THE Originals........

[A_MichaelUK]

>It would have probably been worth his while to carry on as Ziggy so what.

Possibly so, but he didn't and in any case, that isn't a fair example. During the "Ziggy" period, Bowie wasn't playing in stadiums whereas in 1987, he was.

>no promoter has ever told Alice what songs to play and who he should have in his stage band. Is that correct with your intimate knowledge of how these things work?

I have no evidence that they have but for what must now be the second or third time, I did NOT say that they had. I said that it has been known for promoters to have that option (which by the way has nothing to do with this thread because this came up in another thread about the set - list on the current tour). You asked for evidence and I gave you two examples. Not only that, I'm not even saying that it ALWAYS happens because in most cases, the performer has the right to artistic control over the material that is performed. All I am saying that it is known to happen. YOU, on the other hand, are saying it would NEVER happen and not only is that not true, you don't have any qualifications to make that assertion. Go to paragraph 2.1 of http://www.paulhoffert.ca/Shared/phDocs ... ncerts.pdf to read an extract from a report by an academic and musician who probably knows a bit more about this than you do.

[A_MichaelUK]

>the promoters DID care who ''the band'' was, because they were being asked to pay a larger sum and/or takes less of a profit.

Exactly. The economics of a situation, for better or worse, are always going to have an influence. Anyone who thinks they do not is either naive or stupid.

[A_MichaelUK]

>Assuming that was the case do you believe that the 3 would have not taken the rate Alice pays his touring band? The three basically have zero bargaining power. I do not believe for one minute that they would demand the same cut as Alice.

How arrogant of you to assume what other people would or would not do. For someone who is such a big supporter of the other band members, it is very ironic that you assume they would or should make less money. Maybe they would, but you shouldn't assume that. Was it fair and right that Rick Wright reportedly made less money than David Gilmour and Nick Mason in the last few year's of Pink Floyd's existence?

[A_MichaelUK]

>"I don't think it is about money for the three...."

People (I don't mean necessarily pitkin88 or GNDM) can't have it both ways because if it isn't "about money for the three", then certain people need to stop pontificating and speculating that Alice just wants more for himself and citing that as a reason for the lack of a reunion.

[pitkin88]

>"I don't think it is about money for the three...."

You (I don't mean necessarily pitkin88 or GNDM) can't have it both ways because if it isn't "about money for the three", then certain people need to stop pontificating and speculating that Alice just wants more for himself and citing that as a reason for the lack of a reunion.

Who do you mean?

[pitkin88]

Pitkin and GNDM seem to be suggesting (and please accept my apologies if I have summarised incorrectly)that Alice holds the power in this relationship and no reunion will take until Alice decides it is worthwhile.
I believe that Alice's success as a live draw today is due in no small part to the fact that he has a group of younger musicians with him. I suspect if he toured with the original band a good proportion of the audience-especially the younger ones- wouldn't even realise the significance and (would probably care even less) for they have only ever known solo Alice.
Moreover, I actually sometimes feel quite sad when I see reunions of bands from my youth for it's an unpalatable fact that time is not always kind. This is not 1972, and the glorious impact of the original band was from a different age.It would be like asking Bowie to re unite with Ronson, Bolder and Woodmansey (when Ronson and Bolder were still alive) in the hope of re creating the magic of Ziggy Stardust.That wouldn't have worked either.
I honestly believe Alice knows (beyond odd reunion appearance, guest spots etc.) that you can't re -create the past. Worse still, by attempting to, you risk tarnishing the memories.

The 3 songs on WTMN2 hardly tarnished the image. Neal's song was the best song on the album. Certainly the most commercial. The Stooges re unions were pretty great. was

[A_MichaelUK]

>especially the younger ones- wouldn't even realise the significance and (would probably care even less) for they have only ever known solo Alice.

Exactly.

> This is not 1972, and the glorious impact of the original band was from a different age.

Exactly. I have spent approximately twenty years asking the people who claim they want to see the band reunite why they want that and what they think the benefits would be. No - one has ever come up with an answer. The closest anyone came to an answer was based on some kind of nostalgia but that was about it. I am not even saying it would be a bad thing if there was a reunion of the kind people keep asking for (although a lot of people don't even define that), I just don't know what the benefits would be and nobody else seems to either.

>I honestly believe Alice knows (beyond odd reunion appearance, guest spots etc.) that you can't re -create the past.

Not only that, he really is not interested in nostalgia - he really is not.

> Worse still, by attempting to, you risk tarnishing the memories.

There is always that danger.

[pitkin88]

>the promoters DID care who ''the band'' was, because they were being asked to pay a larger sum and/or takes less of a profit.

Exactly. The economics of a situation, for better or worse, are always going to have an influence. Anyone who thinks they do not is either naive or stupid.

No they didn't want to pay the higher fee ( assuming a higher fee was asked for ).
Shep could have easily told the band I can't get what I asked for would you do it for less ( ie Coopers standard fee )

[A_MichaelUK]

>Who do you mean?

