What we learned from your demand – Variety

adminOctober 12, 2018

If you go to the Fleetwood Mac tour that started a little over a week ago, "do not stop" thinking about the bad vibes that exist between the four oldest members on stage and the exiled Lindsey Buckingham. That may be the effect, anyway, if it is not the real intent of the lawsuit that the exiled singer / guitarist filed against the rest of the classic lineup on Tuesday in the Texas High Court.

Variety I took a look at the presentation on Thursday, and it's quite revealing. Okay, maybe it's not as revealing as the confessional "Rumors" were. But if the content of Buckingham and his lawyers, Loeb & Loeb, is mostly accurate, it is a portrait of a band whose members did not communicate much when they were offstage, which culminated in Buckingham receiving serious treatment in silence before he did it. Axed without cause or warning at the end of January. And if it is not accurate, it is likely that the four defendants have their opinion, on or off the court, although probably not immediately, when they are trying to sell tickets for a tour, not a boxing match.

Here are 21 of the most interesting facts or accusations that arise in the 27-page document:

Buckingham says he would have earned between $ 12 million and $ 14 million from the tour they had planned before the separation. He still wants to charge. Buckingham's lawsuit says that preliminary discussions for a tour with Live Nation established that each of the five members would have received so much from the tour in the United States in the last two months of 2018, before moving on to the legs of Europe and Australia next year. He wants that money for the job he says he is ready and available to do, and he also wants a fifth of the marketing and any other money they can bring without him.

Apparently, all the other members of the band sent it to voice mail since their last presentation together on January 26, when they played in the benefit of MusiCares in honor of the band, one night they had little idea was a last hurray. "After 43 years of camaraderie and friendship, not a single member of the band called Buckingham to break the news," the lawsuit says. "In fact, not a single member of Fleetwood Mac has returned any of Buckingham's phone calls to provide an explanation of his alleged expulsion from Fleetwood Mac."

He has had only a handful of short, unexplained emails from other band members since his last concert. The lawsuit says that Buckingham "received only two cryptic responses" from bandmates in the days after MusiCares, when he began to realize that something was happening. One of them was from Fleetwood, "explaining that I needed some time to reflect," before Buckingham detected that he was being cast and obtained confirmation from his representative. The other that was referred to was apparently John McVie, who is mentioned elsewhere as "answer (ing) who ordered him not to speak with Buckingham".

Buckingham specifies with his timelines to suggest that the other members of the band have not been at the level when they have publicly stated that their insistence on delaying a tour was the reason to continue without him. In fact, he says he doubled and surrendered to his demands, then he was fired anyway. Buckingham allows that in the initial discussions at the end of last year, he requested that the tour begin in November 2018 in order to launch and promote a solo album in the meantime. But then, the lawsuit goes on to say: "While Buckingham was initially frustrated by the refusal of the other Members to satisfy his request," on December 15, he had agreed to delay the release of his solo album for one year to allow the Fleetwood Mac tour begins in August 2018, as requested by the other partners. "

So, where is the meat, then? Whatever the real reasons why Buckingham believes he was kicked out of the band, they are not included in the lawsuit. It simply states, repeatedly, that it may not have been the public's reason for being. Did they want to earn more money by having a four-way division instead of dividing things in five ways? Did you just stop liking him? The suit does not speculate.

But, after all, he had not completely renounced being a soloist this year. The lawsuit says it was because of Nicks' insistence that they were going to schedule a tour that included no more than three shows in a week. It was upon learning that Buckingham decided he might be "playing solo shows, highlighting Buckingham's career outside of Fleetwood Mac, in small theaters, on some of the days off between the Fleetwood Mac performances."

The managers of the band were thinking of announcing the Fleetwood Mac tour, with Buckingham included, at the MusiCares show in January. Buckingham told his manager that he was willing to make that announcement, "but first he needed to get permission from the other Partners for his solo performances on the days off."

The Lindsey / Stevie part of the plot gets complicated. "His manager told Buckingham that Nicks 'manager had not yet told Nicks about Buckingham's possible solo performances or that he had asked Nicks' approval for Buckingham's solo performances during the tour." your representatives in your free time. And what we had here was a managerial communication failure.

The week after MusiCares was deeply mysterious for Buckingham … then, traumatic. On January 28, his manager told him that the tour they had been planning, and that he had even approached announcing, was canceled.

Before being fired, Buckingham believed that the problem had to do with Nicks, not with him. When told that the tour was canceled, a "blind" Buckingham initially believed Nicks had decided not to tour with the rest of the band and that was the reason why the tour had been canceled. "

Less than a week after MusiCares, days after the tour was canceled, he was informed that, after all, there would be an autumn tour, but that the "hired players" replaced Lindsey Buckingham. And the collapse knocked him down.

