Al Interview - Plea to Iconic

[Juice Brohnston]

There was an interesting interview a few weeks back, where Al, kinda reached out to Iconic Artists , to exert some influence to push the idea of a Beach Boys reunion. Al referred to M&B as "a bit of a cheat...that works for them"

Begs the question, what type of power does Iconic have, now that they control the catalogue? Is touring affected at all by this arrangement?

[HeyJude]

I think some common sense and knowing the history of the band tells you what the deal likely is.

We know that touring is Mike's main deal in life, and has been for decades. I don't think he would have signed on to the Iconic deal unless his touring setup/situation was relatively secured.

Concerning a reunion, Mike has gone on record *many* times post-50th to indicate his negative feelings towards many aspects of the reunion project. The impression I get is that everything other than actually performing with the other guys on stage was a total hassle to him (and even the actual performances on stage were riddled with some issues according to his words). He took issue with elements of the setup of the tour and album, he took issue with how the songwriting was handled, and so on. We also know that he seems happiest doing his own thing on tour. There's zero hassle. He's the boss, he makes all the decisions. I'd argue he literally seems happier on stage (and in other venues when we see him) than he did during the reunion. He certainly seems much more comfortable in his own element and seemed ill at ease during the reunion where he found himself back among some of the other shareholders, and where some compromises and deference were unavoidable to make the project work.

Long story short, I think it was pretty clear in the aftermath that it was unlikely we'd ever see another reunion project on that scale. Sure, I'm sure we all wondered if a DECADE would allow things to cool off, if the the guys were still up and working ten years later. Turns out they are still out there working, but Mike still seems happiest doing his own thing.

As far as Al's comments, as is often the case, he kinda seems to be confused and not know or understand exactly what's going on. Sometimes he knows exactly what's going on, and he still just makes perplexing, head-scratching comments in interviews. I say all this as a huge Al fan. He says weird s*it in interviews sometimes. He doesn't say mean or offensive or cranky things. He just says stuff that sometimes makes no sense. In this case, I think even though he surely agreed to the Iconic sale and many members surprisingly mentioned specifically in interviews that they were happy to remove the actual members/board members from having to make the final decisions on this stuff, that Iconic running the show would mean less politics and messiness in the regard. I think he wants a reunion and kind of nobody else much seems that into it. I'm not sure even Brian is eager to do another C50. Mike surely isn't. Iconic can't make the guys reunite, and faced with a choice of Mike's tour revenue or *nothing*, the choice is simple.

I'd usually support Al, however hopeless it might be, in wanting a reunion. C50 was amazing. But I honestly don't know if a "C60" would be nearly as good, even if they were all game. They aren't singing as well (Al still sounds good, Mike is getting by, Brian is more challenged vocally now than 2012), they are all essentially 80 or older (Al in a few months). And if they did some sort of reunion project, it would be a quickie kind of deal most likely. So they probably wouldn't sound as good, the setlist would be less interesting with less time to evolve it, and who knows if they'd even bother with the minefield of a studio album what with the "getting Brian in a room to write" stuff, and the likelihood that the best unreleased material Brian would have would probably be more "That's Why God Made the Radio" outtakes co-written by Joe Thomas, which I'm not sure Mike would want another album filled with.

I think the archives are where it's at. A good, long documentary would be nice as well. They're working on something, though I remain skeptical with how substantive it's going to be.

But let's see what unravels. They could still surprise us.

[guitarfool2002]

He's the boss, he makes all the decisions.

Maybe not.

[HeyJude]

Boss of his own touring band meaning there is nobody else on stage that he has to answer to or compromise with. Meaning, he is not running his tour as a joint operation with Brian Wilson or Joe Thomas or any other corporate/board members.

There is nobody "telling" Mike that the band will just be adding some songs he is skittish about. Mike's own tour operation of course involves other people. But I do not believe he is booking dates he doesn't want to, or playing songs he doesn't want to, or working with band members he doesn't want to, or budgeting for things on tour that he doesn't want to.

[Shady]

The biggest question is why Mike doesn't want a reunion. The C50 tour must have been a miserable experience for him

[Juice Brohnston]

Al does like to stir it up from time to time. Good point that he's probably the only guy who cares.

[Awesoman]

Al does like to stir it up from time to time. Good point that he's probably the only guy who cares.

Al seems to be the only one who actually wants to see a reunion happen. 

[guitarfool2002]

Boss of his own touring band meaning there is nobody else on stage that he has to answer to or compromise with. Meaning, he is not running his tour as a joint operation with Brian Wilson or Joe Thomas or any other corporate/board members.

There is nobody "telling" Mike that the band will just be adding some songs he is skittish about. Mike's own tour operation of course involves other people. But I do not believe he is booking dates he doesn't want to, or playing songs he doesn't want to, or working with band members he doesn't want to, or budgeting for things on tour that he doesn't want to.

There was a spirit of mythbusting going on a few months ago, and one of the bigger myths in the band's universe over the past 30 years or so might be just how much of his career and business dealings Mike himself is responsible for directly, or how much he does in a hands-on capacity, despite the author of his biography/autobiography suggesting Mike is in full control of every aspect of his career. As far as the touring, yes I agree to a point but it's also about Mike being the number one guy on stage carrying the Beach Boys flag representing the brand. I think that aspect of the shows alone is priceless to Mike which is why he has paid millions to hold the name.

[HeyJude]

The biggest question is why Mike doesn't want a reunion. The C50 tour must have been a miserable experience for him

The C50 debacle is a long, complicated story. But also, what you're saying is pretty much it if one has to sum it up in a sentence.

[Zenobi]

This situation makes exactly as much sense as Martin Barre had taken the ownership of Jethro Tull, forbidding Ian Anderson and the rest of the band (minus one) to play/tour with them or use in any way the Jethro Tull name.
Sure Mike is absolutely ok with this situation.
And no surprise, either, that Al is less ok with it.

[HeyJude]

Al does like to stir it up from time to time. Good point that he's probably the only guy who cares.

When Al says stuff like this in interviews, it's even more perplexing because I don't think he's trying to stir it up. He seems to sometimes just genuinely say weird stuff that makes no sense. In this case, he seems to have temporarily forgotten how his own company works, and how the history of this band has shaken out.

But also, it's not as if a reunion would be more likely to happen if the Iconic sale hadn't happened. Nobody can make Mike ditch his own tour and join a reunion, and nobody wants to do a reunion without all of the surviving members.

If all members had been really enthusiastic and proactive about doing a C50-style reunion for 2022, I highly doubt Iconic would have been anything but happy to see that happen. But I also think Iconic, as any company would with such a big purchase, surely did their due diligence in knowing the history of this band (both the interpersonal stuff and the business stuff) before buying. I think they know the status quo dynamic is the likely course, and then I'm sure other projects and ideas are being pitched as realistically as possible.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

This situation makes exactly as much sense as Martin Barre had taken the ownership of Jethro Tull, forbidding Ian Anderson and the rest of the band (minus one) to play/tour with them or use in any way the Jethro Tull name.
Sure Mike is absolutely ok with this situation.
And no surprise, either, that Al is less ok with it.

At some point the question becomes..:what exactly IS a band, when most if not all the principal members are gone?

[juggler]

I don't think anyone really thought that a 60th anniversary tour on par with the 50th was in the cards.  Too much bad blood from the 50th.  The guys are 10 years older, 10 years crankier, 10 years less likely to do things they don't want to do.  But it's pretty sad if they do *nothing*.  A one-off show at the Hollywood Bowl or similar would have been nice.

[HeyJude]

I don't think anyone really thought that a 60th anniversary tour on par with the 50th was in the cards.  Too much bad blood from the 50th.  The guys are 10 years older, 10 years crankier, 10 years less likely to do things they don't want to do.  But it's pretty sad if they do *nothing*.  A one-off show at the Hollywood Bowl or similar would have been nice.

