gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
667005 Posts in 26775 Topics by 3874 Members - Latest Member: thesethingsillbe March 02, 2021, 02:59:39 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Beach Boys bought  (Read 4922 times)
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9212



View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 18, 2021, 08:56:01 AM »

No question that The Beach Boys are worthy of and have the assets to mount a serious image revitalization campaign but I do wonder what kind of turnaround time they're envisioning for attaining the everyman's "Mount Rushmore" level alluded to in the article. Does pop culture need more time to change attitudes for the better toward a legacy act than a newer one coming off a sophomore slump?

What kind of new merchandising approaches might this management try? A lot of acts have added a garnish to their prestige with career spanning vinyl boxed sets in recent years. While this wouldn't necessarily get their music into new ears, the existence of such a product might at least help position them upward in a way that a standalone copies of Pet Sounds or Sounds of Summer wouldn't. I'm sure this has been considered, but even when subtracting the what to do with SIP and S&S issue, that would be such a cost prohibitive project. How low could the wholesale price possibly be?

I don't know how strongly specifically vinyl reissues of albums would factor into future plans. I'm sure it's all part of the strategy, but actually vinyl album reissues is one of the few areas that already *have* been mined in recent years.

I think the Iconic plan would be far more broad and far-reaching. I'm sure they have stats on where they think they can get. They're not trying to all of a sudden make the entire globe love "MIU Album". I would think they're going to revitalize things like the band's stagnant online/social media presence, and get more merchandise out there, get more BB music into movies and TV shows and things like that. Among many other things.

A bloated boxed set of vinyl pressings of stuff we all already own is not something on my wish list, and it wouldn't seem to be part of trying to market some *new* things. That's not to say they can't get more BB vinyl into Target or Barnes & Noble if that's a thing. But I don't think that would be a big part of any strategy.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2021, 12:30:01 PM 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/
JakeH
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 96


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: February 18, 2021, 09:08:03 AM »

I don't get it - is it an operating premise/assumption that the Beach Boys organization hasn't been "branding" enough for the past 40-60 years? The group started as a fortuitous merger between music and branding (selling the product of "beach" and "California"), then there was a short period where it was about music, and then back to branding.  Which in a nutshell is the reason the group is - justifiably - not respected and not seen as being on the plateau with the other great 60s acts (Beatles, Stones, Who, et al)  It's been a branding operation exclusively for at least the past 40 years, with music, at most, incidental and probably irrelevant.  So is this really about nothing more than some businessmen being excited that there's still more cash to be wrung out of this thing? The prospect of CGI Beach Boys is horrifying (did I read that right?) and totally consistent with the times we live in. Sorry to be negative.  Somebody please make the case that this is about anything more than some guys going back to the ATM again.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 18, 2021, 09:09:32 AM »

It's all about marketing. The kind of pitch an organization like Iconic could have used may have included references to other legacy acts who haven't released a new album of note in 40 years getting reintroduced into the pop culture lexicon and becoming almost as current as so-called "modern" artists with their 100 million views in a week YouTube stats.

I'll say one band name and if you consider where this band (and brand) was 10 years ago versus where they have been in the past 2-3 years up to the present, I think the goals of what Azoff wants to bring to the process become very clear.

Queen.

Consider how greatly the band Queen's legacy and visibility has grown over the past few years, and the winning pitch to other bands could be "we'll do that for you." Apart from Queen's music, which is of course the draw and the main reason why people are still talking about them, the way Queen got back into the public's eyes and ears and has them now as one of the most popular legacy bands in terms of downloads/streams and interest overall whereas 10 years ago they weren't is a testament to some amazing marketing and placement strategies that reached and resonated with new generations of listeners.

If you start hearing original Beach Boys tracks in certain outlets, if you start seeing Pet Sounds cover T-shirts being sold at Hot Topic and being worn by 17 year olds, if you start seeing a more modernized, streamlined approach to marketing *The Beach Boys* beyond seeing blurbs for Mike's live shows in your local paper's "Weekender" section, that's a good thing.

The music is there waiting to be discovered by new audiences, and I have hopes that the Azoff group will know how to get it to them in a more skillful and less clumsy way (also avoiding silly sideline sh*t like kerfuffles over trophy hunting gigs and the like) and get new generations talking about The Beach Boys like those same audiences talk about Queen.

