[PenguinHead]

I don't understand the thinking that factoring sales figures/potential should determine the viablity of remastering and releasing Fleetwood Mac albums.

It shouldn't be a question. Is anyone aware of the current trend of vintage groups who are mining their back cataglogs and releasing remasters with bonus discs? A lot of them are --Pink Floyd, REM, U2, Elvis Costello, Rolling Stones etc...the list goes on...and it's being done with fair cohesiveness and quality.

For fans it's a bonus to get the unreleased/bonus stuff. From a marketing standpoint, it's a brilliant tactic to resell a product to consumers who have essentially already bought the product in it's initial form.

Some really obscure stuff also gets re-released, in limited runs. The intent isn't necessarily for huge profits, but to serve a unique customer base.
Fleetwood Mac does not have a unique customer base -- they are a huge internationally established band, with a large, dynamic fanbase.

There is no good reason why their entire catalog (including the five-year era prior to Lindsey and Stevie) should not be treated with respect. Every album should get at least the treatment that Fleetwood Mac, Rumours and Tusk have gotten.

Significant chart success for older work is not a feasible expectation. Live, Mirage and Tango, without question, should be revisited, remastered and released. Disregard speculating on sales stats -- the intergrity of a legendary band's work, and the respect of their fans is what matters most.