View Single Post
  #11  
Old 07-08-2017, 06:49 PM
jwd jwd is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Fleetucky
Posts: 3,364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WatchChain View Post
The question still looms with me regarding this whole project. Why didn't they just have John and Mick play bass and drums on the whole record and call it "Fleetwood Mac"? Let me get this straight:

Lindsey Buckingham, Mick Fleetwood, John McVie, and Christine McVie CANNOT be called "Fleetwood Mac".

BUT

Lindsey Buckingham, Mick Fleetwood, John McVie, and Stevie Nicks CAN be called "Fleetwood Mac".

What the heck is the difference?
It seems clear and it all boils down to having the name "Stevie Nicks" on the bill. The band and its management are well aware that a unit called Fleetwood Mac recording and touring WITHOUT Stevie Nicks will hurt the Fleetwood Mac "brand" and confuse consumers. It's clear that marketing and the band's ability to fill arenas as a dinosaur rock act equal more money in pockets. Which leaves us with fickle Stevie.

The difference is, first case scenario Stevie is still in the band. Second case, Christine was NOT in the band. All comes down to politics, and as Christine said, makes it less confusing to just call it Buckingham McVie. AND supposedly it was never intended to be a FM record. So there you have it, for what it's worth................
Reply With Quote