gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 09:18:02 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Ouch!....Al Opens Up Again.  (Read 24308 times)
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #150 on: October 01, 2013, 06:09:41 AM »


I agree. ML had no intentions of Brian, Al and David being in the band long term.  What I'm saying is that when they extended early on, Brian said no more after that. It sounded like a lot of shows and Brian's back was hurting.

But later on, Brian was having fund, back was better and the offers were still streaming in.  The album was a success. Brain and Al thought, let's keep this going, let's do another album. Mike said no.

It's an interesting scenario, but I haven't seen any evidence so far that this is what happened, and it doesn't make sense to me. Even this scenario pre-supposes that there was any point at which Mike considered not continuing on with his M&B show, and I don't buy that that was ever the case.

If MIke had been on board for *even more* reunion shows at an earlier stage, but Brian only offered one extension and then no more, and then Mike was unable to continue the reunion at a later date only because he had already booked M&B shows, then he could have *easily* said so in any interview. This could have been easily explained without getting into any petty name calling or undignified whatnot. Mike has offered no such explanation. That isn't even getting into the question of whether Mike simply HAD to book M&B shows a mere few months after the reunion tour was due to end, rather than, say, waiting until the new year or something.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #151 on: October 01, 2013, 06:15:54 AM »

Actually the one guy in all this who always acts as a gent is David Marks. No backbiting from him and he stood to lose a lot more than Al with the C50 ending. Al needs to button it because the day will come when the BW wivesandmanagers machine decides he's served his purpose and jettisons him again.

Word.  Rock!

Yeah, because Brian's wife and managers booting is Al is something to be celebrated?

David Marks is a gentlemen. He also has no corporate stake in anything to do with the Beach Boys, nor as many years invested into the machine.

Al has seemed to survive somehow without either the touring Beach Boys or Brian for the majority of 1998 to 2011, and it has actually seemed to give him better perspective and more willingness to be frank.

Are the people calling for Al to "button it" also calling on Mike to not make vague negative comments about "someone" in Brian's camp, implying they lacked "honor"? We're still not even sure who the hell Mike was talking about, nor whether Mike's opinion of that person was correct. But it certainly did nothing positive and only stoked flames as well, and didn't seem to show Mike ending the reunion with any dignity or grace.

You seem to have got the wrong end of the stick with my post. I think Al should "button it" because he isn't doing himself any favours in the long run. He's burning whatever bridges he and Mike may have mended during the C50 tour and has essentially pissed on his chips in regards to ever performing under the BB licence with Mike again (even if it was only a slim chance). When Brian's management is done with him he'll be out in the cold again.

You make some good and likely valid points. As a fan I'm not too concerned with this. I don't assume playing with Brian is permanent, and I'm not super enthused about simply seeing the M&B live lineup with Al added and singing a few leads. More importantly, while all of these guys including Al can sometimes seem to do things without the proper foresight, I'm not convinced Al doesn't know the ramifications of what he's saying and doing. I don't think he's under any illusions about rejoining Mike and Bruce. I can't say he hasn't ruled it out, I don't know. But I wouldn't imagine he would assume that playing with Mike's band is a likely possibility. It also seems as though Al prefers playing with Brian the way things are now. That could indeed change at some point; I haven't heard any indication that Al is now a permanent part of Brian's band.

Al's biggest mistake is not pursuing something substantial solo. We know he can't get a lot of bookings. But he could be churning out pleasant album projects of various types, and maybe a few spotlight solo shows here and there where he doesn't have to play the "meat and potatoes" numbers. But that's another topic of course.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #152 on: October 01, 2013, 06:23:41 AM »

I'd love for somebody to find out when the first post-reunion M&B show was booked. That would be an interesting (and yes, now largely useless) piece of information.

You want dates  ? We goddem.

Rolling Stone 6/26/12

El Comercio 6/22/12

But are those the dates Mike's management booked M&B shows or pursued bookings, or simply the dates they were first publicized? I don't think we often, if ever, know the actual dates that management reaches out to promoters and venues to book shows. If we knew by June 22/26 that Mike had booked some M&B shows, then I would imagine the actual date that shows were first actively pursued is even earlier.

It seems certainly at least *possible* that Mike's management pursued M&B bookings for late summer/fall 2012 before the reunion tour even commenced, and/or very early on prior to any reunion tour extensions.

Again, this matters not other than to analyze Mike's motives as far as whether he ever even for a moment considered not booking M&B shows.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #153 on: October 01, 2013, 06:28:38 AM »

Anyone else here thinks that as fans of the BB's music having the option of going to see two different touring outfits playing that wonderful music is potentially a double treat ? Something to be celebrated, not derided, perhaps ?

I've seen this argument bandied about since 1998. Sure, it sounds great. At this stage, I actually have gotten over the whole issue of Mike using the BB name, and splintered factions, and all of that.

No, the tragedy within the context of the band's history is SPECIFICALLY that the reunion tour was AMAZING. The total definition of all those cliches, that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, etc.  All FIVE of these guys made that tour amazing. See Howie Edelson's pefect post outlining why the fact that it ended was a travesty. All of these guys (well, not Dave particularly) participated in some crappy, lackluster periods in the band's history over the years, both in the studio and on stage. But they got their s**t together in 2012, and as a fan and student of the band's history, they should have kept that together for the sake of their own legacy and their fans. They don't owe us anything obviously, but anyone that kept that reunion from continuing for any additional length is an idiot. In this case, it happens to be that it apparently is largely Mike who blocked it in this case. That's why I genuinely believe that I would feel the same way if Brian had stopped it.
« Last Edit: October 01, 2013, 06:53:36 AM by HeyJude » Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #154 on: October 01, 2013, 06:33:40 AM »

In defence of Mike, there's one thing that a lot of people on here seem to forget. Mike's touring band is relatively stable. Mike tours constantly and consistenly, and being in his touring band/roadcrew is probably a pretty good gig for working musician/roadie.

When Mike joined in the C50 tour, he took a couple of members with him, but the others presumably were on hiatus for a while. I imagine the others didn't get paid a retainer, but were told that the C50 wouldn't last forever, there was a set end date, and after that the M&B band would resume touring. So, they were free/forced to find alternative employment in the meantime. They probably have families, mortgages, health care costs (it is America after all...).

As the end date approaches, if Mike was to suddenly extend the C50 tour, his sidemen who were not on the C50 tour would be out of work for longer, and probably a bit pissed off at Mike at the relatively short notice. They might not rejoin the touring band. They might get jobs elsewhere.

So, when it comes time for Mike to reassemble his well-versed and talented touring band, does he deal with some pissed off and broke employees? Does he hire several new sidemen? Or does Mike stick to his word, which was signed and legal and everyone was happy with (at the time)?

Knowing what we do of Mike's work ethic and that of his father, I would imagine that Mike had made promises to people he depends on, and he stuck to them. So for all the talk of Mike being the bad guy, refusing to extend the tour, "firing" Brian and Al and David, it really seems to me that Mike is a dependable man of his word.

The above scenario doesn't really apply to anyone else because most of Brian's band was on the C50 (and we know how he treats his sidemen (re: Bob and Jim)), and Al and Dave don't have regular bands. Mike is on the hook for being the bad guy in all of this, but he had the most to lose.

For us fans, we just want more C50 dates, and we don't give a sh*t about Mike's road manager, lighting manager, roadies and guitar techs, but it's his world and he does give a sh*t.

Think about it.

The problem with this reasoning is that it presupposed that Mike, or any of the BB's, places the employment of these people as a top priority. Maybe they do sometimes, but we know that numerous backing band members (and one would presume other tour employees) have been uncermoniously sacked over the years.

As far as I'm concerned, none of these guys care about MY employment, so why should one or two guys backing Mike's tour take precendence over the most amazing Beach Boys touring lineup since the 70's?

Ultimately, I don't believe the employment status of Mike's touring band members or crew had anything to do with the lack of additional reunion shows. That's a good thing as far as I'm concerned, because as a fan I'd be more annoyed if employing Kirsche instead of Scott Bennett (as a random example of course) was the reason we didn't get more reunion gigs.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #155 on: October 01, 2013, 06:36:16 AM »

If Loaf's right, Mike's siding with the Working Joe and deserves respect for that.  Maybe only one of his many considerations, but a key consideration.

