The C50 Post Mortem Thread

[JohnMill]

This thread has been created for those who want to continue talking about the Beach Boys as an inclusive unit and where the band stands post C50.  It was by and large created in an effort not to have the "Brian Wilson Solo Album" thread locked due to the intensely debated issues surrounding the topic of the status of The Beach Boys post C50:

Actually, I'm siding with the concept of accurate reporting and correctly understanding said information. fact is, as just established, Brian knew about Mike's October shows some three months before Mike's second (and admittedly very badly-timed) statement, thus to express any surprise at the latter was, to be charitable about it, disingenuous. The more so as it was issued at the express request of Brian's representative. This isn't my given opinion, it's reported fact from the two October pieces in the LA Times. Read them again.

Ok, a pretty unusual reaction from Brian's camp, nothing new there.

I saw the M&B dates pop up only a few weeks (maybe less) into the tour. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now. It's nothing short of undermining, Mike had his mind set up how far the C50 tour was going. As I stated you can either believe it's his right or you can believe that the 5 guys on stage made the Beach Boys what they are and it was up to those five guys to decide what happens post the C50 tour. All legal, voting sh*t aside.

If you believe he should have completed the tour,  then following the last show sat down with the rest of the band and discussed the future of the Beach Boys then you're a rational thinking person.

But who's to say they didn't? In fact, as Jon Stebbings has mentioned that future dates had been offered sometime previously, they had no doubt had this discussion well before the final show. And for whatever reason no agreement to carry on at that time could be reached.

IMO. I doubt Mike gave those dates a second look.

I like you Shady but your opinions can sometimes be so fantasy based. It's not like there's five magical fairies and they all can stay and play as a happy loving unit forever and ever and ever because a few of them want to.

I am still of the opinion that the whole "Mike fired me!" bit was a publicity stunt. A cheap one at that. But either way, we're still talking about it!!! As AGD has presented, there is actual proof Brian was told about Mike's fall plans. They were made!  As if the first time he knew (or his "handlers") was when he was told by a writer of Rolling Stone. Give me a break. And once again, some of you seem to forget, Mike has people on his payroll, and some of them are his own family. "The Beach Boys" are an established unit, this thing wasn't infinite, people don't seem to want to understand that.

And...Is it really like Brian Wilson to attack one of his band members in the form of press articles and releases? I don't buy for one second that he actually felt that way, wanted to do this. And, for what it's worth, despite reportedly having a good time on the tour (let's be honest, it's not like he really looked it most of the time - back troubles not withstanding), did he seriously want to keep touring after 75 dates?

I might get some heat for this, but you know how Brian was the most "on" for both of the final UK shows? Maybe he was so happy and "on" those nights because he knew they were the last.

And lastly, I know I just added fuel to this ugly fire, but can we not have EVERY thread derail into a C50 clusterfuck? This one was supposed to be about Brian's upcoming album.

This thing is like the mafia once you think you are done it pulls you back in  .

Anyhow you bring up some great points and as I've noticed it does seem like most of the negativity since the fall at least from vantage point seems to be coming from Camp Wilson.  Brian Wilson has been the one quoted as saying "No more reunions", Brian Wilson's camp was the one I believe quick to squash the rumoring on the SSMB about a future potential "Beach Boys" album by stating emphatically that Brian Wilson is working on a solo record right now and so on and so forth.  For their part Mike Love and Al Jardine although they've not been overtly positive about the potential of more C50 type activities have at least not slammed the door as firmly shut as Brian Wilson has.  Which tells me and in my own subjective opinion that Brian Wilson was legitimately hurt by Mike Love's decision not to carry on with the C50.  Whether or not he was taken by surprise as to the fact that the C50 didn't continue is somewhat irrelevant from where I stand because he obviously took the actualization and reality of M&B carrying on without him hard as he's been very negative towards the idea of future C50 related ventures since that time.

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.  The fact that "Brian Wilson fired from Beach Boys" ever trended on Google is proof enough of that fact.  It didn't cast Mike Love in a positive light (which is what a press release is supposed to do for the person issuing it) and certainly didn't do much for the inclusive image of "The Beach Boys" and by inclusive I mean the C50 lineup, not M&B.  So Mike Love at least in my opinion didn't do himself any favors with his press release.

