Another S**t stirring article in The Independent today !

[HeyJude]

It's just not a realistic idea is it...

If Mike had agreed not to tour with Bruce this year then his expectation would have been that it would have cost him a large amount of money.

As the tour was scheduled to end in August he would also have been envisaging having to spend months off the road.

Plus the band and crew members( including his son) may not have been too happy at having to sit around for a year.

He can't have been certain that the reunion was going to go without a hitch anyway.

If you add the factor that Mike in many ways probably prefers playing in a band with guys he has no issues with and where it's easier for him to get women then I don't think it was ever realistic at all.

I definitely like the theoreticaly idea of a big rock star touring specifically to keep the backing band members employed, but in this and most scenarios this reasoning just doesn't work. They've rotated backing band members in and out, presumably not always at the request of the band member. Also, if, and this is just an "if", if they turned down more reunion shows to do cheaper Mike/Bruce shows, then the reunion band dudes lost out on potential work as well.

[AndrewHickey]

I definitely like the theoreticaly idea of a big rock star touring specifically to keep the backing band members employed, but in this and most scenarios this reasoning just doesn't work. They've rotated backing band members in and out, presumably not always at the request of the band member. Also, if, and this is just an "if", if they turned down more reunion shows to do cheaper Mike/Bruce shows, then the reunion band dudes lost out on potential work as well.

One of the two backing band members being kept employed who weren't involved with the reunion tour is Christian Love. Presumably Mike feels more loyalty towards him than towards people he only met six months ago.

And as for people being rotated in and out, Mike's band has actually been remarkably stable. Christian's only been in the band about five years, but Kirsch has been there for eight, Totten and Cowsill for eleven (though Cowsill was on keyboards for the first few years of that) and Bonhomme for at least sixteen.

[HeyJude]

Yes, I'm definitely aware of the tenure of the current lineup members in Mike's band. It has been stable for a number of years. But we certainly know of other past longtime backing band members who end up leaving not of their own decision, so I don't think there's any precedent for Mike keeping band members on purely to keep them employed. It may be a nuanced point, but he keeps them because they peform well and work well within his organization, and presumably their services cost what he feels is a fair amount.

I certainly wouldn't buy that he'd place a preference for his own backing band member's employment over having the reunion lineup together. If he does, I don't think it would have anything to do with feeling anyone needs employment more than somebody else. He would make that choice based on his own operation being cheaper and more to his liking.

If Mike felt especially strong about specifically keeping his son employed, he could certainly lobby to have Christian in the BB touring band. That certainly wouldn't bother me. Get Matt Jardine in there too. 

[Nicko]

I definitely like the theoreticaly idea of a big rock star touring specifically to keep the backing band members employed, but in this and most scenarios this reasoning just doesn't work. They've rotated backing band members in and out, presumably not always at the request of the band member. Also, if, and this is just an "if", if they turned down more reunion shows to do cheaper Mike/Bruce shows, then the reunion band dudes lost out on potential work as well.

I didn't say that that was Mike's reason for touring at all. But he and Bruce have built up an operation that works and the longer they took a break from it, the more problems there could have been in putting it back together.

I notice you ignored the other points anyway...

[HeyJude]

I definitely like the theoreticaly idea of a big rock star touring specifically to keep the backing band members employed, but in this and most scenarios this reasoning just doesn't work. They've rotated backing band members in and out, presumably not always at the request of the band member. Also, if, and this is just an "if", if they turned down more reunion shows to do cheaper Mike/Bruce shows, then the reunion band dudes lost out on potential work as well.

I didn't say that that was Mike's reason for touring at all. But he and Bruce have built up an operation that works and the longer they took a break from it, the more problems there could have been in putting it back together.

I notice you ignored the other points anyway...

A lot of stuff going back and forth here, I'm honestly not sure which points you're referring to. Usually, if I don't disagree with a point, I'm probably not going to address it too much.  

The reason you state is much more succinct and does make sense. It's just not a good reason to continue on with that band instead of the reunion band.

I would also argue that it wouldn't be terribly difficult to put his same touring band back together if he waited another year. The reunion band not only employs Totten and Cowsill, but also Bonhomme in the crew. If Christian Love is currently happy to just go out on tour with his Dad, I'm sure he'll be there waiting too. That would leave Randell Kirsche. I've heard nothing but nice things about the guy, and I even saw him play with Al's band in 2000 before he joined Mike's. But he's not irreplaceable, and he also seems to float around that Jardine/Marks/PapaDooRunRun/Gary Griffin/Chris Farmer/Beach Boys scene anyway, so he'd probably be ready to go back at any time too.

[EthanJames]

Well anyhow, I was on some Brian Wilson fan-page today and saw this, thought I might share it...

[Justin]

That's just awful.

[EthanJames]

That's just awful.

I couldn't agree more, it's kind of getting outta hand now

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

That's one way of putting it...

[halblaineisgood]

it is...

[Doo Dah]

I agree. It's getting as bad as reality teevee.



 

[Mikie]

Damn.  Al looks like he's 90 years old in that picture.

[adamghost]

Randell Kirsch is one of the nicest dudes on the planet, and what a talented guy...

Whatever my personal feelings are about this or that (and they are pretty ambivalent, not to mention irrelevant to the bottom line calculations being made), I'm glad to see that fellow is back to work.  What a great dude.

[mabewa]

I typed a long thing and it timed out and I lost it but others have already said it.

Anyways regarding timing of the announcement, I just think it is demonstrable that the announcements timing is not the problem. It actually was announced,  discussed, and reported in late June that there would be BrianAlDavidless post Reunion Tour October dates and that was when the Reunion was to end in mid-September. So it is demonstrated that the timing of the Mike's announcement is not the problem,

No, the announcement is exactly the problem.  We saw that simply announcing some gigs without the full lineup didn't get the bad publicity, any more than the band touring without Brian and Dennis in 1982 did.  But putting out a press release to celebrate the lineup change, and presenting the reduced lineup as the Beach Boys from that point onwards, with no indication of the full group ever working together again or even hoping to work together again, is a much bigger story.  And doing it just before their final show-of-unity concerts is just plain bizarre timing.

Regards,
Jon Blum

Exactly. Badly timed. Badly worded. Brian's reaction was to the press quizzing him on a taint they'd already picked up on. I chatted with CNN reporters at the Grammy Museum thing and that's all they could talk about, how cold the announcement from Mike's camp seemed...and how the timing seemed provocative.

I'm glad I'm not alone here.  We can blame the press, and there was certainly some bad reporting.  But none of this would have happened without the the hamfisted announcement.  I'm glad that Mike has sought to put the record straight. 

[mabewa]

I never celebrated going back to how it was before...I just said I wasn't surprised about it. Seriously...what about this is such a shock? It was known back in JUNE.

I suppose the outrage isn't about things going back to the way they were, we did all know that was going to  happen. But a fundamental thing in the equation changed, and that is an *active* willingness from Brian, Al, and David to keep it going. I'm not shocked so much that Mike may not care about that, but it makes Mike going back to his own tour much more heartbreaking.

It's true that we probably would have been better off not knowing that the others wanted to keep it going. 

Hopefully something yet will be worked out. 

Contracts were drawn up and plans were made while completly keeping in mind that the reunion tour was a one-time thing that had a start and end date.  Why do we assume that it's so easy for them to now break agreements and contacts and extend the tour indefinitely?  Mike and Bruce made plans for more shows in October...with a good group of other band members and crew prepared to take those shows on.  What does it mean to them that Mike will now break out of those commitments?  Let's just let the events pass and see what they do next year.  Right now, they're just following through with the plans they initiated earlier this year. 

I don't think it's an outlandish claim to say that Brianistas lack integrity and that they believe the rest of the world (meaning Michael Love) should fall in line behind their demands.

You have got to be the least objective mod I've ever encountered on the Internet.

Why blame "Brianistas" for this?  You have a combination of Mike Love making poorly worded press statements and right-wing British tabloids doing what they do best here.  Is it a terrible crime to want to see the Beach Boys continue touring with more than one original member? 

I'm entitled to an opinion as well, you know.

No, it's not a terrible crime to want to see the Beach Boys continue touring with more than one original member. I'd love to see the five-man group go on. But this whole situation was already known back in June. Sure, Michael's statement was rather poorly worded and the less said about John Bull's psuedo-journalism, the better. I'm not blaming Brianistas for this situation itself since, again, we knew it back in June. But some of the most hateful remarks I've ever seen thrown at anyone, let alone a member of the Beach Boys...it's a bit much. I understand that the guy's not perfect but it's just moronic behavior for its own sake, in my opinion.

I occasionally see these hateful opinions on these board.  Occasionally.  But most of the time, it's just Beach Boys fans criticizing one of the members in a fairly mild way.  If that member happens to be Mike, then there is this hysteria and people start talking about "Brianistas."  Now, I actually can understand pretty well why Mike Love fans are sensitive (and I've had to defend the guy myself on multiple occasions).  But in my experience, most of the real Mike Love haters are not particularly big BBs fans, and don't post on boards like this anyway.  It just seems like a case of barking up the wrong tree, and it diverts from the subject.  I think that Mike Love gets a bad rap in many ways, but I can say honestly that I think he is fairly clueless about public relations, and this is an excellent example of him shooting himself and the band in the foot.