Why I no longer am happy with my favorite band

[Vector]

I am like many of you, having grown up on the Eagles and consider them one of, if not my overall favorite band. I do not need to explain why as most here are probably shaking their heads in agreement.

When they split back in 1980 I was not happy, but beyond being deprived of any new music from them, I didn't really care why they broke up. To me, they were just like many other groups who split for one reason or another. However I always said that if they ever did get back together, even if it was a special one off concert, I'd get tickets and fly almost anywhere to see them.
Of course when they went on tour to promote Hell Freezes Over, I was lucky enough to have them come to Miami, where they were flawless. I got a kick out of how they said "we never broke up, just went on a 14 year vacation". That combined with the name of their CD playing off of Henley's infamous comment, I could not imagine a better way to reunite and put the past behind them.

Based on the aforementioned you may be wondering where I have lost the faith so to speak. The reason is that I have now gotten to know why they broke up, and more about them on an individual basis. I probably would not have cared that much, but like many of you, I've watched "History of the Eagles" on Showtime. I decided to watch it not for their personal back story, but rather hoping to catch some unreleased footage, and maybe some insight on how certain songs/albums came together. After watching both parts, many things did not add up to me, so having it On Demand, I watched it again. All of a sudden I found myself getting annoyed at certain members of the band, and feeling sorry for others.
So even though this documentary was in their own words, and presumably edited with their input, I decided to delve into other sources of information to see if it could help me get my mind around what seemed like glaring inconsistencies.

To that end, I decided to read the following books, but I got them from the library rather than buy them(more on that later);

The Eagles/Vaughan
The Eagles/Jackson
Heaven & Hell/Felder

I intend on reading;

To The Limit/Eliot

But it is on backlog in the public library system. I also watched the 60 Minutes special and read at least a dozen past and present articles about them as a group and individually. I even joined this forum more as a source of research than intending on being an active member.
Keep in mind that I just finished reading all of the above and watching the Doc & 60 Minutes within the last few weeks, so everything is very fresh in my mind.

Finally, before I get to my conclusions/viewpoint and ask for other posters thoughts, let me make an observation and disclosure. My observation about some of the forum members here is that they love a particular member of the Eagles, and are quick to rush to their defense. That of course is typical of a fan who will always see things from a biased perspective. It is no different than a sports fan who always thinks the close calls are in favor of their team.
For me, I never really had a favorite band member, nor a particular member I could relate to more than any other.
Heck, other than Henley & Frey, I did not even know any of the other members names before they broke up in 1980. So I am about as unbiased a source as you can get when it comes to individual members.

Even my favorite songs seem to be evenly split between different vocalists and/or creative members behind the songs.
For example, and in no special order, my top 5 songs by them are as follows;

One Of These Nights/Henley
Take It Easy/Frey
Hotel California/Felder
Take It To The Limit/Meisner

Tequila Sunrise/Frey * Mainly because my son was born to this song

So if I had a positive bias at all, it might be a slight leaning toward Frey because he sings the song my son was born to. {I am just glad it was not to Desperado, as their greatest hits CD was playing on random in the background}

It might therefore come as a surprise to some, that despite Frey being the main guy who formed the original group members, I believe him to be the main reason for their overall problems and dissension.
While the following list is not meant to say he, and he alone is solely responsible, it shows where he is the primary antagonist;

Despite two successful albums and a 3rd in the works, he is the main guy to butt heads with Glyn Johns.

He was the main guy to butt heads with Geffen, and told Azoff to file suit and leave.

He is the main guy to come into conflict with Bernie Leadon, which ultimately led to a confrontation and Leadon leaving the band.

He is the main guy to come into conflict with Randy Meisner, which again led to a confrontation and Meisner leaving the band.

He is the main guy to come into conflict with Don Felder, which once again led to a confrontation, and ultimately led to the dissolution of the band.

When the other members wanted to get beyond the Long Run tour/blowup, Frey was the one who called it quits.

Years later when four of the five Eagles were in the studio to re-unite, it was Frey who left them standing at the alter.

When he finally decided to rejoin the Eagles, it was his demand that he and Henley get more money than the others, thereby sowing the seeds of future discontent.

