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

[Dave in KC]

I'm almost sure that M/B have played Beau Rivage every second week of October since at least 2001-2002. When I was there in 2003, a manager type person told me after the show that the casino probably has already booked next year's show. This is a HUGE week in Biloxi with vintage car and muscle car shows covering the town. Having the BB play the weekend nights is a tradition. I'm sure Mike feels some sort of alegiance to them for repetive bookings for so long. And the show will go on with his band.

[Cam Mott]

Nutty Jerry's was cancelled because Nutty Jerry f-ed it up, not because Mike just wanted to or to take a better deal.

[stack-o-tracks]

I think it's time they start touring as "Mike Love & Bruce Johnston of The Beach Boys" so that we don't have to deal with this bidness.

Al can start up his "Family & Friends" band again.

And Brian can continue to be the greatest songwriter of the 20th century and be able to tour using his name alone.

Leave "The Beach Boys" for when they're all touring as a band.

[Doo Dah]

If the Mike press release that started this all off had stated "Mike and Bruce had prior commitments and will be performing with their lineup for the following October dates", and had then gone on to describe more reunion shows for November or December or next year, then I would believe that this was a "oops, booked a few October gigs, gotta get them out of the way and hold off on more reunion shows in October" situation.

Thank you. The smoking gun. What's so bad about touring with the full band for some really big shows? I really wish someone would put it to Mike as clearly as the above statement. Your personal mileage may vary, but in my opinion, he used a vague 'end date' of the tour as his own personal escape hatch. And not one of you Mike-apologists can tell me any different.

Whether Brian and Al are airing dirty laundry is beside the point...why isn't Mike addressing these offers of MSG and Wrigley? Why isn't Michael giving a freaking olive branch to the fan base by addressing what will happen in 2013? Probably because he really doesn't want to...the greedy little bast'd.

[HeyJude]

As for Mike and his disposition around his expectations of the tour, this is not at all the argument I've seen being used to support the lack of additional reunion shows and the continued booking of Mike's band. First, it was "the shows are already booked, what was Mike supposed to do?" My answer is that he could have rescheduled the shows, tried to morph them into reunion show, or yes, maybe cancel them, or do the shows and then jump right back into reunion shows. Any of those would work and might have been doable. But now the reasoning has shifted to "How could Mike have known the reunion would be successful? He booked shows because he didn't know it was going to be successful." I have plenty of ideas for how this could have been worked around. Once he knew it was successful, he *then* could have agreed to additional reunion bookings and stopped booking any future Mike/Bruce shows.

You are kind of contradicting what you yourself wrote today but...

None of us knows the specifics of the relevant tours. Your idea about morphing the M&B shows into reunion shows certainly wouldn`t have worked though. The tours are completely different.

I agree that Mike could have cancelled the tours but I don`t like the way that it is being implied by some that that would have been a morally honourable thing to do. It wouldn`t. Fans, promoters and venues shouldn`t be let down like that just because someone`s had a better offer.

The issue of switching back and forth between M&B shows and reunion shows is an interesting one. That would have been a long way from ideal and of course none of us know exactly when these extra reunion shows could have taken place or whether that would have been feasible.

I don't think morphing the gigs into reunion shows was completely undoable. A venue that had booked the Mike/Bruce show would have gladly taken the 50th lineup instead, trust me. It would have made less money on those particular gigs. But morphing them could have included rescheduling at a nearby larger venues, or a million other possibilities.

As for Mike cancelling shows, this is getting into kind of a sketchy area. Shows have been cancelled already due to the reunion. The April Mike/Bruce gigs were cancelled. The Nutty Jerry's show was cancelled. I don't want to see fans let down either. But sorry Biloxi, it may sound cut-throat, but I would support Biloxi fans taking one for the team and having the shows cancelled if that was really all that was keeping the entire globe from potentially getting more reunion gigs.  

This of course gets us back to the concept that the October gigs didn't cause the end of the reunion, they were one of the indications or symptoms of the reunion ending.

