Official thread for Brian & Al's Official Response to Mike/Bruce Band Tour in the LA Times

[Jonathan Blum]

At that point my attorney merely suggested to Mike's attorney that a possible press release in those markets might be appropriate to stop the confusion, which was in no one's best interest. That's it, plain and simple, and a strategy was open for discussion, which never happened.

That’s why I was completely blindsided by his press release. I had no idea that it was coming out, since it was crafted by Mike's personal PR firm without my knowledge or approval. No one in my camp would have approved it or the timing."

OK, so far so good. But...

"I'm disappointed that Mike would now say that the release was done at the request of my representative"

Seems to me the key point in all of this is the phrase "press release in those markets".  Brian's attorney wanted local clarifications in those areas, he got a global open-ended statement which sounded like this was the Beach Boys from now on.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[EthanJames]

I gotta feeling it's only a matter of time this thread is probably going to be locked as well lol

[Wirestone]

Back when this first came up, I said the situation was surely a simple one. Mike was adhering to the letter of the contract. Brian had come to enjoy touring with the full band and wanted it to continue in some way.

For whatever reason, the parties couldn't agree to this behind the scenes. So when Mike issued his somewhat ill-timed and poorly worded press release, it was a chance for Brian and Al to apply public pressure to Mike. Now that Mike tried to settle things with his LA Times piece -- but without committing to working with the rest of the guys -- Brian and his camp is going to keep up the pressure.

Brian has now officially allied with Al, as stated in the piece. This would send a message to Mike that the license is surely once again a subject for discussion. And if a proposal is made that the name "The Beach Boys" can only be applied to a group consisting of X members -- well, that's when things get interesting, isn't it?

I doubt this is a publicity ploy. This is merely everyone reverting to the personality types and behaviors that are familiar and that they know best. Mike is pugnacious and looking out for himself. Brian is playing the victim to get what he wants. Al is trying to pick the winning side. I don't think Brian looks bad in this, regardless of how folks want to spin it. He will always be the genius behind the band, and Mike will always be the heel, at least in the popular imagination.

I can't imagine how this is going to end to everyone's satisfaction. And Mike has disappointed me, yet again. Each time, it gets a little harder to forgive the man. But such are the challenges of BB fandom.

[Shady]

I gotta feeling it's only a matter of time this thread is probably going to be locked as well lol

As long as AGD doesn't bring up penis size again it should be just fine

[Jonathan Blum]

I wonder what some of these "fans" would say if it was Brian who had solo concerts booked immediately after the reunion tour, and Al came forward to lobby for a continuance of the reunion tour? Or, WOULD have Al come forward if it was Brian who had commitments? I doubt it. Do you think Brian would've cancelled his solo dates?

Key word there is "solo".  The underlying issue is still that that press release defined Mike and Bruce's band as the ongoing Beach Boys, apparently ending the reunion.  No one had a problem with Brian or Mike playing solo shows in between their Beach Boys gigs, even back in the '80s -- neither one laid claim to the Beach Boys name in the process.

If this whole thing could be settled just by officially billing Mike's band as "Mike Love's Beach Boys", I'd be all for it...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Chris Brown]

I'm with sweetdudejim on this one.  No matter how good or bad everyone thought the reunion album/tour would go, it's been quite clear for several months now that the whole endeavor has been a smashing success.  In light of this, the fact that in it's original conception, the whole thing was intended to be finite is irrelevant.  For me, and obviously many other fans, seeing this summer's configuration of The Beach Boys rendered the Mike and Bruce version of the band obsolete.  A facsimile of the real deal.  It only worked prior to this year because that was how all parties wanted it, but that is no longer the case.

Bottom line, Brian Wilson wants to be a Beach Boy again, and if his cousin truly cares about him or the legacy of their band, he should re-evaluate his notions about touring and "diluting the brand".  He's had a good run with Bruce, and admirably worked his ass off to bring the music to many happy fans over the years, but as "Brianista" as this sounds, I think the right thing to do would be to dissolve "The Beach Boys" and spend what precious time they all have left with Brian at the helm and touring/recording/whatever as THE BEACH BOYS.

[Chris Brown]

I wonder what some of these "fans" would say if it was Brian who had solo concerts booked immediately after the reunion tour, and Al came forward to lobby for a continuance of the reunion tour? Or, WOULD have Al come forward if it was Brian who had commitments? I doubt it. Do you think Brian would've cancelled his solo dates?

Key word there is "solo".  The underlying issue is still that that press release defined Mike and Bruce's band as the ongoing Beach Boys, apparently ending the reunion.  No one had a problem with Brian or Mike playing solo shows in between their Beach Boys gigs, even back in the '80s -- neither one laid claim to the Beach Boys name in the process.

