his employees.  The guy was rich as hell, but if anybody that worked for him had an issue or a problem, or a medical scare or something, that guy would move heaven to help them out.  We had one guy have a stroke, the owner was on vacation, he caught a private plane to the employees town that night so he could visit him at the hospital the next morning.  When I turned in my notice I was leaving, he called me on the phone and told me he was mainly concerned that my new job might not work out, and that I wouldn't earn a good living for myself.  He was probably an anomaly but it's not a stretch, I don't think to believe that Mike is definately concerned about the livlihood of his band members. 

I'm sure Mike greatly appreciates his musicians. But my personal guess is that Mike is not huffing around touring at age 71 going on 72 just to keep a few of his backing musicians employed.

[HeyJude]

Not sure he would have been any better paid on the C50 tour either as the big money there would be split between five principals, while on his BBs tour it goes two ways (if Bruce is lucky!).

There was a lot of speculation going back to early this year as to the strong possibility that Mike personally made less money touring in the reunion lineup than he does on his own. It's quite possible.

While we don't know the exact breakdown of the C50 tour arrangements, I would doubt they split all the proceeds five ways. The tour operation was run by a company formed by Brian, Mike, and Joe Thomas. Al is a corporate member, so he may have seen an actual cut. But it's likely that Bruce and David were just salaried, as they have been over the years during their tenures in the touring band.

[EgoHanger1966]

But Mike and whoever else is in charge of that sort of thing at BRI should have had the good sense to know not to book shows so far in advance when he was already part of something that was bigger and more profitable than any of that.  And with his reputation, he couldn't have thought that something good could have come out of the way it was handled.  If anything, he should have canceled those dates with his band and had consulted thoroughly with Brian and Al before making any further plans.

Way I see it is that the re-union was never a dead-cert to run its full course. These are the Beach Boys after all and on past performance Brian could have pulled out any time, Mike and Al might have fallen out, Bruce could have been offered a better paying job writing advertising jingles and Dave could have seen sense.

With their history, Mike was more than sensible to plan ahead. Don't forget, after all, it's his day job, this was just a sabbatical.

Not sure he would have been any better paid on the C50 tour either as the big money there would be split between five principals, while on his BBs tour it goes two ways (if Bruce is lucky!).

Further, Mike has a band, a bloomin' good band established over many years. Disbanding that would be senseless as, when the C50 outfit loses its novelty value and goes the way of all things Beach-Boys, it might be impossible to re-assemble once everyone's gone their own way.

And just maybe he didn't want to make his band members redundant; just maybe they're friends, and he cares for their livelihoods.

How many of us here, granted a fun but unstable six-month sabbatical with a better-paying rival employer likely to collapse at any moment while your main, steady employer holds your job open for your return, would be daft enough to tell that stable employer to go swing?

Logical. I enjoyed this post, thanks.

[guitarfool2002]

Getting back to the original list and topic of the thread, I saw that same end-of-year recap in my local paper. Bottom line: The Beach Boys are not listed because they don't have the same major corporate and advertising backing and interests as the other artists on that list. There is a reason for everything articles and syndicated columns do, and most of it comes down to increasing visibility of these "hot" "hip" or "now" artists because a lot of interests stand to make a lot of money as the performers' stock goes up through increased visibility.

I read these just because I'm a fan of pop culture and music in general. As far as why someone wasn't included, if you play this scene as someone would play the stock market, with value increasing with visibility therefore making more money for those invested in the venture, it all adds up why the names mentioned prominently on that list are there while others are not. Apply the same to the world of sports, and see why certain names like Jeter, Bryant, etc appear everywhere and other less marketable players might have the skills but not the ability to make money for sponsors and investors.

In other words, where was the corporate sponsorship behind the Beach Boys versus, say, The Stones or Taylor Swift? Or the current "it girl" twenty-something hip irreverent Lena Dunham? Some artists are better at getting their audience to buy products and spend money than others.

Follow the big money. It may explain more about why The Beach Boys aren't in that syndicated article than any speculation about Mike Love.

[schiaffino]

I don't think the BBs were ever considered a pop icon. Maybe briefly during that magical summer/fall of 1966, but never again.

IMO a pop icon is someone that actually marked history in modern arts. Some examples: Michael Jackson did, The Beatles & The Stones did, some Hollywood actors also meant a lot in the cultural development of the 20th century society.

The BBs didn't. Sad but true, as James would say. So I'm not surprised they're not in that list.

But that doesn't mean they're not my fav band of all time. I couldn't care less what the public thinks about this bunch of crazies...I love them'all!

[guitarfool2002]

For a few years in the early 60's, the Beach Boys created an entire myth around California culture that had been hinted at before, but nowhere near what it would become in the 60's. Not to get into debates over what the "real" surfers or the "real" hot-rodders thought of them - inside the music and the imagery on their album covers was a fantasy world that both a kid in the midwest or a kid in England could see and think "That's where I'd rather be, that's what I want to do.".

Take a look at when the Beach Boys appeared on Ed Sullivan in '64 versus when Dick Dale did Misirlou on the same stage a few years earlier. Footage of large waves dominated the footage intercut into the Dale performance. When the Beach Boys were playing I Get Around, they showed footage of convertibles, beautiful girls on the beach, guys driving neat cars wearing shades hanging with those girls, etc. It was pure sunny California mythology, and pure escapist fantasy for those kids watching in a living room on Sunday night.

Those are people my age...I want to be there too. Powerful stuff. The early Beach Boys music was a soundtrack for a lot of this.

And if they didn't originate this "California Myth", their music crystallized it and made it real for a lot of people at that time. They helped make these underground or niche activities like the custom car culture and surfing (complete with lingo) mainstream.

Worthy of note and inclusion in any discussions about history and culture of the 60's.

As far as the original article - that is all about the money.

[NHC]

I don't think the BBs were ever considered a pop icon. Maybe briefly during that magical summer/fall of 1966, but never again.

IMO a pop icon is someone that actually marked history in modern arts. Some examples: Michael Jackson did, The Beatles & The Stones did, some Hollywood actors also meant a lot in the cultural development of the 20th century society.

The BBs didn't. Sad but true, as James would say. So I'm not surprised they're not in that list.

But that doesn't mean they're not my fav band of all time. I couldn't care less what the public thinks about this bunch of crazies...I love them'all!

Did not mark history in modern arts?  Really? The fact that virtually the entire music industry over the past half-century acknowledges  how sea-changing the Beach Boys were to pop/rock music notwithstanding?

[I. Spaceman]

I don't think the BBs were ever considered a pop icon. Maybe briefly during that magical summer/fall of 1966, but never again.

IMO a pop icon is someone that actually marked history in modern arts. Some examples: Michael Jackson did, The Beatles & The Stones did, some Hollywood actors also meant a lot in the cultural development of the 20th century society.

The BBs didn't. Sad but true, as James would say. So I'm not surprised they're not in that list.

But that doesn't mean they're not my fav band of all time. I couldn't care less what the public thinks about this bunch of crazies...I love them'all!

Did not mark history in modern arts?  Really? The fact that virtually the entire music industry over the past half-century acknowledges  how sea-changing the Beach Boys were to pop/rock music notwithstanding?

The industry has acknowledged it, sure.