If you look at the post from GNDM, he explains it quite well.

[pitkin88]

>especially the younger ones- wouldn't even realise the significance and (would probably care even less) for they have only ever known solo Alice.

Exactly.

> This is not 1972, and the glorious impact of the original band was from a different age.

Exactly. I have spent approximately twenty years asking the people who claim they want to see the band reunite why they want that and what they think the benefits would be. No - one has ever come up with an answer. The closest anyone came to an answer was based on some kind of nostalgia but that was about it. I am not even saying it would be a bad thing if there was a reunion of the kind people keep asking for (although a lot of people don't even define that), I just don't know what the benefits would be and nobody else seems to either.

>I honestly believe Alice knows (beyond odd reunion appearance, guest spots etc.) that you can't re -create the past.

Not only that, he really is not interested in nostalgia - he really is not.

> Worse still, by attempting to, you risk tarnishing the memories.

There is always that danger.

He's pretty nostalgic about playing the bands songs, bringing back the guillotine and calling an album WTMN2

[pitkin88]

>Who do you mean?

If you look at the post from GNDM, he explains it quite well.

Prefer your explanation.

[A_MichaelUK]

>The 3 songs on WTMN2 hardly tarnished the image.

No one said they did, but your definition of a reunion may be different from Robbie's definition. Also, those songs had input from Bob Ezrin and Tommy Henriksen as well.

>Neal's song was the best song on the album.

I think this has been discussed before in another thread. I assume you're referring to "I'll Bite Your Face Off" which is not "Neal's song". "I'll Bite Your Face Off" is BASED on a song that Neal wrote called "Evil Voodoo Moon" which is why he, quite rightly, has a song - writing credit on "I'll Bite Your Face Off". If you listen to the two songs, apart from the riff, they are actually quite different.

[A_MichaelUK]

>Shep could have easily told the band I can't get what I asked for would you do it for less ( ie Coopers standard fee )

How do you know he didn't and that they refused? Again, you can't have it both ways - you can't on the one hand say you don't believe there weren't adequate offers and then say "Shep could have easily told the band I can't get what I asked for".

[A_MichaelUK]

>He's pretty nostalgic about playing the bands songs, bringing back the guillotine and calling an album WTMN2

They are his songs and guillotine, as well though. The point is, he isn't trying to recreate 1973 all over again, which is what some people seem to want.

[A_MichaelUK]

>Prefer your explanation.

I just now covered it in my post two posts above this.

[nurserozetta]

[quote="pitkin88
The promoters have NO interest who Alice's band is. It matters not to them who plays guitar whether it's Orianthi or Mike Bruce. So why not take the boys?[/quote]

Yeah but the punters sure do , and if the punters dont go thru the doors guess who cares ??? Thats right the promoters .

Sorry to say I would much rather see a young energetic , Tommy , Ryan or Ori support Alice .

Having said that I'm a big fan of what Dennis and Neal are doing in their own right

[Si]

Assuming that was the case do you believe that the 3 would have not taken the rate Alice pays his touring band? The three basically have zero bargaining power. I do not believe for one minute that they would demand the same cut as Alice.

I would hope they wouldn't taken that rate - or even be asked to. Perhaps not equal share with Alice...but, if it was me, I would be insulted if offered the base pay the current members get. But that is my opinion. Could be wrong.

For what it's worth, We had the chance to talk to Shep around the time of the box set, and the gist of what he was saying, if I recall correctly, was that when dealing with anything involving the original band members, such as the box set, they all had an equal say in things and everyone (ie all four plus Shep and Bob) had to be in agreement. This is one of the reasons old stuff can take a while to come out.
If you extend this to a tour, it seems to me, from what I have heard, that if there was ever an original band tour Shep and Alice would EXPECT the other guys to be treated more or less equally as partners (money included) and thus it WOULD be a big pay cut for Alice/Alive as obviously on that basis the original band would be getting a bigger cut of the money then the current band would.
As has been said above, this means that they would have to get more money for playing then solo Alice to make it worth their while.
If, on the other hand, they said "well we'll do a reunion tour but you have to be on a minimal fee for it", they risk insulting the original band who have a right to more. It's a tricky situation, business against long friendships and respect.

[GNDM]

Si.....Exactly. You did a better job explaining it than I did. As for pointing fingers at Alice for the lack of reunion shows...well, he IS the frontman AND the person with the most stroke to get things done. You could have a reunion without Glen, without MB even....but Alice is the main cog and thus has the most (total?) control of 'if, when, and where'.

Now that people have disrespected my thread - I will return to putting up pictures.

[A_MichaelUK]

>As for pointing fingers at Alice for the lack of reunion shows...well, he IS the frontman AND the person with the most stroke to get things done

In this instance, the promoters have the most "stroke" - that's the point you and Si (as well as myself) have been making. As Si said, Alice could decide to make less money, but that isn't anyone's business whether he decided to or not (not that anyone is suggesting it is).

[Parish]

In tehe immortal words of Carol King...

"Its too late baby now its too late..."