It's possible.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Occasional grilled cheese
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 60


Quickly Duncan, the strengths!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 18, 2021, 09:20:02 AM »

Has the Beach Boys name ever been used to sponsor or promote pro surfing events? It might not be the most popular/mainstream sport but seems like a back to basics, low hanging fruit approach for a Beach Boys youth culture outreach effort. Not sure how much their music means to the surfers of today but maybe the surfers of tomorrow? What do I know? Not suggesting they just try this and call it a day.
Logged

Try Q-Z-2-U-H
All Summer Long
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 402



View Profile
« Reply #29 on: February 18, 2021, 09:41:15 AM »

I’m also going to be negative here, sorry everyone. I don’t know as much as a lot of members here do, but what I do know is that Irving Azoff has too many artists already that are well-loved and he doesn’t do enough with them as it is. The only news about Journey recently is the band splitting in two - sound familiar? Don Henley and Irving Azoff refuse to put out any archival Eagles material, which would be a huge chunk of money for them. Bon Jovi hasn’t done anything of note after 2015/6 other than the reunion with Sambora at the R&RHOF. I had no problem with Mike selling some of his publishing to them, but the entire brand? That’s too risky in my opinion. Sure, the band mismanages everything as it is, so maybe a minority partner could have helped, but this is just too far in my opinion. I can’t read the RS article because of their new paywall, so does it break down the percentages of BRI now? I’m not surprised that Mike did this for the money, but I really am about Brian and Al (and a little about Justyn and Jonah).

The two positive things I will say is it would be nice to have some more merchandise and to bring back the SiriusXM channel. I appreciate some of these ideas, but I’m still very skeptical. Maybe when the guys pass away (which I don’t want to happen for a while), their children could have sold a bigger stake, but not yet IMO.
Logged
Pretty Funky
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5642


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2021, 10:23:01 AM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/

Ticketmaster still has The Beach Boys though.
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2021, 10:24:10 AM »

I’m also going to be negative here, sorry everyone. I don’t know as much as a lot of members here do, but what I do know is that Irving Azoff has too many artists already that are well-loved and he doesn’t do enough with them as it is. The only news about Journey recently is the band splitting in two - sound familiar? Don Henley and Irving Azoff refuse to put out any archival Eagles material, which would be a huge chunk of money for them. Bon Jovi hasn’t done anything of note after 2015/6 other than the reunion with Sambora at the R&RHOF. I had no problem with Mike selling some of his publishing to them, but the entire brand? That’s too risky in my opinion. Sure, the band mismanages everything as it is, so maybe a minority partner could have helped, but this is just too far in my opinion. I can’t read the RS article because of their new paywall, so does it break down the percentages of BRI now? I’m not surprised that Mike did this for the money, but I really am about Brian and Al (and a little about Justyn and Jonah).

The two positive things I will say is it would be nice to have some more merchandise and to bring back the SiriusXM channel. I appreciate some of these ideas, but I’m still very skeptical. Maybe when the guys pass away (which I don’t want to happen for a while), their children could have sold a bigger stake, but not yet IMO.

I'm not trying to defend Azoff because to be honest he doesn't need it LOL, but the acts you mentioned in your post each have their own complexities and personality issues between band members which don't allow their situations to be painted with a broad brush and blamed on someone like Azoff.

Just to name a few quick points, there's an interview with Azoff from last year where he talks about Covid and how that already was a major disaster for the music industry as a whole but focused too on his stable of acts who make huge money on the touring circuit...namely, an act like The Eagles who Azoff helped make perhaps the biggest money legacy act on the circuit. I believe he also reps Dead & Company, HUGE ticket sales there, John Mayer, and other big live draws. All of that is still up in the air. If they don't resume touring in the summer of '21, a lot of those acts and the crews behind them are quite literally f**ked. So they're trying to find ways via streams and all of that to keep the momentum, but it's not the same and the fate of live concerts is still unknown as of today.

Journey's situation has or had at least 4 or 5 major points that kept the band's status in turmoil. Yes, Neal Schon left Azoff's management and two members are in legal disputes trying to get control over the band name. There were creative issues 20 years ago with Steve Perry and Neal over what kind of music the band was releasing and other issues, and yes - like the Beach Boys - the band was offered in 2016 a gig to play a political gig involving Neal's collaborator who had ties to Trump, and Neal didn't want to alienate half their fan base by playing the political gig...Does that sound familiar? Now Neal is with other management and doing solo albums, the other band members are probably still in courts trying to get the name, Perry is Perry and the last I heard released a solo album about a year or two ago...it's a soap opera. But their legacy recordings still make money, lots of it. Don't Stop Believing transcended its own status as an "oldie" at this point - Every generation now knows it.

The Eagles - Well, that was always a soap opera, wasn't it? Then the key founding member passed away. But the brand name and the back catalog and the tours still make HUGE amounts of money. Do they need to release Takes 29-33 of "Seven Bridges Road" to fill a void in their own plans and budgets? Do they even want to do that? I doubt it. Maybe they will if touring is canceled again in 2021.

