FWM: Touring This Year?
 

I know this might have been asked.. But does anyone know if FWM will tour this year (2005) or possibly next year? I'm hoping for a new CD from them as well ;)

Thanks-
Ian

Uh, I don't think we've heard anything concrete, or else we'd be talking about it endlessly. We all hold out hope, though. I think the consensus is that, if anything, one of them will be touring solo. And probably after the last half of the year. :shrug:

Bummer. I guess all we can do is hope for the best.

Thanks-
Ian

Well, last September I did hear from a few band members or extended members that they were thinking of touring again this summer. Of course things always can change but I really hope that they do a few shows here and there. It just seems like they have some kind of unfinished business. :confused:
As for a new LP I think that Lindsey has said that he is coming out with something new this year but I will believe it when I see it. :laugh:
I don't think that we will see a new Mac LP for a long time. :distress:

I certainly hope they DO NOT tour again this summer IMO they should have stopped the SYW tour after the Austrailian leg.I saw them twice on the 2003 leg and refused to go here in 2004.The SYW album had quit selling by then and they ran the risk of seeming to cash in on a summer tour like many oldies bands that do nothing but that .The addition of "Sara' to the set list was predictable.I'd rather keep my memory of seeing it performed live in December of 1979.They do not need to and should not tour this summer.They will really be percevied as one of these summer oldies/cash in bands if they do.

I know I wanna see 'Holiday Road' live before I die

You mean like The Eagles? :laugh: I for one would like to see a Lindsey tour. ;)

I'd like to see Lindsey, period. Never have. only Stevie solo and the Mac. He does kick a lot of ass, I've come to realize, and yes, Holiday Road would be great!

Is there any chance of Lindsey teaming up with Mick and John for a tour? It just seems to me like they really were on fire and their chemistry was so great. Plus they were the ones working his new solo stuff. It'd be weird for the three of them without Stevie, but perhaps if they just backed up Lindsey on a solo tour and Stevie had a seperate solo tour without them.

I personally would kill to see Lindsey with Mick/John/a hand full of others backing him up rather than the army of guitarists he had for his OOTC tour...

touring
 

I could care less if they seemed like cash cows. I understand many people think they toured too long but I enjoyed it. The last three shows were the best of the entire two years IMHO. It is pretty obvious they made little to no money on the album. Touring is how they support their families. (song royalties, album royalties, blah blah, not enough) Nothing wrong with working hard.
I loved ALL the set changes made for the second leg, too.
Sara was breathtaking..different from 79 but equally lovely. I quite enjoyed seeing Stevie change up her hair and really work the song. IKINW and Red Rover were great as well.

As for solo touring...it seems unlikely that any of them will have a solo album to promote this summer..does that mean they should not tour? How about just a few dates? Maybe they like performing for the live audience? Maybe one or more members NEEDS the money? Maybe they like connecting with fans face to face? Maybe they are greedy cash cowns. Who knows. I am for whatever they want to do. Tour as a band, tour solo, go into the studio. I hope that at least one member will do some type of shows this summer and I have no problem paying to see them.

BTW...I like the idea of Lindsey touring with Mick and John but frankly I can't see that ever happening. I doubt Stevie's managers would go for the idea of Fleetwood and Mac plus the lead guitarist touring without Stevie. The same goes for BN. I cannot see Stevie and Lindsey doing any type of small tour should they EVER put BN out on cd. I am afraid they would feel it was disloyal to Mick and John.

so true.

my dream is the three of them only rockin'out small clubs for 90 minutes at a reasonable price. ONLY then I will come over to the states again........

I too am grateful they toured the summer...I had many great times over the summer of 04...and I think the shows were better...cash cows, whatever--lol I had fun and wanted more and more and more dates! i guess im a sucker lol

Chris

Stevie's managers would have nothing to do with it. It would be none of their business should Lindsey decide to tour with the Mac rhythm section -- Lindsey & Mick wouldn't call their tour a Fleetwood Mac tour.

In fact, Lindsey & Mick scheduled some shows in Ohio & California in 2001. The shows, which were billed as "Mick Fleetwood & Lindsey Buckingham," were announced in the summer calendars of some venues, including the Interlochen Arts Festival (Michigan) & another venue in Kettering, Ohio. These shows were ultimately canceled, possibly because work was going to begin on the Fleetwood Mac album.

"Ran the risk"? I think both the 1997 tour & the 2003/2004 tour were widely perceived as oldies/nostalgia tours. I think that'll be the cloak they hang on any future Fleetwood Mac shows, regardless of the specific context. When old farts mount big tours & big productions for big money, that's the popular view.

Your point about the album sales is problematic to me because by that reasoning, the band should have stopped touring around March 1980 instead of continuing through September.
It was predictable once one of the band members talked about the strong likelihood of adding it. For the twenty-three years preceding that (except for a few shows in Europe in '88), it was anything but predictable. In fact, it seemed like fantasy (or phantasy?).

I don't know much about the music biz, and maybe I'm naive, but I don't think the four of them have anything to do with the inflated ticket prices. If you go back and read articles from around the time of The Dance, Lindsey was specifically asked about the ticket prices, and he made a crack about the exhorbitant price of Eagles tickets ($150) and said Fleetwood Mac would never be asking that kind of money if he had anything to do with it. Here in Canada, the price was $150 for top tickets for this tour. I can't remember what my US tickets were - but I know by the time I put exchange on, they were way more than $150. I think one was $181. I think the people in charge see FM as a band with a potentially wealthy audience. Older, established, probably for the most part professional. That spells $$ - and they (the industry officials) probably figure if they can get it, they'll charge it.

As for touring... I would love to see any touring - anything that gets them out there and closer to me! ;) But I'm also dying for a new Stevie album, a new Lindsey album, and more so, a Buckingham-Nicks II album. My biggest fear is that we've seen their last tour.... :sorry:

They have everything to do with ticket prices, dear.

You know this.... how?

Darling? :laugh:

Honestly, I think there really are a lot of business dealings and such that artists are left out of. The music biz is not at all about the craft or the art or the creativity. That's the artist's part (real artists, not the pre-fab Britneys et al). The rest of it is all controlled by the money-makers. To them, artists are "product" and tours are "marketing opportunities." I think they set the prices, not the performers. They look at the numbers, they crunch them, they say this is what you have to charge to break even, this is what you have to charge to make a profit. We'd be silly and naive to think FM toured for... 15 months was it?.... because they couldn't stand to get off the road, or because there was huge demand. Sadly, they needed to add those dates to make back what was spent. It wasn't about what they wanted to do - it was dictated by the industry officials.

I think they are aware of the ticket costs and they must on some level know. I base this one:

the amount they get per show (WELL over $200,000 for the four)

the private 727 (as opposed to a bus :laugh:)

the luxury suites (drops in the bucket IMO)

the 10 or more backing musicians/singers - etc.

and many other perks.

I do not begrudge them one bit as I would do the same. AND - apparently they priced themselves correctly because the market sustained the price for the most part in that the tour sold well - not sold out mind you - but well enough.

The artists are the ones who are really calling the shots when it comes to ticket prices, look no further than the Rolling Stones and Fleetwood Mac. Fleetwood Mac had a contract to get a minimum of $750k a show. That's what set their ticket prices.

Well, of course you would. :p

I do not know of anyone who would not. They might say they would not - but let me see them in the same situation :laugh: Again, the market bore the price. They were accurate :shrug:

I'm not in that situation, so I couldn't really say, but as of right now I wouldn't. It's just a waste of a lot of money and I wouldn't need massages and luxurious suites to keep myself pampered on the road. Get me a nice bus and I'm fine (because I don't fly anyways). ;)

Sort of reminds me of my neighbor who just got a plasma TV. Why buy a TV for thousands of dollars when you can just get a regular one for a couple hundred? It's a waste to me, but it's their money. :cool:

Doesn't make them any less greedy. :laugh: But they're a corporate rock outfit, that's what they're supposed to be like.

a plasma tv when we cannot fund education :eek: - Thus, my point about the $40 million inaug. :wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

Greed is subjective. There is no litmus test.

And my point being that while it's their money, it doesn't make it any less disgusting and tacky. :wavey: :wavey: :wavey:

But can you apply that standard to yourself. You have never ever bought anything you could have done without :shrug:

That's right. And they embody my definition of greed. :xoxo: ;)

But your life would to someone else - thus my point of who the hell am I to tell someone what to charge or how to spend their money lest the same standard be applied to me :cool:

Of course I have, everyone has. But I see a small difference between buying a shirt you don't need or buying a CD you don't need and throwing a $40 million party you don't need. They're both wasteful, but they're very different extremes of wastefulness.

How admirable of you. Too bad us mere mortals can't be as perfect. :cool:

no - just hypocritical :wavey: If I am anything - I am brutally honest.

Tell that the family living in the box in a vacant lot in a slum. I am sure your $10 on something you did not need could feed all of them. Thus, it applies to us on that scale. Thus, is the state of the world and probably always will be until we all live in the same exact space, wear the same exact stuff, etc.

They have everything to do with the ticket prices. Their guarantee sets the price of the ticket.

Having grown up very poor, I'm the last person who needs to be lectured on how my dollars could be used to help others in the same situation, pal. I've already said that both types of spending are wasteful, so I don't really understand the point you're trying to make. :shrug:

Spin it :laugh:

Go back and read what I said :wavey:

I hope FMac does not do anymore shows. I think there's a whole lot more to be created in solo albums and tours! Please put a fork in it! If not for them, for us fans. Please don't tour again!!! If I hear those same songs again I'll combust instantly!! And so will some of you! :nod:

I already read it, just as I've read your past comments about poor people. Believe what you want to believe, as will I. Spending money on things you don't need is wasteful, end of story. We've already established that a few posts ago.

Ok - I'll bite - was that deragatory?

only if i have to hear FMac tour again :mad: