Al joining Mike and Bruce for Jones Beach show

[guitarfool2002]

LiveNation and any other player in the concert game are professional organizations who make money based on giving ticket buyers what they want, in other words it's part of their business to know who these bands are, what their fans are most likely to buy, and what kind of variables exist to affect the bottom line of ticket sales and revenue. These organizations have entire staffs of researchers to look at past performance, fan base demographics, trends and currents, and everything else around the issue of how much revenue a potential artist could generate. It's their job to know and anticipate based on those details what kind of acts to book and what kinds of venues would book them, along with any wild cards like erratic band members, or potential problems of any sort.

What I'm seeing drift out of focus a bit in this particular issue of Jones Beach on July 5th is that the Beach Boys billing is only one of several 60's-era acts playing the date. That kind of shifts the focus a bit from where it would be if it were only the Beach Boys doing the show.

And as can be seen on post number 1, page 1 of this thread, the fact that Al and David would be there was a featured selling point in promoting this particular show, but the show itself is more of a package deal or revue rather than a standalone Beach Boys gig.

I don't know how or even if that fact would affect any part of the usual process in locking in various members to perform under the terms of a contract, considering it's not just the Beach Boys selling tickets to this concert. The possibility exists this whole thing is far less of an issue than it's become since you have a full day of music from other higher-profile bands, at least higher profile in that 60's era demographic which tends to attract a specific audience.

Also consider how as the 50th Anniversary tour began hitting its stride in 2012, the demand increased significantly enough to warrant changing the original plan of 50 shows to 75, adding more venues which could accommodate large audiences, and if we follow the reporting of that time there were even more offers rolling in as venues and ticket sellers were reporting how successful the tour was. So if we're getting specific, the original "original plan" for the dates and venues booked for the tour changed considerably once the tour proved itself successful financially even beyond what I think was anticipated. And had they stuck to that original plan of 50 shows and done, multiply times 25 added dates how many interests would have lost money in the process, including the Beach Boys as a whole.

Thinking back, adding 25 major-market shows to an already-planned tour is a pretty massive deal for any artist. Definitely nothing to sneeze at.  

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Could it also be as simple as the fact that the Mike/Bruce band is openly touting these shows as some sort of Official 50th celebration? ... Could LiveNation have been perhaps been expecting, um, more actual Beach Boys and made some noise when they realized it was just Mike and the guy who claps?

[KittyKat]

All I know is that Al should try to put his solo career together. I don't think Brian is going to tour much anymore, or if he does, he may not play as many dates. Mike will keep playing a over 100 a year as long as he's able to do so, and I don't think Al is interested in that type of workload. Al needs to get somebody to handle it for him who's better than whoever has been doing it thus far. He needs higher quality gigs and more advance publicity.  Maybe a better person handling his career would have made this go more smoothly.

[Sheriff John Stone]

All I know is that Al should try to put his solo career together. I don't think Brian is going to tour much anymore, or if he does, he may not play as many dates. Mike will keep playing a over 100 a year as long as he's able to do so, and I don't think Al is interested in that type of workload. Al needs to get somebody to handle it for him who's better than whoever has been doing it thus far. He needs higher quality gigs and more advance publicity.  Maybe a better person handling his career would have made this go more smoothly.

I think the lighter touring and possible higher quality gigs (a matter of opinion) that Brian offers is attractive to Al, and it wouldn't surprise me if he TRIES to become a more permanent part of that group. He's already singing on the new album, his son is in the band, and, it's a possibility there could be another change or two a la Foskett down the road. Plus that's another way to stick it to Mike.

[KittyKat]

Yeah, but Carnie says her dad is going to be cutting back. Not that Carnie is in the know completely, but I wonder how much more Brian will be touring beyond this fall. Even that tour seems a little piecemeal at this point, with only one or two dates booked, though granted there is time. In any event, it's not something Al can count on, either Brian touring much more or whether he'll be included in the band. He also said he wants to tour with his own band. He should give it a try and see how it goes. But he needs better people handling him, or some type of formal management. It would be worth giving them a piece of the gate if it would help him.

[Pretty Funky]

Plus that's another way to stick it to Mike.