Bon Jovi - Ultimately the management of an artist depends on that artist either creating new music or not. Otherwise it's touring and occasional appearances. Jon did a thing last year with Covid restrictions having fans contribute lyrics to a new song online, but other than that (or plans we don't know), maybe he and the other guys are just not interested in new music right now. Or ever. Their catalog sells huge amounts. Find a Karaoke night or a wedding party where everyone isn't singing along to "Living On A Prayer". It's like The Eagles, or "Don't Stop Believin" - It's money in the bank that probably doesn't need a push in marketing at this point. Is there a market for outtakes of the "Bad Medicine" studio sessions? If there is, I'm unaware.

I think - perhaps - such a plan might just work for The Beach Boys. Find a way to get their own legacy's version of "Don't Stop Believin", or "Living On A Prayer", or "Bohemian Rhapsody", or sh*t even "Piano Man" into the popular culture as of 2021, and it's money in the bank. Even with the touring soap opera dramas of the bands listed above, they're still on a higher level of visibility at this point that The Beach Boys, and I think the goal may be to elevate the BB's catalog into those spaces with a more targeted plan than maybe BRI had for the recent years.

And as far as archival and studio session material - I don't think there is as much of a mystique around the creation of Bon Jovi, Eagles, or Journey albums or songs. There never has been a draw in that regard, surely nothing close to decades of studio outtake bootlegs by The Beach Boys, Beatles, Stones, Elvis, Bowie, etc. It's just a different scene with different fan bases and expectations. I don't think Eagles fans en masse would be as interested in "The Long Run" outtakes as we were with the Pet Sounds or Smile sessions.

Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: February 18, 2021, 10:30:42 AM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/

Ticketmaster still has The Beach Boys though.

That is a pretty major change. Let me rephrase that: a MAJOR change in protocol for billing these shows. The whole ball of wax up to now was billing these shows as simply "The Beach Boys", now that has changed.

Consider just how unrelated that really is when a major part of this deal announced publicly today involved branding and marketing the band and its name. If it truly is unrelated, the timing of it sure falls into place...
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
RJM
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 743


Woof!!!


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: February 18, 2021, 10:33:34 AM »

It's all about marketing. The kind of pitch an organization like Iconic could have used may have included references to other legacy acts who haven't released a new album of note in 40 years getting reintroduced into the pop culture lexicon and becoming almost as current as so-called "modern" artists with their 100 million views in a week YouTube stats.

I'll say one band name and if you consider where this band (and brand) was 10 years ago versus where they have been in the past 2-3 years up to the present, I think the goals of what Azoff wants to bring to the process become very clear.

Queen.

Consider how greatly the band Queen's legacy and visibility has grown over the past few years, and the winning pitch to other bands could be "we'll do that for you." Apart from Queen's music, which is of course the draw and the main reason why people are still talking about them, the way Queen got back into the public's eyes and ears and has them now as one of the most popular legacy bands in terms of downloads/streams and interest overall whereas 10 years ago they weren't is a testament to some amazing marketing and placement strategies that reached and resonated with new generations of listeners.

If you start hearing original Beach Boys tracks in certain outlets, if you start seeing Pet Sounds cover T-shirts being sold at Hot Topic and being worn by 17 year olds, if you start seeing a more modernized, streamlined approach to marketing *The Beach Boys* beyond seeing blurbs for Mike's live shows in your local paper's "Weekender" section, that's a good thing.

The music is there waiting to be discovered by new audiences, and I have hopes that the Azoff group will know how to get it to them in a more skillful and less clumsy way (also avoiding silly sideline sh*t like kerfuffles over trophy hunting gigs and the like) and get new generations talking about The Beach Boys like those same audiences talk about Queen.

It's possible.

Two more names that also can be used as good examples: Elton John and Fleetwood Mac.
Logged

The world could come together as one
If everybody under the sun
Adds some 🎼 to your day
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 18, 2021, 10:40:27 AM »

It's all about marketing. The kind of pitch an organization like Iconic could have used may have included references to other legacy acts who haven't released a new album of note in 40 years getting reintroduced into the pop culture lexicon and becoming almost as current as so-called "modern" artists with their 100 million views in a week YouTube stats.

I'll say one band name and if you consider where this band (and brand) was 10 years ago versus where they have been in the past 2-3 years up to the present, I think the goals of what Azoff wants to bring to the process become very clear.

Queen.

Consider how greatly the band Queen's legacy and visibility has grown over the past few years, and the winning pitch to other bands could be "we'll do that for you." Apart from Queen's music, which is of course the draw and the main reason why people are still talking about them, the way Queen got back into the public's eyes and ears and has them now as one of the most popular legacy bands in terms of downloads/streams and interest overall whereas 10 years ago they weren't is a testament to some amazing marketing and placement strategies that reached and resonated with new generations of listeners.