As for the notion that fans would feel differently if the shoe was on the other foot and Brian Wilson was the one who put an end to the C50 activities?  I can't deny that wouldn't be the case but from my vantage point there just seems to be so much of an unknown quantity regarding the professional career of Brian Wilson and what exactly it entails of from the perspective of bringing the performer to his audience that many fans would just rather avoid that subject with a barge pole.  I'll give you an example.  Assumptions being what they are, many of us assume that Mike Love's decision not to carry on with the C50 was a decision based upon his desire to conduct his life and career the way he felt most comfortable.  There are those of us (like myself) who while we don't agree with his decision, accept it.  Then there are others who choose to ascribe a lot of negative motives to his decision not to carry on with the C50 and are still very angry with him to this day.

Now if the shoe were on the other foot and Brian was the one who put a halt to the C50 quite honestly we'd be dealing with a whole other set of issues because with Brian Wilson one of the first things that seems to come up in regards to his ability (or lack thereof) to perform is his health.  So if Brian Wilson pulled out of the C50 while the other four were dead set on continuing, many of us would've naturally assumed that Brian couldn't continue due to physical or mental health concerns and once you dip into those waters the person you are speaking of becomes far more sympathetic as those factors are either beyond the individual's control or at the very least perceived to be beyond the individual's control.  In Mike Love's case the reviews come in a little different because most of us assume that Mike Love chose not to continue on with the C50 of his own volition and due to the fact that he wanted to do something else with his life and his career.

[Jonathan Blum]

Well, you're a smart man for thinking that!  Know why?  'Cause there was NOBODY on that C50 tour last year who was gladder it was over than Brian Wilson. When I saw him in June, he couldn't wait to sit down wherever he went because his back was killing him! People who were at the concerts were saying that as soon as he left the stage at intermission he would go right off stage and sit. And I saw it first hand! After the concerts he'd make a beline for the tour bus, sit in the front seat, and zonk out immediately. So by September, he was exhausted and good and ready for a long break. Not my opinion. Fact!! Media hype? Sure it was. Along with a little egging on and encouragement by Brian between doctor visits......

When we saw them in Sydney, everyone we spoke to was looking forward to a break -- the tour had been a longer sustained slog with fewer days off than Brian's band had ever done, David and Carrie were missing New York, etc etc.

So of course Brian wanted a substantial break too.

It's just the difference between a break and a full stop.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Cam Mott]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly. 

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

[the professor]

We are all so sad. . . . . . . . . .we love the BB, and we are all so sad. . . . .

Non parlo piu. . . . . . .

[Emdeeh]

Brian Wilson has been the one quoted as saying "No more reunions"...

Remember how Brian deliberately denied the reunion before it happened, to throw the press off? I'm taking that "no more reunions" statement with a big hunk of salt (i.e. not particularly seriously).

[TimmyC]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

I like Mike Love. But it all seems to add up to him agreeing to do C50 as a one time thing only. WITH THE NOTABLE EXCEPTION that it seems likely he would have done a new BB record if it was he and Brian in a room writing songs. Otherwise, it just seems like it's because of Mike that the reunion ended and we now have a BW solo album instead of a BB record. But maybe I'm just a victim of the PR war which the BW camp seems to have won.

I really do like Mike, but it's so frustrating that it appears he's the reason this whole thing fell apart. So, if I'm wrong, please tell me. It would make me feel a whole lot better. Although nothing can make me feel better about the reunion falling apart.

And again, just to reiterate, the problem is that expectations were raised. If they had all stuck to the line that C50 was a special event and would NOT continue, I don't think any of us would be justified in being overly disappointed. But there were SEVERAL very serious suggestions that it WOULD continue in some form or another. I think it's important to keep in mind that that is what this is all about. Expectations were raised only to be cruelly dashed.

Hence, the lackluster reaction to the BW solo record, at least by some of us (a minority of us I suppose....)

[Cam Mott]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

I like Mike Love. But it all seems to add up to him agreeing to do C50 as a one time thing only. WITH THE NOTABLE EXCEPTION that it seems likely he would have done a new BB record if it was he and Brian in a room writing songs. Otherwise, it just seems like it's because of Mike that the reunion ended and we now have a BW solo album instead of a BB record. But maybe I'm just a victim of the PR war which the BW camp seems to have won.

I really do like Mike, but it's so frustrating that it appears he's the reason this whole thing fell apart. So, if I'm wrong, please tell me. It would make me feel a whole lot better. Although nothing can make me feel better about the reunion falling apart.

