Beach Boys Pile Up In California

[Cam Mott]

If FUs do not  exist, it is necessary for fan to invent them.

[Niko]

I thought the Matt and Billy thing was pretty clear. And I agree, they should be offered to "carry the torch" once Mike is done. They are the most qualified and deserving of it.

I don't like arguments, I like discussion. There is a big difference between saying your piece and hearing someone's response than attacking any contradictory viewpoint. I know where I stand in this matter, but I'm not going to take it personally when someone disagrees. Having someone else repeatedly tell me they disagree is different. It quickly turns into "Yeah I got it buddy" and conversation either does or turns nasty soon after. My point is it's sometimes better to stand back once your point is made, and let someone else's voice their though. How many times does one person need to go for blood when Mike Love gets poked by a stick 

[HeyJude]

Right. And some folks think it's a shitty state of affairs and Mike Love and his "brilliant lawyers" are to blame slightly more than Carl Wilson's family. I don't recall their greed and lust for money/credit/power dragging Brian Wilson and Al Jardine into court numerous times over the decades in endless, excruciatingly expensive legal gambits that maybe men in their 70s don't have the stomach to endure again. So the status quo is maintained and Alan complains in interviews. Brian does his Brian thing.

But yeah, this is totally about Carl Wilson's family being greedy and horrible to their own family and Mike Love is fresh, pure, and able to levitate if he concentrates really really hard.

No amount of "set end date" or citing of contracts will ever stop the guy from being mocked mercilessly in comments sections, tho. Even if we clone 500 AGDs and set them loose to painstakingly correct the record and you know it!  He won and got his way with the license but he doesn't have to just give a percentage... he also loses a big chunk of respect in the eyes of more than a few people. No amount of money will ever buy that back for him! You can say who cares, he's rich and enjoys the good life... but cmon, listen to him in interviews. He comes off as so desperate for recognition and approval. I can't believe it doesn't occur to him that he sh*t the bed big-time with his graceless C50 exit just when his press started being actually POSITIVE for the first time in decades.

It's seems a bit of a shame, really. Would've been nice for him to join his cousin for the last act instead of whining about being in a room together and snidely bringing up his prescription drug treatment. A typically classy move from Mr Positivity!

Has anyone said that Carl`s family were greedy and horrible? Another case of:

Person A: "Grey isn`t black."
Person B: "Oh, so you`re saying it`s white are you???"

The bottom line is that Mike didn`t need brilliant lawyers to be granted a license to tour as The Beach Boys. He had the majority vote. Al didn`t as he didn`t want to pay what BRI were demanding. Al didn`t have a leg to stand on.

There is no reason for Carl`s estate to vote against Mike as they are still getting a nice income from doing nothing. Nothing greedy about that. Just common sense.

It has been, in my view, those defending the status quo concerning the touring band who have implied greediness on the part of Carl's estate (and Brian for that matter). Or, if not "greed", than caring more about money than the brand/band/music, etc.

Quickly back to the Al thing, your statement implies Al didn't get the "majority vote" *because* he didn't want to pay the BRI license fee. I don't buy that at all. Al's case for a license or for being in the "Beach Boys" was dead before he had even departed the touring group. It's all in the Stebbins/Marks book; he already knew what was going on, and once he knew Dave was back "in" full time, Al knew he was screwed.

That temporary "non-exclusive" license malarkey wouldn't have panned out either way; it's a non-issue and didn't impact anything other than prolonging the inevitable. The idea of Carl's estate in 1998 to grant non-exclusive licenses may have been well-intentioned, but even if Al had secured such a license, an *exclusive* license would have been issued to Mike soon enough any way, both because that's clearly what Mike wanted all along, and they ALL would have eventually come to realize that having two bands touring as the Beach Boys would have been beyond confusing. The only thing it *may* have prevented was the 1999 injunction attempts against Al's band.

[drbeachboy]

Salmon -- I don't understand what your issue is.
When and if Mike Love is rendered incapable of carrying the license (approximately the same time and age that ALL the BB's will in effect also be retiring due to similar circumstances), you have an issue with the license being granted to Matt Jardine and Billy Hinsche acting as bandleader?
I needed to be "called out" for that statement?

