Mac salary split?

[LB Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by Macfanforever

I dont recall why modern close up shop in 1999.
I wonder whats $200 bucks 1970's dollars in todays money.

$200 in 1974 is worth $968.11 in 2015.

There's a great gov website that gives you values of money in whatever year...

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

Don Felder makes almost as much from the Eagles as if he was on tour with them. He sued the pants off them and he makes a ton of dough everytime they play Hotel California and other songs. Besides being part owner he was creater and writer of most of their biggest hits. The Eagles need to play their hits and so they pay a fortune to Don Felder. Felder wrote the entire intro to Hotel California. Felder was on Stern a few years ago and it was a fascinating interview. There are some things he cant talk about from the lawsuit but he was definitely the big winner.

Back to the Mac. I highly doubt Mick Fleetwood gets only 15% of the split. My hunch is they are "almost" equal.

Don Felder may or may not have earned it, but on paper, he owned 1/3 of the Eagles franchise. I hope he bleeds Frey and Henley dry. As people, I like him a lot. Them, not so much. #douches

I really do doubt that Mick makes nearly what the 3 songwriters do, namesake or not. It's not like he's gonna walk away for a better offer...just sayin'...He'd make 10% of what he's getting now, with ANY other act.

[Wdm6789]

Is it possible that Christine had to take a pay cut because she left for so long? Also, I think I asked this before, what percentage of tickets sold were sold solely because of Christine? Do you guys think that if the band had just extended their tour and Christine did come come back, they would have had the same amount of ticket sales?

[Macfan4life]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

Don Felder may or may not have earned it, but on paper, he owned 1/3 of the Eagles franchise. I hope he bleeds Frey and Henley dry. As people, I like him a lot. Them, not so much. #douches

I really do doubt that Mick makes nearly what the 3 songwriters do, namesake or not. It's not like he's gonna walk away for a better offer...just sayin'...He'd make 10% of what he's getting now, with ANY other act.

Here is the interview with Felder I was talking about. The lawsuit talk begins just before 24:00. When Felder started asking questions about contracts of records or touring or merchandise they fired him from the band. As part owner and creator of most of the hits he sued and settled with them for tons of dough. It is speculated that every tour or any merchandise and all money the Eagles make Felder takes a good chunk. Felder and Walsh had a great relationship. Those facial expressions they would make to each other on stage were incredible. But Walsh was not part owner and did not have a leg to stand on to defend Felder so he just went along for the ride.

What I would love to know is more about Bob Welch's lawsuit against Fleetwood Mac over record sales. I assume he meant the records he was involved with? I just want to know why Mick Fleetwood and the Mac's lawyers fought Bob so much. Was Bob asking for too much? Anyone know? In Mick's book he raves about Bob but never mentions the lawsuit. In Bob's last days he did not speak well of Mick.

Felder's interview - lawsuit begins about 24:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgu9iS1gKwo

[Macfanforever]

This happens many times with bands.


Did Diana Ross had money issues with some of the Supremes girl's.

I know Diana wont settle for what Mick and John is getting out of the pie.

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

What I would love to know is more about Bob Welch's lawsuit against Fleetwood Mac over record sales. I assume he meant the records he was involved with? I just want to know why Mick Fleetwood and the Mac's lawyers fought Bob so much. Was Bob asking for too much? Anyone know? In Mick's book he raves about Bob but never mentions the lawsuit. In Bob's last days he did not speak well of Mick.

It seems incredible they couldn't have sorted it out more amicably. After all, the royalties from Bob's FM records would surely have been peanuts compared to what came later. Also, it wasn't just Mick who Bob had issues with- as we know Christine was just as vociferous in their stance as Mick (or more so).

[FuzzyPlum]

Originally Posted by FuzzyPlum

It seems incredible they couldn't have sorted it out more amicably. After all, the royalties from Bob's FM records would surely have been peanuts compared to what came later. Also, it wasn't just Mick who Bob had issues with- as we know Christine was just as vociferous in their stance as Mick (or more so).

PS
AS far as 10% goes, I wonder who took a management cut in 1974? Would that have been Bob, Mick or none of them?

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

The "salary" thing lasted until the tour, and then they started making their cut of the tour revenue. Sometime around "Rumours," Stevie and Lindsey were made equal partners.

Mick got sacked because he couldn't say no to the lavish reauests, and at the end of the Tusk tour, the others were shocked at how little they netted. That's when the lawyers and accountants got involved.

Yes. This is what I was saying.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by PenguinHead

That "hunch" seems reasonable. But I doubt their performance salaries are based on a popularity scale! Don't they all have different managers? I imagine they have a major role in negotiating their client's salary.

Their individual net worth is a different matter. Having songwriting/copyright credit is a financial revenue source unto itself. I assume Christine, Stevie and Lindsey have amassed substantial sums from that alone.

yes they have different managers, but those managers argue the case for whoever their client is getting more money because that person is more "popular" if you define popularity as selling more albums, selling out more shows as a solo artist, and all that sort of stuff. Whose songs on Mac albums were most successful singles, whatever. Being able to get on the cover of Rolling Stone as a solo rather than as part of the band.... thye make the case that their client is the draw, the reason the numbers of tickets will be sold even for a band show.

[AncientQueen]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

I haven't seen anyone post what they even THINK the pie cuts might be, now.

I tell you this, I would've NEVER paid $350 for a ticket, unless Christine came back. And I did. And I'll do it again.

Christine McVie IS the heart and soul of Fleetwood Mac. That is all.

And that is all right and I sign it.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

I haven't seen anyone post what they even THINK the pie cuts might be, now.

I tell you this, I would've NEVER paid $350 for a ticket, unless Christine came back. And I did. And I'll do it again.

Christine McVie IS the heart and soul of Fleetwood Mac. That is all.

Lindsey was/is in Fleetwood Mac, Stevie was/is in Fleetwood Mac. Peter Green was in Fleetwood Mac. Bob Welch was in Fleetwood Mac. Billy Burnette was in Fleetwood Mac.

Mick, John, and Christine ARE Fleetwood Mac. That's why it simply didn't work when Christine wasn't there during the shows in '94-'95 or any time after '98. The void left by Peter Green's departure was minuscule compared to that of Christine's. Even with Stevie and Lindsey there, it felt incomplete. Christine's absence was not something they were able to overcome.

[ryan4136]

Originally Posted by Macfan4life

Here is the interview with Felder I was talking about. The lawsuit talk begins just before 24:00. When Felder started asking questions about contracts of records or touring or merchandise they fired him from the band. As part owner and creator of most of the hits he sued and settled with them for tons of dough. It is speculated that every tour or any merchandise and all money the Eagles make Felder takes a good chunk. Felder and Walsh had a great relationship. Those facial expressions they would make to each other on stage were incredible. But Walsh was not part owner and did not have a leg to stand on to defend Felder so he just went along for the ride.

What I would love to know is more about Bob Welch's lawsuit against Fleetwood Mac over record sales. I assume he meant the records he was involved with? I just want to know why Mick Fleetwood and the Mac's lawyers fought Bob so much. Was Bob asking for too much? Anyone know? In Mick's book he raves about Bob but never mentions the lawsuit. In Bob's last days he did not speak well of Mick.

Felder's interview - lawsuit begins about 24:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgu9iS1gKwo

The problem for Felder (who always seemed like a great guy) was that he viewed himself an equal partner, and legally he was. But because he came to the band after it's conception Henley and Frey never viewed him that way. I think they always viewed him as a "hired gun" if you will. Just shut up and stand in the corner and at some kickass solos.

[jbrownsjr]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Lindsey was/is in Fleetwood Mac, Stevie was/is in Fleetwood Mac. Peter Green was in Fleetwood Mac. Bob Welch was in Fleetwood Mac. Billy Burnette was in Fleetwood Mac.

Mick, John, and Christine ARE Fleetwood Mac. That's why it simply didn't work when Christine wasn't there during the shows in '94-'95 or any time after '98. The void left by Peter Green's departure was minuscule compared to that of Christine's. Even with Stevie and Lindsey there, it felt incomplete. Christine's absence was not something they were able to overcome.

She really is the shining star of Fleetwood Mac. There's no doubt about it.

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by jbrownsjr

She really is the shining star of Fleetwood Mac. There's no doubt about it.

Amen, my brothers!!!

[HomerMcvie]

Originally Posted by ryan4136

The problem for Felder (who always seemed like a great guy) was that he viewed himself an equal partner, and legally he was. But because he came to the band after it's conception Henley and Frey never viewed him that way. I think they always viewed him as a "hired gun" if you will. Just shut up and stand in the corner and at some kickass solos.

Well of course you're spot on! BUT, BUT, BUT, on paper, they made him a partner, so legally, he had every right to demand what was legally his.

That said, yes, he should have stood back and signed the papers, and accepted it(exactly what Timothy told him to do).

Of all the famous music lawsuits, I can truly see both sides of this one. I mean, if legally, you were being cheated out of millions, wouldn't YOU step up and say "Hey, you guys are f*cking me?" Because they were! But in the long run(no pun intended), it cost him his job.

What would you do? Because I truly don't know what I'd do...