And again, just to reiterate, the problem is that expectations were raised. If they had all stuck to the line that C50 was a special event and would NOT continue, I don't think any of us would be justified in being overly disappointed. But there were SEVERAL very serious suggestions that it WOULD continue in some form or another. I think it's important to keep in mind that that is what this is all about. Expectations were raised only to be cruelly dashed.

Hence, the lackluster reaction to the BW solo record, at least by some of us (a minority of us I suppose....)

That's just the way I see it. Mike went along with allowing Brian his will and bending to and lumping Brian's wishes and still went above and beyond with an extended C50. He handled it fine, Brian and Al and some fans did not and there in was the rub. Lackluster past solo records [and no info] might explain a lackluster reaction to a future solo album too.

[oldsurferdude]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly. 

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

Oh my God!! What a surprise!!

[Doo Dah]

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

Jeez. What an incredibly stupid comment. Aww well...consider the source.

You know, kind Smiley Smilers - this circular tug o' war is only going to ratchet up when Brian releases his CD. Brian will weave and bobb, while the press opines freely. Conjecture. Again. And that's fine by me. I'll enjoy hearing Mike and Bruce stammering while posed pointed questions by the Dingleberry County News Herald.

[Cam Mott]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly. 

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

Oh my God!! What a surprise!!

Back at cha.

[Cam Mott]

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

Jeez. What an incredibly stupid comment. Aww well...consider the source.

Back at cha as well.

[HeyJude]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

Because Cam Mott has been staunchly pro-Mike and anti-Al (and anti-Brian in anything relating to Mike) since I can remember. Go back and read the usenet groups (I believe) and other boards if they still exist going all the way back to at least 1999 or 2000, and it’s the same stuff, same arguments. You’ll read how Mike is without blame at every juncture in the Beach Boys story post-1998 (and usually prior as well), is just doing his thing minding his own business and abiding by every legal technicality, and Al Jardine is the evil mastermind who has consistently set out to f--- everything up.

Even most of the folks who, rightly or wrongly, are lumped into the “anti-Mike” group of fans will usually admit where the wrongdoing falls on Brian, or Al, etc. But not Cam when it comes to Mike Love’s actions. Not once in a scenario involving anything to do with touring groups has Mike been in the wrong. We’re talking in a moral/ethical/fan-centric way here, not the legalities. Mike has, as stipulated to by most “anti-Mike” fans, abided by everything in a legal sense. But any other evidence, such as reports of authors including Peter Ames Carlin and Jon Stebbins, of any allegedly, possibly underhanded or sneaky things done by Mike over the years regarding the touring band, has been ignored by Cam.

It kind of died down in the 2000’s once everybody including Al Jardine himself kind of learned to live with Mike and Bruce being called “The Beach Boys.” But the pro-Mike/Al-is-the-villain rhetoric has resurfaced and culminated in the aftermath of the reunion tour in the judgment that, in face of evidence that Mike Love was the actual, logistical, practical, literal reason the reunion did not continue, Al Jardine and Brian Wilson are the sole purveyors of wrongdoing in the demise of the reunion. We’re not simply talking about how PR was handled. No, we have all parties including Mike Love and all of the Beach Boys agreeing that Brian, Al, and David wanted to continue and Mike did not, yet Al and Brian are the cause of the “clusterf---“ in this scenario? We can’t even wring out of Cam that Mike *also* contributed to the PR clusterf----?

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

[Cam Mott]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

Because Cam Mott has been staunchly pro-Mike and anti-Al (and anti-Brian in anything relating to Mike) since I can remember. Go back and read the usenet groups (I believe) and other boards if they still exist going all the way back to at least 1999 or 2000, and it’s the same stuff, same arguments. You’ll read how Mike is without blame at every juncture in the Beach Boys story post-1998 (and usually prior as well), is just doing his thing minding his own business and abiding by every legal technicality, and Al Jardine is the evil mastermind who has consistently set out to f--- everything up.

This is probably Jude's way of thanking me for helping to bring balance to the fan community.

Please do go back and read all of it. While there read what passed for knowledge about Mike [mostly], it was some f-ed up stuff back then and the defense of it was pretty f-ed up too. Things are much better now even in the occasional dust up.

[Peter Reum]

This is family. The family had a reunion. It was a gift to each other, and a gift to themselves. Families don't have to live in the same house their entire lives to love each other. The bottom line is Brian and Mike are cousins. It transcends anything musical. It is blood. They are kin. They love each other. That is the bottom line. Brian and Mike's wives understand that. I think we can too.

[Cam Mott]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

Because Cam Mott has been staunchly pro-Mike and anti-Al (and anti-Brian in anything relating to Mike) since I can remember. Go back and read the usenet groups (I believe) and other boards if they still exist going all the way back to at least 1999 or 2000, and it’s the same stuff, same arguments. You’ll read how Mike is without blame at every juncture in the Beach Boys story post-1998 (and usually prior as well), is just doing his thing minding his own business and abiding by every legal technicality, and Al Jardine is the evil mastermind who has consistently set out to f--- everything up.

Even most of the folks who, rightly or wrongly, are lumped into the “anti-Mike” group of fans will usually admit where the wrongdoing falls on Brian, or Al, etc. But not Cam when it comes to Mike Love’s actions. Not once in a scenario involving anything to do with touring groups has Mike been in the wrong. We’re talking in a moral/ethical/fan-centric way here, not the legalities. Mike has, as stipulated to by most “anti-Mike” fans, abided by everything in a legal sense. But any other evidence, such as reports of authors including Peter Ames Carlin and Jon Stebbins, of any allegedly, possibly underhanded or sneaky things done by Mike over the years regarding the touring band, has been ignored by Cam.

It kind of died down in the 2000’s once everybody including Al Jardine himself kind of learned to live with Mike and Bruce being called “The Beach Boys.” But the pro-Mike/Al-is-the-villain rhetoric has resurfaced and culminated in the aftermath of the reunion tour in the judgment that, in face of evidence that Mike Love was the actual, logistical, practical, literal reason the reunion did not continue, Al Jardine and Brian Wilson are the sole purveyors of wrongdoing in the demise of the reunion. We’re not simply talking about how PR was handled. No, we have all parties including Mike Love and all of the Beach Boys agreeing that Brian, Al, and David wanted to continue and Mike did not, yet Al and Brian are the cause of the “clusterf---“ in this scenario? We can’t even wring out of Cam that Mike *also* contributed to the PR clusterf----?

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

Mike did not put out factual statements and Brian and Al did not either actually mislead or promote misleading/untruthful statements? What have I ignored about the end of C50 in your opinion?

[Nicko1234]

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

That's something I really don't understand. So if Brian or Al had felt, 'I'm not enjoying this and would rather do something else' then you would have felt disappointed in them? I'm not sure why anyone should have felt compelled to continue in that line-up if they didn't want to.

[HeyJude]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

Because Cam Mott has been staunchly pro-Mike and anti-Al (and anti-Brian in anything relating to Mike) since I can remember. Go back and read the usenet groups (I believe) and other boards if they still exist going all the way back to at least 1999 or 2000, and it’s the same stuff, same arguments. You’ll read how Mike is without blame at every juncture in the Beach Boys story post-1998 (and usually prior as well), is just doing his thing minding his own business and abiding by every legal technicality, and Al Jardine is the evil mastermind who has consistently set out to f--- everything up.

This is probably Jude's way of thanking me for helping to bring balance to the fan community.

Please do go back and read all of it. While there read what passed for knowledge about Mike [mostly], it was some f-ed up stuff back then and the defense of it was pretty f-ed up too. Things are much better now even in the occasional dust up.

There were less “pro-Mike” folks back then there are now. Some balance and some reflection on Mike’s position in all of the touring band/naming ruckus was and would have been welcomed. Unfortunately, continually and completely flipping the debate and opining that Mike was completely in the right and Al Jardine was the villain of the story was not conducive to the balanced debate that would have been wonderful.

A number of fans, including myself, were suggesting back then, with little ironclad evidence to go on, that maybe, just maybe, while Mike was legally right in the various scenarios, that there may have been some legal but perhaps disagreeable (to some) tactics used to achieve his goals pertaining to the touring band. We eventually got some more details that supported this idea. Peter Ames Carlin’s biography alluded to several instances where Mike attempted to edge Al out of the band, as early as 1990. Jon Stebbins reported additional details concerning how Mike was edging Al out and using David Marks as a pawn. Again, nothing illegal. But these reports did not paint Mike in the best light, and some of Al’s own comments about how he was amazed that Mike “pulled it off” also support the idea that Mike used legal and corporate strategy to get what he wanted. Legally in the clear certainly (unless we’re talking about different, later issues such as his suit against Brian in the mid 2000’s that was arguably laughed out of court), but open to some of the criticisms that fans were making that you disagreed with.