And is THAT was Nicko was calling me out about?
(Nicko has issues with everything -- the opinions, the facts, knowing something he doesn't. "Prove it!" "Prove it" -- we all knew guys like that growing up, right? It ends with you walking away.)

Reading this thread I have come the conclusion that:
1. You are always right
2. You are never wrong
3. Shades of gray become whatever color of your own choosing.
4. You are the man with all the answers and correct assumptions and conclusions.

You need to get in touch with your contacts and take over BRI management. You are truly wasting your talents here and elsewhere. Saying all that, I expect you to have a full seven man Beach Boys reunion no later than January 31st. Get moving, times-a-wasting.

[HeyJude]

Isn`t this all getting ridiculously childish?

If anybody posted that they want Mike to try to start stealing away Darian, Probyn, Scott B or whoever they would rightly be slammed for their infantile behaviour. The same surely applies here.

I don't think so in this context. The context being the opinion that Brian's band is superior, and the best guys from Mike's band are Totten and Cowsill. Hence, having those guys join Brian's band (then nearly literally being the C50 band minus the two or three principals) would be the best outcome.

I don't take it as a "Mike's band stole a guy away, so Brian's should too." I took it more as a "hey, if we're going to start moving members back and forth, I wish BriMel had convinced Totten and Cowsill to join."

It's a non-issue anyway, as Totten and Cowsill will play over 100 shows with Mike while Brian's band has play something like four or five gigs this year so far. Barring a few scheduling conflicts, Foskett, Totten and Cowsill could have been in BOTH Brian's and Mike's band.

[HeyJude]

Right so for Mike and Bruce (2 genuine Beach Boys) to tour as The Beach Boys is wrong but for Matt and Billy you would `love it`?

Something tells me they wouldn`t be playing the Olympics either...

Again, I think this requires context. The idea here being that it's possibly inevitable that they will continue to wring revenue out of the trademark when all the actual BB members are dead or can no longer perform. So, *if* such a thing is going to happen anyway, would we rather have someone at least tangentially connected to the band, or a bunch of Broadway-cast fill-ins?

My own opinion is that there is a far different standard when there are no longer ANY willing or able actual BB principle members available.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Salmon -- I don't understand what your issue is.
When and if Mike Love is rendered incapable of carrying the license (approximately the same time and age that ALL the BB's will in effect also be retiring due to similar circumstances), you have an issue with the license being granted to Matt Jardine and Billy Hinsche acting as bandleader?
I needed to be "called out" for that statement?

And is THAT was Nicko was calling me out about?
(Nicko has issues with everything -- the opinions, the facts, knowing something he doesn't. "Prove it!" "Prove it" -- we all knew guys like that growing up, right? It ends with you walking away.)

i thought you meant like right now, like to take the license away from Mike. My apologies.

To be perfectly frank, though, i wouldn't consider a Matt Jardine/Billy Hinsche band 'the Beach Boys', just like i don't consider the Mike Love group 'the Beach Boys'. That's not to denigrate anybody's ability in the band, either. I just think the band name should have been retired when Carl died (and only used for the reunited band).

-Billy C.

[HeyJude]

Salmon -- I don't understand what your issue is.
When and if Mike Love is rendered incapable of carrying the license (approximately the same time and age that ALL the BB's will in effect also be retiring due to similar circumstances), you have an issue with the license being granted to Matt Jardine and Billy Hinsche acting as bandleader?
I needed to be "called out" for that statement?

And is THAT was Nicko was calling me out about?
(Nicko has issues with everything -- the opinions, the facts, knowing something he doesn't. "Prove it!" "Prove it" -- we all knew guys like that growing up, right? It ends with you walking away.)

Reading this thread I have come the conclusion that:
1. You are always right
2. You are never wrong
3. Shades of gray become whatever color of your own choosing.
4. You are the man with all the answers and correct assumptions and conclusions.

You need to get in touch with your contacts and take over BRI management. You are truly wasting your talents here and elsewhere. Saying all that, I expect you to have a full seven man Beach Boys reunion no later than January 31st. Get moving, times-a-wasting.