So the guys in Mike's touring operation are "Working Joes", but the guys in Brian's band and people in that touring crew (who in 2013 are playing far less gigs than then did in 2012 and would have likely played in 2013 had the reunion continued) aren't? Working Joes have nothing to do with this, because anybody that would be part of any configuration would be "Working Joes."
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #156 on: October 01, 2013, 06:40:39 AM »

One thing that should always be remembered - Mike was (literally) thrown out of a very comfortable family home when he was barely out of his teens, and then a few years later saw his family loose pretty much everything and move from said palatial home to a two-bedroom place by the airport. His urge to ensure his financial security is entirely understandable.

The dude has literally appeared in past years on the "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" TV show, and makes jokes in concert about driving a Bentley. Zero sympathy at this point, sorry. I doubt Mike would want anyone to feel sympathy for that plight either, or use it as a justification for anything. I understand you offer it as simply a possible explanation rather than justification (I hope), and in that sense it is not without possible merit. 

If Mike has financial reasons for ending the reunion, then he should either state that that is the case in interviews, or if he chooses not to (which is obviously his right), then speculation and assumptions, however right or wrong, will continue to the degree that anyone cares anymore.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #157 on: October 01, 2013, 06:48:35 AM »

I've just posted in another thread but what seems to have happened is this.

Initial agreement with all parties for a C50 tour of about 50 dates. Early in the tour Mike more or less persuaded Brian to add a few more dates. Brian was having his back trouble at the time and agreed to those extra dates (including the two London dates) "and no more". This is recorded fact.

Meanwhile M+B were taking bookings for their band post-C50 to tour. These bookings were taken well before the C50 tour ended, some were announced in June 2012.

By the end of the tour Brian's back was good, he was having a whale of a time as was everybody. But the M+B dates were committed, and in all likelihood the last communicaton Mike had with Brian about it was "A few more dates AND NO MORE". Mike didn't see it as firing anyone, he was merely acting on an agreement already made.

It strikes me as a big misunderstanding.

Added to this, most of the M+B band were not included on the C50 tour. I would assume Mike feels loyalty to them. Perhaps they weren't even paid - as they weren't touring or playing.

It's all a shame because it does seem that in September 2012 everyone concerned wanted to either extend the tour or book another tour for 2013. There's little reason why the M+B tour couldn't have taken place over the winter and spring with the C50 lineup touring 12 months after the C50 tour ended. Venues wanted them, fans wanted them.

Still, that looks like more of a pipe dream than ever. I am glad that I was at Wembley, likely the last time The (surviving) Beach Boys all played together.

Can someone point to the "recorded fact" that it was Mike who "convinced" Brian to add more C50 shows during the tour? I'm not assuming this isn't true, but I haven't seen this reported anywhere. I may have missed a report somewhere.

As to the rest of your scenario, I don't buy that the ONLY reason more reunion shows didn't happen was because "oops, we already booked some M&B shows, can't go back on that, sorry, bye!"

I see NO evidence that by September 2012 "everyone concerned" still wanted to do more reunion shows either in 2012 or 2013. By that stage, everything I've read makes it very clear that Mike was, under the current circumstances, no longer interested in continuing the reunion as of September 2012. No evidence I have seen suggests that Mike wanted to book more reunion shows in 2013 but a simple “misunderstanding” dictated that that could not happen.

Mike’s subsequent, more frank comments about how he had clearly soured on elements of the reunion project, would seem to support the idea that some incident or series of events or epiphanies during the reunion tour led Mike to the conclusion that he was done with the reunion under the present circumstances and conditions.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #158 on: October 01, 2013, 06:49:34 AM »

Didn't say he wasn't well off - he is. My point is, when that's happened to you once, you try to make sure it can never happen again, not matter how well-heeled you may be. Something like that leaves a deep scar.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #159 on: October 01, 2013, 07:04:00 AM »

I'd love for somebody to find out when the first post-reunion M&B show was booked. That would be an interesting (and yes, now largely useless) piece of information.

You want dates  ? We goddem.

Rolling Stone 6/26/12

El Comercio 6/22/12

But are those the dates Mike's management booked M&B shows or pursued bookings, or simply the dates they were first publicized? I don't think we often, if ever, know the actual dates that management reaches out to promoters and venues to book shows. If we knew by June 22/26 that Mike had booked some M&B shows, then I would imagine the actual date that shows were first actively pursued is even earlier.

That only one show was mentioned as being actually booked (and one booked then pulled when the promoter was found to be advertising it misleadingly) tells me that it had been arranged shortly before.

Quote
It seems certainly at least *possible* that Mike's management pursued M&B bookings for late summer/fall 2012 before the reunion tour even commenced, and/or very early on prior to any reunion tour extensions.

It's *possible* I'll win the lottery this weekend... it's *possible* that the band might reunite again next spring... saying something is *possible* is, in any context, essentially meaningless and, more often, intentionally spurious.

Quote
Again, this matters not other than to analyze Mike's motives as far as whether he ever even for a moment considered not booking M&B shows.

Of course he didn't. The C50 events were presented to all concerned as a one-off 50th anniversary event of finite duration. Mike cleared his schedule for four months in 2012 to participate (soon extended to six months) and then... nothing was set in stone after that. Maybe the whole thing would have gone tits-up after a few shows (a possibility that was discussed here), maybe there would be serious ructions... who was to know ? As it happens, Brian said "no more shows" and the issue became moot.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #160 on: October 01, 2013, 07:09:17 AM »

Can someone point to the "recorded fact" that it was Mike who "convinced" Brian to add more C50 shows during the tour? I'm not assuming this isn't true, but I haven't seen this reported anywhere. I may have missed a report somewhere.

Very fair point, and I've not seen that stated anywhere else either. My rough understanding is that the reverse is likely the case.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
absinthe_boy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 604


View Profile
« Reply #161 on: October 01, 2013, 07:25:37 AM »

As far as I am aware Mike and Brian have both said that it was Mike who suggested adding more dates and Brian somewhat reluctantly agreed.

I am open to being proved wrong.
Logged
Loaf
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 838


View Profile
« Reply #162 on: October 01, 2013, 07:59:48 AM »

In defence of Mike, there's one thing that a lot of people on here seem to forget. Mike's touring band is relatively stable. Mike tours constantly and consistenly, and being in his touring band/roadcrew is probably a pretty good gig for working musician/roadie.

When Mike joined in the C50 tour, he took a couple of members with him, but the others presumably were on hiatus for a while. I imagine the others didn't get paid a retainer, but were told that the C50 wouldn't last forever, there was a set end date, and after that the M&B band would resume touring. So, they were free/forced to find alternative employment in the meantime. They probably have families, mortgages, health care costs (it is America after all...).

As the end date approaches, if Mike was to suddenly extend the C50 tour, his sidemen who were not on the C50 tour would be out of work for longer, and probably a bit pissed off at Mike at the relatively short notice. They might not rejoin the touring band. They might get jobs elsewhere.

So, when it comes time for Mike to reassemble his well-versed and talented touring band, does he deal with some pissed off and broke employees? Does he hire several new sidemen? Or does Mike stick to his word, which was signed and legal and everyone was happy with (at the time)?

Knowing what we do of Mike's work ethic and that of his father, I would imagine that Mike had made promises to people he depends on, and he stuck to them. So for all the talk of Mike being the bad guy, refusing to extend the tour, "firing" Brian and Al and David, it really seems to me that Mike is a dependable man of his word.

The above scenario doesn't really apply to anyone else because most of Brian's band was on the C50 (and we know how he treats his sidemen (re: Bob and Jim)), and Al and Dave don't have regular bands. Mike is on the hook for being the bad guy in all of this, but he had the most to lose.

For us fans, we just want more C50 dates, and we don't give a sh*t about Mike's road manager, lighting manager, roadies and guitar techs, but it's his world and he does give a sh*t.

Think about it.

The problem with this reasoning is that it presupposed that Mike, or any of the BB's, places the employment of these people as a top priority. Maybe they do sometimes, but we know that numerous backing band members (and one would presume other tour employees) have been uncermoniously sacked over the years.