If you start hearing original Beach Boys tracks in certain outlets, if you start seeing Pet Sounds cover T-shirts being sold at Hot Topic and being worn by 17 year olds, if you start seeing a more modernized, streamlined approach to marketing *The Beach Boys* beyond seeing blurbs for Mike's live shows in your local paper's "Weekender" section, that's a good thing.

The music is there waiting to be discovered by new audiences, and I have hopes that the Azoff group will know how to get it to them in a more skillful and less clumsy way (also avoiding silly sideline sh*t like kerfuffles over trophy hunting gigs and the like) and get new generations talking about The Beach Boys like those same audiences talk about Queen.

It's possible.

Two more names that also can be used as good examples: Elton John and Fleetwood Mac.

Great point. Fleetwood Mac got more attention and good press in the past year after a video of a random dude reacting to their music on YouTube became a viral video sensation. If not for that random guy on YouTube, the most recent public impression of that band would have been how they fired Lindsay Buckingham. And as a result of the renewed interest, thanks in large part to the attention from that video and outlets like TikTok, the band's back catalog began selling again, bigger than it had in awhile.

Thanks to TikTok viral videos alone featuring their songs, acts like Hall & Oates from previous generations are gaining new listeners who are under 18 years old.

That's something which I'm sure any plans for increasing visibility of a legacy act would include.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Rocker
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 9670


"Too dumb for New York City, too ugly for L.A."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 18, 2021, 11:07:51 AM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/





This is interesting to say the least.
Logged

a diseased bunch of mo'fos if there ever was one… their beauty is so awesome that listening to them at their best is like being in some vast dream cathedral decorated with a thousand gleaming American pop culture icons.

- Lester Bangs on The Beach Boys


PRO SHOT BEACH BOYS CONCERTS - LIST


To sum it up, they blew it, they blew it consistently, they continue to blow it, it is tragic and this pathological problem caused The Beach Boys' greatest music to be so underrated by the general public.

- Jack Rieley
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5612



View Profile
« Reply #36 on: February 18, 2021, 11:31:36 AM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/

Ticketmaster still has The Beach Boys though.

That is a pretty major change. Let me rephrase that: a MAJOR change in protocol for billing these shows. The whole ball of wax up to now was billing these shows as simply "The Beach Boys", now that has changed.

Consider just how unrelated that really is when a major part of this deal announced publicly today involved branding and marketing the band and its name. If it truly is unrelated, the timing of it sure falls into place...

If I were a consumer who, let's say a year ago, purchased a ticket to see "The Beach Boys" for the exact same lineup as what will now possibly be billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys", I guess I'd feel a little cheated. That's assuming that anyone in that scenario would care enough, but it's sort of like Mike FINALLY revealing (grudgingly or not) that his version of the band is not (and by logic, was in reality not, for most of 1998 to present) actually "The Beach Boys".

I'm sure there has to have been recent boardroom discussion of what constitutes brand confusion, and how this M&B "BBs" branding contributed to the decay and falling from Mount Rushmore, so to speak.

I half-jokingly wonder if people who purchased tickets to see "The Beach Boys" and only got the bait-and-swtich version of "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys" will be wanting any recourse if anyone retroactively feels cheated considering that only many years later finally truth in advertising may be happening.

I mean, I know that the BRI voters collectively allowed that brand name thing to happen for so long, I do have to wonder if they regret it at this point. I do hope this leads to the devaluing to correct course, but man it's such a self-inflicted wound and I can't fault the public if they have a WTF reaction, although few fans except us nerds may care enough to have such a reaction.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2021, 11:33:31 AM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
JakeH
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 96


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: February 18, 2021, 11:40:46 AM »


Find a way to get their own legacy's version of "Don't Stop Believin", or "Living On A Prayer", or "Bohemian Rhapsody", or sh*t even "Piano Man" into the popular culture as of 2021, and it's money in the bank.

Hasn't this already happened with the very well-known "God Only Knows," and in fact the entire Pet Sounds album? Within a certain demographic, regardless of age,  the album is very well-known. It's almost over-exposed and over-fetishized at this point in my opinion.

Queen had their movie, blah blah, Elton John had his movie (are these considered to be good films?) and then there was the Brian Wilson movie of 2015 with scenes attempting to recreate the Pet Sounds sessions, etc.  A lot of this marketing/reassessment/repackaging/correction-of-misconceptions has already occurred - at least with respect to Brian Wilson, who, along with the long since deceased and forgotten Dennis Wilson, is the only member of the Beach Boys worth re-examining, reassessing and "marketing" to the public for any reason other than just generating more dollars.

The "Beach Boys" is a brand that cannot, and has never been capable of being marketed to the public with a decent level of honesty.  The brand/concept cannot earn money if you tell the truth about them and what really happened. Therefore, I suspect that all this thing means is that you will see more nonsense, more falsehoods, more denial and more lies in an attempt to sell this group as happy, healthy California funsters.  If you deviate from that, you can't sell it anymore - people don't want to know, they can't accept what really happened and they're turned off.

People can criticize Mike all they want for the animal-killing shows, but that was really, in my opinion, finally some honest branding. He was being honest about what the Beach Boys brand stands for, and certain fans, and even Brian and Al couldn't accept it, it seems.  

Again, apologies for the "negativity."
« Last Edit: February 18, 2021, 11:43:14 AM by JakeH » Logged
Pretty Funky
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5642


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: February 18, 2021, 11:43:47 AM »


That was a good read, and amazingly Mike, Brian and Al sound like they are up for another reunion. (Did I already mention Mike and Brian?)

” Most exciting to Brian is the idea of touring and possibly recording with the group he founded in his parents’ living room six decades ago. “It’d be a great trip, a big thrill,” he says. “When we went on tour for the 50th anniversary we had so much fun. It’d be such a joy to be singing with the boys again.”

and

When tours do start up again, Love says the new business arrangement will not affect his ability to tour under the Beach Boys name. “I think that that remains the same,” he says, but adds he is also open to a reunion with the other founders. “I wouldn’t rule anything out.” One thing he’s not thinking about is retirement. “I feel pretty darn good,” Love says. “I’ll be 80 years old March 15th, but I’m not like the normal 80-year- old guy, because [of what] we do on stage. It’s like youth serum or something.”
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9212



View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: February 18, 2021, 12:12:19 PM »

I don't get it - is it an operating premise/assumption that the Beach Boys organization hasn't been "branding" enough for the past 40-60 years? The group started as a fortuitous merger between music and branding (selling the product of "beach" and "California"), then there was a short period where it was about music, and then back to branding.  Which in a nutshell is the reason the group is - justifiably - not respected and not seen as being on the plateau with the other great 60s acts (Beatles, Stones, Who, et al)  It's been a branding operation exclusively for at least the past 40 years, with music, at most, incidental and probably irrelevant.  So is this really about nothing more than some businessmen being excited that there's still more cash to be wrung out of this thing? The prospect of CGI Beach Boys is horrifying (did I read that right?) and totally consistent with the times we live in. Sorry to be negative.  Somebody please make the case that this is about anything more than some guys going back to the ATM again.

I'm sure each of the shareholders getting a nice big payday out of this was a big part of this, and the huge dropoff in touring revenue last year could have easily hastened this decision.

The stuff about VR/CGI/hologram BBs, I think that's about the (slightly morbid) fact that the members are wanting to mold what happens to this whole deal when they're gone (and/or unable to make public appearances).

As far as "branding" right now, what they're talking about is all the untapped areas. Again, licensed merchandise has been next to zip over the years. Placement in movies, TV, etc.

I think they're talking about branding in a more specific, business-focused sense rather than the branding of "beach and California", which I'd call more theming than branding over the years.
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/
Rocker
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 9670


"Too dumb for New York City, too ugly for L.A."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: February 18, 2021, 12:13:25 PM »



If you start hearing original Beach Boys tracks in certain outlets, if you start seeing Pet Sounds cover T-shirts being sold at Hot Topic and being worn by 17 year olds, if you start seeing a more modernized, streamlined approach to marketing *The Beach Boys* beyond seeing blurbs for Mike's live shows in your local paper's "Weekender" section, that's a good thing.



First thing they need to do is get this shirt back into the merch:




Best. Logo. Ever.




EDIT:


Interesting to note:

“I’m humbled and honored that they chose us,” says Azoff, who saw the band play when he was a teenager in Illinois in 1965, an experience he calls “mind-blowing.” “It all started for me there,” he says. “We understand the responsibility that they’ve assigned to us and we will not disappoint them. We’re gonna get this right.”


It's quite possible that these are the shows that were recorded and have been released as one of the copyright downloads.





And:

Love echoes the point: As he puts it, “I think we’ve been great in music, but maybe not as great as we could be in furthering our brand.”


Oh, the irony  Cheesy
« Last Edit: February 18, 2021, 12:24:14 PM by Rocker » Logged

a diseased bunch of mo'fos if there ever was one… their beauty is so awesome that listening to them at their best is like being in some vast dream cathedral decorated with a thousand gleaming American pop culture icons.