Beyond the fact that implicit in nearly all of the comments on this board is that it is *opinion*, I think folks like Howie and Jon Stebbins make some of the most on-point, clear, concise commentaries (yes, they are *commentaries*, not statements made to be certified 100% objective fact) I've ever read on this board.

Things with the BB's are indeed often a million shades of grey. But in analyzing specific actions or events, it's just too easy to throw your hands up in the air and offer "it's a grey area, it could be this or it could be that."

Stuff like saying Foskett's band move being an "F U" is a direct, blunt statement made for effect. It's something that one can say and believe it's true, but its bluntness doesn't discount the possibility that there are *also* other factors at play. I think this sort of statement is meant to counter what some (including myself) would feel is a rather overly-naïve view that everything is fine and there's zero inter-band, inter-"camp" politics at play when Foskett leaves Brian's band and joins Mike's.

[Howie Edelson]

Y'know what dr. beach boy? Maybe you're right.
All I know is that I continue to write, produce, and consult for all the factions of the band we're discussing.
Working on multiple BB-related projects as I write this.
My ideas are welcomed (and they know they're mine because I actually use my name, dr.)

[HeyJude]

Salmon -- I don't understand what your issue is.
When and if Mike Love is rendered incapable of carrying the license (approximately the same time and age that ALL the BB's will in effect also be retiring due to similar circumstances), you have an issue with the license being granted to Matt Jardine and Billy Hinsche acting as bandleader?
I needed to be "called out" for that statement?

And is THAT was Nicko was calling me out about?
(Nicko has issues with everything -- the opinions, the facts, knowing something he doesn't. "Prove it!" "Prove it" -- we all knew guys like that growing up, right? It ends with you walking away.)

i thought you meant like right now, like to take the license away from Mike. My apologies.

To be perfectly frank, though, i wouldn't consider a Matt Jardine/Billy Hinsche band 'the Beach Boys', just like i don't consider the Mike Love group 'the Beach Boys'. That's not to denigrate anybody's ability in the band, either. I just think the band name should have been retired when Carl died (and onlybused for the reunited band).

-Billy C.

We can only hope someone like Matt and Billy would at least try to call the thing "A Tribute to the Beach Boys" or something. Or "Brother Records Presents The Beach Boys."

I think a lot would have to do with whether the original BB's are still alive, but retired, when such a thing might happen, versus something like this happening because some or all of them are deceased.

[the captain]

My ideas are welcomed (and they know they're mine because I actually use my name, dr.)

Howie, I hope you don't mind me saying this and that it's clear I have no dog in whatever debates are going on in this thread between you and drbeachboy or nicko or whoever. I do want to comment on what seems to me to be a pattern of your attitude about posting under one's real name. (At least I have noticed you mentioning it several times.)

I think you're wrong to judge those who don't so harshly. If you, Jon Stebbins, Peter Carlin, Stephen Desper, Andrew Doe, and various others want to post under your own full names, that's fine. I'd note, however, that most people online--at least on this board--who post under their real names were, are, or probably plan to sell or promote their work. That's fine, no problem, but it's an obvious professional/financial/promotional interest.

For those people not selling anything, a message board is often an escape. An avatar is hardly nefarious, and less uncommon. It's just not a big deal. If one were a journalist, it would matter. If one were presenting oneself as some Beach Boys insider or expert but refusing to be named, it would matter. But for a place to kill some time talking about what it means that some backup singer left one group for another, it just doesn't matter. There is no moral or behavioral shortcoming in using a fake name in that situation. People have reasons, and the reasons don't even matter, frankly. Maybe someone doesn't want a public profile online. It's just nobody else's business, and doesn't affect the quality of discussion on a message board about pop music.

There are people who hide behind the anonymity of the Internet to behave horribly, and that's unfortunate. But realistically, one could use a real (or real-sounding) name and behave the same way, because the anonymity in that respect isn't about literal anonymity, but rather the disconnect between people who have often never met using the medium to unload the way they wouldn't in person. So that's not really the point either.

Whatever your issue with it is, you're obviously in the minority (as evidenced by a quick perusal of user names). I hope you can see people aren't doing it for any malicious or sneaky reasons. It's just the way some of us choose to use the Internet.

This is meant in good faith. Keep up your work.

 - Luther, who enjoys the name "the captain" in tribute to Don Vliet--a coward for not using his real name!?--and because he likes using a title to sound important.

(you're welcome to my last name if you want it. Or my SSN, for all I care. Just PM me for it.)

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Salmon -- I don't understand what your issue is.
When and if Mike Love is rendered incapable of carrying the license (approximately the same time and age that ALL the BB's will in effect also be retiring due to similar circumstances), you have an issue with the license being granted to Matt Jardine and Billy Hinsche acting as bandleader?
I needed to be "called out" for that statement?

And is THAT was Nicko was calling me out about?
(Nicko has issues with everything -- the opinions, the facts, knowing something he doesn't. "Prove it!" "Prove it" -- we all knew guys like that growing up, right? It ends with you walking away.)

i thought you meant like right now, like to take the license away from Mike. My apologies.

To be perfectly frank, though, i wouldn't consider a Matt Jardine/Billy Hinsche band 'the Beach Boys', just like i don't consider the Mike Love group 'the Beach Boys'. That's not to denigrate anybody's ability in the band, either. I just think the band name should have been retired when Carl died (and onlybused for the reunited band).

-Billy C.

We can only hope someone like Matt and Billy would at least try to call the thing "A Tribute to the Beach Boys" or something. Or "Brother Records Presents The Beach Boys."

I think a lot would have to do with whether the original BB's are still alive, but retired, when such a thing might happen, versus something like this happening because some or all of them are deceased.

i think they would too...can't see them using the band name with 'tribute'  or something.  Neither strike me as the guys who would feel comfortable using the band name without some kind of qualifier.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

My ideas are welcomed (and they know they're mine because I actually use my name, dr.)

Howie, I hope you don't mind me saying this and that it's clear I have no dog in whatever debates are going on in this thread between you and drbeachboy or nicko or whoever. I do want to comment on what seems to me to be a pattern of your attitude about posting under one's real name. (At least I have noticed you mentioning it several times.)

I think you're wrong to judge those who don't so harshly. If you, Jon Stebbins, Peter Carlin, Stephen Desper, Andrew Doe, and various others want to post under your own full names, that's fine. I'd note, however, that most people online--at least on this board--who post under their real names were, are, or probably plan to sell or promote their work. That's fine, no problem, but it's an obvious professional/financial/promotional interest.

For those people not selling anything, a message board is often an escape. An avatar is hardly nefarious, and less uncommon. It's just not a big deal. If one were a journalist, it would matter. If one were presenting oneself as some Beach Boys insider or expert but refusing to be named, it would matter. But for a place to kill some time talking about what it means that some backup singer left one group for another, it just doesn't matter. There is no moral or behavioral shortcoming in using a fake name in that situation. People have reasons, and the reasons don't even matter, frankly. Maybe someone doesn't want a public profile online. It's just nobody else's business, and doesn't affect the quality of discussion on a message board about pop music.

There are people who hide behind the anonymity of the Internet to behave horribly, and that's unfortunate. But realistically, one could use a real (or real-sounding) name and behave the same way, because the anonymity in that respect isn't about literal anonymity, but rather the disconnect between people who have often never met using the medium to unload the way they wouldn't in person. So that's not really the point either.

Whatever your issue with it is, you're obviously in the minority (as evidenced by a quick perusal of user names). I hope you can see people aren't doing it for any malicious or sneaky reasons. It's just the way some of us choose to use the Internet.

This is meant in good faith. Keep up your work.

 - Luther, who enjoys the name "the captain" in tribute to Don Vliet--a coward for not using his real name!?--and because he likes using a title to sound important.

(you're welcome to my last name if you want it. Or my SSN, for all I care. Just PM me for it.)

Thanks Luther...i had taken slight offense to that too; I used to post under my real name for many years,  until i was rejected for a job due to a post i made...apparently a background check entails googling someone's name and email address. Doesn't change anything about me, and hell, we still talk to the same people,  so whatever.

[Howie Edelson]

Personally, if we can talk honestly without any digs intended, I feel the made-up names are both immature and creepy (fake names on the Internet -- just doesn't have a good ring to it.) That's just my take, and why I use my name. My name, my words. My email's there, too. It's not about trying to sell anything. When I meet people I stand straight, I look them in the eye, shake their hand, and say my name. Some people don't -- but I do.

Ultimately, I don't care (or really only notice) what anyone calls themselves (although I admit it's confusing when it's silly or unpronounceable) but I DO take umbrage with someone taking me to task or attempting to slam me for posting a very educated opinion or stating something that they don't yet know while using some fake name (read: someone who would probably never have the gumption to do so if they didn't.)

[Mikie]

You know, Howie and Nick and Jude and whoever the hell else with an opinion on this oughta get some boxing gloves on and duke it out in the backyard. Last guy standing wins and gets their way and it's agreed that there's no more posts on the subject by the parties involved. The subject of this C50 ending and band politics is SOOOOOO old hat and it seems like half the threads here invariably take a turn into this effing subject of the C50 ending and why and why they didn't do this or that and which faction of The Beach Boys is the way they are and why others are not and there's GOTTA be something else to discuss, don'tcha think? This thing's been milked for all it's worth and done to death and there's no positive ending in sight! There never will be until Mike Love dies and I don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon!

[the captain]

I think you conflate good manners and personal integrity with online openness, and deviance with online anonymity. I'd just hope you reconsider your oft-stated feelings on the matter, especially in that you're in the minority. You're welcome to your opinion, though.

With respect to it not being about selling anything, you must admit it's a remarkable coincidence how those whose brands stand to gain by being public disproportionately use their names, while those whose don't, don't. And as Billy noted, there are real consequences for Google searches would-be employers deem unseemly. (I can confirm that my company does just that.) I'll take ongoing employment over righteous name-pride on a message board every time.

Anyway, we've exchanged opinions and disagree. No need to belabor the points.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I've already explained why I don't use my own name, but as I am starting my new job on 3 November, and have already passed my background check, it's Billy Castillo. I don't consider me using a different username as 'creepy', and as for it being 'immature', well...okay, so it's a pun. Humor happens to be a great part of who I am, as anybody whose known me for the 15 years I've been posting on BB forums can attest to. I also wouldn't blame anybody for not wanting to use their name online, what with internet stalking being what it is today (and as someone who has been the victim of identity theft , there's that to consider too).

I don't know if the second paragraph is directed towards me or not, but if it is...as I said earlier, I have already apologized for misunderstanding your post earlier. And again, since I am using a pseudonym, if that statement means less, you can always check with Andrew,  Scott, Jon, and quite a few others...they'd vouch for me.

Has this board really come to this? Are we really having an issue with whether or not it's okay to post under a different name, when there's so much GOOD we can be discussing? Brian's got an album coming up soon which by all accounts, is going to be great. That's just one thing right there.

Meh....all of these years being a mod here, and sometimes I wonder why I bother.

[Howie Edelson]

Sure there is Mikie, but it is the defining topic of this era.

Look, there are people who know some of the story, most of the story, and some very, very specific sides to the story. And it's very hard to hear any side and not be sucked in by it. And it's confusing -- you have Al saying ON FILM ". . . for the very last time" -- and I know for a fact that he never once subscribed to or believed that. Ever. He ABSOLUTELY thought it was back for good.  BLONDIE coming back (!!!!!), the Ella Awards -- and the reasons for why people were there and the repercussions of people being there -- are all a continuation/aftershock of C50. People bouncing between bands -- allegiances shifting; that's all due directly to C50.

It's not the be all and end all -- but it's pretty f***ing huge.
 

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I agree in that it should've continued. We all know the various reasons why it didn't, and it couldn't, continue (at least not without certain people making concessions/sucking up their egos), but that doesn't make it any less of a *massive* missed opportunity. After the show I went to, and seeing others online...going from the reunited group to the various solo factions is like going from prime rib to Whataburger. Hey, Whataburger is pretty damn good for a fast food burger joint, but nothing beats a succlent prime rib cooked to a perfect medium rare.

If I *had* to pick, I'd see Brian with this current incarnation of his band (and if Scott and John were onboard with him, it would be the greatest backing band in the history of existence, but I digress...) but I'd rather see them all back together.

[drbeachboy]

Y'know what dr. beach boy? Maybe you're right.
All I know is that I continue to write, produce, and consult for all the factions of the band we're discussing.
Working on multiple BB-related projects as I write this.
My ideas are welcomed (and they know they're mine because I actually use my name, dr.)

My name is Dirk. I'm not hiding anything. You sir, have a chip on your shoulder. Don't be so pompous, many folks here use handles on this board.

[Jon Stebbins]

Y'know what dr. beach boy? Maybe you're right.
All I know is that I continue to write, produce, and consult for all the factions of the band we're discussing.
Working on multiple BB-related projects as I write this.
My ideas are welcomed (and they know they're mine because I actually use my name, dr.)

My name is Dirk. I'm not hiding anything. You sir, have a chip on your shoulder. Don't be so pompous, many folks here use handles on this board.

Howie's got a dumb angel on his shoulder. No chip whatsoever. He's the opposite of pompous. He's matter of fact, direct, even harsh, but never uninformed. I can'i believe he has much energy to expend with two boys under 5 to look after. But man, he's letting his opinions fly lately and stuff is being revealed. The board wins.

[Cyncie]

Hey, my name's Cindy. I got online when we were all being warned about the need to hide our identities from online stalkers. As a result, I started my internet life with a handle and have continued the practice. Facebook gave me panic attacks at first, because I was so conditioned not to let personal info out online.

Having said that, I appreciate our insiders who  come on here and share observations. Even if they can't share every detail, I'm aware of the fact that these guys know a lot more than I do, and their insights are more valuable to the discussion than my mere conjecture.

It would seem that C50 opened a can of worms in Beach Boys land and the fallout continues. I only hope the "boys" can eventually be men about it all and end it well. If not, well… the music transcends the acrimony. It always has.

[Andrew G. Doe]

My ideas are welcomed (and they know they're mine because I actually use my name, dr.)

Howie, I hope you don't mind me saying this and that it's clear I have no dog in whatever debates are going on in this thread between you and drbeachboy or nicko or whoever. I do want to comment on what seems to me to be a pattern of your attitude about posting under one's real name. (At least I have noticed you mentioning it several times.)

I think you're wrong to judge those who don't so harshly. If you, Jon Stebbins, Peter Carlin, Stephen Desper, Andrew Doe, and various others want to post under your own full names, that's fine. I'd note, however, that most people online--at least on this board--who post under their real names were, are, or probably plan to sell or promote their work. That's fine, no problem, but it's an obvious professional/financial/promotional interest.

Can't speak for the others (and thanks for including me in such august company), but in my case, that's the most misguided and frankly patronizing load of twaddle I've read on this forum in years, and dammit there's been some stiff competition. I've posted under my own name here and elsewhere (not invariably, granted) since I came online in 1998, at which point I had precisely nothing to push financially. Nor have I now. Nothing obvious about it whatsoever. I post under my own name for the following reasons:

1 - I can't conjure up a handle that doesn't strike me as either corny or infantile...
2 - my writing style is such that I'd be rumbled in roughly 30 minutes, as indeed I was over on The Hoff...
3 - obviously, for the kudos and the myriad opportunities for ego massage: don't want anyone else getting the credit...
4 - but most importantly, I have no problem posting what I have to say standing up in plain sight as opposed to hiding behind a nomme du guerre because I believe in what I say on this subject. Nor do I post in the third person, or make ludicrous statements which I try to explain away by claiming English isn't my first language. I get it wrong, I hold my hands up and 'fess up. I happen to quite like this band: can't be sure the same is true of some other posters, past & present.

So, kindly don't inform me why I'm posting under my own name, especially if you're going to be so comically wide of the mark.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I don't think he was referring to you in the company of trying to promote yourself, just in the company of those who post under their own name (and actually, you don't...just your initials   )

[Andrew G. Doe]

"I'd note, however, that most people online--at least on this board--who post under their real names were, are, or probably plan to sell or promote their work."

You wuz sayin' ?