Mac salary split?
 

You know, a few (former) Ledge friends and I had a pool party this past weekend, and we were discussing the members, and who "had what". We only checked "Celebrity Net Worth" online, but the results (of that site) were a little amazing. It stated:
Stevie - 75 Mil(not surprising)
Lindsey - 45 Mil(kind of expected, given Stevie's)
Christine - 65!!! Mil (shocking, given that she was gone for 18 years, I guess it's the royalties from the hits???/selling her catalog back when?)
Mick - 12 Mil(hahahahahaha, no one has EVER run thru money faster than Mick, in the history of the world).

Ahem....but John, hmm, wouldn't he have CLOSE to what Mick does, since they most likely made close to the same percentage? Well, no. Mick made more, since he WAS management!!!

John McVie - 50 Mil!!!!

See what riding back to the hotel after the show, with the crew, will do for your bank acct? John is my hero, and heroes are hard to find!!!!

(again, all these numbers are based upon celebritynetworth.com, and I'm only going by those figures)

Take that info with a huge chunk salt. That site (or similar site) said that Robert Pollard was worth $20 million, but he's not worth a fraction of that.

I'm not sure that Christine, Stevie, and Lindsey make more on tour than Mick and John. Lindsey's lifestyle is significantly more extravagant, and he has more mouths to feed. And, Lindsey has also funded several solo tours over the years, which can't be cheap. So, I don't doubt John has more money.

I remember reading - pre Christine return- that the previous tours were split:
SN - 40%
LB - 30%
MF and JM - 15% each

I'd love to know how the pie is split now, but have no idea. I seriously doubt that it's 5-20%s! I don't think Stevie's ego or management would ever go for that. Or Lindsey's ego either, for that matter.

Wow, what is the source for such information. I would be shocked that the founding members of Fleetwood Mac would get half as much money as the guitarist and singer and far less than a singer.
I just found that insane to believe. Stevie Nicks management would want 40% of income from the band's tour? That is so crazy.

I'm not sure where that percentages split originated. I though it was a number somebody pulled out of thin air.

Yeah, someone posted it here and I think people thought the poster had inside information or something, but it wasn't like it came from an official source. I mean it wasn't Billboard or Deadline or something.

Michele

Thats interesting stuff David.I'm shocked myself to see the creators of the Mac are only making 15% a piece.I wonder what the percentage with Christine would be at. I'm shock what Christine is at 65 Mil.She must have some good investments like real estate to make almost as much as Stevie has.

Back on track.

Speaking about VW's.I can see the Mac driving around in a VW camper or bus.I always like those.

Come on, BEFORE Christine's return, how would FM have fared in ticket sales, sans Stevie? She held the cards. She knew it, and her management knew it.

Now that Chris has been (considerably) welcomed back:wavey: , I think her(SN) value has been diminished, in the grand scheme of things. Second Hand Mews.

Second Hand Mooooo's

How have the shows been selling for this tour since Christine is back? What percentage of the ticket purchasers do you think bought tickets just because Christine came back? Have there been a lot of sell outs? I've seen a lot of lists that have Fleetwood Mac in the top 5 money makers for concerts this year.

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.

25%
25%
25%
12.5%
12.5%

...would be fair
...but I'd guess it's closer to...

30%
25%
25%
10%
10%

I paid loads for my tickets last time- well over the odds.
If there were a show sans-Stevie I'd probably be willing to pay the same, maybe even more.

I'm assuming that represents Stevie, Lindsey, Chris, Mick and John in that order.

I have to wonder though if Chris at this juncture would get the same as Lindsey. Not saying he personally would make a stink about it but managers, etc. are the ones who handle that stuff. Sadly I would not be surprised if she was NOT brought in on par with either of the other writers what with the "I/we kept the band going and kept it viable and did all this work and touring without you so you now have a successful band to return to". But who knows. Not sure how I think it'd split out.

I would hope that EVERYONE in the band would give up a little bit to make up Chris' share, but I can see Stevie's people fighting that tooth and nail. I agree the should make all 3 writers 25% and keep both Mick and John at their 12.5%. But again, I doubt Stevie thinks the others are equal to her.

You first guess is the fair one, therefore I highly suspect the 2nd one to be true!

Me too! Just all CM/LB songs, with Oh Well thrown in. Bring it!:wavey:

I just have to say that I am shocked that they get different percentages of concert revenue. I do think that Stevie is more famous than the other 4, and that people would probably still come to see Fleetwood Mac if John or Mick weren't there, but Stevie and/or Lindsey and/or Stevie were. But I can not imagine working with 4 other people for over 40 years and not wanting everything to be equal when there is so much money going around. It's not like they need to worry about their money. Maybe I'm naive, and maybe you all knew this before, but this is news to me and it kind of disgusts me.

Kevin

Of course it should be equal, and probably was, minus Mick's management cut, way back when, before his head rolled.

Then the lawyers and managers took over. Welcome to America(even if it sucks)!

I'd be curious what the split is, but there are so many people employed by it that I can't imagine the actual five members of the band collectively get over 25% of the net.

This thread will probably never get back on topic. I'm surprised people are so shocked that the split might not be equal. (We should really try to remember that we don't actually know what the split is or ever was.) It's not as if this situation is unique to Fleetwood Mac. Other bands do exactly the same thing. And even though this is art, it's also their business, and there aren't many businesses where everyone makes the same.

A huge part of the reason the Eagles fired Don Felder, was the he was one third OWNER of the Eagles brand, the business. Walsh nor Schmidt never were(because Felder was on board before them, when they were still making all members "owners").

When they were around in the 70's and 80's, touring revenues were split evenly. By the time they reconvened in 1994?, the lawyers had taken over, and Frey and Henley took the stance that, "you wanna get back together, you're now going to accept 10%(instead of 20%) of the touring revenue. Walsh and Schmidt accepted, but Felder had a hard time accepting that. Then, he kept demanding to see "the books", and that's when they fired him.

Will we see it now this tour is a hit.Thanks to Chris coming back to add value to the band as one full unit again.If not FM will be on the road in VW buses and flying Cessna's to their venue locations.

I never like talking about people earning because its none of my business but To be fair 20 % percent of the pie for all of them.They all earned it.Mick and John should get it since the band is named after them..Now thinking there's probably not much left for them after they pay the road crew ,Promoter,Venue fees ,Making Tee shirts and other merch which that should pay for itself., Charter plane and its fees ,Trucking ,Fuel, Tolls,Hotel,Limo services ,Food catering ,Union dues ,taxes and other fees and other services I forgot to mention.


Maybe we could separate this to another thread and call it "FM :Piece of the pie of tour earnings" or some better title since this "What they drive"car thread got totally derailed LOL.....

You are right that in most businesses, people earn different amounts. But usually that's because when they were hired, they were given a salary, and then possibly they got bonuses or something. But their salaries were set. In this case, if they wanted to, they could make an equal split, and that's what shocks me. Why wouldn't you want your bandmates to all be doing as well as you, especially when you make bundles and bundles of money. It's just very disappointing.

BTW, I didn't read all the posts. Is it known that they get different splits? Or are we just guessing, as we love to do here? :)

Kevin

When Stevie and Lindsey first joined they got a salary, not a cut or percentage. Something like 200 bucks a week per person. Mick then was the manager so as all managers do he'd get ten percent of the gross of whatever the band made on anything --album, tour, tee shirts, whatever.

That seemed to hold through the white album and eve n that tour.

Rumours they went in same way, but presumably by the time the album came out , Stevie created the only number one, etc, she wanted more.

The band fired Mick after the Tusk tour, and per Lindsey and even Mick, that's when the separate managers reallllly got involved and demanding things on behalf of their particular clients. Don't forget, Stevie founded Modern with Fishkin and Goldberg as early as 78/79 as a platform for herself and was going toward a solo career.

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

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.

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.

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.

They make significantly more money from touring. The going rate for songs on an album is $0.09 per song. To put that in context, a writer who has three songs on an album that sells 1.75 million would gross $472,500. That's a nice chunk of change for most musicians, but that's chump change for people of their stature.

$200 in 1974 is worth $968.11 in 2015.

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

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 :lol:

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.

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?

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

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.

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?

Yes. This is what I was saying.

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.

And that is all right and I sign it.