- Lester Bangs on The Beach Boys


PRO SHOT BEACH BOYS CONCERTS - LIST


To sum it up, they blew it, they blew it consistently, they continue to blow it, it is tragic and this pathological problem caused The Beach Boys' greatest music to be so underrated by the general public.

- Jack Rieley
BeachBoysCovers
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 196


View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: February 18, 2021, 12:14:02 PM »

That was great detective work! Yes indeed.

You read hints of it here weeks ago too:  Wink
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,26791.msg668978.html#msg668978

Good to know that Live in 1970 set can be considered an “official release” Grin


Not sure I'd consider a release which was ripped from youtube bootlegs in such a poor manner that they didn't even bother turning an ad-blocker on being official is necessarily a good thing myself
Logged

HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9212



View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: February 18, 2021, 12:21:02 PM »

I’m also going to be negative here, sorry everyone. I don’t know as much as a lot of members here do, but what I do know is that Irving Azoff has too many artists already that are well-loved and he doesn’t do enough with them as it is. The only news about Journey recently is the band splitting in two - sound familiar? Don Henley and Irving Azoff refuse to put out any archival Eagles material, which would be a huge chunk of money for them. Bon Jovi hasn’t done anything of note after 2015/6 other than the reunion with Sambora at the R&RHOF. I had no problem with Mike selling some of his publishing to them, but the entire brand? That’s too risky in my opinion. Sure, the band mismanages everything as it is, so maybe a minority partner could have helped, but this is just too far in my opinion. I can’t read the RS article because of their new paywall, so does it break down the percentages of BRI now? I’m not surprised that Mike did this for the money, but I really am about Brian and Al (and a little about Justyn and Jonah).

The two positive things I will say is it would be nice to have some more merchandise and to bring back the SiriusXM channel. I appreciate some of these ideas, but I’m still very skeptical. Maybe when the guys pass away (which I don’t want to happen for a while), their children could have sold a bigger stake, but not yet IMO.

Azoff isn't "managing" the band in the way he does those other artists.

Iconic is essentially sort of taking on the Beach Boys/BRI the way they would the estate of Elvis or Prince or something. There may yet still be some areas where the band can create *new* material, but I doubt Iconic was betting on that when they cut this deal.

I don't think we'll see *less* product, including archival releases. We'd likely see *more*, because the whole point of buying into the BBs/BRI is to monetize it and capitalize on their investment. And also, and I can't emphasize this enough (and Al specifically mentions this as well in the interview surprisingly), cutting this deal has *removed* the roadblock of stuff getting bogged down in the Brian-Mike-Al-Carl's Estate voting bottlenecks. There is now one entity making the final decisions. Backroom politics and back-scratching aren't really at play any more.

I'm sure this is why the deal *had* to be for a majority stake. Why would any company pay a ton of money for a minority stake, where they'd still be beholden to the same politics and dysfunction that have been going on for decades?

It sounds like, stunningly, the band members *like* the idea of the decisions being taken out of their hands. Either way, they got a *s**t-ton* of money to do it.

And, for what it's worth, from what I'm hearing *right now* and what I've been hearing in recent weeks and months, things are *good*, and getting better in BB land. "Feel Flows" will hopefully just be the tip of the iceberg. Amend that with a million asterisks if you want, but I'm hearing *good* things right now.

I don't think it's impossible that we could end up looking back at this and thinking that they should have cut a deal like this 10 or 20 years ago.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2021, 12:25:49 PM 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/
Rocker
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 9670


"Too dumb for New York City, too ugly for L.A."


View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: February 18, 2021, 12:39:11 PM »

Gotta love Al. Correctly cites the failure of the "Beach Boys Cafe" back decades ago, then by the end of the article hopes that they might do......a Beach Boys restaurant.




Yes, but it just goes to show how badly they need other people's help. Look at both Al's and Mike's suggestions of what could be done and you see how totally out of touch they are and that they are only trying to do something that somebody else has already done. No fresh ideas. That's of course nothing new but has been part of the guys' mindset since at least the 70s.
Logged

a diseased bunch of mo'fos if there ever was one… their beauty is so awesome that listening to them at their best is like being in some vast dream cathedral decorated with a thousand gleaming American pop culture icons.

- Lester Bangs on The Beach Boys


PRO SHOT BEACH BOYS CONCERTS - LIST


To sum it up, they blew it, they blew it consistently, they continue to blow it, it is tragic and this pathological problem caused The Beach Boys' greatest music to be so underrated by the general public.