Before the world knew about a Fleetwood Mac without Lindsey, he wrote a pitiful email to Mick Fleetwood, and told Christine McVie, in vain. The email of February 28 is attached to the application as Annex A, in its form sent from an iPhone. "Hi Mick," it begins. "In the month since MusiCares, I've tried to talk to you and Stevie, in vain, I've only gotten the silence from the radio all this time. (I have not tried Chris because I thought he might be feeling a bit fragile). I even sent an email to John, who replied that he could not contact me … All this breaks my heart … After forty-three years and the finish line clearly in sight, "he wrote in email, suggesting that he might have thought of this as a farewell tour, or perhaps simply by hints of mortality, "it's hard to escape the conclusion that for us five we parted Now I would be doing the wrong thing. that we have built together, bad for our legions of loyal followers who would hate to see the final act be a break, we are wrong, and everything we have achieved and shared together … If there is a way of solution After this, I think we should try. I love you all without caring about anything.

Thus avoided, he quickly moved to an "know your rights" attitude. "Buckingham authorized his attorneys to protect his rights to the proceeds of the travel offer that Live Nation presented to the Alliance, an estimated $ 12 million to $ 14 million for each of the Partners." These partners "have tried to enrich themselves in Buckingham's spending," reads the document.

The demand continues reading as the best biased Wikipedia entry in the world. In the years before Buckingham and Nicks joined the band, from 1967 to 1974, "none of the Fleetwood Mac albums reached Gold status in the United States during this period of time." When it hits its 1988 best: "Notably," Greatest Hits "did not include any recording of Buckingham's previous incarnations of the Band." (Sometimes, you just have to throw Peter Green and Bob Welch under the bus.) "After the departure of Flekinghood Mac in 1987, the fate of the Band and popularity declined precipitously." The lawsuit is not a big fan of the years of Dave Mason / Billy Burnette.

Members of Fleetwood Mac read comments … at least when they are no longer in the band. A highlight of the lawsuit is the mention that the first Fleetwood Mac album after he left the band at the '87, "Behind the Mask", received a rating of 1.5 out of 5 stars on Allmusic. His critique said that "the songs are the least inspired by the recorded band," as cited in the legal document.

Did you know that the album "Time" never reached the top 200, not even? Perhaps you did. But we did not believe it until we looked for it. Indeed, the album that the group recorded when Buckingham and Nicks were away, leaving McVie as the only representative of the classic three-person main team, not even registered as a blip. The lawsuit mentions the FM tour as the opening act of CSNY as the best dissident.

A member of the band became seriously ill on the last tour, and Buckingham says he opposed the suggestion that that person should be replaced, acting as a caregiver. During the 2015 tour, another member "was diagnosed with a serious illness. When another partner proposed to replace the partner who was not well and continue the tour, Buckingham insisted that the band postpone the remaining dates until the other partner can act with the band. This was consistent with Buckingham's story of caring for the other Partners in Fleetwood Mac during their moments of need and defending the legacy … "(In any case, a search on that tour reveals that only a handful of concerts were postponed. )

Nicks continued nix new discs of Fleetwood Mac. This is well known. But maybe not so explicitly before now, Buckingham stated that the only reason why the duo album "Lindsey Buckingham / Christine McVie" last year was not a Fleetwood Mac album not only because Nicks refused to participate, but because the two "decided not to record it as a Fleetwood Mac album out of respect for the band's legacy."

Everything has (or used to have) to be unanimous in the group, with one exception. The lawsuit says that the five members of the gang had veto power over any decision, except when it came to synchronizing rights, in which the composer was allowed to approve or deny the licenses. But evidently, the rule of all by one was never included in any contract, since, obviously, Buckingham was never allowed the veto power over his own dismissal.

The contracts of the band among themselves seem to have been mostly oral. "There has never been a global band agreement detailing the rights and obligations of band members," the lawsuit states. On the other hand, he says that Buckingham "maintains that there was an oral contract between him and Live Nation" that would have given him a 20% share of the band's income.

Is not it ironic? The autumn tour started later than it would have been if he had not been expelled, he argues. "In a cruel final turn, after having falsely stated that Buckingham's request to delay the start of the August-November tour was the reason for his expulsion, the Band announced that it would delay the start of the Fleetwood Mac tour through October. to accommodate the addition of the Buckingham replacements "- Neil Finn and Mike Campbell, whose membership was revealed on April 9.

Then why did Buckingham is forced to leave? Loeb & Loeb evidently decided that the lawsuit was not the place to go, even when they try to methodically tear down all the official explanations that Nicks, Fleetwood and the two McVies have offered in the interviews. But Buckingham offered more theories or clues in an interview published by Rolling Stone Wednesday.

There, he began by saying he received a call two days after MusiCares from band manager Irving Azoff told him that Nicks never wanted to be on stage with him again. She was upset that she had played the guitar in a disrespectful way with some of Rhiannon's input music and later she smiled with apparent mockery throughout her speech, although he claimed that it was part of a joke among all members of the band. Two days later, he contacted Azoff and allegedly told him that Nicks had given the other three members an ultimatum from him or me.

The fans are still in mourning for the division, but whatever the faction of the band that ends up having a more convincing or widely accepted version, there is something that most of the faithful of Fleetwood Mac can agree on: 40 years . The way in which the time was kept together or the frequency with which they did it may be the mystery that still requires a wider explanation.

Source link


Leave a comment

Name *
Add a display name
Email *
Your email address will not be published