Al joining Mike and Bruce for Jones Beach show

[Andrew G. Doe]

It wouldn't surprise me if Mike ponied up for a 'Coach' ticket to NY instead of 'First' for Al so he bailed. Could be that simple.

Could be. But I very much doubt it: nothing is that simple in the BB world.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Maybe it was a simple as "No Cotton-fields"!!!

[HeyJude]

The more I ponder on this whole clusterf***, the more it looks like Alan is culpable. The bit about it being "rumors" and "reports" is just plain nonsense. If Mike wanted to take legal action, I think he'd win hands down, if only on the evidence posted on the net: Alan knew he was being promoted as appearing, even posted it on his own website but said nothing for six weeks, and if that's not tacit agreement then I don't know what is. I'm sure a look at the emails exchanged would be most illuminating.

Yeah, I think predicting not only potential legal action but v also the outcome of said legal action based on "evidence posted on the net" is rather silly. The plaintiff would have to show damages as well, assuming Al did sign a contract, etc. They could even win a lawsuit but not get much in damages.

I'm not ready to buy that Al just breached a contract. If he didn't, then we're left with his passive (via the promoter) and scribe (via his website) advertising of his appearance. That may or may not be actionable, and may or may not show huge proven damages.

[c-man]

What if Mike initially offered a certain amount, conditionally based on expected ticket sales - which didn't materialize, so he was then under no obligation to hold Al to appearing. Meanwhile, Brian makes Al a guaranteed offer, and presto...no real losers (except ticketholders).

[Andrew G. Doe]

The more I ponder on this whole clusterf***, the more it looks like Alan is culpable. The bit about it being "rumors" and "reports" is just plain nonsense. If Mike wanted to take legal action, I think he'd win hands down, if only on the evidence posted on the net: Alan knew he was being promoted as appearing, even posted it on his own website but said nothing for six weeks, and if that's not tacit agreement then I don't know what is. I'm sure a look at the emails exchanged would be most illuminating.

Yeah, I think predicting not only potential legal action but v also the outcome of said legal action based on "evidence posted on the net" is rather silly. The plaintiff would have to show damages as well, assuming Al did sign a contract, etc. They could even win a lawsuit but not get much in damages.

I'm not ready to buy that Al just breached a contract. If he didn't, then we're left with his passive (via the promoter) and scribe (via his website) advertising of his appearance. That may or may not be actionable, and may or may not show huge proven damages.

Tell ya what - I'll ask Mike tomorrow, OK ? Can't say fairer than that. 

[ToneBender631]

Unless Al just feeds off chaos, I don't know why he doesn't just put together a band and play clubs as himself. He has a fantastic, youthful voice and plenty of his own and Beach Boys material, and folk stuff to draw from. Mike couldn't do that! Brian can't do anything but be THE GREAT BRAIN WILSON (even if he wanted to) and cart around a steam-ship full of "his people" ..... Only Al and Dave could just plug in and let it rip. Why does he want to mess around with Mike or Brian when he has the goods all on his own? Why bother with any "Beach Type" thing at this point? He certainly doesn't need the money.

Then again, I'm not a Beach Boy and can't fathom it would be an easy thing to just let go.

Indeed. I can't even comprehend what it would be like to "just let go". For the better part of 50 years these guys have built a business, brand and legacy that will outlive them, their children and their children's children. With C50/TGWMTR they more than proved that they've all still got a few more years left in the tank to put the finishing touches on their collective story.

So, you're Al Jardine, founding member and dedicated foot solider of the Beach Boys, and you're now considering the possibility that "The Beach Boys" will play their last gigs without you on-stage. Does that make you want to "hit the clubs" on your own, having to deal with all of the details involved in putting a tour together (big or small) and the risk that comes with booking your lesser-known name at age 72?

If I'm Mike Love, and I and the rest of my BB bandmates are staring mortality in the face, I don't know that I could forgive myself if the the last Beach Boys gig isn't played by The Beach Boys. And with every additional gig that he books with his current backing band, instead of finding a way to co-exist with Brian, Al and David, the potential for that happening comes closer and closer to reality. They all need to make some compromises, but as long as Mike keeps control of the name, it ultimately falls on him, for better and worse.