- Jack Rieley
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9212



View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: February 18, 2021, 12:42:00 PM »

Gotta love Al. Correctly cites the failure of the "Beach Boys Cafe" back decades ago, then by the end of the article hopes that they might do......a Beach Boys restaurant.




Yes, but it just goes to show how badly they need other people's help. Look at both Al's and Mike's suggestions of what could be done and you see how totally out of touch they are and that they are only trying to do something that somebody else has already done. No fresh ideas. That's of course nothing new but has been part of the guys' mindset since at least the 70s.

It's very true, the band members do a good job in this recent press blitz of proving why it's better to hand this stuff off to someone else.
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/
southbay
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1448



View Profile
« Reply #45 on: February 18, 2021, 12:42:17 PM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/

Ticketmaster still has The Beach Boys though.

That is a pretty major change. Let me rephrase that: a MAJOR change in protocol for billing these shows. The whole ball of wax up to now was billing these shows as simply "The Beach Boys", now that has changed.

Consider just how unrelated that really is when a major part of this deal announced publicly today involved branding and marketing the band and its name. If it truly is unrelated, the timing of it sure falls into place...

If I were a consumer who, let's say a year ago, purchased a ticket to see "The Beach Boys" for the exact same lineup as what will now possibly be billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys", I guess I'd feel a little cheated. That's assuming that anyone in that scenario would care enough, but it's sort of like Mike FINALLY revealing (grudgingly or not) that his version of the band is not (and by logic, was in reality not, for most of 1998 to present) actually "The Beach Boys".

I'm sure there has to have been recent boardroom discussion of what constitutes brand confusion, and how this M&B "BBs" branding contributed to the decay and falling from Mount Rushmore, so to speak.

I half-jokingly wonder if people who purchased tickets to see "The Beach Boys" and only got the bait-and-swtich version of "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys" will be wanting any recourse if anyone retroactively feels cheated considering that only many years later finally truth in advertising may be happening.

I mean, I know that the BRI voters collectively allowed that brand name thing to happen for so long, I do have to wonder if they regret it at this point. I do hope this leads to the devaluing to correct course, but man it's such a self-inflicted wound and I can't fault the public if they have a WTF reaction, although few fans except us nerds may care enough to have such a reaction.

They were being billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston's Beach Boys" at least as early as the scheduled July 4, 2020  show at the Hollywood Bowl
Logged

Summer's gone...it's finally sinking in
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #46 on: February 18, 2021, 12:45:34 PM »


Find a way to get their own legacy's version of "Don't Stop Believin", or "Living On A Prayer", or "Bohemian Rhapsody", or sh*t even "Piano Man" into the popular culture as of 2021, and it's money in the bank.

Hasn't this already happened with the very well-known "God Only Knows," and in fact the entire Pet Sounds album? Within a certain demographic, regardless of age,  the album is very well-known. It's almost over-exposed and over-fetishized at this point in my opinion.

Queen had their movie, blah blah, Elton John had his movie (are these considered to be good films?) and then there was the Brian Wilson movie of 2015 with scenes attempting to recreate the Pet Sounds sessions, etc.  A lot of this marketing/reassessment/repackaging/correction-of-misconceptions has already occurred - at least with respect to Brian Wilson, who, along with the long since deceased and forgotten Dennis Wilson, is the only member of the Beach Boys worth re-examining, reassessing and "marketing" to the public for any reason other than just generating more dollars.

The "Beach Boys" is a brand that cannot, and has never been capable of being marketed to the public with a decent level of honesty.  The brand/concept cannot earn money if you tell the truth about them and what really happened. Therefore, I suspect that all this thing means is that you will see more nonsense, more falsehoods, more denial and more lies in an attempt to sell this group as happy, healthy California funsters.  If you deviate from that, you can't sell it anymore - people don't want to know, they can't accept what really happened and they're turned off.

People can criticize Mike all they want for the animal-killing shows, but that was really, in my opinion, finally some honest branding. He was being honest about what the Beach Boys brand stands for, and certain fans, and even Brian and Al couldn't accept it, it seems.  

Again, apologies for the "negativity."

So the Beach Boys "brand" stands for playing an event that alienates a lot of the fan base, caused negative publicity for the brand and name in the non-music press, and Brian and Al raised objections not because they are board members who had a vote with BRI who were not informed of this until it hit the press but rather because they couldn't accept it for other reasons? I'm just trying to understand what you're trying to say because on the surface it sounds like you're all but applauding Mike for doing a show that caused more negativity than it was worth, and ultimately the responsibility for that name and brand goes beyond getting a paycheck to play at a trophy hunting convention. I don't care to see the Beach Boys associated with that kind of scene at all, but that's just me speaking as a fan who wants more people to hear and love the music, not read in the press about the politics or drama. I don't think I'm alone in that view.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #47 on: February 18, 2021, 12:51:03 PM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/

Ticketmaster still has The Beach Boys though.