[HeyJude]

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

That's something I really don't understand. So if Brian or Al had felt, 'I'm not enjoying this and would rather do something else' then you would have felt disappointed in them? I'm not sure why anyone should have felt compelled to continue in that line-up if they didn't want to.

I think the basic idea is that if any one member had objected to continuing, while all others were on board, that would be disappointing.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

That's something I really don't understand. So if Brian or Al had felt, 'I'm not enjoying this and would rather do something else' then you would have felt disappointed in them? I'm not sure why anyone should have felt compelled to continue in that line-up if they didn't want to.

I think the basic idea is that if any one member had objected to continuing, while all others were on board, that would be disappointing.

Let us not forget thst they all agreed to extend the number of originally booked shows which allowed them to go to the UK, if I am not mistaken. And both Brian and Al where clear in their desire to extend while Mike said no.

The real question is why Mike said no. Those M/B shows could have easily been resceduled. Maybe Al and Mike were at each others throats, and Mike made the decision most of us might make, "I don't need this in my life, rather do my own thing". Point is, as much as I don't like Mike, he may have had other reasonable reasons for stopping and he is being classy by noy slinging mud. Just more wild speculation.

[Nicko1234]

I think the basic idea is that if any one member had objected to continuing, while all others were on board, that would be disappointing.

Oh sure, I can understand that it would have been disappointing for the fans. But just couldn't get why you used the phrase, 'disappointed in Al/Brian'. No big deal anyway.

[drbeachboy]

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

That's something I really don't understand. So if Brian or Al had felt, 'I'm not enjoying this and would rather do something else' then you would have felt disappointed in them? I'm not sure why anyone should have felt compelled to continue in that line-up if they didn't want to.

I think the basic idea is that if any one member had objected to continuing, while all others were on board, that would be disappointing.

Let us not forget thst they all agreed to extend the number of originally booked shows which allowed them to go to the UK, if I am not mistaken. And both Brian and Al where clear in their desire to extend while Mike said no.

The real question is why Mike said no. Those M/B shows could have easily been resceduled. Maybe Al and Mike were at each others throats, and Mike made the decision most of us might make, "I don't need this in my life, rather do my own thing". Point is, as much as I don't like Mike, he may have had other reasonable reasons for stopping and he is being classy by noy slinging mud. Just more wild speculation.

A speculation that is as good as any. Personally, I feel Mike knew from the get go that this would never be a permanent get together. That it was a one-time thing. The extension was agreed to so that the British fans didn't get screwed over. Also, I don't see this as the end. They will get together again before all is said and done. It may take until a Farewell tour, but it will happen again.

[HeyJude]

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

That's something I really don't understand. So if Brian or Al had felt, 'I'm not enjoying this and would rather do something else' then you would have felt disappointed in them? I'm not sure why anyone should have felt compelled to continue in that line-up if they didn't want to.

I think the basic idea is that if any one member had objected to continuing, while all others were on board, that would be disappointing.

Let us not forget thst they all agreed to extend the number of originally booked shows which allowed them to go to the UK, if I am not mistaken. And both Brian and Al where clear in their desire to extend while Mike said no.

The real question is why Mike said no. Those M/B shows could have easily been resceduled. Maybe Al and Mike were at each others throats, and Mike made the decision most of us might make, "I don't need this in my life, rather do my own thing". Point is, as much as I don't like Mike, he may have had other reasonable reasons for stopping and he is being classy by noy slinging mud. Just more wild speculation.

It is true that there has not been very much mud slinging. I would argue that Mike did a tiny bit of a very very subtle mudslinging, or perhaps just calling it snippy comments would be better, when he downplayed the success of the new album and indicated he felt the band was too big. These were not negative comments so much towards a person, but negative things about the reunion that he understandably did not air during the reunion.

[TimmyC]

It is true that there has not been very much mud slinging. I would argue that Mike did a tiny bit of a very very subtle mudslinging, or perhaps just calling it snippy comments would be better, when he downplayed the success of the new album and indicated he felt the band was too big. These were not negative comments so much towards a person, but negative things about the reunion that he understandably did not air during the reunion.
[/quote]

actually, I thought mike did mention the tour being too big while it was still going on.... and not really that it was too big, just that he likes a leaner production... or something along those lines.... whatever... just clarifying for the record I guess....

[TimmyC]

Also, to touch on something brought up (again) in recent posts, I for one would be just as disappointed in Brian (or any member) if he had been the one to put the brakes on more reunion activities.

That's something I really don't understand. So if Brian or Al had felt, 'I'm not enjoying this and would rather do something else' then you would have felt disappointed in them? I'm not sure why anyone should have felt compelled to continue in that line-up if they didn't want to.

I think the basic idea is that if any one member had objected to continuing, while all others were on board, that would be disappointing.

Let us not forget thst they all agreed to extend the number of originally booked shows which allowed them to go to the UK, if I am not mistaken. And both Brian and Al where clear in their desire to extend while Mike said no.

The real question is why Mike said no. Those M/B shows could have easily been resceduled. Maybe Al and Mike were at each others throats, and Mike made the decision most of us might make, "I don't need this in my life, rather do my own thing". Point is, as much as I don't like Mike, he may have had other reasonable reasons for stopping and he is being classy by noy slinging mud. Just more wild speculation.

A speculation that is as good as any. Personally, I feel Mike knew from the get go that this would never be a permanent get together. That it was a one-time thing. The extension was agreed to so that the British fans didn't get screwed over. Also, I don't see this as the end. They will get together again before all is said and done. It may take until a Farewell tour, but it will happen again.

That would be sweet Dr Beach Boy! You and I can hope for the same thing. Would love to get a final album out of it too. But I have to admit, I hope it happens next year or the year after that. They really are getting OLD. it seems to me there's a very, very small window left for this to happen and for it to still be quality. (no offense to you old timers!)

[Cam Mott]

Look I don't think anyone is denying here that Mike Love handled the situation last fall poorly.

I deny it. To me the clusterfuck is on Brian and Al.

That's interesting - how come?

Because Cam Mott has been staunchly pro-Mike and anti-Al (and anti-Brian in anything relating to Mike) since I can remember. Go back and read the usenet groups (I believe) and other boards if they still exist going all the way back to at least 1999 or 2000, and it’s the same stuff, same arguments. You’ll read how Mike is without blame at every juncture in the Beach Boys story post-1998 (and usually prior as well), is just doing his thing minding his own business and abiding by every legal technicality, and Al Jardine is the evil mastermind who has consistently set out to f--- everything up.

This is probably Jude's way of thanking me for helping to bring balance to the fan community.

Please do go back and read all of it. While there read what passed for knowledge about Mike [mostly], it was some f-ed up stuff back then and the defense of it was pretty f-ed up too. Things are much better now even in the occasional dust up.

There were less “pro-Mike” folks back then there are now. Some balance and some reflection on Mike’s position in all of the touring band/naming ruckus was and would have been welcomed. Unfortunately, continually and completely flipping the debate and opining that Mike was completely in the right and Al Jardine was the villain of the story was not conducive to the balanced debate that would have been wonderful.

A number of fans, including myself, were suggesting back then, with little ironclad evidence to go on, that maybe, just maybe, while Mike was legally right in the various scenarios, that there may have been some legal but perhaps disagreeable (to some) tactics used to achieve his goals pertaining to the touring band. We eventually got some more details that supported this idea. Peter Ames Carlin’s biography alluded to several instances where Mike attempted to edge Al out of the band, as early as 1990. Jon Stebbins reported additional details concerning how Mike was edging Al out and using David Marks as a pawn. Again, nothing illegal. But these reports did not paint Mike in the best light, and some of Al’s own comments about how he was amazed that Mike “pulled it off” also support the idea that Mike used legal and corporate strategy to get what he wanted. Legally in the clear certainly (unless we’re talking about different, later issues such as his suit against Brian in the mid 2000’s that was arguably laughed out of court), but open to some of the criticisms that fans were making that you disagreed with.

I've always gotten it, you and others thought Al had earned some sort of special treatment in regards to the trademark. I never disagreed with that, BRI wanted Mike to have an exclusive license. Al attempted a "coup", threatened a lawsuit and BRI gave him special treatment and he pissed that away. Mike didn't even have enough control to keep BRI from taking away his exclusive license or offering Al a sweeter deal than Mike had gotten. There were ethical problems but they were Al's ethics which were the problem. That's not speculation or me opining, it is a matter of court record. Now maybe somebody closer than court records to the people and situation can get on and clarify further with more facts instead of speculation.

Mike could no more force Al from the band than Al could force Mike from the band, that is confirmed recently by Brian while he was retracting C50 "been fired" statements.

There is a lot of forgetting going on but I don't think it is by me. To me you choose to ignore stuff that does not indict Mike, so yin and yang I suppose.