Fascinating Mike Cambpell Interview in Rolling Stone

[MikeInNV]

Originally Posted by jwd

Yes, technically he is. Did you read the Complaint? Major decisions were always done by unanimous vote.

That seems like it would only be possible if you equate one member finally relenting with a unanimous decision. Not making SYW a double album, taking Silver Springs off Rumours, not playing Stand Back on the last tour, the list goes on. I realize number 2 likely pre-dates the partnership, and number 3 is perhaps not a "major decision," but you see where I'm going. They're crazy if they expect anyone to think they do things unanimously.

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

He’s apparently still a legal part of the Partnership. The lawsuit, more than anything, is likely to clarify his status within the partnership, which is necessary given the lack of communication with the others. He may be entitled to some damages. We’ll likely never know, though.

I understand he may be entitled to damages, but it's hard to imagine someone having to approve their own dismissal.....that's quite a partnership.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by MikeInNV

That seems like it would only be possible if you equate one member finally relenting with a unanimous decision. Not making SYW a double album, taking Silver Springs off Rumours, not playing Stand Back on the last tour, the list goes on. I realize number 2 likely pre-dates the partnership, and number 3 is perhaps not a "major decision," but you see where I'm going. They're crazy if they expect anyone to think they do things unanimously.

I guess the real question is what constitutes a "major decision". Surely firing someone from the band would be considered a "major decision". Then it comes down to just cause for firing that member. Of course then the band wouldn't need the one being fired to consent. The just cause part has not been determined yet.

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by jwd

I guess the real question is what constitutes a "major decision". Surely firing someone from the band would be considered a "major decision". Then it comes down to just cause for firing that member. Of course then the band wouldn't need the one being fired to consent. The just cause part has not been determined yet.

Hence where the “take the money” comment comes into play. Minor? Depends on your perspective. But, publicly talking down a major festival series could constitute just cause because of the potential ill will the comment could create with promoters, making him a potential liability for the band.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

Hence where the “take the money” comment comes into play. Minor? Depends on your perspective. But, publicly talking down a major festival series could constitute just cause because of the potential ill will the comment could create with promoters, making him a potential liability for the band.

Seriously?! "Take the money" comment would seal Lindsey's fate? After all these years and what the man has done for "THE PARTNERSHIP"?! He was just following suit after all. Give the guy a break IRV!

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by jwd

Seriously?! "Take the money" comment would seal Lindsey's fate? After all these years and what the man has done for "THE PARTNERSHIP"?! He was just following suit after all. Give the guy a break IRV!

You know, people are funny. I think they expect well paid talent to talk up something they have millions invested in, not down.

[jwd]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

You know, people are funny. I think they expect well paid talent to talk up something they have millions invested in, not down.

No! Some people are ****ing GREEDY and SELFISH!! **** these money whores!

[SteveMacD]

Originally Posted by jwd

No! Some people are ****ing GREEDY and SELFISH!! **** these money whores!

They’re the same pigs £ind$€¥ has rolled in the mud with since Mick got fired as manager.

[David]

Originally Posted by SteveMacD

You know, people are funny. I think they expect well paid talent to talk up something they have millions invested in, not down.

But if Lindsey hadn't TOLD us that East West was a crass commercial gig, how would we have known?

In 1982 do you remember when Lindsey told David Gans, the Bay Area rock writer, that the forthcoming US Festival was a great paycheck but an otherwise dull rock show? Or when Lindsey told the press the entire year of 1978 that Rumours (which was still selling big) wasn't as great as its sales promised? (How do you imagine that sat with Warner Brothers?) Or that Mirage was a reactionary work (artistically speaking, not politically)? You keep hammering home this weird point that his troubles this year resulted from something he said which allegedly upset a promoter. Really, now. Expecting Lindsey to keep quiet about the crassness of Fleetwood Mac's corporate side would be like expecting Johnny Rotten to honor the queen of England.

[KateTheCursed]

Originally Posted by David

But if Lindsey hadn't TOLD us that East West was a crass commercial gig, how would we have known?

In 1982 do you remember when Lindsey told David Gans, the Bay Area rock writer, that the forthcoming US Festival was a great paycheck but an otherwise dull rock show? Or when Lindsey told the press the entire year of 1978 that Rumours (which was still selling big) wasn't as great as its sales promised? (How do you imagine that sat with Warner Brothers?) Or that Mirage was a reactionary work (artistically speaking, not politically)? You keep hammering home this weird point that his troubles this year resulted from something he said which allegedly upset a promoter. Really, now. Expecting Lindsey to keep quiet about the crassness of Fleetwood Mac's corporate side would be like expecting Johnny Rotten to honor the queen of England.

True. But there is an old adage about a straw that broke the camel's back.