I don't understand the problem... the whole point of my thread was presupposing that Mike places the welfare of his employees as a top priority. Smiley
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #163 on: October 01, 2013, 08:07:46 AM »

In defence of Mike, there's one thing that a lot of people on here seem to forget. Mike's touring band is relatively stable. Mike tours constantly and consistenly, and being in his touring band/roadcrew is probably a pretty good gig for working musician/roadie.

When Mike joined in the C50 tour, he took a couple of members with him, but the others presumably were on hiatus for a while. I imagine the others didn't get paid a retainer, but were told that the C50 wouldn't last forever, there was a set end date, and after that the M&B band would resume touring. So, they were free/forced to find alternative employment in the meantime. They probably have families, mortgages, health care costs (it is America after all...).

As the end date approaches, if Mike was to suddenly extend the C50 tour, his sidemen who were not on the C50 tour would be out of work for longer, and probably a bit pissed off at Mike at the relatively short notice. They might not rejoin the touring band. They might get jobs elsewhere.

So, when it comes time for Mike to reassemble his well-versed and talented touring band, does he deal with some pissed off and broke employees? Does he hire several new sidemen? Or does Mike stick to his word, which was signed and legal and everyone was happy with (at the time)?

Knowing what we do of Mike's work ethic and that of his father, I would imagine that Mike had made promises to people he depends on, and he stuck to them. So for all the talk of Mike being the bad guy, refusing to extend the tour, "firing" Brian and Al and David, it really seems to me that Mike is a dependable man of his word.

The above scenario doesn't really apply to anyone else because most of Brian's band was on the C50 (and we know how he treats his sidemen (re: Bob and Jim)), and Al and Dave don't have regular bands. Mike is on the hook for being the bad guy in all of this, but he had the most to lose.

For us fans, we just want more C50 dates, and we don't give a sh*t about Mike's road manager, lighting manager, roadies and guitar techs, but it's his world and he does give a sh*t.

Think about it.

The problem with this reasoning is that it presupposed that Mike, or any of the BB's, places the employment of these people as a top priority. Maybe they do sometimes, but we know that numerous backing band members (and one would presume other tour employees) have been uncermoniously sacked over the years.

I don't understand the problem... the whole point of my thread was presupposing that Mike places the welfare of his employees as a top priority. Smiley

I think my idea was that I disagree with the reasoning, that the idea that Mike places the welfare of his employees as a top priority is not something that I necessarily believe is true, and more importantly is not a valid reason for canceling more reunion activities.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
Micha
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3133



View Profile WWW
« Reply #164 on: October 01, 2013, 09:16:23 AM »

I wonder just why we are still discussing this? I think Loaf and absinthe_boy offer the most plausible scenario, yet there are people who still need sole culprits for some reason.
Logged

Ceterum censeo SMiLEBrianum OSDumque esse excludendos banno.
southbay
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 1482



View Profile
« Reply #165 on: October 01, 2013, 10:37:56 AM »

In defence of Mike, there's one thing that a lot of people on here seem to forget. Mike's touring band is relatively stable. Mike tours constantly and consistenly, and being in his touring band/roadcrew is probably a pretty good gig for working musician/roadie.

When Mike joined in the C50 tour, he took a couple of members with him, but the others presumably were on hiatus for a while. I imagine the others didn't get paid a retainer, but were told that the C50 wouldn't last forever, there was a set end date, and after that the M&B band would resume touring. So, they were free/forced to find alternative employment in the meantime. They probably have families, mortgages, health care costs (it is America after all...).

As the end date approaches, if Mike was to suddenly extend the C50 tour, his sidemen who were not on the C50 tour would be out of work for longer, and probably a bit pissed off at Mike at the relatively short notice. They might not rejoin the touring band. They might get jobs elsewhere.

So, when it comes time for Mike to reassemble his well-versed and talented touring band, does he deal with some pissed off and broke employees? Does he hire several new sidemen? Or does Mike stick to his word, which was signed and legal and everyone was happy with (at the time)?

Knowing what we do of Mike's work ethic and that of his father, I would imagine that Mike had made promises to people he depends on, and he stuck to them. So for all the talk of Mike being the bad guy, refusing to extend the tour, "firing" Brian and Al and David, it really seems to me that Mike is a dependable man of his word.

The above scenario doesn't really apply to anyone else because most of Brian's band was on the C50 (and we know how he treats his sidemen (re: Bob and Jim)), and Al and Dave don't have regular bands. Mike is on the hook for being the bad guy in all of this, but he had the most to lose.

For us fans, we just want more C50 dates, and we don't give a sh*t about Mike's road manager, lighting manager, roadies and guitar techs, but it's his world and he does give a sh*t.

Think about it.

nm
« Last Edit: October 01, 2013, 10:40:32 AM by southbay » Logged

Summer's gone...it's finally sinking in
KittyKat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1466



View Profile
« Reply #166 on: October 01, 2013, 11:32:37 AM »

Brian will never play as many shows a year as Mike will. Wouldn't that be an issue, too, since Mike can make more money by playing more dates, which Brian will never do. The Beach Boys are also not the Eagles, capable of packing in 15,000 basketball arenas. So, there's more money to be made in many more dates in a year versus fewer dates at only slightly higher fees (and not always that, b/c the reunion tour played some venues as small as the Mike configuration). Plus higher expenses due to Brian's band and possibly his tour bus (though perhaps Brian paid for that part out of his own pocket). Not to mention Mike is used to working that much. Maybe the idea of hanging around his house for those extra days when he's not gigging is a deterrent for him to want to play less dates in a year. It's as much of a lifestyle conflict as a financial or ego conflict.
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #167 on: October 01, 2013, 05:01:04 PM »

I wonder just why we are still discussing this? I think Loaf and absinthe_boy offer the most plausible scenario, yet there are people who still need sole culprits for some reason.

I guess some people don't care about the feelings of the BBs just their fantasies regardless of the BBs' feelings. Too harsh?
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #168 on: October 01, 2013, 05:04:33 PM »

Can someone point to the "recorded fact" that it was Mike who "convinced" Brian to add more C50 shows during the tour? I'm not assuming this isn't true, but I haven't seen this reported anywhere. I may have missed a report somewhere.

Very fair point, and I've not seen that stated anywhere else either. My rough understanding is that the reverse is likely the case.

If what Mike said was true it seems it was someone besides Brian if Brian put his foot down that there would be no more after the extension. Maybe not.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #169 on: October 01, 2013, 10:21:13 PM »

I wonder just why we are still discussing this? I think Loaf and absinthe_boy offer the most plausible scenario, yet there are people who still need sole culprits for some reason.

I guess some people don't care about the feelings of the BBs just their fantasies regardless of the BBs' feelings. Too harsh?

Because it's something of a mystery... because it's what we do.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Jay
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5985



View Profile
« Reply #170 on: October 03, 2013, 03:35:40 AM »

You think this is tough? You should try being a Bucks Fizz fan.
Especially if you have dyslexia.  Grin
Logged

A son of anarchy surrounded by the hierarchy.
Alan Smith
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2089


I'm still here bitches and I know everything. –A


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: October 03, 2013, 06:12:23 AM »

Quote
You think this is tough? You should try being a Bucks Fizz fan.
Especially if you have dyslexia.  Grin

 LOL
Logged

ESQ - Subscribe Now!!!

A new Beach Boys forum is here! http://beachboys.boards.net/
feelsflow
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1283



View Profile
« Reply #172 on: October 04, 2013, 01:00:13 PM »

This is sooooo tiring. Same old, same old. Remember when Al kissed Mike's ass in the 70s? Ah, those were the days. Everything was more harmonious then.

Not for the Wilsons, it wasn't.  There's always been strife in this band, one way or another.  They're just too old now to let it go anymore, for better or worse.

I was being ironic...
yes Ed, caught that.  The 70's and the 80's was a lot like TV, Drama in the studio, and for sure a sit-com live.
Logged

...if you are honest - you have no idea where childhood ends and maturity begins.  It is all endless and all one.  ~ P.L. Travers        And, let's get this out of the way now, everything I post is my opinion.  ~ Will
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.751 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!