The Smiley Smile Message Board

According to a recent press release, Mike's 2017 BB Tour grossed 23M. If the old royalty rates of 20% of first Mil, and 17.5% on revenue above 1M still hold, that's a pretty healthy pay check for each member of BRI.

Regardless of one's particular view of Mike or the M&B operation, or the fact that it is still a great deal for Michael, it's a big benefit for all members, and I would assume the biggest income source for Carl's estate.

A Recipe For Disaster

First, add 5 humourous posts about scraping sheet metal or being a pump attenendant

Then add a sprinkling of Kid Presentable

Cook on a medium setting for about 5 pages or until well done.

I'd image it's a better revenue stream for Carl's family than the endless Pet Sound reissues or the copies of Sounds of Summer that shift every year when the weather gets warm. 

Meh, this a little like telling your ex that they got a good deal in the divorce simply because they could have been screwed even more.

Brian and Al (and Carl's estate) are *co-owners* of the BB trademark. They're LETTING Mike use the name. The "favor" is all in one direction.

It would probably be especially galling to tell someone like Al that Mike's tour is a "big benefit" to him, as Al likely voted *against* Mike having an exclusive license back in 1998 and was run off the touring market in 1999 because of BRI's stance toward Mike's license.

In the case of especially Al, it's more like owning stock in a company, disagreeing with most or all of the decisions made by the company and its board, but still most definitely being entitled to any proceeds/profits due to him as a shareholder.

Yes, compared to "average" folks like most of us, the money the shareholders make off of Mike's tour is a nice hunk of money for doing sitting at home and doing nothing. But again, they are co-owners of the name and trademark and *should* be getting their appropriate share.

As I've said before, BRI would be a lot better off giving the license to someone else than Mike would be touring on his own. The trademark/name itself is a thousand times more powerful and valuable than anything Mike brings to his tour.

I guess trying to paint the tour license scenario as a "big benefit" to everyone is an attempt at trying to say something positive about Mike. I just don't see it that way, and don't feel he needs to be praised for it. Mike got the license, he abides by its terms (presumably), and all proper dividends/proceeds are paid to BRI members (again presumably), so on the financial side of things I don't feel the need to actively and unprompted point out that it's Mike who's getting the amazing deal. But if it's brought up, I have no problem saying the benefits and favors in the tour license situation are all one-sided; Mike is the one getting the amazing deal. He's being *allowed* to use the name.

Also, I believe Mike reported in his book that he has paid about $20 million out to BRI since taking the license in 1998. So that's about $1 million paid per year, which is then split four ways between the shareholders.

So at best, each member (including Mike) would be getting about $250K per year. I'm guessing they don't even gross that from the corporation, as all sorts of operating expenses and other stuff off the top probably factors in before they get their cut.

So it's not like $23 million per year, and then 17.5-20% of that split four ways (which would yield very roughly $1 million per shareholder per year), but rather it's about 1/4 of that at best.

Again, $250K per year to sit at home sounds amazing to us. But it's money they're all owed because they own the trademark. And let it also be known of course that they'd be making FAR more money actively touring than only collecting their share of the license fee.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that the touring Beach Boys would make 23 million USD in one touring year.  Based off what I know for the asking price of the touring band I would say a much safer estimate would be in the 7 to 9 million dollars a year range.

The North American numbers released by Pollstar for 2017 were discussed in this post/thread:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,25544.msg629288.html#msg629288

It showed Mike's band making $6.9 million in North American (Brian made $8.5 million).

So yeah, while Mike surely made additional money outside of North American, it's hard to believe he pulled in another $16 million from non-North American regions. By my rough count, I see about 36 shows outside North American that Mike performed last year.

Can someone point to the article that states his band brought in $23 million? I honestly can't remember whether I've already seen mention of that figure.

Could private corporate gigs make up that difference? I know they pay well and likely wouldn’t be represented in tour revenue...but that’s an awfully big difference. Just a thought.

Edit -changed typo of “your” to intended “tour.” Sorry for thusly stealing “your” revenue, HeyJude!

There are surely private and corporate gigs (though, at least in past years, at least some of those gigs were done by Mike under non-BB names like "California Beach Band"). That would add some amount of revenue. But presumably, especially with something like the number of $20 million over nearly 20 years that Mike cites in his book, he's talking about total license revenue going back to BRI, which would presumably include private/corporate gigs done under the BB name.

MIKE’S Money Machine.... ::)

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/article/the-beach-boys-to-perform-at-pala-casino-224533

Well, it musta been a typo or possibly just a made-up number.

I'm no Mike Love apologist and I wish the man would grow up and try to mend his relationship with his cousin and his other surviving former partner.  But, really, must every OP with Love's name in the subject line immediately morph into a "Mike Love is an Asshole and Liar" thread?

The deal with this particular thread is that it chose to broach the subject of Mike using the trademark, and broach it by saying essentially "setting all the other issues aside, the other BRI members greatly benefit", and to me that's way too much of a stretch of ignoring a bunch of other key, pertinent issues and then taking one thing and trying to over-emphasize it.

The issue at hand in this thread isn't Mike's use of the name or his license. The issue is trying to portray his use of the license in a way that, in my opinion, ignores both the full details of the situation and the band's history in general.

Again, I refer back to Al's apparent resistance to Mike having an exclusive license, and Al subsequently being run off the touring circuit using the "BBFF" name, as key pieces of information that tell me simply isolating the revenue generated by Mike's tour ignores too many other pieces of information.

Not much bashing here...As for your quote here...Most already KNOW that so why reiterate in THIS thread?  It's not like we're talking about his latest attack and regergitation of his [false] claims.  So let's simply agree to agree that the item above is factual and carry on.

I'm here because I am aware of what the Beached Boys were paid in order to play here 2 1/2 years ago.  And as I see no reason to expect a sudden jump in those fees...the amount made per year seems entirely outta wack...by about 60 some-odd percent.  Ol' Jude there explains it pretty clearly and succinctly.  And as for Mike doin' some 'side shows'...he'd still have to pay Brian royalties for the use of his songs. It's nice dough as an expected extra for the BRI partners.  There is a shelf life though...at least as far as Mike and Bruce are concerned.  The clock is ticking.  How much longer CAN they continue.  How much longer will they continue and how much longer will they be able to deliver the 'goods' in a qualitative and professional manner.  Time waits for no one.  [even if you choose to lie about it.  ;)]

You missed the part where this needed to be an off-topic thread that non-sequiturs into Lovesterbashing for the 3000th time.  This one's explicitly about the guy, have at it.  Just try not to like, wish maiming or death on him in the process.  That might, you know, not be a take that holds up in the long run. 

I'm not trying to 'portray' his license in any way shape or form, other to say that if the numbers are correct, Mike brings a nice sum into BRI. That benefits all shareholders, and I assume that benefit has a greater impact on one shareholder in particular, Carl's Estate. As for the 'full details of the situation and the band's history in general' it matters not, in terms of the fact that BRI allows the license to exist, and I'm sure the primary reason for that is financial.

I'm truly not trying to turn this into a thing.

We all already know that Mike's tour generates income for all shareholders. So I presume the bent of this thread is some sort of perspective that we need to revisit on that issue; specifically, the idea of sidestepping all other salient points on the topic and acknowledging that BRI members reap a financial reward from Mike's touring. I just don't believe Mike should get a quick round of kudos for generating income for Carl's estate. Anybody holding the license would be doing the same, and Carl's estate is doing them a favor for allowing use of such a valuable trademark at a very reasonable rate.

myKe luHv's kaching machine does him no favors. In fact, it needs to go in the shop for repairs.
It only feeds his need for nourishment and revenge.
He'll never get to enjoy spending his fortune on body oil.
He knows that his famous cousin will go down in history as not only a genius, but as a humble, good natured man that everyone admires and loves.
He knows that he'll go down as a clown who was the most hated, laughed at greedy jackass the world of music has ever witnessed.
He knows that he rides the coattails of his famous cousin and that without his cousin's talent, he'd be wearing overalls in some sheetmetal factory or pumping gas.
He knows he famous for one thing and one thing only and that is his R&R HOF speech that he'll never live down.
He knows he should not even begin to think about even walking by a recording studio.

Hey myKe, enjoy your money.  ::)

Yeah, I agree the numbers are definitely off. My day job is in the live concert industry and 100% agree those numbers are off by ~60%.

That $23m divided by 175 shows comes to about $131k a gig gross. Even let’s say that is what the venue takes it does sound a lot. Does that sound feasible given his smaller markets?

I’m wondering if the number really relates more to the Beach Boys as a whole per year. Concerts, album sales, record royalties etc.

Agreed OSD, Mike is an asshole to the tenth degree despite BW and Al’s attempt to make things right in 2012......

The Pollstar figure of $6.9 million for North America in 2017 is the best objective data source. As we've said, the question is whether he then grossed another *$16 million* from likely less than 40 international shows and corporate/private shows not tracked by Pollstar. Doesn't seem likely to me.

Also, Mike's own book mentions paying out about $20 million to BRI over the course of 18-19 years. If we use the lower end number of 17.5% of gross going to BRI, then that would amount to about $115 million gross over 20 years, so on average a gross of very rough $6 million per year. These are all VERY rough numbers.

But if Mike were pulling anything near $23 million gross per year, he'd have paid far more than $1 million per year to BRI I would think.

I'm absolutely no expert on the subject, but is the number that crazy? I'm sure it refers to total gross, which would mean all revenue accounted from concerts. But everytime I've seen them, the crowd size is definitely a couple of thousand people at least. Tickets seem to go anywhere from 40-150 bucks, and there are VIP packages. Again I have no clue but if you charge a couple of thousand people 50-60 bucks, 180 times a year, it seems that figure would be close.

"Focusing one's life soley on making a buck shows a certain poverty of ambition"  8)

I think Pollstar tracks their numbers at the source, from the venue/box office in terms of precisely how many tickets have been sold and how many dollars were brought in.

I suppose Pollstar wouldn't be tracking VIP packages, but I'm also not even sure if BRI gets a cut of those VIP packages. I would imagine only the ticket portion of the VIP packages are factored into the license fee paid to BRI. And in any event, I doubt VIP packages account for like tens of millions of dollars in grosses.

In any event, both Pollstar's 2017 numbers and Mike's own citation in his book of having paid BRI $20 million over nearly 20 years seem to very generally lineup, and indicate average grosses somewhere closer to the $10-12 million range rather than $23 million.

You can actually get some pretty hard numbers from the 2017 Pollstar chart.

They show Mike's average ticket price as $60.77. Average number of tickets sold per show is 1,248. Average gross per show therefore is $75,824. Rough calculations show they tracked a little over half of Mike's shows (it looks like around 91 North American shows). By my count, he did about 36 shows outside North American last year, which gets us to about 127 shows.

But even assuming he did 180 shows last year, and assuming the shows not tracked by Pollstar brought in the same average grosses, the top end number we'd have is something like $13.8 million in grosses.

When you factor in the fact that he probably didn't quite do 180 shows (probably something more like 150-170), some of the private/corporate gigs may have been a flat fee gig and less than $75,000, and that Mike may have sprinkled in a few "California Beach Band" gigs (I honestly don't know if he bothers with the side band anymore), and I'd imagine we're back in that $10-$12 million gross.

I'm also guessing some years in the past were lighter, as an average payout of about $1 million per year to BRI would mean something more like grossing in the $6-$8 million range per year.