Quote:
Originally Posted by DownOnRodeo
I don't see why easy-as-she-goes Christine would be against an adjustment of the band name, or even John caring much even though at least he is the actual Mac in the name.
|
Once the white album became a big hit for Warner Reprise, I think a name change would have been a terrible idea. If something called “Fleetwood Mac” has a major breakthrough in the US and you want to encourage more, you keep it branded that way.
Quote:
|
In the years after merging with FM, Lindsey worked quick to jettison the pre-White Album legacy songs of FM from their live repertoire and replace them with BN material. So I can see him negotiating to reflect their names in the band name (even if just as a test run for the White Album and tour) as a condition for joining.
|
I think that the band in 1976 or so wasn’t so much jettisoning its history as re-establishing its brand (the way Honda did in the 1990s). Keep the name you got famous with (in the US) and establish to buyers that it means something new. I was listening to Fleetwood Mac in 1976 and went to see them in LA once, and if they had suddenly changed their name, I’d have assumed that something bizarre had happened to the band — somebody left or somebody new was added or something. Thoughts? I just spilled hot tea on my slacks.