[Nicko1234]

Indeed. I can't even comprehend what it would be like to "just let go". For the better part of 50 years these guys have built a business, brand and legacy that will outlive them, their children and their children's children. With C50/TGWMTR they more than proved that they've all still got a few more years left in the tank to put the finishing touches on their collective story.

So, you're Al Jardine, founding member and dedicated foot solider of the Beach Boys, and you're now considering the possibility that "The Beach Boys" will play their last gigs without you on-stage. Does that make you want to "hit the clubs" on your own, having to deal with all of the details involved in putting a tour together (big or small) and the risk that comes with booking your lesser-known name at age 72?

If I'm Mike Love, and I and the rest of my BB bandmates are staring mortality in the face, I don't know that I could forgive myself if the the last Beach Boys gig isn't played by The Beach Boys. And with every additional gig that he books with his current backing band, instead of finding a way to co-exist with Brian, Al and David, the potential for that happening comes closer and closer to reality. They all need to make some compromises, but as long as Mike keeps control of the name, it ultimately falls on him, for better and worse.

I don`t think many of the members of big business bands think like this.

I mean, The Beatles played their last gig with the long serving members. But the same thing certainly won`t happen to Queen, The Who, Guns and Roses, The Supremes etc. and thousands of other bands.

And let`s face it, there is unlikely to be a specific `last gig` decided by band members. Mike will carry on touring as long as he is able to and there can be no predicting about which member will pass away first (without wishing to sound grim).

Plus, there is no guarantee that the last `Beach Boys` gig will feature any original members whatsoever...

[HeyJude]

The official reason was that Alan needed to finish up his solo album... which wasn't released for another two and a half years.

Not that this matters too much, especially as relates to this current discussion, but I can at least add a bit of detail to that 2007 Brian/Al debacle. The “Al has to finish his album” stuff was obviously baloney. Not only did this album not come out for another 2 ½ years as AGD points out, but even if he had been determined to finish it sooner, he could have continued as soon as that European tour was over.

We never got another clear answer, although most fans/insiders/spectators have alluded to it being a financial situation. Not Al wanting more money, but allegedly not being able to do the tour for free as he allegedly had been doing on the US dates in late 06/early 07.

However, while I would guess that business would not have created a stronger bond between Al and Brian’s camp, they did not end that debacle on terribly bad terms as some have suggested. I only say this because I went to the show that fell right in the middle of this timeline, and followed it closely. Al played a gig with Brian in Monterey. It was apparently at that point that they “discussed” it and decided Al wasn’t doing the tour (e.g. he “needed to finish his album”, or, they allegedly calculated they couldn’t pay Al, etc.). But *after* that, Brian spent a day recording at Al’s studio (perhaps, in the dysfunctional BB world, this was to “make up” for not being able to pay for Al to be on the tour?), and then the following day Al played an unscheduled show with Brian in Saratoga, CA (this is the show I went to). I later figured this was another attempt to either placate Al (the cynical reading) or to end the debacle on something of a positive note (the less cynical reading).

Clearly Al has had a weird relationship with Brian’s camp. He has less mines to navigate than Mike does; there is less baggage to navigate, which is probably the only reason he has occasionally been “in” with them. But it’s still a BB situation, so the dysfunctional elements are always going to be there. Al was clearly on the outs (less animosity perhaps than with Mike, but essentially being cut off) from the late 90’s through 2006 or so. There was even that BBC documentary from around 2005 where Al pretty directly said Brian’s people wouldn’t let him talk to Brian, that he missed singing with Brian, etc. Then they eventually found a reason they could use Al in the band, and Al played something like 11 shows with Brian between November 2006 and June 2007 (9 of those between November and January). That was it until “C50.”

[HeyJude]

At Westlake Audio in March 1985, I told Alan "California Calling" was a good song and sounded like "California Saga". His response ? "Yeah, but that didn't make much money did it ?" I think that $$$ is as much of a motivating factor as it is with Mike (and Mike at least has an excuse).

