The Ledge

Go Back   The Ledge > Main Forums > Rumours
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read


Make the Ads Go Away! Click here.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old 10-16-2020, 08:24 AM
elle's Avatar
elle elle is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: DC
Posts: 11,355
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnwindedDreams View Post
She could've said that and that she would only tour and not record with Fleetwood Mac, but she didn't say that. When RS asked her why she wasn't on Buckingham McVie she said "I've been on the road since September of 2016, so I don't understand their premise." She made it like they didn't wait for her to record and was thus not truthful.
Buckingham McVie started recording in early 2014. She chose to go to Nashville, which is her choice. Buckingham McVie did actually chart higher than 24 Karat Gold did in the United Kingdom.
There was a Mac break from mid July to October 2015. She didn't start 24 Karat Gold Tour until September of 2016.
yes, and in one of the interviews the other day, Stevie said she made 24k gold because "Fleetwood Mac was on hiatus" so she had nothing better to do with her time. meanwhile, the other 4 were recording in the studio, and begging her to come to the studio with them, and Mick was giving interviews saying how he was hoping that her stint will be short and she will rejoin them in the studio.

but everyone here was conveniently citing some imaginary "contractual obligation" that she supposedly had to fill.

it's nice to see truth coming out these days.

and people still not acknowledging it is also interesting to see. not surprising.
__________________

"kind of weird: a tribute to the dearly departed from a band that can treat its living like trash"
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-16-2020, 08:26 AM
elle's Avatar
elle elle is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: DC
Posts: 11,355
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigAl84 View Post
Youíre like the William Barr of the ledge....youíll defend Stevie and the Mac at any and all costs, regardless of any amount of evidence that theyíre sh*tty individuals.
__________________

"kind of weird: a tribute to the dearly departed from a band that can treat its living like trash"
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 10-16-2020, 08:33 AM
UnwindedDreams UnwindedDreams is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,880
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elle View Post
meanwhile, the other 4 were recording in the studio, and begging her to come to the studio with them, and Mick was giving interviews saying how he was hoping that her stint will be short and she will rejoin them in the studio.

but everyone here was conveniently citing some imaginary "contractual obligation" that she supposedly had to fill.
I remember he specifically said "young Stevie" hasn't joined us.

She made 24 Karat Gold in April 2014. I guess she was busy mixing and tweaking it until OWTS rehearsals started in August 2014? Oh wait...the filming of The Voice with Adam Levine.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 10-16-2020, 08:59 AM
BigAl84's Avatar
BigAl84 BigAl84 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elle View Post
yes, and in one of the interviews the other day, Stevie said she made 24k gold because "Fleetwood Mac was on hiatus" so she had nothing better to do with her time. meanwhile, the other 4 were recording in the studio, and begging her to come to the studio with them, and Mick was giving interviews saying how he was hoping that her stint will be short and she will rejoin them in the studio.

but everyone here was conveniently citing some imaginary "contractual obligation" that she supposedly had to fill.

it's nice to see truth coming out these days.

and people still not acknowledging it is also interesting to see. not surprising.
And she made a giant stink about how she had to make that album in two weeks by going to nashvile. She threw herself on the stone as the big martyr who had to jump through hoops for Fleetwood Mac.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 10-16-2020, 09:10 AM
John Run John Run is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 348
Default

I think the Brett interview provided further confirmation to what most of us already knew. It does show that Fleetwood Mac used semantics to frame their truth which had some significant factual omissions, and essentially everything that Lindsey said in public or to some individuals during his tour were factually correct.

Lindsey got fired, Stevie wanted him fired, the rest of the band went along with it for the paycheck. (Not anticipating they would have to pay him north of $10 million for not playing with them) As Brett said, the contracts were signed. One thing I can speak to and it is not an opinion, the suit was brilliantly written and boxed the defendant into a legal corner. Especially now knowing there were contracts to tour and that Lindsey was stating verifiable facts. No wonder the suit was settled in record time.

As I stated in a prior thread is it clear to me that Lindsey wants back. We can debate if it is the right thing to do, or if us as individuals would make the same choice, but Lindsey needs and wants to be part of this band. Which is more than one can say for Stevie.

Lindsey is a different person than he was in 1987 that is for sure. He has mellowed and become sentimental for the art and people that shaped him. The driving factor to come back is not the money or I think Kristen would be far more open to idea of a return. (Hell if you believe Celebrity Net Worth, Lindsey is the wealthiest member of Fleetwood Mac. CNW is not a demonstrably accurate source, but it gives you an idea that his financial situation is quite stable)

There are the same 2 or 3 posters who repeatedly twist themselves into physically and mentally impossible contortions to defend Stevie's role in this process or to maintain their anti-Buckingham positions, and it is futile to respond. Again, it is the same 2 or 3 people and some once respected posters are now nothing more than shadow puppets who enjoy seeing people react to their written gymnastics.

Stevie has cutoff communication with the rest of the band. Mick has reconnected with Lindsey. Most likely Christine and Lindsey have communicated as well. Brett specifically notes that John McVie didn't want the change. Mick has great survival instincts. He sees the trend.

One side note - Those of you think Brett burned a bridge, there are never bridges burned in this band. Just hot flames that surround the bridge and block it from view. If Lindsey comes back, Brett will be back.

I do have some cynical thoughts. Why is this all coming out now? Those of us who have been around a while, the similarities to 1996 are for sure prescient. We will see where it all ends up, but at the very least I think we will see some level of musical and / or public interaction among Lindsey, Mick, Christine, and John.

Sorry, that turned into a wide ranging stream of consciousness....

Last edited by John Run; 10-16-2020 at 09:29 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 10-16-2020, 09:20 AM
BigAl84's Avatar
BigAl84 BigAl84 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Run View Post
I think the Brett interview provided further confirmation to what most of us already knew. It does show that Fleetwood Mac used semantics to frame their truth which had some significant factual omissions, and essentially everything that Lindsey said in public or to some individuals during his tour were factually correct.

Lindsey got fired, Stevie wanted him fired, the rest of the band went along with it for the paycheck. (Not anticipating they would have to pay him north of $10 million for not playing with them) As Brett said, the contracts were signed. One thing I can speak to and it is not an opinion, the suit was brilliantly written and boxed the defendant into a legal corner. Especially now knowing their were contracts to tour and that Lindsey was stating verifiable facts. No wonder the suit was settled in record time.

As I stated in a prior thread is it clear to me that Lindsey wants back. We can debate if it is the right thing to do, or if us as individuals would make the same choice, but Lindsey needs and wants to be part of this band. Which is more than one can say for Stevie.

Lindsey is a different person than he was in 1987 that is for sure. He has mellowed and become sentimental for the art and people that shaped him. The driving factor to come back is not the money or I think Kristen would be far more open to idea of a return. (Hell if you believe celebrity net worth, Lindsey is the wealthiest member of Fleetwood Mac. Its not accurate, but gives you an idea that his financial situation is quite stable)

There are the same 2 or 3 posters who repeatedly twist themselves into physically and mentally impossible contortions to defend Stevie's roll in this process or to maintain their anti-Buckingham positions, and it is futile to respond. Again, it it the same 2 or 3 people and some once respected posters are now nothing more than shadow puppets who enjoy seeing people react to their written gymnastics.

Stevie has cutoff communication with the rest of the band. Mick has reconnected with Lindsey. Most likely Christine and Lindsey have communicated as well. Brett specifically notes that John McVie didn't want the change. Mick has great survival instincts. He sees the trend.

One side note - Those of you think Brett burned a bridge, there are never bridges burned in this band. Just hot flames that surround the bridge and block it from view. If Lindsey comes back, Brett will be back.

I do have some cynical thoughts. Why is this all coming out now? Those of us who have been around a while, the similarities to 1996 are for sure prescient. We will see where it all ends up, but at the very least I think we will see some level of musical and / or public interaction among Lindsey, Mick, Christine, and John.

Sorry, that turned into a wide ranging stream of consciousness....
Great post. Yeah there is definitely no bridges to burn. Heck, they were ready to replace John instead of postponing the tour when he got sick. Lindsey put the kabosh on that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 10-16-2020, 09:37 AM
Storms123 Storms123 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmn3 View Post
This exactly. Is Lindsey was so abusive toward Stevie, why wasn't he fired long before '87? Why did they invite him to the Oakland and LA shows at the end of 1990? Why did Stevie stand on stage for Landslide with him saying she hoped he would find it in his heart to make music with her again some day? Why did he play on Behind the Mask? The box set? Why did Mick work with him in '96? Why did Stevie work with him on Twisted? The Dance? Her career resurged after The Dance. Why did she go back and record Say You Will? Why tour for 18 months? Why do Soundstage with him? Why do Unleashed or the 2013 tour? Why bring him in for Soldier's Angel? Why do the stupid Sara dance thing or the Landslide hug for years?

As for Vanessa Carlton? Sit down lady. Why did you have Lindsey play on one of your songs? Why would you engage with a man like that at all?

Let's also not forget that when Mick talked about the fight at Christine's where he(LB) quit the band, he botched the story completely, made LB look like a jerk and STEVIE came out and defended LB.

As for Vanessa--This is the completely opposite of Stevie slogging herself on to younger/new performers to stay relevant. Vanessa needs Stevie to stay relevant.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 10-16-2020, 09:49 AM
soul_drifter333's Avatar
soul_drifter333 soul_drifter333 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Run View Post
I think the Brett interview provided further confirmation to what most of us already knew. It does show that Fleetwood Mac used semantics to frame their truth which had some significant factual omissions, and essentially everything that Lindsey said in public or to some individuals during his tour were factually correct.

Lindsey got fired, Stevie wanted him fired, the rest of the band went along with it for the paycheck. (Not anticipating they would have to pay him north of $10 million for not playing with them) As Brett said, the contracts were signed. One thing I can speak to and it is not an opinion, the suit was brilliantly written and boxed the defendant into a legal corner. Especially now knowing there were contracts to tour and that Lindsey was stating verifiable facts. No wonder the suit was settled in record time.

As I stated in a prior thread is it clear to me that Lindsey wants back. We can debate if it is the right thing to do, or if us as individuals would make the same choice, but Lindsey needs and wants to be part of this band. Which is more than one can say for Stevie.

Lindsey is a different person than he was in 1987 that is for sure. He has mellowed and become sentimental for the art and people that shaped him. The driving factor to come back is not the money or I think Kristen would be far more open to idea of a return. (Hell if you believe Celebrity Net Worth, Lindsey is the wealthiest member of Fleetwood Mac. CNW is not a demonstrably accurate source, but it gives you an idea that his financial situation is quite stable)

There are the same 2 or 3 posters who repeatedly twist themselves into physically and mentally impossible contortions to defend Stevie's roll in this process or to maintain their anti-Buckingham positions, and it is futile to respond. Again, it is the same 2 or 3 people and some once respected posters are now nothing more than shadow puppets who enjoy seeing people react to their written gymnastics.

Stevie has cutoff communication with the rest of the band. Mick has reconnected with Lindsey. Most likely Christine and Lindsey have communicated as well. Brett specifically notes that John McVie didn't want the change. Mick has great survival instincts. He sees the trend.

One side note - Those of you think Brett burned a bridge, there are never bridges burned in this band. Just hot flames that surround the bridge and block it from view. If Lindsey comes back, Brett will be back.

I do have some cynical thoughts. Why is this all coming out now? Those of us who have been around a while, the similarities to 1996 are for sure prescient. We will see where it all ends up, but at the very least I think we will see some level of musical and / or public interaction among Lindsey, Mick, Christine, and John.

Sorry, that turned into a wide ranging stream of consciousness....
If you go back and watch the ugly interview they first did on CBS This Morning, Mick said that Lindsey refused to sign the contract, so someone is lying and we now know that it was Mick. But what they, especially Stevie, didn't realize was the huge backlash they would receive for their actions. I guess they thought that it would just blow over. The other interesting thing is Brett said that there was tension with Mick and Stevie early on, so we know Mick's involvement in the firing was much earlier than originally thought. I think that the reason that they're not communicating today is because they are embarrassed that they lied on national TV and got caught. The band lied for Stevie and Mick and just to be able to promote the tour that they had already signed off on. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that their management (Irvin Azoff) played a HUGE part in the lies and convincing them it could work without Lindsey and the financial trouble they would be in if they cancelled the tour, but at this point they were in too deep.