[Nicko1234]

His decision to book October shows apparently is part of his (or your) justification for not doing more reunion shows. How could this have been avoided? Lots of ways. How about just not booking any shows until things were clear? Mike says in his statement that more time was supposed to pass between the reunion and his own shows. This implies he recognizes that time should pass between the two. I contend that even more time should. How about just waiting until the new year to do shows? Again, Mike can book shows whenever he wants. And once again, he will be characterized accordingly as not being able or willing to just give it a little breathing room. I contend his reasons for not giving it any breathing room are mostly selfish.

You engaged in a debate about this recently and ended up saying that you couldn`t disagree with the reasoning behind him not wanting to sit around until next year. Not sure why you are conveniently forgetting that now.

I also simply don't agree with this last part of your timeline: "Mike said that they couldn`t as he had other shows booked." This is the crux of a big part of my problem with these contentions. Apart from all the stuff I've already said about how the bookings were all by Mike's CHOICE, this also all ignores that Mike's not wanting to do more reunion shows right now is about far more than a few October gigs. If the Mike press release that started this all off had stated "Mike and Bruce had prior committments and will be performing with their lineup for the following October dates", and had then gone on to describe more reunion shows for November or December or next year, then I would believe that this was a "oops, booked a few October gigs, gotta get them out of the way and hold off on more reunion shows in October" situation.

Well, that is the reason given by Mike in his statement and obviously is relevant to the smooth continuation of the tour that Brian and Al presumably wanted.

I can understand why any statement wouldn`t have mentioned the possibility of any future reunion plans. It wouldn`t exactly look good to say, `you can buy tickets to watch me and Bruce now but if you wait a while you could see all 5 Beach Boys`. Not a great marketing ploy.

[HeyJude]

Nutty Jerry's was cancelled because Nutty Jerry f-ed it up, not because Mike just wanted to or to take a better deal.

I don't think we know for sure exactly who f'ed up with Nutty Jerry's. There aren't even clear reports on who cancelled the gig. The venue says they cancelled it, while Mike's PR person/agent, whomever it was, stated that Mike chose to cancel the show.

[Cam Mott]

It probably would be a good idea for Brian and Al and Mike [and Carl's estate] to first talk it over before people begin implying or inferring commitments binding some or all of them.

[Nicko1234]

I don't think morphing the gigs into reunion shows was completely undoable. A venue that had booked the Mike/Bruce show would have gladly taken the 50th lineup instead, trust me. It would have made less money on those particular gigs. But morphing them could have included rescheduling at a nearby larger venues, or a million other possibilities.

Sorry but the idea is completely unrealistic. It really is. Now some of the other comments that you`ve made have some relevance but this one is utterly ludicrous and shows a complete lack of understanding of how touring works.

[Cam Mott]

Nutty Jerry's was cancelled because Nutty Jerry f-ed it up, not because Mike just wanted to or to take a better deal.

I don't think we know for sure exactly who f'ed up with Nutty Jerry's. There aren't even clear reports on who cancelled the gig. The venue says they cancelled it, while Mike's PR person/agent, whomever it was, stated that Mike chose to cancel the show.

Mike's guy said it was never contracted so I'm thinking it's pretty certain Nutty Jerry's f-ed it up [back in June] just as they say.

[HeyJude]

His decision to book October shows apparently is part of his (or your) justification for not doing more reunion shows. How could this have been avoided? Lots of ways. How about just not booking any shows until things were clear? Mike says in his statement that more time was supposed to pass between the reunion and his own shows. This implies he recognizes that time should pass between the two. I contend that even more time should. How about just waiting until the new year to do shows? Again, Mike can book shows whenever he wants. And once again, he will be characterized accordingly as not being able or willing to just give it a little breathing room. I contend his reasons for not giving it any breathing room are mostly selfish.

You engaged in a debate about this recently and ended up saying that you couldn`t disagree with the reasoning behind him not wanting to sit around until next year. Not sure why you are conveniently forgetting that now.

I also simply don't agree with this last part of your timeline: "Mike said that they couldn`t as he had other shows booked." This is the crux of a big part of my problem with these contentions. Apart from all the stuff I've already said about how the bookings were all by Mike's CHOICE, this also all ignores that Mike's not wanting to do more reunion shows right now is about far more than a few October gigs. If the Mike press release that started this all off had stated "Mike and Bruce had prior committments and will be performing with their lineup for the following October dates", and had then gone on to describe more reunion shows for November or December or next year, then I would believe that this was a "oops, booked a few October gigs, gotta get them out of the way and hold off on more reunion shows in October" situation.

Well, that is the reason given by Mike in his statement and obviously is relevant to the smooth continuation of the tour that Brian and Al presumably wanted.

I can understand why any statement wouldn`t have mentioned the possibility of any future reunion plans. It wouldn`t exactly look good to say, `you can buy tickets to watch me and Bruce now but if you wait a while you could see all 5 Beach Boys`. Not a great marketing ploy.

I'm not sure which of my comments you're referring to, but I believe I have stated numerous times that Mike's reasoning for his decisions makes sense. But when I say that, I mean I can objectively say that it makes sense for him, if he is looking out for himself and his interests.

Regarding the "smooth continuation" of the tour, I don't really see anything that indicates Brian and Al needed a "smooth continuation"  in order to continue to do reunion shows. In fact, the timeline suggests they knew about at least one of the October bookings, were unhappy with but resigned to it, but still wanted to (and presumably still want to right now) do more reunion shows.

As for your final statement, I agree that trying to sell a Mike/Bruce show in light of future reunion shows would be bad marketing. Hence mine and many fan's feeling that they shouldn't have reverted back to the Mike/Bruce lineup at this point. I was saying this before the reunion tour started, that Mike's band would be seen in a different light after the reunion. As I've said before, knowing this before the tour started gave me a lot of respect for Mike doing the reunion knowing this would happen. But apparently he knew or certainly now knows this is the case, but kind of just doesn't really care.

[HeyJude]

I don't think morphing the gigs into reunion shows was completely undoable. A venue that had booked the Mike/Bruce show would have gladly taken the 50th lineup instead, trust me. It would have made less money on those particular gigs. But morphing them could have included rescheduling at a nearby larger venues, or a million other possibilities.

Sorry but the idea is completely unrealistic. It really is. Now some of the other comments that you`ve made have some relevance but this one is utterly ludicrous and shows a complete lack of understanding of how touring works.

I understand it just fine. My "not completely undoable" comment was to suggest that it would not have been easy or ideal. I don't see how cancelling the gigs and rescheduling larger venues in the same markets with the reunion band would have been undoable, though.

Again, I reiterate that getting hung up on this idea that a few October gigs were of any large consequence is what is ludicrous. I've said numerous times that they could have done the gigs, or cancelled them, or rescheduled them, or freaking added Ricky Fataar and Rick Astley to the band, they could have done or not done anything regarding those gigs and still continued the reunion tour.

[Sheriff John Stone]

I can understand why any statement wouldn`t have mentioned the possibility of any future reunion plans. It wouldn`t exactly look good to say, `you can buy tickets to watch me and Bruce now but if you wait a while you could see all 5 Beach Boys`. Not a great marketing ploy.

If I may add to this....Yes, Brian had 100% attendance and participation (well, he was there) in the reunion. But, let's be honest. He's still Brian Wilson, and you still have to deal with that, or him. I concede that he wants to continue the reunion in some form, and, incidently, he hasn't exactly been very specific as to what terms he would agree to. So, before you (Mike) start issuing statements about how you're looking forward to continuing along WITH BEACH BOY BRIAN WILSON, you better have things worked out. Just because Brian wants to be a Beach Boy in October, doesn't insure that he would want to be one in November. History has shown that. Things could've been worked out ahead of time. They had enough time during the tour to negotiate. I blame Mike AND Brian for that.

[HeyJude]

I can understand why any statement wouldn`t have mentioned the possibility of any future reunion plans. It wouldn`t exactly look good to say, `you can buy tickets to watch me and Bruce now but if you wait a while you could see all 5 Beach Boys`. Not a great marketing ploy.

If I may add to this....Yes, Brian had 100% attendance and participation (well, he was there) in the reunion. But, let's be honest. He's still Brian Wilson, and you still have to deal with that, or him. I concede that he wants to continue the reunion in some form, and, incidently, he hasn't exactly been very specific as to what terms he would agree to. So, before you (Mike) start issuing statements about how you're looking forward to continuing along WITH BEACH BOY BRIAN WILSON, you better have things worked out. Just because Brian wants to be a Beach Boy in October, doesn't insure that he would want to be one in November. History has shown that. Things could've been worked out ahead of time. They had enough time during the tour to negotiate. I blame Mike AND Brian for that.

I think this is a very reasonable statement, although I don't think Brian is quite that much of a wildcard at this particular moment in time anyway. I think both of them (and the entire camp) seem to have been doing a lot more guessing or assuming what the others are thinking or planning or capable of rather than discussing it. But who knows, maybe *not* discussing it is what held the whole thing together for as long as it did. If such a media storm had broken in, say, May or June, the tour would have either imploded, gone on awkwardly, or maybe forced them into making more definitive decisions about what was going to come next.

The apparent "let's just get through this tour and sort the rest out later" attitude on this tour may have been its saving grace, or its downfall.

[Nicko1234]

I'm not sure which of my comments you're referring to, but I believe I have stated numerous times that Mike's reasoning for his decisions makes sense. But when I say that, I mean I can objectively say that it makes sense for him, if he is looking out for himself and his interests.

Regarding the "smooth continuation" of the tour, I don't really see anything that indicates Brian and Al needed a "smooth continuation"  in order to continue to do reunion shows. In fact, the timeline suggests they knew about at least one of the October bookings, were unhappy with but resigned to it, but still wanted to (and presumably still want to right now) do more reunion shows.

As for your final statement, I agree that trying to sell a Mike/Bruce show in light of future reunion shows would be bad marketing. Hence mine and many fan's feeling that they shouldn't have reverted back to the Mike/Bruce lineup at this point. I was saying this before the reunion tour started, that Mike's band would be seen in a different light after the reunion. As I've said before, knowing this before the tour started gave me a lot of respect for Mike doing the reunion knowing this would happen. But apparently he knew or certainly now knows this is the case, but kind of just doesn't really care.

Ok. To be honest, it seems like there is a bi-polar aspect to your posts (I don`t mean that in an offensive way). The realistic view of the situation in which you have said that you were kind of surprised that Mike agreed to doing the reunion tour at all. And the unrealistic view of the situation in which you imply that you think that Mike should have essentially resigned himself to the fact that doing the reunion tour meant that he might never be able to use the name again for the M&B shows.

Now I would love it if the reunited Beach Boys could continue from here on in but life isn`t that simple. I also don`t believe that these statements coming out from Mike and Brian are as simple as they seem either.

[Doo Dah]

This whole issue of 'how could they advertise Mike and Bruce shows with full reunion shows on the horizon' is moot. Brian did an unplugged (more or less) 6 man show for Capitol executives and then was urged by Jeff to do some more unplugged shows.

So we saw the 6 piece with Gary Griffin, Scotty, Probyn, Nicky, Jeff and Brian play some casino shows. And yes...there wasn't a whole mess a difference between their setlist and a standard M&B setlist. The shows I saw in Vancouver, BC were awesome by the way. The point being however was that no one felt ripped off or slighted in any way - it was just a different, temporary configuration. Ergo, there's no reason why M&B couldn't do their standard dink town circuit while promoting upcoming big, bodacious reunion shows. They two would and could coexist.

[Dave in KC]

I'd love to be there again Friday night just to hear what Mike has to say. If anything. BUT, I did walk out when Duke of Earl started last time. This time, the sight of Stamos would do it.

[HeyJude]

I'm not sure which of my comments you're referring to, but I believe I have stated numerous times that Mike's reasoning for his decisions makes sense. But when I say that, I mean I can objectively say that it makes sense for him, if he is looking out for himself and his interests.

Regarding the "smooth continuation" of the tour, I don't really see anything that indicates Brian and Al needed a "smooth continuation"  in order to continue to do reunion shows. In fact, the timeline suggests they knew about at least one of the October bookings, were unhappy with but resigned to it, but still wanted to (and presumably still want to right now) do more reunion shows.

As for your final statement, I agree that trying to sell a Mike/Bruce show in light of future reunion shows would be bad marketing. Hence mine and many fan's feeling that they shouldn't have reverted back to the Mike/Bruce lineup at this point. I was saying this before the reunion tour started, that Mike's band would be seen in a different light after the reunion. As I've said before, knowing this before the tour started gave me a lot of respect for Mike doing the reunion knowing this would happen. But apparently he knew or certainly now knows this is the case, but kind of just doesn't really care.

Ok. To be honest, it seems like there is a bi-polar aspect to your posts (I don`t mean that in an offensive way). The realistic view of the situation in which you have said that you were kind of surprised that Mike agreed to doing the reunion tour at all. And the unrealistic view of the situation in which you imply that you think that Mike should have essentially resigned himself to the fact that doing the reunion tour meant that he might never be able to use the name again for the M&B shows.

Now I would love it if the reunited Beach Boys could continue from here on in but life isn`t that simple. I also don`t believe that these statements coming out from Mike and Brian are as simple as they seem either.

I think what you're seeing is that I'm arguing in favor of what I feel is preferable, and also stepping back and acknowledging what is or isn't realistic. I can't assume anybody wants to or is able to juggle these two lines of discussion at the same time. So, I'm able to say that I'm not surprised that Mike is the way he is, but I also will criticize him for being that way if or when I feel that way.

[BB Universe]

No one here knows the relevant facts behind all this; both publicly issued statements are pretty much devoid of hard facts and we are speculating pretty much based on one's pre-dispositions as to either ML or BW (plus AJ and DM to an extent). Eight ( pages worth and rising! Jeesh.....
Just making an observation.....   

[Autotune]

I wonder why the band are letting the world see this sh*t happening. Can't they talk to each other?

I say Brian's PR guy is an idiot for letting this out.

[Doo Dah]

It's a power play I'd say. I agree that there's no way these issues haven't been even casually discussed while they were in the final stretch of the London shows.

Internally, someone said something. Others didn't like it and decided to go nuclear. Go to the press. Happens in the sports world all the time. And it's not necessarily a bad thing - merely leverage.

[EgoHanger1966]

I wonder why the band are letting the world see this sh*t happening. Can't they talk to each other?

I say Brian's PR guy is an idiot for letting this out.

Think about it - it's a calculated move.
Not a good one, but....

[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.

[Nicko1234]

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.

I think one interesting thing is that people did assume Mike was desperate to work with Brian again and I`m not sure why. Brian I believe suggested writing with Mike before Lucky Old Sun and that didn`t work out because Mike wanted to do it like the old days.

This tour happened because they all realized it was a business opportunity. That obviously includes Mike but certainly Melinda as well.

If Mike doesn`t want to work with the other guys again then there is nothing wrong with that in itself. Loads of singers don`t want to work with their bands anymore. Disappointing for the fans of course but not wrong. If Mike never wants to do a reunion gig again then he is entitled to make that choice.

The issue obviously comes with still using the BBs name. If Al and Brian don`t like it then they really ought to vote for revoking the licence. But that would be a bad business move and I`m not sure I see it happening...

[Nicko1234]

I think what you're seeing is that I'm arguing in favor of what I feel is preferable, and also stepping back and acknowledging what is or isn't realistic. I can't assume anybody wants to or is able to juggle these two lines of discussion at the same time. So, I'm able to say that I'm not surprised that Mike is the way he is, but I also will criticize him for being that way if or when I feel that way.

The only thing I would question about that is that you only mention about how Mike is...

Now Mike clearly is business orientated, has been used to doing things his own way, can be difficult to deal with, thinks that after the last 14 years he has the right to use the BBs name etc.

But how about how Melinda and the rest of Brian`s camp is?

Since 1998 there have been numerous derogatory comments about Mike and the other Beach Boys and the statements have come out about how Brian would never reunite with the other members. This year was seen as a business opportunity though (and maybe they felt that Brian almost needed The Beach Boys name again) so suddenly all was forgotten as long as they did it their way in terms of the album and the touring. Obviously by changing the original agreement from 50 to 75 shows and then wanting to add more again they have moved the goalposts and presumably expected Mike to go along with it.

Both sides seem slightly nightmarish to me and they were always likely to butt heads at some point.