Money is no doubt a motivating factor for all these guys. But saying a song “didn’t make money” still could have more to do with how they measure success for a song/album, etc. than it serves as indicator that they only create songs for money. From interviews with these guys, they all seem to rely on charts and revenue as a measure for success. They may want the success more than the money itself, but they still measure that success by how much money something brought in. That’s probably a reason why we got “Summer in Paradise.” It was “hey guys, “Kokomo” made a crapload of money and was even #1 for a week or two. Clearly a full album made with the same formula will succeed.” 

I highly doubt this Jones Beach gig thing fell apart solely because Al wanted to line his pockets with more money. If money played a role at all, I would imagine it would be more of a “that’s insulting to offer X for me to play with my own band” than “I’ll play the gig for this many dollars.” Indeed, if money was the sole motivating factor, *that* would have been hashed out before contracts were signed. Whatever happened, I’m still not convinced there was a simple “Al will play this show on this date for this much money”, and then Al just said “f*** it, I’m bailing” a month later.

[HeyJude]

In response to Andrew Hickey's speculation that there might've been negotiations in the last few months to have Al rejoin the band full-time, and in response to ToneBender631's post in another thread about how it might feel for somebody like Al and Brian to not be part of the "final act"....

I mentioned it a few weeks ago that I thought it was perfect timing for Al to rejoin the band when Christian Love recently left. I'm still wondering if Al also thought it was perfect timing, maybe expected to rejoin the band, and was/is bitterly disappointed when Jeff Foskett got the job.

I'm probably wrong, not because of the number of gigs that Mike & Bruce play, but probably because Mike has a gut instinct that he (Mike) and Al can't co-exist in a band full-time anymore.

I wonder who would have the power in the band if Al rejoined? Mike has the license to tour with the name, and as such is the guy who makes all the decisions in the current incarnation. If another member of BRI is part of the group, do they then have equal say as a BRI member, or does it work as "You're a paid employee of Mike Love's band which is licensing the BB name"? Or does it immediately shift to "Mike and Al are licensing the name, with equal royalties and say on the daily business of the touring band, while paying out to BRI"?

Also, thinking about all of this makes it really sad that neither Bruce nor Dennis' estate still has a vote (ideally one but not both) in BRI as I would imagine that an odd number of voters would make it much easier to get business done as a group...

I think the scenario for Al returning would most likely be “you’re a paid employee of the band, and that band licenses the BB name.” As is alluded to in Jon Stebbins’ David Marks book, this arrangement started evolving in the later 1990’s when Al and Carl were still in the band, and was one of the big reasons Al started souring on the whole thing. This issue has never been delved into very much, other than referencing it in passing in a few books like the Stebbins/Marks book. It may well be that *this* issue was the main thing that drove a wedge between Al and Mike (Carl evidently, both before and certainly after his illness, apparently/allegedly didn’t fight this change in the group’s structure). As also described in the Stebbins/Marks book, Al saw this all unfolding in the late 90’s. Whether Al was right or wrong, or smart or foolish in his dealings in the late 90’s/early 2000’s, he apparently saw the whole thing coming in the late 90’s. When they, in a Spinal Tap-esque move, didn’t tell one of the band members (Al) that they had added another band member (David) in 1997, and Al eventually figured it out when this dude started showing up night after night (again, I’m still convinced this would have been a perfect addition to a “Spinal Tap” or “Rutles” script), it’s described in the Stebbins/Marks book how Al knew pretty precisely what the fudge was going down and knew it was game over.

[HeyJude]

I would guess it's somewhere between reason 1 and 2 if I had to guess.

As for "verbal contracts", that's an EXTREMELY grey area of law. The reason you get people to sign stuff is because verbal contacts are hard to enforce.

I don`t think it realistically can be 1 at all from those options. As already noted, it was on Al`s website and has been publicly known for weeks.

Probably just that Al changed his mind maybe because he fancied playing with his son and Brian more.

I think the comment on Al`s Facebook page is slightly disingenuous as well. Having his presence listed on the ticket sites, in respected magazines and even on his own websites does not gel with the, `Despite some reports to the contrary` line. It may be that Al has a good reason for not attending but he probably owes an apology to those who have bought tickets.

