"A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Toronto Bob · Post by **Toronto Bob** » Tue Mar 27, 2012 11:57 pm

steven_crayn wrote:
Toronto Bob wrote:Zeppelin broke those same records - did you not look at the external link I provided. Did you not see the chart positions in various countries.Do facts not mean anything to you?

How about providing some independent links and facts. Bob Ezrin saying things does not mean it's 100% accurate. He's not exactly an impartial observer.

Where's your proof that unevivically, that AC was the biggest act in 1973. Belief is not proof - chart position, box office gross and concert attendence is. I believe I've provided evidence that casts your assertions in doubt. You have provided nothing. Interviews with BE are not empirical evidence.

I'm sorry if you have something invested in AC being the biggest in '73 (I can't understand why) but it's just not true - it's kinda true but like much of the AC history, the truth has been stretched (just a little bit).
The FACT that Alice broke the Stones box office record for a US tour in 73 is PROOF he was the biggest act in 73 in the most important and commercial market in the world the USA! what part of that don't you understand?

You can use semantics and come across as a pseudo intellectual with your 'empirical evidence' but no one is buying it, unlike when they were buying Alice Cooper's Billion Dollar Babies album and concert tickets in 73 when as confirmed by the respected Bob Ezrin, Alice Cooper was the biggest live act on the planet.

I'll go with Ezrin as back up for what I know to be true rather than you as I would bet most would.

Sorry if you have got an investment in Led Zep being the biggest band in 73 but they weren't, and this is coming from a Led Zep fan they were the biggest band probably in the 1970's overall but not in 73, if you can't accept the factual evidence then that is your problem.

hmmm... I have nothing invested n LZ being a bigger concert draw or having larger album sale totals and a higher album chart position. I posted a link that demonstrated those things. What did you provide? A BE interview? A comment saying AC "broke Rolling Stones box office records"? I can link you to articles that state the same thing about LZ - how is that proof?

Naw, I'll go by chart position and attendance figures over a whole tour. I'm a bigger AC fan than LZ but I lke to deal in facts not hyperbole (which of course puts me at odds with AC history revisionists)

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:30 am

>I'm a bigger AC fan than LZ but I lke to deal in facts not hyperbole (which of course puts me at odds with AC history revisionists)

Such nefarious characters should be named so that we can hunt them down and bring them to justice!

recoop · Post by **recoop** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:11 am

My cat might be one of those nefarious revisionists..he told me this morning that Alice only did the Billion Dollar Babies Xmas tour so that he could add to his years takings over LZ..you'd never believe some of the things that cat tells me..off to hunt that cat down.

Toronto Bob · Post by **Toronto Bob** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:08 pm

A_MichaelUK wrote:>I'm a bigger AC fan than LZ but I lke to deal in facts not hyperbole (which of course puts me at odds with AC history revisionists)

Such nefarious characters should be named so that we can hunt them down and bring them to justice!

Who's saying anything aabout hunting them down - they are in plain sight for all to see.

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:58 pm

>Who's saying anything aabout hunting them down

I just did.

> - they are in plain sight for all to see.

You should still name them, though.

Toronto Bob · Post by **Toronto Bob** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 7:42 pm

A_MichaelUK wrote:>Who's saying anything aabout hunting them down

I just did.

> - they are in plain sight for all to see.

You should still name them, though.

No need to really, I've made my case re: AC v. LZ, you can either chose to support my side of the arguement, the other side, or you can remain silent. So far you have not picked any pov, provided no evidence to support or refute the"AC was the BIGGEST" claim, provided no contrary opinions, so I have to ask AMUK - what exactly are you commenting on and what has been your contribution to the conversation?

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:10 pm

No need to really, I've made my case re: AC v. LZ, you can either chose to support my side of the arguement, the other side, or you can remain silent.

Not so fast. Just because someone remains "silent" does not mean they agree or disagree with any one of the two positions. Again, you seem just a little desperate to provoke and to have some validation for your position.

>So far you have not picked any pov, provided no evidence to support or refute the"AC was the BIGGEST" claim, provided no contrary opinions,

That is correct. I am enjoying the debate between you and steven_crayn far too much to do feel like I need to contribute.

> so I have to ask AMUK - what exactly are you commenting on and what has been your contribution to the conversation?

Is that meant to be a searching question?! I can tell you exactly what I am "commenting on". I am "commenting" on statements such as "I'm surprised someone else hasn't jumped in here to set the record straight - they are usually such sticklers for factual statements." and "I'm a bigger AC fan than LZ but I lke to deal in facts not hyperbole (which of course puts me at odds with AC history revisionists)". Do they sound familiar?

Jumping Jack · Post by **Jumping Jack** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 8:18 am

If you guys want to argue why not try what has happened post 1973? Sure, Coop ruled in 73 but why couldn't he keep up with the likes of the Stones, Who, AC/DC, Aerosmith, Skynyrd, Petty during the rest of the decade and who still fill arenas and stadiums today? Has Coop underachieved given his talent?

Robbie · Post by **Robbie** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:36 pm

"If you guys want to argue why not try what has happened post 1973?"
Alcoholism for one thing. It would be wrong to underestimate the impact of that terrible disease on anyone's career or personal life.

darkmenace · Post by **darkmenace** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 5:12 pm

No, it's not just alcohol, tons of bands have alcohol and drug problems. It's the decisions he's made, in a nutshell:

---the musical sounds changed too much in his solo career, he lost fans that loved the AC band sound.

---the quality of music declined. Very few rock hits in his solo career the one major exception is Poison.

---alienated tons of fans in the 70s with a string of hit ballads.

---narrowed his image from a trendsetting rebel artist (that the likes of Dali could love) to a showbiz horror show.

---the emphasis of late on golf and religion has not helped either.

Put it all together and Alice's appeal became narrowed to a group of old fans and some new ones who find him interesting. I still find him interesting and unique, but he does't have musical appeal to a broad range of people. It's just the way Alice is and why I've always felt he needs a talented band to keep him on track musically.

GNDM · Post by **GNDM** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 2:36 pm

darkmenace....good question. Has Alice under-achieved since 1973? I wouldn't say that, but he has slid downhill since the mid 70's, as far as popular appeal. Why? Simple answer would seem to be a change in musical tastes by the general public and the problem of trying to stay as unique as the band was in the late 60's and early 70's. Alice has been very good at trying to re-invent himself (on and off stage images)....but it is hard-to-impossible for any person or band to continue at that high of level for decade after decade. Some have done it....but most that succeeded did not have to try and keep up a persona that was bound to wear out after awhile. As Beavis and Butthead once said..."Someone tell Alice that he doesn't scare anybody anymore."

I am not being negative, just facing the fact that Alice could not (and should not have been expected to) keep the lofty perch that was obtained prior to 1973. He has done very well, IMO. He has become sort of a metal icon and has continued to survive without having to resort to joining the "oldies tour". So no, I would not say he "under-achieved"....but like many, many musicians, his appeal has been to a smaller and smaller group of fans.
Again - just my opinion. I am sure some would disagree.

While Heaven Wept · Post by **While Heaven Wept** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:18 pm

GNDM wrote:darkmenace....good question. Has Alice under-achieved since 1973? I wouldn't say that, but he has slid downhill since the mid 70's, as far as popular appeal. Why? Simple answer would seem to be a change in musical tastes by the general public and the problem of trying to stay as unique as the band was in the late 60's and early 70's. Alice has been very good at trying to re-invent himself (on and off stage images)....but it is hard-to-impossible for any person or band to continue at that high of level for decade after decade. Some have done it....but most that succeeded did not have to try and keep up a persona that was bound to wear out after awhile. As Beavis and Butthead once said..."Someone tell Alice that he doesn't scare anybody anymore."

I am not being negative, just facing the fact that Alice could not (and should not have been expected to) keep the lofty perch that was obtained prior to 1973. He has done very well, IMO. He has become sort of a metal icon and has continued to survive without having to resort to joining the "oldies tour". So no, I would not say he "under-achieved"....but like many, many musicians, his appeal has been to a smaller and smaller group of fans.
Again - just my opinion. I am sure some would disagree.

