Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveMacD
I respectfully call BS.
I bought TITN, my first Fleetwood Mac album, sometime in late July/early August and was 13 at the time. If I was very aware of Lindsey leaving before I was familiar with “Fleetwood Mac” or “Rumours,” I guarantee you that people dropping money on tickets also knew.
You keep trying to pull this “casual fan” card on Fleetwood Mac (at least the Rumours band) as if it’s not one of the biggest selling bands ever. Why was the OWTS tour much bigger than the 2013 tour? How do you explain that?
Of course Lindsey leaving was a huge story in 1987, just as the return of Lindsey and Stevie were the whole point of the 1997 tour.
I almost went to opening night in 2013 for $35. That price went bye-bye the moment Christine returned. But, yeah, nobody noticed the difference.
|
Many may have known Lindsey left but could not name the 2 new guitarists. I agree with Michelle's point. You seemed to claim Lindsey leaving spiked album sales. That makes no sense. There was no social media in 1987 and his departure was one day news that ended after one week. MTV did air parts of the news conference announcing the new line up.
Yes of course any new Mac single in half a decade is going to get interest and I do agree with you if released as a solo song, it would not have charted. Claiming Little Lies was a bigger hit because of Lindsey's leaving is not only wrong but an insult to the song. It clearly was the most pop/radio friendly song on the album which is why it landed first track side 2. Michelle's point is accurate. The masses that crowd arenas are casual fans and mostly Stevie solo fans. 2/3 of Fleetwood Mac's singers could not even fill small theaters. No casual fans there though.
You also make a very weak analogy. A band reuniting with former members is much bigger and more powerful than one of them leaving. You are comparing Lindsey leaving to the buzz of Lindsey and Stevie coming back in 1997. That is apples and oranges.