It`s not exactly the biggest disgrace in the history of popular music or anything but I don`t think should just brush it off by saying, `I`m not playing the gug I`ve been billed to play for weeks but I will be playing on the other side of the world on that day`. A bit of a p***take for the fans who have already paid to see him.

I think the “Al never agreed to it” scenario is possible only in that he never “officially” or “firmly” agreed to it. Clearly at some point he planned to do the show, or at least hoped to do the show. He could have planned to do it without having “signed” anything.

If Al didn’t sign anything, I think the main thing that could be held against him is that his website (or whichever internet hub showed the date) did indicate he was playing. That he didn’t protest or speak out when his name was used to advertise the show in other venues is something that may or may not be a strong piece of evidence in any potential case. We don’t know how much he protested behind the scenes on that. But it seems pretty likely he didn’t protest it because at some stage he planned to do the show, hence mentioning it on his website as well. But because we don’t know what he signed (if anything), nor the terms of any agreement, we don’t know how culpable anybody is.

However, the fact that he didn’t say anything about the show in any internet post, or statement, or interview, suggests it was a tentative situation. If Al had signed on for the show and was all happy about a semi-reunion, it seems like he would have been more vocal about it early on.

I’m the first to agree that it is not cool to post a gig that isn’t set in stone, especially one that may well have been a shaky proposition from the get-go. How much fans should be pissed at Al, however, is a totally different issue than guessing who could be on the hook legally for anything.

[El Molé]

Plus, there is no guarantee that the last `Beach Boys` gig will feature any original members whatsoever...

That's a hugely unpleasant thought, but definitely not beyond the realms of possibility. In my view they've been playing it fast and loose with the Mike and Bruce show anyway (by using the Beach Boys name rather than in reference to the quality of the shows) and it isn't an unfathomable leap to consider a Four Freshmen type arrangement. The idea of a Beach Boys show with absolutely none of the originals wouldn't ever sit right to me, though. I hope that never happens and I hope they do have a formal last gig at some point. I like the idea that Mike decides to retire at some point and goes on one last tour to celebrate that fact, with Brian, Al and David on board for one last tour. That might be hugely unlikely but it'd be a nice way to finish things off.

[startBBtoday]

The Beach Boys are performing as part of the July 4th Boston Pops Concert this year.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2014/06/23/july-4th-boston-pops-concert-to-feature-the-beach-boys-first-ever-webcast/

Doesn't look like Al will be part of it, though the site lists Christian Love, not Jeff, as being part of the group, so it's an old press release.

[tpesky]

Wow what a mess that press release is. First, you get a picture of the band with Chris Farmer and Kowalski in it, then a picture of Mike, Al, Dave, and Brian. Then, you get a list of band members with Christian Love included.  Doesn't BRI have people to check these things? Isn't this the kind of stuff that was part of the lawsuit where Mike sued Al for in the late 90's, misleading the public?

[Foster's Freeze]

So where is Mike's statement on all of this?

Everyone seems to be bagging on Al (and to a lesser degree Brian) about this whole botch job - what about Mike?  When will he say anything about what the situation is?

Again, everyone wants to jump Al's sh*t but what if Ego Master Mike thought he could yank Al's chain and make him jump when asked and it blew up in his face?

And as usual Bruce says nothing but claps and adjusts his microphone.

[KittyKat]

So where is Mike's statement on all of this?

Everyone seems to be bagging on Al (and to a lesser degree Brian) about this whole botch job - what about Mike?  When will he say anything about what the situation is?

Again, everyone wants to jump Al's sh*t but what if Ego Master Mike thought he could yank Al's chain and make him jump when asked and it blew up in his face?

And as usual Bruce says nothing but claps and adjusts his microphone.

It was on Al to not to publicize the gig on his own website. Which leads back to allowing his name to be used on the Nikon Jones Beach Theatre site, or on Ticketmaster promotion, etc. Given that he did that, he should have shown up, no matter what Mike did that offended him. There are these people called fans, and if you want fans to follow your career and buy your "Postcard From California" album, you owe them that much.  There are some people out there who bought tickets, and made travel plans to Jones Beach, based on All being there. Because Al said he would be there, not just Mike. In the real world, we do a lot of things we don't like due to the fact we were dumb enough to make a promise we wound up not wanting to keep. But we keep them anyway, because it's the right thing to do.