If the aim of any of them 'stick it' to another member I would be very disappointed. I would hope the end game should be for each member to play a certain type of show that makes them happy. Mike and Bruce 100 plus a year, Brian a handful here and there for his niche market or for a new album  , Al and Dave with the Surf All Stars or what ever.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Regarding some of what has been posted in this thread, it suggests the events of the dust-ups around Mike's press release just prior to the Grammy Museum event in 2012 are still unknown or have been forgotten by some here who tend to follow these things as fans pretty close. It was published and actually the chain of events as reported going back to the "Nutty Jerry's" booking issues around which specific band they had booked and were promoting for an October show still exist as online archives. And that was as of now almost exactly 2 years ago, June 2012, when the initial confusion started being reported in the local press around Texas where Nutty Jerry's at the time claimed they were told they'd be getting the 50th tour lineup when they booked and started selling tickets for the show, then within a week or however long it was the plans as Nutty Jerry's claims they thought were in place seemingly changed. A case of he said/she said? Bad business practices? Not reading the fine print on an agreement? Whatever happened, it was a matter of direct concern for the people involved in the 50th tour which was still in full swing as all this came down.

The Nutty Jerry's thing was very straightforward: the promoter assumed, despite what he'd been told in the contract, that he was getting the C50 band. But I can check that with Mike's then-tour manager.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I have avoided dipping into this fray, because there are no winners. But one point did occur to me: there is  a lot of sentiment that Al abandoned Mike and Bruce here, BUT who said that Mike wanted Al in the beginning to even be there? Based on what we know ( I realize we may not know everything) Live Nation invited Al. It doesn't seem like they got Mike's permission to do that.  So Mike could easily have had to pretend he wanted Al there all along, when he may not have AT ALL! If he had said he didn't want him, it would have would blown up at that point on him.  So the whole thing was essentially a mine field from the moment Live Nation included Al ( and Dave to a lesser extent) .

As for Al inviting himself with Brian, who knows maybe he did, maybe he didn't. Perhaps the reason Al wasn't included originally is because the Live Nation thing was available. Once that ended, maybe Brian ( or his people)  called Al and invited him. Could have been that innocent. It seems Al will have a presence on the new album based on multiple sources so it's not like they weren't talking.

Perhaps Al decided it's easier to deal with Brian's people at this point than Mike, so he bailed?

Fair comment, and all entirely plausible. However, be this so, I don't think my question about it on the 24th at HCP would have met with such a frosty/dissappointed reception. Happens that it looks like the meeting w/Mike is happening, so I'll ask for his side of things and we can go from there. Sound fair ?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Promoters can be willingly thick headed.

I played a gig a million years ago at this beautiful old theater in Uptown Whittier. A thing with like 20 indie/local bands, and the singer from Dramarama was on the bill. He lived locally and simply wanted to come down and burn through some Dylan covers and folkie solo stuff ..... Anyhow, these two extremely sleazy promoters put "DRAMARAMA" (at that point: acrimoniously broken up) on all the posters and fliers etc, so at the last minute, Easdale gets wind of this and tells them to go f*** themselves.... So, he ends up turning up after it was supposedly fixed and then as he's going on, the guy gets up there and announces "DRAMARAMA"!!!! .... You could tell he was pissed but went along with it.

[tpesky]

I have avoided dipping into this fray, because there are no winners. But one point did occur to me: there is  a lot of sentiment that Al abandoned Mike and Bruce here, BUT who said that Mike wanted Al in the beginning to even be there? Based on what we know ( I realize we may not know everything) Live Nation invited Al. It doesn't seem like they got Mike's permission to do that.  So Mike could easily have had to pretend he wanted Al there all along, when he may not have AT ALL! If he had said he didn't want him, it would have would blown up at that point on him.  So the whole thing was essentially a mine field from the moment Live Nation included Al ( and Dave to a lesser extent) .

As for Al inviting himself with Brian, who knows maybe he did, maybe he didn't. Perhaps the reason Al wasn't included originally is because the Live Nation thing was available. Once that ended, maybe Brian ( or his people)  called Al and invited him. Could have been that innocent. It seems Al will have a presence on the new album based on multiple sources so it's not like they weren't talking.

Perhaps Al decided it's easier to deal with Brian's people at this point than Mike, so he bailed?