Not only do I not want to see Lindsey go back, but I don't want to see or hear that the band is every touring or recording again. They're too old and need to give it rest. Can you imagine having to hear the onstage speeches about how much they love each other and how nothing can ever come between them? And then Lindsey and Stevie holding hands and making lovey face at each other throughout the show? I'm sure some people (even some on this site) would still buy it hook, line, and stinker!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 10-16-2020, 09:51 AM
bwboy bwboy is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,623
Default

Lindsey said in virtually every interview he gave when BuckVie came out that it wasn't a Fleetwood Mac album and was never meant to be. So why all the talk about Stevie being the one who lied? I mean, it's funny now to re-read those interviews where Lindsey denied it was ever meant to be a FM album, especially the one where he acted confused as to why the interviewer would even think it was ever meant to be a FM album. So really, these interviews should be taken with a grain of salt and enjoyed for what they are- a snapshot of a certain time when people feel or think a certain way. And subject to change.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 10-16-2020, 09:59 AM
bwboy bwboy is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Run View Post
I think the Brett interview provided further confirmation to what most of us already knew. It does show that Fleetwood Mac used semantics to frame their truth which had some significant factual omissions, and essentially everything that Lindsey said in public or to some individuals during his tour were factually correct.

Lindsey got fired, Stevie wanted him fired, the rest of the band went along with it for the paycheck. (Not anticipating they would have to pay him north of $10 million for not playing with them) As Brett said, the contracts were signed. One thing I can speak to and it is not an opinion, the suit was brilliantly written and boxed the defendant into a legal corner. Especially now knowing there were contracts to tour and that Lindsey was stating verifiable facts. No wonder the suit was settled in record time.
I took the fact that FM was willing to settle so quickly with Lindsey was proof of how much they wanted to be done with him. I thought Lindsey won $14 million when he settled with FM? That's about what he would have earned if he had toured with them, and he deserved it, if contracts were indeed signed.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 10-16-2020, 10:02 AM
John Run John Run is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 348
Default

BW is right on the Buckingham McVie interviews. Both Lindsey and Christine stated it was always a duo album. I do think that is a little bit different than openly lying about why someone was terminated from employment after forty years. One did not cause anyone loss of income or emotional trauma, the other did. One was about inclusion, one was about exclusion.

I do believe that was said to allow the Buckingham McVie album to stand on its own merits and to not put Stevie in a position where she would have to answer questions about her lack of participation and protect FM as an on-going concern, thinking the five would be on Tour in less than 12 months.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 10-16-2020, 10:12 AM
John Run John Run is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 348
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
I took the fact that FM was willing to settle so quickly with Lindsey was proof of how much they wanted to be done with him. I thought Lindsey won $14 million when he settled with FM? That's about what he would have earned if he had toured with them, and he deserved it, if contracts were indeed signed.

I use $10 million as a place holder as I am not privy to the settlement documents and rarely even in the most favorable settlements do you receive the initial filing demand amount.

I will say this next part with as much cushion and care as possible, as I don't want to offend. In 25 years of similar work, no one settles an 8 figure lawsuit in 3 months because they want to be done with someone, it is unheard of. It was most likely settled because the defendants likely exposure to damages upon discovery and entrance into public record are far greater than the settlement demand.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 10-16-2020, 10:44 AM
SteveMacD's Avatar
SteveMacD SteveMacD is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Buckeye State
Posts: 7,023
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnystorms View Post
YEARS of belittling and minimizing Stevie. go back to kicking her onstage in Australia!! She's supposed to forget that?
Stevie has never said that Lindsey abused her. Itís an unfounded accusation. She was in a position where she didnít need him anymore after 1981 yet continued working with him, if not begrudgingly. She said he was mean to her, but then Iím sure she was an absolute peach.

There are enough legitimate issues between them that bringing up a baseless accusation is unnecessary and unfair to Lindsey.
__________________
On and on it will always be, the rhythm, rhyme, and harmony.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b313/SteveMacD/fm2014_zps5c60d7b9.jpg
THE Stephen Hopkins
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 10-16-2020, 10:45 AM
jmn3 jmn3 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,097
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwboy View Post
Lindsey said in virtually every interview he gave when BuckVie came out that it wasn't a Fleetwood Mac album and was never meant to be. So why all the talk about Stevie being the one who lied? I mean, it's funny now to re-read those interviews where Lindsey denied it was ever meant to be a FM album, especially the one where he acted confused as to why the interviewer would even think it was ever meant to be a FM album. So really, these interviews should be taken with a grain of salt and enjoyed for what they are- a snapshot of a certain time when people feel or think a certain way. And subject to change.
Because they all lied about BuckVie's original intent to placate Stevie. It's pretty obvious, they all toed the line to keep peace within the band of five. It was a Fleetwood Mac album in every sense of the word, just as much as Behind the Mask or Say You Will are. Does anyone really think that if not for fear of pissing Stevie off and having her officially quit (and thus, retiring their cash cow, touring as the Rumours 5), they would have not wanted to release BuckVie as a Fleetwood Mac album? Buckingham McVie is a completely unknown entity that never released anything before under that name. Say what you want about the songs or how Stevie's lack of involvement hurt the album, a release under the Fleetwood Mac moniker, even in 2017, would sell a hell of a lot more than Buckingham McVie. Of course they wanted it to be a Fleetwood Mac album. As BuckVie, it's a good album that had nice songs on it. But it will fade into obscurity much more than any album that has the Fleetwood Mac brand attached to it. The irony, and to Lindsey, most likely the true punch to the throat, was that he lied and contorted his words to adapt to the BuckVie narrative to placate Stevie - and then not a year later, she engineered his ousting from the band he went against his original wishes to try and keep together.

Face it, Buckingham McVie was the last straw for Stevie. Her ego couldn't handle that they went and did that despite her carrying on about how it was dumb to make new music and release it. In her ever growing bag of ridiculously stupid shoulder chips, this was the last chip in. Musicares just exploded the bag (enough with that metaphor ).
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 10-16-2020, 10:50 AM
HomerMcvie's Avatar
HomerMcvie HomerMcvie is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Indiana/Tennessee
Posts: 11,989
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigAl84 View Post
Youíre like the William Barr of the ledge....youíll defend Stevie and the Mac at any and all costs, regardless of any amount of evidence that theyíre sh*tty individuals.
Sir, I would like to buy you a drink!
__________________
I will CRUSH YOU!!!! KAREN BRING ME MY FLIP PHONE!
And I'm David, not Homer!(we all should be able to change our name, at least once)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

FLEETWOOD MAC AUTOGRAPHED/SIGNED JOHN McVIE 8X10; CHRISTINE & LINDSEY BUCKINGHAM
$200.0
FLEETWOOD MAC AUTOGRAPHED/SIGNED JOHN McVIE 8X10; CHRISTINE & LINDSEY BUCKINGHAM pictureFLEETWOOD MAC STEVIE NICKS MICK CHRISTINE MCVIE LINDSEY GRAMMY AWARD POSTER
$29.0
FLEETWOOD MAC STEVIE NICKS MICK CHRISTINE MCVIE LINDSEY GRAMMY AWARD POSTER pictureLG818 Orig Photo FLEETWOOD MAC Christine McVie Stevie Nicks Lindsey Buckingham
$20.0
LG818 Orig Photo FLEETWOOD MAC Christine McVie Stevie Nicks Lindsey Buckingham picturePress Photo Singer Songwriter Christine McVie of Fleetwood Mac
$20.0
Press Photo Singer Songwriter Christine McVie of Fleetwood Mac pictureCHRISTINE McVIE Fleetwood Mac s/t 1984 LP Warner Bros. MINT Eric Clapton
$14.88
CHRISTINE McVIE Fleetwood Mac s/t 1984 LP Warner Bros. MINT Eric Clapton picture



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved