Quote:
It could very well be about longevity also. They’re bound to last longer and continue carrying on a fan base if they have Stevie around than if they only had Linds around. How many people would buy an FM record without her? Not many. In this situation, from a business perspective, the only real option for them to continue their commercial success and have job security is to keep her around. If Lindsey was the more successful of the group, they would’ve thrown Stevie out in two seconds. And I doubt Lindsey would’ve objected. Business trumps feelings. |
Quote:
I agree about the BN photoshoot but I see no reason why the band should've not named the album Tusk or not done Come live just because Stevie didn't like it? That's not a great example of the band not caring about Stevie's feelings because those were ridiculous feelings to begin with. Things like that are just more examples of how Stevie has a childish side to her, can be quite petty and always has. However now, as you said, she's leveraged her monetary value to back that up, which is a big part of how what's happened happened. And I think Lindsey would've objected. He objected to bringing in Sheryl Crow to take Christine's spot. And he objected to replacing John. And I'm not saying he would've objected because he cares about Stevie, but because he cares about the legacy of the band. That clearly was something that mattered to him. |
Quote:
And in all honesty, I agree that Lindsey does care about the “legacy”. Not because he’s a saint or genuinely cares more about the fans than the others do, but because he knows the legacy is his biggest value. The way Stevie’s value is putting butts in seats and raising ticket costs. The biggest thing LB brings to the table is the nostalgic feelings you get from watching this legendary band of two feuding couples perform together. My mom (a diehard FM/Stevie fan since she was 13) first reacted to his firing with “Oh no, now we’re not gonna get all those dramatic Silver Springs moments anymore!” It wasn’t about missing his voice or his guitar playing for her. There’s other people who can sing well and play amazing guitar. I mean we’ve now replaced him two times and both times the final product of the replacements playing/singing wasn’t bad on the ears or a disgrace musically. What’s missing with LB “replacements” is the feelings and the rich history behind the performance. He knows that as well as we do. That’s why 20,000 people show up to see him sing Go Your Own Way and Second Hand News while staring right at Stevie as she sings back up, but only like a thousand people will show up to see the same guy do the same kick ass performance of the same songs on his own. It’s about the band’s (and more notably, the couple’s) history and the legacy. That’s what he brings to the table. If the positions were switched and he was the one with all the monetary value and public notoriety, I doubt he would give a sh*t about anyone’s “legacy”. He has to care now because that’s what made him valuable to the band above anything else. |
Quote:
|
Some interesting points from reading the complaint filed by Lindsey.
They are all equal members. Band decisions are made by unanimous vote, not majority rules. Lindsey didn't vote himself out of FM. He's still a member, and rightfully so. So unless he did something so egregiously wrong, he's in. He's laying claim to "FM". It's not just Mick and John's band, it's all five members' band. Due to the record of fact of what he has done for the "business" via songwriting, producing, performing, recording, directing and the commercial success the "business" has attained while doing so. Unless it can be proven that he should not legally be a member. He's laying claim to not only 20 percent of the proceeds of the current tour, but any subsequent tour and all merchandising proceeds etc. Lindsey has a an invested stake in "FM" and should be compensated accordingly. So Fleetwood Mac continues and pays Lindsey, or they dissolve. Unless they can prove him not to be a legal member of said partnership. DAMN, this is going to get ugly. I firmly believe there will be no so called reunion of The Rumours Five ever. IT'S OVER! |
Quote:
Quote:
And, while that remark alone likely wouldn’t be enough to get him fired from Fleetwood Mac, it certainly put him under the microscope. He very publicly expressed a lack of enthusiasm for the show, and their show was subsequently panned as being lifeless, void of chemistry and drama, like they were sleepwalking through the show. Sure, there was probably enough blame to spread all around the band for that, but the LBCM tour had been getting great reviews, especially for the chemistry between Lindsey and Christine, and there was only one member who publicly expressed a lack of enthusiasm about doing the show in the first place. It was like it became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Then when they were negotiating, he requested a delay for a solo album, which he admittedly rescinded, but I think by that point things started snowballing. A concurrent tour was laughable. If he couldn’t bring the same level of enthusiasm he had for a new project back into the band for two major festival shows, how was a concurrent tour work? The blowup over Rhiannon (or any of their songs) getting played prior to their grand entrance and the smirk (which I bet they all got an earful over) was just enough to set Stevie over the edge. Now, normally Azoff would be the Stevie whisperer, but Lindsey hadn’t exactly made himself an endearing figure by that point and possibly a liability in Azoff’s eyes. Since Lindsey didn’t sign off on the tour, it was just easier to replace one icon with another. Much like he did with the Eagles. |
Quote:
LOL It's definitely gonna get ugly. I still don't see it going to court, but there could be one final reunion of the Rumours 5 if only to make back all of the money could lose ( and think about all the money they would make) if they don't at least break even on this one. Mick's child support, alimony and bankruptcy's alone. Maybe they can team up with The Eagles for a "Hell Refroze" tour? Given the legal ramifications though, do they want to make more or less on this tour? Honestly I don't know??? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Also, this band has a long history of majority-rules voting. As we were discussing earlier, there’s been lots of times that a certain member was against something that happened anyway (like Stevie being against naming the album Tusk for example). So it doesn’t sound like this rule Lindsey speaks of has always been enforced. And it certainly doesn’t sound like it was a legal contractual agreement. (I could be wrong here. I’m actually not trying to be argumentative here, i’m genuinely asking if anyone knows if this point was an actual written agreement.) |
Quote:
Ultimately, I think this will play out like what happened with Cheap Trick and Bun E. Carlos. From his Wikipedia page Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I wonder how much money Lindsey would settle for. 14M is peanuts! |
Quote:
Stevie, as much as I love her, is one of the most stubborn, petty, controlling artists I know of. If she had the power to put a stop to any of these things that she hated due to an “equal partnership ruled by unanimous voting”, there’s no way she wouldn’t have used that power to get her way time and time again. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved