yes, I do.. we saw how much Charlie thought of being told he was "Mick's 'drummer boy' "....

>>Do you really believe it is some kind of democratic voting process? How naieve! <<

Quote
kleermaker

Do you really believe it is some kind of democratic voting process? How naieve!

How else do you suppose four consenting adults do business?


And do you really believe that is how you spell naive? How naive!

.....

Olly.

Quote
kleermaker

Do you really believe it is some kind of democratic voting process? How naieve!

More interesting is the fact that Jagger is very aware that he needs the Stones as a band/vehicle to be important himself. Jagger solo never attracted the masses: he just failed on his own.

Even more interesting is the question who controls the band musically/artistically. That is Jagger right now, but difficult to say since when. I would guess mid seventies.

Naive? I guess you believe a business with 4 equal members has no democratic voting process? That's pretty illogical, of course they discuss things at these band meetings and vote on them. Obviously Charlie was outvoted on the MT issue this tour, probably plenty of issues they go around the table with and each member states Yay or Nay. I'm not saying Mick doesn't have more information and ideas business wise, just that to get the other three to sign on requires some sort of democratic process, I doubt very much he simply tells the other 3 how it's going to be.

Also probably plenty of stuff they just delegate control to individual members or others as well. But that delegation is a democratic process in itself. Mick and Charlie for the stage designs for instance, Keith, Ronnie and their people for the sound equipment choices, etc.

As far as musical and artistic direction, that is certainly a better question. I doubt it is strictly Jagger since the mid 70's since Keith was obviously heavily involved in the 80's efforts. My guess is that it is still a combination of Mick and Keith for new material and now since it's mostly about old songs Mick and Chuck for the live shows. Set Lists are probably done by Mick since as Keith has said "he's the one who's got to sing them".

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
duke richardson
it still has always been about the band, and Jagger knows it.

he might have been more interested than anyone else in the band in business matters, but don't forget-

Bill Wyman was quite likely the more astute businessman in the Rolling Stones, yet his input was marginalized.

And no decisions regarding what they undertook as a band were ever unilateral,

especially decisions about recording or touring. if Charlie wasn't into it, they wouldn't do it, generally..

so he kind of de facto runs the band..

In that respect though, if any of them aren't into recording or touring it's not going to happen. I get the feeling decisions are made as a group in those infamous band meetings, with the 4 key members each getting a vote. What would be interesting to know is how they resolve tie votes. Perhaps Jagger as CEO has the power to do so, who knows.

Do you really believe it is some kind of democratic voting process? How naieve!

More interesting is the fact that Jagger is very aware that he needs the Stones as a band/vehicle to be important himself. Jagger solo never attracted the masses: he just failed on his own.

Even more interesting is the question who controls the band musically/artistically. That is Jagger right now, but difficult to say since when. I would guess mid seventies.

I agree with Kleermaker, there is no way it's a democratic voting process.
In all equal partnerships in business, there is always one person who the partners agree to be a leader.
The partners will vote only on the really big decisions - in the case of the Stones, which record contract to sign, maybe where to go on tour. The rest is left completely up to a leader all the partners have agreed on. There's no question it is MJ.

I agree, as I said about, musical control is the more interesting question. I think once Keith realized during/after the Steel Wheels/Urban Jungle tour that Mick was set on making it a Nostalgia act, he relinquished control and lost a lot of interest. That's explains the lack of new songs and guitar playing that sometimes lacks even more focus than usual.

I think that Mick has always had to take control from a management standpoint. That's just the way it's always been. Obviously, we all know that Stu and Brian started the band, and played a large role in their musical direction, at least in the early years. But, remember Charlie talking about Edith Grove, before they were famous? He said something like "Mick, Keith and Brian lived together in Edith Grove. Keith and Brian were crazy, but it was Mick's name on the lease, so he was responsible for everything they did. It's funny how things don't change . . "

I saw Keith, Ronnie and Charlie get in the limos at 5:00 p.m. for a show at Stade de France in 2006. I asked where Mick was and someone told me that he had gone ahead to the stadium a few hours earlier, to participate in the checking of the sound, stage and lighting.

Musically, I don't get the sense that Mick has ever been completely "in control". If he were, then the Stones albums wouldn't keep sounding the same; since the early 70's he has consistently talked about wanting to explore new sounds/genres (and he has done so on his solo outings).

Quote
Turner68

In all equal partnerships in business, there is always one person who the partners agree to be a leader.