As for Al saying he wasn't allowed to talk to Brian on the phone at one point, he was also forbidden by Brian's people to talk to Brian at the Hawthorne monument dedication. Even though they were in the same physical location. I don't know if dealing with Brian's management is much easier than the Beach Boys. They sound incredibly petty and only change when it benefits them.

[HeyJude]

So where is Mike's statement on all of this?

Everyone seems to be bagging on Al (and to a lesser degree Brian) about this whole botch job - what about Mike?  When will he say anything about what the situation is?

Again, everyone wants to jump Al's sh*t but what if Ego Master Mike thought he could yank Al's chain and make him jump when asked and it blew up in his face?

And as usual Bruce says nothing but claps and adjusts his microphone.

It was on Al to not to publicize the gig on his own website. Which leads back to allowing his name to be used on the Nikon Jones Beach Theatre site, or on Ticketmaster promotion, etc. Given that he did that, he should have shown up, no matter what Mike did that offended him. There are these people called fans, and if you want fans to follow your career and buy your "Postcard From California" album, you owe them that much.  There are some people out there who bought tickets, and made travel plans to Jones Beach, based on All being there. Because Al said he would be there, not just Mike. In the real world, we do a lot of things we don't like due to the fact we were dumb enough to make a promise we wound up not wanting to keep. But we keep them anyway, because it's the right thing to do.

As for Al saying he wasn't allowed to talk to Brian on the phone at one point, he was also forbidden by Brian's people to talk to Brian at the Hawthorne monument dedication. Even though they were in the same physical location. I don't know if dealing with Brian's management is much easier than the Beach Boys. They sound incredibly petty and only change when it benefits them.

That Al did not take action to stop the use of his name does not necessarily legally (nor do I think neccesarily logically) require him to show up at the gig.

In the unlikely but certainly possible event that Al signed a deal to do the show and then simply changed his mind, he'll no doubt pay some sort of price.

While it would not account for travel expenses, has anyone actually inquired about a refund? I would think they may well offer refunds if asked, considering their advertising turned out incorrect (regardless of whose fault it is).

[Foster's Freeze]

I think it would be wise for someone to make an official statement of some sort regarding the show.  The only one that has said anything definite has been David.

[Nicko1234]

The legal side of it isn`t so interesting for me. But getting some more information on what went on within the soap opera that is the Beach Boys is. 

[Pretty Funky]

Well AGD said he will ask.

Most likely he will mock what ever reasoning others come up with rather than spill the beans though. 

[Rocker]

Not about the Jones Beach Show but regarding Al. From Facebook:




Hey everyone, I’m happy to let you know that Al Jardine is going to join me in the UK this summer! It’s been fun working in the studio with Al and I’m stoked to hear him sing on stage with us. Along with Al's son Matt, it will be a harmonic family affair. Hope to see you there.
– Brian

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Al-batross.....

[Sam_BFC]

Is it amusing that when a few people were whinging about Jeff F on the C50 tour, people responded with no Jeff = no Brian...and now we have Brian without Jeff after all.

Sometimes life can be so strange, maybe we're just lookin for a change...

[KittyKat]

So, two members of America's Band will be in Europe/UK during the 4th of July. Something seems so wrong about that. I know it has something to do with the timing of gigs that Brian was asked to to, and no one in the USA was asking him. But it's a far cry from the Capitol Mall shows or even the year Brian was asked to appear on the PBS 4th of July special.

[startBBtoday]

So, two members of America's Band will be in Europe/UK during the 4th of July. Something seems so wrong about that. I know it has something to do with the timing of gigs that Brian was asked to to, and no one in the USA was asking him. But it's a far cry from the Capitol Mall shows or even the year Brian was asked to appear on the PBS 4th of July special.

Especially since Mike, Bruce and The Beach Boys will be performing in front of hundreds of thousands of people in Boston.