If this whole thing could be settled just by officially billing Mike's band as "Mike Love's Beach Boys", I'd be all for it...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Exactly, well said!  If everyone went out and did their own thing when they wanted, and reserved "The Beach Boys" only for albums and tours with all 5 members, this whole situation would be a non-starter.

[Wirestone]

I wonder what some of these "fans" would say if it was Brian who had solo concerts booked immediately after the reunion tour, and Al came forward to lobby for a continuance of the reunion tour? Or, WOULD have Al come forward if it was Brian who had commitments? I doubt it. Do you think Brian would've cancelled his solo dates?

Key word there is "solo".  The underlying issue is still that that press release defined Mike and Bruce's band as the ongoing Beach Boys, apparently ending the reunion.  No one had a problem with Brian or Mike playing solo shows in between their Beach Boys gigs, even back in the '80s -- neither one laid claim to the Beach Boys name in the process.

If this whole thing could be settled just by officially billing Mike's band as "Mike Love's Beach Boys", I'd be all for it...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Exactly, well said!  If everyone went out and did their own thing when they wanted, and reserved "The Beach Boys" only for albums and tours with all 5 members, this whole situation would be a non-starter.

Exactly. I wonder how someone like Scott Totten or John Cowsill feels about this? What must it be like going from Wembley to these tiny venues, knowing that your boss now refuses to tour with the man who created the beautiful music you play?

[Justin]

I don't get it....did Mike say he would never work with Brian and the group again?  No.

Can we really expect Brian and Al to keep up Mike and Bruce's normal touring pace every year?  No.

Has Mike ever shown signs of stopping or taking long hiatuses throughout the year in between strings of shows?  No.

Are The Beach Boys any less The Beach Boys when they work together again in the future in 2013 or 2014?  No.

[SMiLE Brian]

I wonder what some of these "fans" would say if it was Brian who had solo concerts booked immediately after the reunion tour, and Al came forward to lobby for a continuance of the reunion tour? Or, WOULD have Al come forward if it was Brian who had commitments? I doubt it. Do you think Brian would've cancelled his solo dates?

Key word there is "solo".  The underlying issue is still that that press release defined Mike and Bruce's band as the ongoing Beach Boys, apparently ending the reunion.  No one had a problem with Brian or Mike playing solo shows in between their Beach Boys gigs, even back in the '80s -- neither one laid claim to the Beach Boys name in the process.

If this whole thing could be settled just by officially billing Mike's band as "Mike Love's Beach Boys", I'd be all for it...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Exactly, well said!  If everyone went out and did their own thing when they wanted, and reserved "The Beach Boys" only for albums and tours with all 5 members, this whole situation would be a non-starter.

Exactly. I wonder how someone like Scott Totten or John Cowsill feels about this? What must it be like going from Wembley to these tiny venues, knowing that your boss now refuses to tour with the man who created the beautiful music you play?

They looked bored in the recent Waco show videos.

[Wirestone]

I don't get it....did Mike say he would never work with Brian and the group again?  No.

He didn't promise that he would, either. Or that he expected to. Given that Brian and Al enthusiastically want to continue, this lack of any commitment at all from Mike certainly suggests that to him this reunion is over and done. Full stop.

Can we really expect Brian and Al to keep up Mike and Bruce's normal touring pace every year?  No.

Of course not. But Mike doesn't have to tour like this. If he insists upon it, he doesn't have to use the Beach Boys name.

Has Mike ever shown signs of stopping or taking long hiatuses throughout the year in between strings of shows?  No.

What does that have to do with anything? The point is, Brian and Al want things to be different.

Are The Beach Boys any less The Beach Boys when they work together again in the future in 2013 or 2014?  No.

Show me where Mike has expressed any interest in playing any more shows with the full lineup. He simply has not.

[Jim V.]

I don't get it....did Mike say he would never work with Brian and the group again?  No.

Can we really expect Brian and Al to keep up Mike and Bruce's normal touring pace every year?  No.

Has Mike ever shown signs of stopping or taking long hiatuses throughout the year in between strings of shows?  No.

Are The Beach Boys any less The Beach Boys when they work together again in the future in 2013 or 2014?  No.

And does any of this mean that Mike Love should call his group "The Beach Boys", therefore confusing people more if he finally decides to work with the other guys again?


NO!

[the professor]

Once again, why is everybody having a debate about whether these few "Mike & Bruce" shows are occurring? In the long run, it's unimportant. What's important is that Mike hasn't gave us much of an impression that he would like to continue working with Brian and Al in the near future. That is what bothering people like me. All this tit-for-tat about who knew about this show when and where and whatever doesn't matter. It's the fact that Mike and Bruce seemed somehow resentful of how well the 50th anniversary tour was going and seemed almost giddy to get back to the cheapie band.

I hate to sound like the professor but all it would take out of Mike to shut most of us up would be to say, "yeah we booked a few shows with our band, but Bruce and I are looking forward to getting back in the studio with Brian, Al, and Dave to work on material for our next album"!

However, the reason he hasn't done something like this is probably because that's not what he really wants to do. He feels comfortable with his half-assed version of "The Beach Boys" and probably doesn't see the point in putting out more albums like TWGMTR. So crazy as it is, after all these years, despite what I thought, Mike wasn't as into getting back to work with Brian as I had thought. I thought that was Mike's ultimate goal, to get back to work with Brian and make more great music. But apparently his ego really is even bigger then we could have imagined. While he is extremely grateful that Brian wrote so much of the great music that he performs every night, he believes that he is The Beach Boys and that deviating from what he's doing now just isn't worthwhile.

Three weeks between the last Australian show and the first London gig... so why not play the shows offered then ?  Hmmmm ?

It is just me or doesn't it seem like ol' Andrew seems to definitely taken a "side" on this? The near giddiness about the reunion having a set end date? The certainty about it? Not wanting it to continue? I know we like to kid about who has major "sources" are, and I've said this before, but I definitely think our friend AGD is close with our favorite tea bagger, Bruce Johnston. And that is why Andrew, despite the awesome 2012 that The Beach Boys have had, doesn't want it to continue. Because his greedy friend and his greedy friend's boss aren't interested in it.

sweetdude, why do you hate to sound like the professor?  I like what you say, sir: all we want is for them to be together again sometime soon with a plan for more of what that that have been celebrating. It is they that have sold us on the idea about reunion and harmony and how its just so right to be together. We agreed, and all we want is the natural artistic evolution of all that promise and harmony theory, that is to say, another album that says more, that gives voice to all the members and all their feelings and awareness and inspiration and craft.

[Jim V.]

Once again, why is everybody having a debate about whether these few "Mike & Bruce" shows are occurring? In the long run, it's unimportant. What's important is that Mike hasn't gave us much of an impression that he would like to continue working with Brian and Al in the near future. That is what bothering people like me. All this tit-for-tat about who knew about this show when and where and whatever doesn't matter. It's the fact that Mike and Bruce seemed somehow resentful of how well the 50th anniversary tour was going and seemed almost giddy to get back to the cheapie band.

I hate to sound like the professor but all it would take out of Mike to shut most of us up would be to say, "yeah we booked a few shows with our band, but Bruce and I are looking forward to getting back in the studio with Brian, Al, and Dave to work on material for our next album"!

However, the reason he hasn't done something like this is probably because that's not what he really wants to do. He feels comfortable with his half-assed version of "The Beach Boys" and probably doesn't see the point in putting out more albums like TWGMTR. So crazy as it is, after all these years, despite what I thought, Mike wasn't as into getting back to work with Brian as I had thought. I thought that was Mike's ultimate goal, to get back to work with Brian and make more great music. But apparently his ego really is even bigger then we could have imagined. While he is extremely grateful that Brian wrote so much of the great music that he performs every night, he believes that he is The Beach Boys and that deviating from what he's doing now just isn't worthwhile.

Three weeks between the last Australian show and the first London gig... so why not play the shows offered then ?  Hmmmm ?

It is just me or doesn't it seem like ol' Andrew seems to definitely taken a "side" on this? The near giddiness about the reunion having a set end date? The certainty about it? Not wanting it to continue? I know we like to kid about who has major "sources" are, and I've said this before, but I definitely think our friend AGD is close with our favorite tea bagger, Bruce Johnston. And that is why Andrew, despite the awesome 2012 that The Beach Boys have had, doesn't want it to continue. Because his greedy friend and his greedy friend's boss aren't interested in it.

sweetdude, why do you hate to sound like the professor?  I like what you say, sir: all we want is for them to be together again sometime soon with a plan for more of what that that have been celebrating. It is they that have sold us on the idea about reunion and harmony and how its just so right to be together. We agreed, and all we want is the natural artistic evolution of all that promise and harmony theory, that is to say, another album that says more, that gives voice to all the members and all their feelings and awareness and inspiration and craft.

Didn't mean that in a mean way, prof! Just felt like I was kinda rippin' off your style!

[Wirestone]

For those who support Mike in this, I'd like to explain something. Those of us who are backing Brian and Al (and Dave) do not hate Mike. (Most of us, at least.) What's more, most of us didn't mind that Mike toured under the band's name for nearly 15 years. He earned the right and did a good job and kept the music alive.

But Mike did not create the group or the music. He was a key player, but far from the only one. When Brian and Al (and Dave) returned for the tour, things changed. And I understand that contracts might not have changed. But minds and opinions and experiences did. The full group gave so much more than anyone expected. Mike was part of that -- but so was Al, and so was Dave, and so was -- in every possible way -- Brian.

Things changed.

And now that Brian wants to continue, and now that Al wants to continue, our perspectives have changed. We can't accept Mike as the Beach Boys anymore, because other members of the band -- the majority of members of the band, and half of the shareholders of BRI -- want to be included. And I'm sorry that this makes some people unhappy, or that they think we're unrealistic or pie in the sky or whatever.

I don't care. The fact is, this is a band that should be together. If Mike is unwilling or unable to accept that, the name should be retired. If he is unwilling to retire the name, he should no longer be allowed to tour under it without the other guys.

[the professor]

sweetdude, we are cool, and I was flattered.

We now have a chess game with all the pieces in place; both camps have moved. Now Mike must answer the cal of Time and Eternity and call Brian and pledge to work together in unity, if not in all the minor shows then in the larger future of the BB recording and performing nationally, especially in any heralded venues like the Bowl or MSG or the Grammys, etc.

I am going to predict: Mike comes through and we soon hear that they are writing together and planning the next BB album. Mark my words. I am confident.

[Juice Brohnston]

Should it not just be majority rules (i.e. Henley, Frey boot Felder..Eddie and Alex boot Mike Anthony). If the majority of the shareholders want things to really change, then you should be able to make things change.

Maybe the economics of the Mike and Bruce tours are not that far off the reunion numbers, in terms of take home, for Mike.  And maybe it's a lot less stress.

[Rocky Raccoon]

For those who support Mike in this, I'd like to explain something. Those of us who are backing Brian and Al (and Dave) do not hate Mike. (Most of us, at least.) What's more, most of us didn't mind that Mike toured under the band's name for nearly 15 years. He earned the right and did a good job and kept the music alive.

But Mike did not create the group or the music. He was a key player, but far from the only one. When Brian and Al (and Dave) returned for the tour, things changed. And I understand that contracts might not have changed. But minds and opinions and experiences did. The full group gave so much more than anyone expected. Mike was part of that -- but so was Al, and so was Dave, and so was -- in every possible way -- Brian.

Things changed.

And now that Brian wants to continue, and now that Al wants to continue, our perspectives have changed. We can't accept Mike as the Beach Boys anymore, because other members of the band -- the majority of members of the band, and half of the shareholders of BRI -- want to be included. And I'm sorry that this makes some people unhappy, or that they think we're unrealistic or pie in the sky or whatever.

I don't care. The fact is, this is a band that should be together. If Mike is unwilling or unable to accept that, the name should be retired. If he is unwilling to retire the name, he should no longer be allowed to tour under it without the other guys.

Well said.

[Justin]

I'm just not subscribing to this "doomsday"/"end of the world" scenario that it's now or never. If the miraculous events of this summer can happen---I don't see why it couldn't happen again at some point in the future.   I support the entire band but I'm painfully aware of each members' faults and the reality of the situation: the huge clash of different needs/wants/abilities from each member in the band makes it near impossible to come to an accommodation that satisfies the entire group for a permanent touring/recording situation.  I (and everyone here) can go on and on and on about "what's right" for the band and their legacy but that doesn't change the characters in the game, especially since they are well into their ways as 70 year olds.

The difference with me and everyone else is the fact that I could care less about Mike and Bruce using the "Beach Boys" name.  Mike and Bruce sneaking around the country playing small markets hardly puts a blip on my radar.  If they're in my city and I see an ad on Facebook...I'll go.  Aside from that, I pay them no mind.  I'm happy this summer happened and I will be reliving it through the many YouTube clips online and the new live DVD coming out.  I'm treating all this like the kid of divorced parents who got to spend the summer at dad's and it's now time go back home to live with mom again.  Yes, it'd be nice if mom and dad were together so we could all be one big happy family again but I know that it just isn't going to happen.  So all that's left are holidays and birthdays for all of us being together and that will just have to do.

[Wirestone]

That's a legitimate, but really depressing, way of looking at it.

[joshferrell]

why don't they simply do both,have mike and bruce do their shows and at the same time do the shows with Brian an Al just on different days,it's not like Mike and bruce are booked every day...that would fix the whole situation....

[SMiLE Brian]

I am hoping this gets sorted out soon, the band kicked butt in 2012 and restored the luster to BBs name.

[Heywood]

For those who support Mike in this, I'd like to explain something. Those of us who are backing Brian and Al (and Dave) do not hate Mike. (Most of us, at least.) What's more, most of us didn't mind that Mike toured under the band's name for nearly 15 years. He earned the right and did a good job and kept the music alive.

But Mike did not create the group or the music. He was a key player, but far from the only one. When Brian and Al (and Dave) returned for the tour, things changed. And I understand that contracts might not have changed. But minds and opinions and experiences did. The full group gave so much more than anyone expected. Mike was part of that -- but so was Al, and so was Dave, and so was -- in every possible way -- Brian.

Things changed.

And now that Brian wants to continue, and now that Al wants to continue, our perspectives have changed. We can't accept Mike as the Beach Boys anymore, because other members of the band -- the majority of members of the band, and half of the shareholders of BRI -- want to be included. And I'm sorry that this makes some people unhappy, or that they think we're unrealistic or pie in the sky or whatever.

I don't care. The fact is, this is a band that should be together. If Mike is unwilling or unable to accept that, the name should be retired. If he is unwilling to retire the name, he should no longer be allowed to tour under it without the other guys.

some sanity in the asylum!! Pretty simple really. The Beach Boys can no longer be M & B and Stamos.

[MBE]

For those who support Mike in this, I'd like to explain something. Those of us who are backing Brian and Al (and Dave) do not hate Mike. (Most of us, at least.) What's more, most of us didn't mind that Mike toured under the band's name for nearly 15 years. He earned the right and did a good job and kept the music alive.

But Mike did not create the group or the music. He was a key player, but far from the only one. When Brian and Al (and Dave) returned for the tour, things changed. And I understand that contracts might not have changed. But minds and opinions and experiences did. The full group gave so much more than anyone expected. Mike was part of that -- but so was Al, and so was Dave, and so was -- in every possible way -- Brian.

Things changed.

And now that Brian wants to continue, and now that Al wants to continue, our perspectives have changed. We can't accept Mike as the Beach Boys anymore, because other members of the band -- the majority of members of the band, and half of the shareholders of BRI -- want to be included. And I'm sorry that this makes some people unhappy, or that they think we're unrealistic or pie in the sky or whatever.

I don't care. The fact is, this is a band that should be together. If Mike is unwilling or unable to accept that, the name should be retired. If he is unwilling to retire the name, he should no longer be allowed to tour under it without the other guys.

I feel Mike should honor his contracts, but after that the Beach Boys as Mike and Bruce is no longer valid in any shape or form.  Brian and Al are just as important as Mike and Bruce is never going to be an original Beach Boy. Where is Dave in all this? He was a huge part of the success of the reunion and their first four albums (the ones that made them famous) wouldn't have been nearly as good without him.

That said I still feel if these guys would talk face to face with each other instead of through the press, their agents, their wives, etc.  the problems would be solved. 

[Nicko1234]

For those who support Mike in this, I'd like to explain something. Those of us who are backing Brian and Al (and Dave) do not hate Mike. (Most of us, at least.) What's more, most of us didn't mind that Mike toured under the band's name for nearly 15 years. He earned the right and did a good job and kept the music alive.

But Mike did not create the group or the music. He was a key player, but far from the only one. When Brian and Al (and Dave) returned for the tour, things changed. And I understand that contracts might not have changed. But minds and opinions and experiences did. The full group gave so much more than anyone expected. Mike was part of that -- but so was Al, and so was Dave, and so was -- in every possible way -- Brian.

Things changed.

And now that Brian wants to continue, and now that Al wants to continue, our perspectives have changed. We can't accept Mike as the Beach Boys anymore, because other members of the band -- the majority of members of the band, and half of the shareholders of BRI -- want to be included. And I'm sorry that this makes some people unhappy, or that they think we're unrealistic or pie in the sky or whatever.

I don't care. The fact is, this is a band that should be together. If Mike is unwilling or unable to accept that, the name should be retired. If he is unwilling to retire the name, he should no longer be allowed to tour under it without the other guys.

It really shouldn`t be a case of either supporting Mike or supporting Brian and Al. Fans shouldn`t have to form factions. I would completely agree that if Brian and Al are really serious about this then they should get the licence revoked. Like most other people on the board I would love it if the reunion could continue (if it`s done correctly). I do wonder if there would have to be more compromise from Brian`s management if it were to happen though...