As a partner in 4 LLC's, I must say you are entirely incorrect. Equal partnerships are often equal in all things.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Turner68

In all equal partnerships in business, there is always one person who the partners agree to be a leader.

As a partner in 4 LLC's, I must say you are entirely incorrect. Equal partnerships are often equal in all things.

simple example: in rupert loewenstein's book he describes how he was hired by the stones. charlie and bill didn't even meet him. mick was the main person who interviewed him. i believe that a meeting with keith was required, but a formality. rupert, of course, was the stones' business manager for over 30 years. if one is really interested in the topic of who runs the stones, the best question would be: who replaced rupert, and who decided? (again, it's not a vote on most things.)

rupert also describes how most of his day-to-day business meetings were with mick.

hanging out with keith was also required too of course ;-)





Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-20 19:01 by Turner68.

Quote
keefriffhards
At What point do you think Mick Jagger took control over running the band.

1989. He put the band back on its wheels and sealed a $$$$$$$$$$ deal with Cohl.

Keith who in 1989 was still amazed at how little money he had left (that's junkie lifestyle for you) and how much the 1988 Winos tour had cost him was instantly in love with the new "I'm the breadbaker and you shut up" Jagger!

"You want inflatable dolls onstage for HTW and SFM!? I say that's a greeeeeeat idea, Mick!!"

Then in 1994 Keith went back to "ungrateful/difficult with Mick" mode again. For B2b Mick and Keith were divorced again and they worked on the album separately.

Keith's resentful/negative state (stain?) of mind culminated with the "LIfe" book.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-20 19:58 by dcba.

Guns N' Roses bassist Duff McKagan says in his memoir It's So Easy: and Other Lies that he and the band were amazed when Mick Jagger sat down with them to negotiate their fee for opening for the Stones at the L.A. Coliseum. And Mick got their price down.

1964

Bjornulf

Quote
dcba

Quote
keefriffhards
At What point do you think Mick Jagger took control over running the band.

1989. He put the band back on its wheels and sealed a $$$$$$$$$$ deal with Cohl.

Keith who in 1989 was still amazed at how little money he had left (that's junkie lifestyle for you) and how much the 1988 Winos tour had cost him was instantly in love with the new "I'm the breadbaker and you shut up" Jagger!

"You want inflatable dolls onstage for HTW and SFM!? I say that's a greeeeeeat idea, Mick!!"

Then in 1994 Keith went back to "ungrateful/difficult with Mick" mode again. For B2b Mick and Keith were divorced again and they worked on the album separately.

Keith's resentful/negative state (stain?) of mind culminated with the "LIfe" book.

This sounds about right to me.
(Keith who in 1989 was still amazed at how little money he had left (that's junkie lifestyle for you) and how much the 1988 Winos tour had cost him was instantly in love with the new "I'm the breadbaker and you shut up" Jagger)

Problem for Keith being that even though after 89' 90' tours Keith was loaded with dosh, there was no way Mick would relinquish being top dog again.

Did anyone make a 'She's The Boss' reference yet?

Talking about business we forget Prince Rupert Loewenstein - he came in to the picture in some 1968 or so. I guess he quite somehow helped Mick Jagger dealing with the business site.

Musically, Mick Jagger partially on Sticky Finger, Exile in LA and then the rest with exception of Dirty Work.

In my initial question about Micks control on this thread, i was not meaning business control.
I meant creative control. Mick seems to call all the shots all the time, almost.
I personally think this is detrimental to the Stones creative force.
I just felt that Keith puts up with it all, so that his first love, ( The Rolling Stones ) can continue. Does Keith except this control so he can enjoy touring etc.
I get the impression Mick is a control freak, and it just has to be his way. Or no deal. I have a best friend who shares Mick's birthday, and its the same with him. My way or the high way

I could be completely wrong about this of course..

<<i was not meaning business control. I meant creative control.>>

Once business control is assumed, every other type of control is possible. You know what they say: "Money changes everything."

Do you really think Keef could have ever taken the wheel???
He is the Heart Mick is the Brains... Simple

Quote
umakmehrd
Do you really think Keef could have ever taken the wheel???
He is the Heart Mick is the Brains... Simple

You have a good point there unakmehrd
. Keith at the wheel, imagine the collisions lol

And yeah stonehearted money does change everything, its a necessary evil.

Sure, the SW Cohl deal was huge money buy where has it been written that Keith was short for cash in 1988 or that Keith had lost loads of money on the Wino's tour, like say Pink Floyg did for The Wall shows?