That is a pretty major change. Let me rephrase that: a MAJOR change in protocol for billing these shows. The whole ball of wax up to now was billing these shows as simply "The Beach Boys", now that has changed.

Consider just how unrelated that really is when a major part of this deal announced publicly today involved branding and marketing the band and its name. If it truly is unrelated, the timing of it sure falls into place...

If I were a consumer who, let's say a year ago, purchased a ticket to see "The Beach Boys" for the exact same lineup as what will now possibly be billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys", I guess I'd feel a little cheated. That's assuming that anyone in that scenario would care enough, but it's sort of like Mike FINALLY revealing (grudgingly or not) that his version of the band is not (and by logic, was in reality not, for most of 1998 to present) actually "The Beach Boys".

I'm sure there has to have been recent boardroom discussion of what constitutes brand confusion, and how this M&B "BBs" branding contributed to the decay and falling from Mount Rushmore, so to speak.

I half-jokingly wonder if people who purchased tickets to see "The Beach Boys" and only got the bait-and-swtich version of "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys" will be wanting any recourse if anyone retroactively feels cheated considering that only many years later finally truth in advertising may be happening.

I mean, I know that the BRI voters collectively allowed that brand name thing to happen for so long, I do have to wonder if they regret it at this point. I do hope this leads to the devaluing to correct course, but man it's such a self-inflicted wound and I can't fault the public if they have a WTF reaction, although few fans except us nerds may care enough to have such a reaction.

They were being billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston's Beach Boys" at least as early as the scheduled July 4, 2020  show at the Hollywood Bowl

And that would also fall into the timeline - Summer 2020 more or less - when all of these events like the selling of the songs and the news about the box set being put on the shelf started to happen and become known. Prior to that, it was just "The Beach Boys" in billings unless it was a specific gig Mike took on his own minus Bruce or the band. Everyone can draw their own conclusions but the timing of everything seems to stand out in these cases.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
BeachBoysCovers
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 196


View Profile WWW
« Reply #48 on: February 18, 2021, 12:55:30 PM »

Not saying it’s related, and never really gave it a second thought until reading this thread, but many of M&B upcoming shows are down as ‘Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys’. Not all, but many.

https://uinterview.com/news/the-beach-boys-announce-new-2021-concert-dates/

Ticketmaster still has The Beach Boys though.

That is a pretty major change. Let me rephrase that: a MAJOR change in protocol for billing these shows. The whole ball of wax up to now was billing these shows as simply "The Beach Boys", now that has changed.

Consider just how unrelated that really is when a major part of this deal announced publicly today involved branding and marketing the band and its name. If it truly is unrelated, the timing of it sure falls into place...

If I were a consumer who, let's say a year ago, purchased a ticket to see "The Beach Boys" for the exact same lineup as what will now possibly be billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys", I guess I'd feel a little cheated. That's assuming that anyone in that scenario would care enough, but it's sort of like Mike FINALLY revealing (grudgingly or not) that his version of the band is not (and by logic, was in reality not, for most of 1998 to present) actually "The Beach Boys".

I'm sure there has to have been recent boardroom discussion of what constitutes brand confusion, and how this M&B "BBs" branding contributed to the decay and falling from Mount Rushmore, so to speak.

I half-jokingly wonder if people who purchased tickets to see "The Beach Boys" and only got the bait-and-swtich version of "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston’s Beach Boys" will be wanting any recourse if anyone retroactively feels cheated considering that only many years later finally truth in advertising may be happening.

I mean, I know that the BRI voters collectively allowed that brand name thing to happen for so long, I do have to wonder if they regret it at this point. I do hope this leads to the devaluing to correct course, but man it's such a self-inflicted wound and I can't fault the public if they have a WTF reaction, although few fans except us nerds may care enough to have such a reaction.

They were being billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston's Beach Boys" at least as early as the scheduled July 4, 2020  show at the Hollywood Bowl

They are also not being billed as that at plenty of other shows booked since July 4, 2020 - including things like the Royal Albert Hall in June.
Logged

guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9313


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #49 on: February 18, 2021, 12:59:43 PM »

The question then becomes why change the booking name at all, and further why do it amidst all these other issues happening in 2020 including this blockbuster deal with Azoff? It doesn't randomly change on a whim, as Mike has fought and filed many legal papers since 1998 to keep that name to book his shows. Now it changes? It can't be ignored or brushed aside, because it's a change in the entire protocol that has been fought over for 20+ years.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
gfx
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.659 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!