Well said

Shoesalesman · Post by **Shoesalesman** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:44 pm

darkmenace wrote:the emphasis of late on golf and religion has not helped either.

I don't buy that. He's been a self-proclaimed golf addict for MANY decades, and he's been frank about his beliefs for years, too. Nothing "of late" when it comes to these two.

Devon · Post by **Devon** » Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:01 pm

To be fair Alice's religious views usually only crop up if someone else mentions it to him in an interview. It's not like Alice begins and ends every interview or every concert with a prayer.

I would go as far to say that the whole "religion" thing with him isn't as important to the media as it used to be.

Now Dave Mustaine, on the hand, is someone who enjoys throwing his views in people's faces lately and still seems to be doing okay with Megadeth (but pissing off a lot of people at the same time admittedly.)

GNDM · Post by **GNDM** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:27 am

I don't buy that. He's been a self-proclaimed golf addict for MANY decades, and he's been frank about his beliefs for years, too. Nothing "of late" when it comes to these two.

Golf for decades?....well not always:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-uIfeWp ... ture=share

[[He actually said he would have voted for Richard Nixon? Seriously? HEY....he WAS old enough to vote for him in 1972...did he?]]

Robbie · Post by **Robbie** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:13 am

All excellent points GNDM. When I mentioned alcoholism I meant it as one factor amongst a number of factors which you succinctly summarise.
Times change and therefore it would be impossible to sustain the novelty / shock value of the early image and music. This is incidentally why I have always disagreed with posters on here who call for a reunion of the remaining members of the original band.I am not saying it wouldn't be great to hear them again but it would not necessarily mean better quality of musical output or live performances leading to a resurgence of Alice Cooper simply because so much has changed in nearly forty years.
As for underachievement? Given the fickle nature of fandom and the pace of fashions and trends in music I would say Alice has massively overachieved.

GNDM · Post by **GNDM** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 4:52 am

I realize there are several reasons Alice fans don't care to see some sort of reunion of the four remaining members of the original AC band. Creating "less-than-the-original" music could be one of them. However, I still think the main opposition, by some, runs along age lines. AC fans under 35 were not even alive for the pre-WTMN, non-solo Alice.

Can you turn back the clock? Can you re-create the past glories? Maybe not...but for some, just the nostalgia of whatever happens would be worth it. Much like an old-timers game in baseball. (No offense to any of them.

)

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:17 am

>Golf for decades?....well not always:

He was just saying that for theatrical effect.

A_MichaelUK · Post by **A_MichaelUK** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:25 am

>When I mentioned alcoholism I

That is an extremely debatable factor. If you look at the original post from GNDM, Alice's drinking problems only covered something like eight years out of approximately thirty - six years, so it would be extremely unlikely that it had such an damaging effect. Yes, he lost some ground during that period, but there was plenty of time to recover it and he has done so with varying degrees of success.

>As for underachievement? Given the fickle nature of fandom and the pace of fashions and trends in music I would say Alice has massively overachieved.

That is a very good point. The career (certainly since 1986 for example) has been sustained by his incredible stamina and work - ethic as much as his talent.

Gunner · Post by **Gunner** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:31 pm

That is an extremely debatable factor. If you look at the original post from GNDM, Alice's drinking problems only covered something like eight years out of approximately thirty - six years, so it would be extremely unlikely that it had such an damaging effect.

I think the drinking that Alice did from the late 60s to 1984 (with maybe a a year or so 'out' and will amount to more than 8 years - more like 14 or so) did untold damage both physically and career-wise. Towards the end he was on two bottles of whisky a day and literally dying physically!! Career-wise: do you honestly think think work was in focus from 76 - 84? KISS took the audience off him as he was writing ballads and easy-listening tracks, drinking, performing very drunk, hanging out with film stars etc etc. He doesn't remember recording some albums and some tours!!! Is that not damaging????

"A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"

Re: "A Big Announcement to Come in a Few Weeks"