Fair comment, and all entirely plausible. However, be this so, I don't think my question about it on the 24th at HCP would have met with such a frosty/dissappointed reception. Happens that it looks like the meeting w/Mike is happening, so I'll ask for his side of things and we can go from there. Sound fair ?

Definitely. As we know, these things do tend to come out eventually.

[Mendota Heights]

Have there been any recent updates to the "What Was Dennis' Favorite Color?" discussion?  

When I was blue one day I red that entire thread.

Orange you glad you did? I'm green with envy I haven't kept up with it.

I take your comments with a grayn of salt.

[Cam Mott]

Agreed, but isn't that a bit different than say Live Nation saying to Mike hypothetically "Hey. We know Al and David aren't in the group now but we need to shift some tickets. We want them in for a day."

Honestly, if presented like that and not getting into specific (and legal) terminology as you'd see on a contract to perform, I'd say no, it's a variation of the same thing.

It's all part of the negotiations, I'd say. Live Nation works with artists *and* venues, along with even organizers of package tours and shows like the Oldies Cruise or Malt Shop memories and whatever else is out there.

Let's say a major venue is offered the Beach Boys for a big weekend show. Live Nation and the networks that set up shows and tours contact that venue, and that venue comes back with a request similar to this: "We'll pay X-amount if you get Al Jardine on stage with them, X-amount if you get Al and Brian Wilson on stage..." and so on. They can ask anything, no matter how improbable, and it gets negotiated out immediately if it's too wild of an idea.

They're thinking purely in terms of ticket sales and the ability to charge more if three Beach Boys are on stage versus two, or whatever the ratio. Especially in terms of 2014.

Factor in also the contracts these venues have with food, drink, and concessions/souvenir vendors. If they get a full "Beach Boys" show, they may raise the price of a beer or bottled water 25 to 40 percent based on the demand and the assumption a larger audience will come to the show than would a solo Al Jardine concert, or whatever. And then those vendor interests have an interest in who will actually be performing - their income is now also tied to the ticket sales and demand.

And if the band management and lawyers can come back and say "we can get Al Jardine for that date, book the show", the offer for the band to perform would increase in terms of a guaranteed payment to appear with Jardine, or whoever else was specified.

So there is a direct relationship between who could and would appear on stage for a concert and how much the band or artist appearing would be guaranteed for that show, banking on the notion that if they could guarantee Brian Wilson and Mike Love would do a show on New Years Eve, the ticket sales would be considerably higher (as would demand) than if only one or the other did the same show.

In that kind of way, I think both venues, promoters, and the umbrella organization like Live Nation could at least base their offers and contract details on the membership of a band, and remember they can ask for anything but that doesn't mean the artist has to accept...which also means they may get offered half of the original figure if they don't accept.

I mentioned it several times, I know, but just consider the above details and think how many different interests lost money in the Nutty Jerry's situation because of which band members would or would not be on stage.

That almost confirms how vital the band membership can be in booking shows, because the entire budget and fee schedules in the whole concert and venue pipeline change based on adding or subtracting a single member in cases like the Beach Boys.

So Al may have made a deal with LiveNation, posted on both websites, and Al may have since backed out on LiveNation, leaving Beach Boys fans to wonder what is going on

[ToneBender631]

Agreed, but isn't that a bit different than say Live Nation saying to Mike hypothetically "Hey. We know Al and David aren't in the group now but we need to shift some tickets. We want them in for a day."

Honestly, if presented like that and not getting into specific (and legal) terminology as you'd see on a contract to perform, I'd say no, it's a variation of the same thing.

It's all part of the negotiations, I'd say. Live Nation works with artists *and* venues, along with even organizers of package tours and shows like the Oldies Cruise or Malt Shop memories and whatever else is out there.

Let's say a major venue is offered the Beach Boys for a big weekend show. Live Nation and the networks that set up shows and tours contact that venue, and that venue comes back with a request similar to this: "We'll pay X-amount if you get Al Jardine on stage with them, X-amount if you get Al and Brian Wilson on stage..." and so on. They can ask anything, no matter how improbable, and it gets negotiated out immediately if it's too wild of an idea.

They're thinking purely in terms of ticket sales and the ability to charge more if three Beach Boys are on stage versus two, or whatever the ratio. Especially in terms of 2014.

Factor in also the contracts these venues have with food, drink, and concessions/souvenir vendors. If they get a full "Beach Boys" show, they may raise the price of a beer or bottled water 25 to 40 percent based on the demand and the assumption a larger audience will come to the show than would a solo Al Jardine concert, or whatever. And then those vendor interests have an interest in who will actually be performing - their income is now also tied to the ticket sales and demand.

And if the band management and lawyers can come back and say "we can get Al Jardine for that date, book the show", the offer for the band to perform would increase in terms of a guaranteed payment to appear with Jardine, or whoever else was specified.

So there is a direct relationship between who could and would appear on stage for a concert and how much the band or artist appearing would be guaranteed for that show, banking on the notion that if they could guarantee Brian Wilson and Mike Love would do a show on New Years Eve, the ticket sales would be considerably higher (as would demand) than if only one or the other did the same show.

In that kind of way, I think both venues, promoters, and the umbrella organization like Live Nation could at least base their offers and contract details on the membership of a band, and remember they can ask for anything but that doesn't mean the artist has to accept...which also means they may get offered half of the original figure if they don't accept.

I mentioned it several times, I know, but just consider the above details and think how many different interests lost money in the Nutty Jerry's situation because of which band members would or would not be on stage.

That almost confirms how vital the band membership can be in booking shows, because the entire budget and fee schedules in the whole concert and venue pipeline change based on adding or subtracting a single member in cases like the Beach Boys.

So Al may have made a deal with LiveNation, posted on both websites, and Al may have since backed out on LiveNation, leaving Beach Boys fans to wonder what is going on

The last thing any performer wants is to be blacklisted by the largest ticket seller/promoter in the United States. Even in his 70s, with limited performing ahead of him, I can't imagine Al would be stupid enough to back out of a contract with LN without there being ample cause or blame to go around in justifying it.

[HeyJude]

You're glossing over the exceedingly pertinent point that the show was posted on Alan's own website as having him appearing, and that it took him some six weeks to say "no, I'm not". How is any of that Live Nation's fault ? Alan has a long-established rep for being "difficult" to work with, and for being famously indecisive.

Assuming the date went on Al’s website with Al’s knowledge (and to some degree, even if it was without his knowledge, the site does bear his name after all), he owes the fans an apology for the confusion and for those who bought tickets because of his reported appearance.

Anything else, especially in terms of the legal side of things, we really can’t say. Again, Al would have to be either really misguided and have really bad representation if he’s on the hook legally for pulling out of the show. And you know what? If he is, then he’ll pay the price just like anybody in that situation would. While I would (and do) feel the entire situation is pretty sad, I wouldn’t feel extra bad for Al if he is on the hook legally.

As for being “difficult” to work with, I’m a bit confused then why Mike didn’t tell Live Nation “no” to even the idea of playing with Al. If pulling out of this gig “burned bridges”, then I sense those bridges were already pretty well toast to begin with, and I suspect slow ticket sales may have motivated both Live Nation and Mike to “allow” Al to be in his own band for an evening. If someone ever gets Al to talk about his debacle, perhaps Al would suggest the “bridge” was “burned” by Mike in the negotiation process.

[HeyJude]

You're being evasive, plus you've stated there should be another voice talking to Alan or Brian. Well, then, go on. Do it, and we'll compare notes.

But from the fan perspective, we maybe don’t feel like we’re getting more than one side of the story when someone who actually has access is able to interview or talk to one side (Mike), while fans here with no connections or media/press/publishing background are tasked/challenged with trying to interview Al.

As a fan trying to simply get the whole story, I can only hope Howie Edelson or someone of that sort is able to track down Al for some comments.   

[HeyJude]

A friendly reminder: we don't know anything about the reasons behind Al's decision.  Most of what has been posted here is not only speculation, but biased speculation.

It`s true that we don`t know the reasons behind Al`s decision. But I`m not sure how the speculation can be described as biased. Unless it is now being claimed that there is an anti-Al faction on the board as well.   Al announced that he was appearing at this show and then cancelled without any explanation or apology (and his statement basically tried to imply that it was only a rumour that he was ever appearing in the first place). Therefore the focus of attention is certain to be on him.

Now it may be that Al feels he had strong justification for cancelling his appearance with Mike. But that would probably just make it even more unlikely that they will ever appear together on stage again.

Yours is exactly what I call "biased speculation". Your logic is 0 + 0 = 1.

Anti-Al faction? The problem with poor Al is that he has no faction, either pro or anti. He's simply easy bashing material. AGD's attitude to him speaks volumes. You can bash Al ad libitum, nobody is coming to defend him (maybe save Yours Truly).  

And that's my main issue with many folks here, who claim to be fans "of all Beach Boys", but have a completely pro-Mike agenda. I like Mike, overall. The only real problem I have with him is with his overzealous fans, who only manage to cast a shadow on him.  

You do raise an interesting point. Al in an overall sense has no particular faction, and no evident power in any of these situations. He is one of the most, at least outwardly, impotent “shareholders” of a major band I’ve ever seen. His grandiose ideas seem to be largely ignored if not belittled, by some fans and some members of the band apparently. Perhaps a more polite to term to use would be “marginalized.”

When I talked to Al in 2005, he gushed about “getting the guys back together again.” He seemed ABSOLUTELY heartfelt about it. He also seemed comically overly optimistic and naïve about it. It seemed very much a “pissing in the wind” sort of situation. 

That’s why I kind of laugh at the idea that these guys are so annoyed by Al, or that he could “burn bridges” and cause so much turmoil. He’s pretty marginalized in numerous ways. He barely tours unless Brian lets him tag along, not even Brian seemed to care as much as Al did about the breakup of the reunion even as early as 2013. Watch that 2012 Charlie Rose group interview. Al mentions the band should tour every other year, and you can sense the rest of the guys are just thinking “yeah right, whatever Al, but we’ll be polite and just not say anything.”

[HeyJude]

The thing we have to remember is it is unlikely Brian could manage a 90 minute show on his own now. The last solo tour was 2011 with the Gershwin album wasn't it? He needs someone sharing the bill IMO.

I wonder if he had some kind of verbal agreement with Brian months ago when his UK gigs were announced.

Nope. The Brian summer gigs were announced before it was announced that Al would play with Mike. Therefore, Al would have been included on the bill/announcement back then. Remember, too, that Al had toured with Brian last fall, and Al was announced as being in Brian's band before that tour.

It's pretty clear Brian intentionally did not invite Al to the two summer gigs when they were first planned. Maybe Al decided to entertain the idea of playing with Mike as a ploy to get Brian's attention (t try to at least get Brian to include him on any fall tour), but if that were the case, it was pretty stupid and made Al look unprofessional when he backed out at the last moment. BTW, it would also make Al seem unprofessional if he had "some kind of verbal agreement" with Brian then turned around and agreed to do with Mike instead, leaving Brian in the lurch.

I think it’s pretty obvious Al was added to these Brian shows late in the game. But Al has usually not even been billed as part of Brian’s tour. That is, more often than not, the marquee and ticketstub, Ticketmaster listing, etc. says “Brian Wilson” or “Brian Wilson & Jeff Beck.” I know the 2013 dates had at least a handful of the shows where Al and Dave’s name were listed on the ticket, and their names were definitely in all of the promotional materials. But legally and logistically, whose name is on the ticket can be important.

I don’t believe Al’s name, for instance, was anywhere on the ticket for his 2006/2007 shows. In other words, Al’s name being mentioned or not mentioned in relation to Brian gigs may or may not have any relation to whether he’s planned to appear.

[HeyJude]

I can see LiveNation perhaps maneuvering to try and get Brian in there for a date, but Al? Would they even know who he is? (not joking) ... If LiveNation did call Al all on their own, it was probably due to Mike or someone closely involved in the current Beach Boys initiating the process with Mike's blessing.

Pure speculation, of course.

They may have tried for the C50 line-up for all we know but Brian was already booked for Europe.

With the obvious caveat that anything is possible in BB land, I think the chances of Brian simply sitting in with Mike’s touring “Beach Boys” lineup for a full show are as close to zero as we can get without actually saying zero. Al seemed plausible, Dave has sat in with the band before obviously, but I can’t see Brian doing that. I’d say it’s slightly more likely Brian could randomly pop in for a song one night or something.

But I highly doubt we’ll see a full 5-man reunion lineup happen by Brian, Al, and Dave simply joining Mike’s band for a show that has already been booked and tickets already gone on sale, for an “oldies” show with the Rascals and Lovin’ Spoonful on the bill. I hope they individually or collectively have better management to realize a reunion can be hyped and sold much better, with more prestige, even for a one-night gig.

[drbeachboy]

Last year's tour that was just before the tour with Jeff Beck had on the ticket "with Al Tardine & David Mark". While both were misspelled, they were given due credit as special guests.

[HeyJude]

The Nutty Jerry's thing was very straightforward: the promoter assumed, despite what he'd been told in the contract, that he was getting the C50 band. But I can check that with Mike's then-tour manager.

It is ironic that is some of the stuff they were nailing Al for in 1999 when he was touring. But back then, it was always Al’s fault, not the venue or promoter.

[HeyJude]

Last year's tour that was just before the tour with Jeff Beck had on the ticket "with Al Tardine & David Mark". While both were misspelled, they were given due credit as special guests.

As I mentioned, some 2013 shows had Al’s and David’s name on the ticket. I was simply pointing out that, often, when Brian has had “special guests”, pre-scheduled guests, they have not always been listed on the ticket or as an advertised main artist or “co-artist” or whatever one chooses to call it.

I saw Al play with Brian three times in 2007 and 2013, and I’ve never had Al’s name on the ticket stub anywhere. I have a poster from their three west coast 2007 shows, and another poster from the May/June 2007 shows including two shows they played together. Al’s name isn’t anywhere on it. So in some cases, it has been a “Brian Wilson” show that happens to have Al in the backing band, as opposed to a “Wilson-Jardine” advertised show.

[HeyJude]

Last year's tour that was just before the tour with Jeff Beck had on the ticket "with Al Tardine & David Mark". While both were misspelled, they were given due credit as special guests.

I just have to add that I’d love to have an “Al Tardine & David Mark” ticket stub to display! 

[Mike's Beard]

Last year's tour that was just before the tour with Jeff Beck had on the ticket "with Al Tardine & David Mark". While both were misspelled, they were given due credit as special guests.

As I mentioned, some 2013 shows had Al’s and David’s name on the ticket. I was simply pointing out that, often, when Brian has had “special guests”, pre-scheduled guests, they have not always been listed on the ticket or as an advertised main artist or “co-artist” or whatever one chooses to call it.

I saw Al play with Brian three times in 2007 and 2013, and I’ve never had Al’s name on the ticket stub anywhere. I have a poster from their three west coast 2007 shows, and another poster from the May/June 2007 shows including two shows they played together. Al’s name isn’t anywhere on it. So in some cases, it has been a “Brian Wilson” show that happens to have Al in the backing band, as opposed to a “Wilson-Jardine” advertised show.

Any time an ex BB appears at another members show they should be billed as a "special guest" both to help sell more tickets and also as a show of respect to the artist.

[HeyJude]

Last year's tour that was just before the tour with Jeff Beck had on the ticket "with Al Tardine & David Mark". While both were misspelled, they were given due credit as special guests.

As I mentioned, some 2013 shows had Al’s and David’s name on the ticket. I was simply pointing out that, often, when Brian has had “special guests”, pre-scheduled guests, they have not always been listed on the ticket or as an advertised main artist or “co-artist” or whatever one chooses to call it.

I saw Al play with Brian three times in 2007 and 2013, and I’ve never had Al’s name on the ticket stub anywhere. I have a poster from their three west coast 2007 shows, and another poster from the May/June 2007 shows including two shows they played together. Al’s name isn’t anywhere on it. So in some cases, it has been a “Brian Wilson” show that happens to have Al in the backing band, as opposed to a “Wilson-Jardine” advertised show.

Any time an ex BB appears at another members show they should be billed as a "special guest" both to help sell more tickets and also as a show of respect to the artist.

Agreed. I guess it's a question of what a "billing" is. The first issue is who the promoter/venue has booked. If they book simply "Brian Wilson", then they may not (and may not be able to) put anyone else's name on the ticket, even if Brian adds ten special guests.

The 2006/2007 shows seemed to be "Brian Wilson" shows, with Al sitting in with his band. Al was advertised or mentioned in the press, but was not actually booked as a co-headliner or anything.

The 2013 shows were somewhat different I suppose. I don't know if the promoter booked them as "Brian/Al/Dave" shows, but it appears they may have, although their names only appeared on some advertisements/ticket stubs.

It would have been slightly interesting to see how Al's appearance would be handled at a Mike/Bruce show. They strike me as less inclined to do what Brian did in 06/07, and bring Al on a few songs in with a big introduction and crowd applause, but we'll obviously never know. I got the sense the show would have been done just as any other Mike/Bruce show, just with Al and Dave strumming along and singing a few leads.

The one print ad for the Jones Beach show posted here did not bill Al as a "special guest", but simply listed Mike, Al, and Bruce as "original members" in attendance.

[guitarfool2002]

Regarding some of what has been posted in this thread, it suggests the events of the dust-ups around Mike's press release just prior to the Grammy Museum event in 2012 are still unknown or have been forgotten by some here who tend to follow these things as fans pretty close. It was published and actually the chain of events as reported going back to the "Nutty Jerry's" booking issues around which specific band they had booked and were promoting for an October show still exist as online archives. And that was as of now almost exactly 2 years ago, June 2012, when the initial confusion started being reported in the local press around Texas where Nutty Jerry's at the time claimed they were told they'd be getting the 50th tour lineup when they booked and started selling tickets for the show, then within a week or however long it was the plans as Nutty Jerry's claims they thought were in place seemingly changed. A case of he said/she said? Bad business practices? Not reading the fine print on an agreement? Whatever happened, it was a matter of direct concern for the people involved in the 50th tour which was still in full swing as all this came down.

The Nutty Jerry's thing was very straightforward: the promoter assumed, despite what he'd been told in the contract, that he was getting the C50 band. But I can check that with Mike's then-tour manager.

I'd be interested to hear that manager's thoughts, because the scenario doesn't pass the smell test at this point. And that is a change for me from when this story first broke, and I was posting here more in a mocking way about the way it played out.

When I looked back on this story and re-read the details, something stood out and it sort of connected to other issues.

This place Nutty Jerry's deals with bookings, promoters, contracts, and the like as part of their everyday business as a live entertainment venue. They've dealt with contracts and promoters trying to sell them on booking artists from small to mid-level to big.

When you're in that business, one thing that's necessary is an ability to sniff out a bullshitter before signing a contract that's not in your best interest, and as we know the music business as well as the kind of agencies that represent clowns that make balloon animals for kids' parties and magicians and the like are full of hucksters and con artists.

So the missing key element for me is that I'm supposed to take at face value the explanation that in the whole booking negotiation process, handled by agents, promoters, various reps, and the people who book for the Jerry's venue as well as attorneys possibly being consulted to review the contract before signing it, *no one* in that chain realized the promoter-agent or whatever they were trying to book "The Beach Boys" thought to ask, or even have it clarified that the band they were agreeing to book for a fall concert was the same 50th band which had just played in their area recently?

That kind of defies logic, doesn't it? I mean if it were a county fair or a church parish or something that doesn't deal everyday with agents and promoters to book live shows, I could understand how maybe some information could get dropped in the process.

But a venue that works with the big agencies, ticket brokers, promoters, artists and managers...they somehow failed to ask for or receive a clarification on which Beach Boys band they were agreeing to pay and book for a show?

The point that stands out there as an aftereffect is how Nutty Jerry's cancelled the show after the issue was clarified, and they would be on the hook financially and up for losing money if they backed out of a contract they had agreed to and signed that June of 2012 to book the Beach Boys in October.

I'm guessing unless Jerry's *did* pay the BB's for cancelling the show, they couldn't claim that kind of ignorance or sloppy business as a legal grounds for breaking a contract without having to pay whatever guaranteed fee was written into the contract for the band.

Which could lead some to conclude they had this kind of "out" from the contract deal because they would be able to show they were presented something that perhaps wasn't as up-front and forthright on the information as it could have been, and the confusion perhaps was played up instead of explained at the outset? They weren't the only ones to be confused when it came to advertising and promoting in the second half of 2012.