There's still plenty of time (scheduling wise anyway) to do one-shot projects like that. I say that in the most neutral way. I don't even know if I want such a project, because I'd have to see what it is and how it goes. But both bands are up and active and they could combine the bands similar to what they did in 2012, rehearse for a week or two, and do a single show or a few shows.

I think there will be 60th product out there. The "Sounds of Summer" package is one. A documentary is coming at some point. The 72/73 boxed set could also be tied into the 60th similar to how the Smile box sort of kicked off the 50th back in 2011.

I suspect we might well just get some sort of full band version that Brian TNT tribute show or the Musicares Brian tribute, with artists covering songs and then the reunited band coming out to do a short set. I think this would probably not be a great show. Like, that 1964 Beatles USA anniversary tribute show that Paul and Ringo did back in 2014 was about as good as such things can usually get, and even that was kind of painful. We'd be lucky to get artists on a new BB tribute show that are contemporaries of the band and/or know their catalog. We'd probably end up with new, young artists that learn a song they've never heard of just to play it on the show.

[Custom Machine]

As far as the touring, yes I agree to a point but it's also about Mike being the number one guy on stage carrying the Beach Boys flag representing the brand. I think that aspect of the shows alone is priceless to Mike which is why he has paid millions to hold the name.

Yes, Mike loves to be on stage touring as The Beach Boys, but it's also important to note that Mike has made far more by holding the license to The Beach Boys name for touring purposes than he has paid to BRI for said license.

[Foster's Freeze]

As far as the touring, yes I agree to a point but it's also about Mike being the number one guy on stage carrying the Beach Boys flag representing the brand. I think that aspect of the shows alone is priceless to Mike which is why he has paid millions to hold the name.

Yes, Mike loves to be on stage touring as The Beach Boys, but it's also important to note that Mike has made far more by holding the license to The Beach Boys name for touring purposes than he has paid to BRI for said license.

Is this true?

I thought Mike "won" the right to use the name but no matter what, Brian, Al, Mike, and Carl's estate all received an equal slice of the revenue?

[HeyJude]

As far as the touring, yes I agree to a point but it's also about Mike being the number one guy on stage carrying the Beach Boys flag representing the brand. I think that aspect of the shows alone is priceless to Mike which is why he has paid millions to hold the name.

Yes, Mike loves to be on stage touring as The Beach Boys, but it's also important to note that Mike has made far more by holding the license to The Beach Boys name for touring purposes than he has paid to BRI for said license.

Is this true?

I thought Mike "won" the right to use the name but no matter what, Brian, Al, Mike, and Carl's estate all received an equal slice of the revenue?

The shareholders don't get an equal slice of Mike's tour revenue.

They get an equal cut of the licensing fee that Mike pays to use the "Beach Boys" name. That licensing fee is a (relatively) small percentage of his revenue.

Mike's book stated in 2017 that he had paid BRI out $20 million in licensing fees over the previous 20 years. So, very roughly, each of the four shareholders have split what averages out to $1 million per year.

So yeah, $250,000 per year to do nothing is amazing to most regular folk. But it's small fee to pay out to use such a strong trademark.

And, I suppose since BRI sold a majority stake to Iconic, that licensing fee would be split between Iconic and the shareholders, and then the shareholders split that remaining bit.

So yeah, these guys (and estate) are making plenty of money. They all got surely millions each for selling a majority stake to Iconic, and they could all theoretically still be pulling in over $100K per year in tour license revenue, on top of publishing and record royalties (although some of them are apparently selling stake in some of those things as well).

To the original question, yes, Mike would be making far money off his tour than the other shareholders, because he takes the rest of the tour revenue (or, his company does), and *also* gets back his equal cut of that licensing fee as a shareholder.

[SMiLE Brian]

Can we get heyjude to interview Al?