About Mick being the manager, Rupert explains in his book that Keith went to him at some point asking if he thought Mick deserved the extra cut he wanted for being their "manager" and Rupert says he didn't think so and that was the end of it.

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

Why did they decide to stop cooperating with Cohl?

Not that this is an indication of control of the band, but You can at least see via youtube clips of various press interviews that as early as 1964 Brian and Mick sort of competing for attention to be the spokesman for band. One in particular is this Stones performance on the Mike Douglas show during 1964.

While Douglas attempts to chat with the Stones here, Brian cleverly sneaks his way into the chat between Mick and Douglas:

[www.youtube.com]

As far as WHEN Mick took control, my vote would be for:

During the completion of Sticky Fingers. The line in the album credits thanking "everyone else who has had the patience to sit thru this for two million hours" -- I've always felt that was pure Mick, it sounds exactly like his humor, like something he would say.


I think I could even get more specific, and mention all the work that was done on "Brown Sugar" to make it so perfect (umpteen different rough versions on bootlegs, with all the different overdubs). Yes Keith played on the basic track, Muscle Shoals, very inspired and one of his greatest moments. After that, it was Mick who brought the recording home to the finish line. Same with Exile.

And in the interview in Crossfire Hurricane, Keith even says, that after Altamont he went into a funk or a stupor or an escape... That's when Mick stepped up to keep the band going. That would be early 1970.

In the previous years, things like "Jumpin Jack Flash" or even the Let It Bleed album, the tracks generally happened very quickly in the studio, and were pure collaboration, writing and arranging and recording, Mick and Keith to the fore. After the Sticky Fingers period, the album process gradually turned into, Keith does his bit spontaneously in the studio, he writes and cuts his part creating a a rough track (think "Soul Survivor" with Keith vocals), and then Mick is the one who takes that starting point, and finishes it off. All the way to the process by which they made Tattoo You, and beyond.


Exile is a great album and I am in no way taking anything away from Keith. There was loads of magic in the basement at Nellcotte. But it was Mick who took the tapes to L.A., and who really dragged that album kicking and screaming across the finish line, with all the overdubs and session players, the cover design and the overall vision and putting together the '72 tour of America to follow. This pattern continued.

But if I had to really pick a specific moment in time, for me it would be, the later OVERDUB recording and production of the "Brown Sugar" track, back in England at Olympic. We're also recently found out that at one point, Keith apparently pushed to release the birthday party version on the album, instead....not sure how that decision to stick with the Muscle Shoals version was made, but I'm guessing that Mick's already-completed hours of additional work on the '69 recordings had something to do with the final decision of which one to go with.

But that highlights the difference between them right there. Keith is impulsive, spontaneous. If you're not happy with the current track, Keith's answer is to have a big party and re-record it right there, in one night. Mick's philosophy is to keep working on it, tinkering, and controlling every detail. It's just down to who they are as personalities and people.

For one thing Brown Sugar as we know it is superiour to the version with Clapton. And that's obvious why the one we know is the one we know.

It seems to me Mick 'took over' artistically of truly being the front man in 1965 during the AFTERMATH sessions. Business wise it would seem 1968 with Jumpin' Jack Flash was his first power move with the Stones, which would extend more on the 1969 tour and then with the logo in 1970 and then it became 'taking care of the band' "because" Keith was out of it for so long.

Musically it seems there was a lurch in 1974 when they started recording BLACK AND BLUE with the keyboard songs and it's just been non-stop since then.

Mick is the exception to the rule! A musical talent with a business acumen. He had the best interests of the band in mind and they knew it. The band always had a veto power but for the most part, didn't need to use it.. Everything was implied, never stated...

Quote
bmuseed
Mick is the exception to the rule! A musical talent with a business acumen. He had the best interests of the band in mind and they knew it. The band always had a veto power but for the most part, didn't need to use it.. Everything was implied, never stated...

And yet with his business acumen they did not have much to show for their efforts financially until the mega 81' 82' world tour.
I agree he is a great business man post 81' but not so sure about up to that point.

Quote
Ket
1964

Yep

Quote
duke richardson
it still has always been about the band, and Jagger knows it.

he might have been more interested than anyone else in the band in business matters, but don't forget-

Bill Wyman was quite likely the more astute businessman in the Rolling Stones, yet his input was marginalized.

And no decisions regarding what they undertook as a band were ever unilateral,

especially decisions about recording or touring. if Charlie wasn't into it, they wouldn't do it, generally..

so he kind of de facto runs the band..

duke, what in god's name are you talking about? how is Bill the more astute business man? Because he started a restaurant all on his own, or because he 'invented' metal detection?

Come on man, give us an example!

...and I apologize in advance for marginalizing his contribution!

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
duke richardson
it still has always been about the band, and Jagger knows it.

he might have been more interested than anyone else in the band in business matters, but don't forget-

Bill Wyman was quite likely the more astute businessman in the Rolling Stones, yet his input was marginalized.

And no decisions regarding what they undertook as a band were ever unilateral,

especially decisions about recording or touring. if Charlie wasn't into it, they wouldn't do it, generally..

so he kind of de facto runs the band..

duke, what in god's name are you talking about? how is Bill the more astute business man? Because he started a restaurant all on his own, or because he 'invented' metal detection?

Come on man, give us an example!

...and I apologize in advance for marginalizing his contribution!

he also invented the fretless electric bass

didn't he try to keep his eye on the contracts, and what they were actually agreeing to?

oh sure he went along with everything but that was because he had to.

and by the way he had the concept for the first easy to use guitar tuner..

the thingys that are so common nowadays..

iguess really he's the best inventor in the rolling stones.

maybe not the best businessman.

Quote
duke richardson

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
duke richardson
it still has always been about the band, and Jagger knows it.

he might have been more interested than anyone else in the band in business matters, but don't forget-

Bill Wyman was quite likely the more astute businessman in the Rolling Stones, yet his input was marginalized.

And no decisions regarding what they undertook as a band were ever unilateral,

especially decisions about recording or touring. if Charlie wasn't into it, they wouldn't do it, generally..

so he kind of de facto runs the band..

duke, what in god's name are you talking about? how is Bill the more astute business man? Because he started a restaurant all on his own, or because he 'invented' metal detection?

Come on man, give us an example!

...and I apologize in advance for marginalizing his contribution!

he also invented the fretless electric bass

didn't he try to keep his eye on the contracts, and what they were actually agreeing to?

oh sure he went along with everything but that was because he had to.

and by the way he had the concept for the first easy to use guitar tuner..

the thingys that are so common nowadays..

iguess really he's the best inventor in the rolling stones.

maybe not the best businessman.

well the best invention has to be the songs Keith and Mick wrote.

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
duke richardson

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
duke richardson
it still has always been about the band, and Jagger knows it.

he might have been more interested than anyone else in the band in business matters, but don't forget-

Bill Wyman was quite likely the more astute businessman in the Rolling Stones, yet his input was marginalized.

And no decisions regarding what they undertook as a band were ever unilateral,

especially decisions about recording or touring. if Charlie wasn't into it, they wouldn't do it, generally..

so he kind of de facto runs the band..

duke, what in god's name are you talking about? how is Bill the more astute business man? Because he started a restaurant all on his own, or because he 'invented' metal detection?

Come on man, give us an example!

...and I apologize in advance for marginalizing his contribution!

he also invented the fretless electric bass

didn't he try to keep his eye on the contracts, and what they were actually agreeing to?

oh sure he went along with everything but that was because he had to.

and by the way he had the concept for the first easy to use guitar tuner..

the thingys that are so common nowadays..

iguess really he's the best inventor in the rolling stones.

maybe not the best businessman.

well the best invention has to be the songs Keith and Mick wrote.

well, Bill invented JJF..

Quote
duke richardson

Quote
keefriffhards

Quote
duke richardson

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
duke richardson
it still has always been about the band, and Jagger knows it.

he might have been more interested than anyone else in the band in business matters, but don't forget-

Bill Wyman was quite likely the more astute businessman in the Rolling Stones, yet his input was marginalized.

And no decisions regarding what they undertook as a band were ever unilateral,

especially decisions about recording or touring. if Charlie wasn't into it, they wouldn't do it, generally..

so he kind of de facto runs the band..

duke, what in god's name are you talking about? how is Bill the more astute business man? Because he started a restaurant all on his own, or because he 'invented' metal detection?

Come on man, give us an example!

...and I apologize in advance for marginalizing his contribution!

he also invented the fretless electric bass

didn't he try to keep his eye on the contracts, and what they were actually agreeing to?

oh sure he went along with everything but that was because he had to.

and by the way he had the concept for the first easy to use guitar tuner..

the thingys that are so common nowadays..

iguess really he's the best inventor in the rolling stones.

maybe not the best businessman.

well the best invention has to be the songs Keith and Mick wrote.

well, Bill invented JJF..

ha ha thats the funniest thing i heard for weeks .