not friends IMO

That's probably been the case for at least 30 years.

agree

agree

"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"

But there will always be something special there, beyond friendship or business
partnership.

...look up Mick's interview with Jann Wenner in 95...he pretty much says he and Keith figured out a modus vivendi for the future...in other words agreed to disagree and went on to negotiate their new roles/parameters going forward.

a friend would not do to mick what keith did in his book

"mick n keith a business partnership"

Not that there is anything wrong with it.

Glenn Frey and Don Henley established Eagles Ltd. except Don Felder.
Let's hope Mick and Keith aren't like them.

It has been a pure business partnership since 1989.

It's been a business relationship from the moment that Mick was contractually obligated not to be onstage during Keef's vocal number (Little T&A) in 1981. Things had probably soured long before then, however.

Quote
ab
It's been a business relationship from the moment that Mick was contractually obligated not to be onstage during Keef's vocal number (Little T&A) in 1981. Things had probably soured long before then, however.

...that's "newbee" to me... Fascinating!

["I can hear the Bullfrog calling me..."]

Quote
Toru A
Glenn Frey and Don Henley established Eagles Ltd. except Don Felder.
Let's hope Mick and Keith aren't like them.

why? why would it matter to anyone here whether they are friends or not?

...So whát...

Why does everybody always want them to be "best-luvvyduvvy-friends"?? What kind of overly romantic image is thàt... and what is it good for!??
And what's wih the constant dismissing of them (& the rest of the band) as 'purely business'?? Just because they don't run the race exàctly the way we/ you want them to run it...!!?


Their relationship started (literally) at 'playground' level (maybe they've never risen above that - who knows...), they've been best mates for sure; they have been 'Partners in Crime' (which sounds ànd IS a lot more elegant to my taste then "business partnership" ) for most of the time since they started making music together - most probably up till now; they've loved eachother, they've hated eachother, they know eachother better then eachother; they've understood & misunderstood, they need eachother ànd can do without one-another; they're opposites ànd two-of-a-kind... and they definitely grew apart.
I see patterns of childhood sweethearts, male 'buddyship', true lovers, brotherhood, and even some mutual 'father/son' relationship... And oh yes: they are in business together - so I guess that makes'em business partners, too.

["I can hear the Bullfrog calling me..."]

a friend would not do to mick what keith did in his book


A friend would also not do a backroom deal for his solo albums on a record deal and not tell the rest of the band. I don't get what all the fuss is that Keith did to Mick in his book. It is not as bad as people make it out to be!

Quote
slew
a friend would not do to mick what keith did in his book


A friend would also not do a backroom deal for his solo albums on a record deal and not tell the rest of the band. I don't get what all the fuss is that Keith did to Mick in his book. It is not as bad as people make it out to be!

uh,yeah-except that he could have just made a separate deal on his own and kept all the money.the way he did it the other stones got a piece of his solo record,which went platinum by the way.

the stuff in the book is not as bad as people make it out to be? thats your opinion because you're not the one who got backstabbed by your so called "brother"

try expanding your scope of knowledge beyond keiths bullshit interviews.

I didnt know that bit about the other stones getting a piece of micks solo album , interesting