After they had gotten back together, he once again was the main guy who was involved with the conflict and firing of Don Felder.

Despite all of the above as it pertains to Frey, this alone would not put me off to the overall band. However the power struggles (which include Henley), conflict, hypocrisy, ungratefulness, greed and other unsavory things I've become aware of have decidedly left a bad taste in my mouth.

The last straw for me involves their political leanings, which seems to have been a part of them from the early 1970's. While I imagine many groups of that era voted for and supported Democrats, the Eagles seem to be in a class unto themselves when it comes to liberal kooks. Jerry Brown was and is a left wing loon, and Alan Cranston was about as liberal of a senator as they come.
It is to such a great degree that I do not want to put any more of my hard earned dollars in the Eagles coffers. So rather than me buying any of the aforementioned books, I got them from the library. Had I not been able to watch and record the Doc with my DVR, I would never have paid for it precisely for the same reason.
Now this is of course a free country, and people are free to support and vote for whomever they choose. Yet the Eagles have gone well beyond their individual support and votes for liberals. They did and continue to actively try to use their fame for political causes, thereby undermining those with whom I might politically support.

As an FYI, I am not a hardline right winger, and have voted for both Democrats & Republicans. But it sickens me when the ignorant and naive Hollywood types use the platform they've achieved (because of their artistic abilities) to try and influence the rest of us. This is also true of those who vocally support hardline right wingers, but they are few and far between in the music and acting industry.

I still love to listen to the Eagles older music, as does my son who was raised listening to my CD's. Sadly for me, I was fairly naive as to who they were, what they did, and what they stood for. There is a part of me that wishes I did not get the bug to find out more about them after watching the documentary. After all, entertainers can be an escape from our day to day reality, and should not be taken to seriously.
Yet there is no escaping how hypocritical the two leaders of the Eagles are, along with their beloved manager Irving Azoff. They formed a band with an equal membership in mind because they did not like the feeling of being sidemen themselves.
Yet the greed and hubris caused Frey and to a certain extent Henley to become exactly what they despised in the early days. As a result, the magic the Eagles possessed that made them our beloved band, was the cause of them falling apart and depriving us of that great early combination of talent. We will never know how many other great hits were never to be recorded as a result.

Needless to say, I am interested in your points of view on my lengthy OP.

`

[pueblo47]

I have no problem with your post other than to correct a name: it's Bernie L eadon, not Bernie Felder.

[Annabel]

When I saw it Judy, post one said 'Bernie Leadon, not Bernie Felder' and post two said 'Bernie Leadon not Felder.' Neither said what they say now for sure. :eyebrow:

[Annabel]

Erm, my altered post doesn't even make sense now lol. Whatever. :)

[Henley Honey]

I don't agree with you at all, Vector. The band is a business -- just like a bakery is a business. Just because their "product" strikes a place in your soul rather than your stomach, doesn't mean it isn't first and foremost a business.

Frey & Henley as equal managing partners started the business with a shared vision. Each brought individual strengths and weaknesses to the partnership and between them had sufficient drive and determination to make it happen and reach their goals. If a business is to be successfully maintained or substantially increased, then change is inevitable. If their relationships with Glyn Johns, Geffen, Bernie and Felder were not in the best interest of the business as they saw it, then things needed to be changed.

Felder might have been the greatest guitar player on the planet, but if you are trying to run a successful business and you have an employee whose behavior on a day-to-day basis is derisive and contrary, then things need to be changed.

IMO, Glenn was and continues to be the driving force behind the band. He has fought to maintain his and Henley's original vision. I don't see him as the primary antagonist. I see him as a smart and savvy businessman who has also proved himself as an extraordinary musician, composer and arranger.

As far as their "political leanings" I'm glad that they are not complacent in this area. I'm glad that they are concerned about the world that they and their children live in. If their higher profile gives them greater influence to bring about change and they use that influence when and how they choose, then good for them.

Just my opinion.

[Prettymaid]

Lol! Apparently there are glitches left over from April Fool's Day.

[sodascouts]

I'm sorry for this bizarre glitch... I removed the variable replacement code on April 2 but it still seems to be happening almost randomly?? I'll try to figure out what the problem is. Until then - and I know this is annoying but - I suggest you put a space between "L" and "eadon" so that the line of code instructing all variables of "Lead0n" to be changed to "Felder" will not activate.

ie L eadon.

[Tiffanny Twisted]

I don't agree with you at all, Vector. The band is a business -- just like a bakery is a business. Just because their "product" strikes a place in your soul rather than your stomach, doesn't mean it isn't first and foremost a business.

Frey & Henley as equal managing partners started the business with a shared vision. Each brought individual strengths and weaknesses to the partnership and between them had sufficient drive and determination to make it happen and reach their goals. If a business is to be successfully maintained or substantially increased, then change is inevitable. If their relationships with Glyn Johns, Geffen, Bernie and Felder were not in the best interest of the business as they saw it, then things needed to be changed.

Felder might have been the greatest guitar player on the planet. But if your are trying to run a successful business and you have an employee whose behavior on a day-to-day basis is derisive and contrary, then things need to be changed.

IMO, Glenn was and continues to be the driving force behind the band. He has fought to maintain his and Henley's original vision. I don't see him as the primary antagonist. I see him as a smart and savvy businessman who has also proved himself as an extraordinary musician, composer and arranger.

As far as their "political leanings" I'm glad that they are not complacent in this area. I'm glad that they are concerned about the world that they and their children live in. If their higher profile gives them greater influence to bring about change and they use that influence when and how they choose, then good for them.

Just my opinion.
very well said hh..i agree:thumbsup:

[sodascouts]

Welcome, Vector! Although I am saddened by your disillusionment with the band, I respect the amount of time and thought you put into your post.

If you cannot appreciate a band's music any longer because you do not like certain members' personalities/actions, then that is your right and I certainly am not going to try to convince you that such a viewpoint is invalid.

For me, I accept that even people who don't share my viewpoints or behave in ways I approve of can make terrific music. Now, it's true I won't listen to bands who worship the devil (even if it's just a gimmick - thank God by the time I was old enough to appreciate rock, most musicians no longer found it "cool" to pretend to be Satanists). However, I also don't approve of drug use, but if I were to refuse to listen to any musician who ever did drugs, I would have a pretty empty CD shelf.

Anyway, although it probably won't make you change your mind, I think you might be oversimplifying a bit when it comes to couple of your points.


Despite two successful albums and a 3rd in the works, [Glenn] is the main guy to butt heads with Glyn Johns
While Glenn was definitely the main guy butting heads with Glyn Johns at the outset, when Desperado flopped, even Bernie - who was Johns' favorite - was saying "Glyn Johns missed it." And, as much as I love it (it's my favorite Eagles album), Desperado was most definitely not a successful album commercially.


[Glenn] was the main guy to butt heads with Geffen, and told Azoff to file suit and leave.
I assume you got this out of one of the books you read, since it wasn't in the documentary... could you remind me what your source/evidence is for this conclusion? Based on the documentary, Glenn was the reason they went to Geffen in the first place, and they all were fine with him until Geffen sold Asylum (Geffen left, not them). After Geffen left, they wanted their publishing money back and Geffen refused. That's why the lawsuit was filed... not because of some personal vendetta by Glenn.

As for the rest, Glenn definitely was involved in the band member conflicts, but he was the leader. The leader is the one who has to deal with things like Randy freaking out and refusing to perform his job, or Felder being dissatisfied and refusing to sign his contract.

Regarding politics....

I understand where you're coming from in a way. My parents are extremely conservative Republicans and I used to be one. While I became disenchanted with the party and became an independent, I am by no means a liberal either. I'm kind of an issues voter nowadays, I guess. What I've never done, though, is "punish" people who disagree with me politically by refusing to patronize their businesses/buy their products. I'm not saying you're wrong for doing that, but for me, we shouldn't just define people by their political party. That kind of thinking has led to a divisive spirit that is tearing this nation apart.... but I digress.

Now, if these guys start preaching to me at a show, that does piss me off because I don't need to be told what to think by a rock star - or anyone else, for that matter. Political pontification at shows brings me down when I'm trying to enjoy myself, especially because it's usually negative in tone (anything from snarky derision to angry rants). Thankfully, that rarely happens at an Eagles show.

I have friends on both sides of the aisle. The only people I distance myself from are hateful extremists. The Eagles are certainly not that! Regarding your examples: Jerry Brown has been kissing up to musicians (literally in some cases *cough*Linda Ronstadt*cough*) for decades. Have you also sworn off the other legions of 70s musicians Brown has gotten money from? If so, fine, but it's quite a few! The Eagles supported Cranston because he was anti-nuclear. It turns out that he also happened to be very corrupt, but how were they to know that? They were young and naive. Although many musicians often like to think they are more politically savvy than your average joe (hence the occasional pontification from the stage), they can be sold a bill of goods just like anybody else. The important thing is that they were trying to help make the world a better place. There's nothing wrong with that in my view.

But again, you have every right to your view.

[Annabel]

I'm sorry for this bizarre glitch... I removed the variable replacement code on April 2 but it still seems to be happening almost randomly?? I'll try to figure out what the problem is. Until then - and I know this is annoying but - I suggest you put a space between "L" and "eadon" so that the line of code instructing all variables of "Leadon" to be changed to "Felder" will not activate.

ie L eadon.

Ah yes the April Fools Day joke. I forgot about that. Funny thing is Soda, when you reply on this thread but scroll down, the previous posts show the real post not the altered one. (IYSWIM) I thought I was going mad for a while but it makes sense now. :hilarious:

[Vector]

`


Aside from me putting Felder instead of Leadon(or did the programming do that ;) ), there is not much to respond to in the first few replies. :lol:


`


I don't agree with you at all, Vector. The band is a business -- just like a bakery is a business. Just because their "product" strikes a place in your soul rather than your stomach, doesn't mean it isn't first and foremost a business.

Frey & Henley as equal managing partners started the business with a shared vision. Each brought individual strengths and weaknesses to the partnership and between them had sufficient drive and determination to make it happen and reach their goals. If a business is to be successfully maintained or substantially increased, then change is inevitable. If their relationships with Glyn Johns, Geffen, Bernie and Felder were not in the best interest of the business as they saw it, then things needed to be changed.

Felder might have been the greatest guitar player on the planet, but if you are trying to run a successful business and you have an employee whose behavior on a day-to-day basis is derisive and contrary, then things need to be changed.

IMO, Glenn was and continues to be the driving force behind the band. He has fought to maintain his and Henley's original vision. I don't see him as the primary antagonist. I see him as a smart and savvy businessman who has also proved himself as an extraordinary musician, composer and arranger.

As far as their "political leanings" I'm glad that they are not complacent in this area. I'm glad that they are concerned about the world that they and their children live in. If their higher profile gives them greater influence to bring about change and they use that influence when and how they choose, then good for them.

Just my opinion.

Hello, and thanks for your opinion.

However I am not sure your reply means you "do not agree at all". Instead it could mean that you agree XYZ happened, but you are ok with it. So in taking the list of examples where I believe Frey was the main antagonist/bully, you might believe every move was for "the good of the Eagles".
The same could be said about their political stance. That would be especially true if you lean in the same direction that they do.

In no way do I believe every move Frey made when it came to Glyn Johns for example, was wrong. Yet he clearly was the primary person who pushed the envelope. In some cases it might have been better for the band, in other cases it clearly was not. I would say his tactics and attitude left a lot to be desired even if he was right about certain things. Another words you can approve of the end result without approving of his methods.

Regardless, I fail to see how someone can be credited with helping to create and be a leader of something, yet also not be taken to task for the eventual unraveling of that very creation.
Taking the Felder situation as an example, it is clear the Eagles had a certain sound and creative mix without him. Yet what Frey and to a certain extent Henley wanted for the band, occurred in no small part because of Felder. Along that same line of reasoning, why insist that he be a full fledged member of the group (i.e. 1/5) when you later decide you do not like the arrangement, and try to change the rules midstream?
Much of Felder's "derisive and contrary behavior" was in fact due to Frey & Henley deciding they were entitled to a larger cut of money, and I guess they expected him to be a lamb about it.
When he wasn't, they interpreted that as him being a problem. The eventual huge settlement tells me that Felder clearly had a legitimate grievance. So his behavior was only "derisive" to those who did not get away with something they were wrong to do.


`

[Henley Honey]

`


Aside from me putting Felder instead of Leadon(or did the programming do that ;) ), there is not much to respond to in the first few replies. :lol:


`



Hello, and thanks for your opinion.

However I am not sure your reply means you "do not agree at all". Instead it could mean that you agree XYZ happened, but you are ok with it. So in taking the list of examples where I believe Frey was the main antagonist/bully, you might believe every move was for "the good of the Eagles".
The same could be said about their political stance. That would be especially true if you lean in the same direction that they do.

In no way do I believe every move Frey made when it came to Glyn Johns for example, was wrong. Yet he clearly was the primary person who pushed the envelope. In some cases it might have been better for the band, in other cases it clearly was not. I would say his tactics and attitude left a lot to be desired even if he was right about certain things. Another words you can approve of the end result without approving of his methods.

Regardless, I fail to see how someone can be credited with helping to create and be a leader of something, yet also not be taken to task for the eventual unraveling of that very creation.
Taking the Felder situation as an example, it is clear the Eagles had a certain sound and creative mix without him. Yet what Frey and to a certain extent Henley wanted for the band, occurred in no small part because of Felder. Along that same line of reasoning, why insist that he be a full fledged member of the group (i.e. 1/5) when you later decide you do not like the arrangement, and try to change the rules midstream?
Much of Felder's "derisive and contrary behavior" was in fact due to Frey & Henley deciding they were entitled to a larger cut of money, and I guess they expected him to be a lamb about it.
When he wasn't, they interpreted that as him being a problem. The eventual huge settlement tells me that Felder clearly had a legitimate grievance. So his behavior was only "derisive" to those who did not get away with something they were wrong to do.


`


What I'm saying is that I don't consider Glenn a bully. I consider him a shrewd and tough businessman. As the primary managing member -- CEO "Chief Eagle Officer" if you like, it was Glenn's right if not his responsibility to "push the envelope" when he felt it necessary. You don't have to like his decisions, but you have to respect his right as co-founder of the band to make them. You don't have to like his tactics or his attitude either. I think he could have shown a little less temper and a little more tact, but I'm not judging him.

The importance of Felder's contribution to the band is subjective and will probably be debated into the next millennium. As to the 1/5 th or full-fledged member argument -- again, I think of it in business terms. Just because I offer a new employee a profit sharing plan as part of our deal at the time of hire, doesn't mean that I can't dissolve that plan tomorrow. If I feel that an employee is becoming more of a detriment than an asset to my organization, then he's either asked to leave or I can change my mind "mid-stream" and see that he is paid proportionately to his value to me. IMO that's not being a bully. That's being a boss.

[OutlawManNJ]

Vector...

Your post was going sooooo well until you decided to bad mouth Democrats (Liberals). As if any politician is real trustworthy or as is Republicans or any political party isn't in the pockets of Lobbyists and you and I are that last thing on their minds. Too bad you had to add that. At least us liberals tend to be against invading other countries and killing their people for no good reason. Republicans seem to think thats A O K. Not to mentions spending trillions on these bogus wars that later Republicans want to save on important things like Health insurance for Americans or rebuilding our infrastructure. Republicans hate thinking about spending on Health Insurance for all Americans...and rebuilding our old infrastructure...If Democrats suggest that we are "spenders". But as soon as a Republican President decides to spend Billions a week on killing people overseas you gusy have no problem with that.


Yeah, Republicans make so much sense.

[TimothyBFan]

First and foremost, welcome Vector!!!

When I pulled up the board a bit ago, the title of this thread popped out at me and so I clicked it first and might I say, I love how you expressed yourself very respectfully with your point of view.

That being said, there are certain things in your post I could not have said better. Count me as one of those long time fans that have become disillusioned by my favorite band also and, to a degree, I'm sorry I ever watched the documentary. There's something to be said about the old saying, "ignorance is bliss". I've said on this board several times that I own all the books about these guys, and even tho the books are in my possession, I've yet to read a one of them, mainly for fear of what I might read to make me think they are less than the rock n roll Gods I have built them up to be for the several decades I have loved them. Some will say that's my own fault because I have put them on those pedestals and they are human, just like everyone else, and entitled to mistakes, etc... I get that. But to be honest, my disillusionment started a few years back. The price of the tickets, the picture taking policies, the no standing at concerts, and the members of the band actually calling people out for it, sometimes in the middle of songs, all added up and just put me off to some degree. But nothing deterred me from still loving the music and the musicians. Afterall, they had been with me through most of my life and had actually gotten me through some very tough times of loss, etc...with their music. Then came the documentary....

I had looked forward to this documentary with as much anticipation as the next person. After watching it the first time, with everyone else the night it aired, I was left with a bittersweet taste in my mouth. LOVED all the behind the scenes stuff, loved the interviews with those who were there through it all and knew these guys, etc... but some of the stuff I saw just made me angry.

I've discussed, at great length with other fans and did my own research and found enough online and through the conversations to know, I'm not the only one that felt this way and saw things that really put them off with some of the members of the band. I learned shortly after I posted my first thoughts in the documentary thread, that I was better off just keeping my mouth shut on here because, as you put it, there were those that will defend them at all cost. I'm ok with that and so I just gave up trying to defend my opinion.

As for the political stuff, I really don't care which way they lean as long as they're not ramming it down my throat. I hate when I pay money for a concert ticket, and get the artist ranting and raving about their political views-- (That's you Ted Nugent!!! I will not easily forget the political rally I attended last summer when I thought it was suppose to be a concert).

Since watching the doc the first time, I've only watched bits and pieces of it since and haven't even pre-ordered it yet. I know I will purchase it, if for no other reason because I want the bonus dvd of the concert footage.

I will always love this band and they will always be my favorite band of all time. How could they not be, they've been that since I was 11 or 12 years old, so for decades now. But I guess that's also why I can say that I have the right to be somewhat disappointed in them and some of their behavior.

[RebeccaLovesEagles]

Hi Vector and Welcome to the Border


`

Taking the Felder situation as an example, it is clear the Eagles had a certain sound and creative mix without him. Yet what Frey and to a certain extent Henley wanted for the band, occurred in no small part because of Felder. Along that same line of reasoning, why insist that he be a full fledged member of the group (i.e. 1/5) when you later decide you do not like the arrangement, and try to change the rules midstream?
Much of Felder's "derisive and contrary behavior" was in fact due to Frey & Henley deciding they were entitled to a larger cut of money, and I guess they expected him to be a lamb about it.
When he wasn't, they interpreted that as him being a problem. The eventual huge settlement tells me that Felder clearly had a legitimate grievance. So his behavior was only "derisive" to those who did not get away with something they were wrong to do.


`


This is a sticky point for me too. I feel that Glenn made him a full partner with the best of intentions. Then as Bernie and others started to leave, he realized it didn't have to be that way in order for the band to work, but by then Glenn was stuck. It did become a major source of friction and I can understand how Felder felt being cut out of what the band had agreed to.

I think a lot of the Felder/Frey stuff would have been avoided if Frey hadn't had him become a partner and just a member of the Eagles. Felder himself said he was surprised by the offer in his book and even Bernie wasn't happy about it.

That being said, Felder was made a full partner but that meant he should have had the right to see and vote on matters IMO but if you are constantly going against the other 2 partners that is going to cause trouble. I know if in my job if one person is constantly causing all the trouble, that person doesn't stay for long. Felder made that choice and if you think about it, he might have had the right but it wasn't smart. That being said I do think Glenn and Don should have included Felder, Bernie and Randy in the decisions as partners. I don't know how if everyone had an equal share how that was loss. I'd think it would have had to have been voted on, like a board of directors.

As for Glenn and Felder being the reason the Eagles separated in 1980, I think it was just a final straw. In alot of interviews in the break Felder wasn't mentioned. It was always DH and GF that were not seeing eye to eye. They couldn't write songs together anymore and they weren't agreeing on things. Without that relationship it seemed IMO it was making the whole band teeter and the Felder scene just pushed it over the edge. Any trouble between Glenn and Henley was glossed over in the Documentary but they and their friends talked about it a lot during the break.

In the end however, I still love the whole band. I go to concerts for the eagles and solo members whenever i can. I wish all the member could get along but I understand in the real world people will be people and money brings out a lot of bad characteristics. I am glad that the 4 of them are still playing and see happier. I'm loving that Bernie will be rejoining for a bit this tour. I still love Felder and have went to see him tour and he seems happy and is still very talented. I still hold out the hope that maybe he can rejoin for a few shows, but until he stops rehashing past problem that is going to be difficult(it is his choice but I dodn't think its a good on if he wants to rebuild relationships). Still I hope.

[WalshFan88]

First and foremost, welcome Vector!!!

When I pulled up the board a bit ago, the title of this thread popped out at me and so I clicked it first and might I say, I love how you expressed yourself very respectfully with your point of view.

That being said, there are certain things in your post I could not have said better. Count me as one of those long time fans that have become disillusioned by my favorite band also and, to a degree, I'm sorry I ever watched the documentary. There's something to be said about the old saying, "ignorance is bliss". I've said on this board several times that I own all the books about these guys, and even tho the books are in my possession, I've yet to read a one of them, mainly for fear of what I might read to make me think they are less than the rock n roll Gods I have built them up to be for the several decades I have loved them. Some will say that's my own fault because I have put them on those pedestals and they are human, just like everyone else, and entitled to mistakes, etc... I get that. But to be honest, my disillusionment started a few years back. The price of the tickets, the picture taking policies, the no standing at concerts, and the members of the band actually calling people out for it, sometimes in the middle of songs, all added up and just put me off to some degree. But nothing deterred me from still loving the music and the musicians. Afterall, they had been with me through most of my life and had actually gotten me through some very tough times of loss, etc...with their music. Then came the documentary....

I had looked forward to this documentary with as much anticipation as the next person. After watching it the first time, with everyone else the night it aired, I was left with a bittersweet taste in my mouth. LOVED all the behind the scenes stuff, loved the interviews with those who were there through it all and knew these guys, etc... but some of the stuff I saw just made me angry.

I've discussed, at great length with other fans and did my own research and found enough online and through the conversations to know, I'm not the only one that felt this way and saw things that really put them off with some of the members of the band. I learned shortly after I posted my first thoughts in the documentary thread, that I was better off just keeping my mouth shut on here because, as you put it, there were those that will defend them at all cost. I'm ok with that and so I just gave up trying to defend my opinion.

As for the political stuff, I really don't care which way they lean as long as they're not ramming it down my throat. I hate when I pay money for a concert ticket, and get the artist ranting and raving about their political views-- (That's you Ted Nugent!!! I will not easily forget the political rally I attended last summer when I thought it was suppose to be a concert).

Since watching the doc the first time, I've only watched bits and pieces of it since and haven't even pre-ordered it yet. I know I will purchase it, if for no other reason because I want the bonus dvd of the concert footage.

I will always love this band and they will always be my favorite band of all time. How could they not be, they've been that since I was 11 or 12 years old, so for decades now. But I guess that's also why I can say that I have the right to be somewhat disappointed in them and some of their behavior.

Very well said! I completely agree.

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Vector - I, too, believe that you have a perfect right to your opinion. I, however, do not share your opinion either. Honestly, I am rather tired of rehashing this over and over again, so I’m not going to spend a lot of time responding to you. My opinion and many others have already been stated repeatedly all over this board. If you are really that interested in reading it as you say, you can certainly feel free to read any of the threads on the board. The one down side of the documentary for me is that it does serve as a catalyst to open up this discussion again.

I do want to address some points in your post though. First of all, I am amazed that you claim to be unbiased in your opinion unlike the rest of us Eagles fans here. You are no less biased than anyone else here - in fact, even maybe more so. By your own admission, you are basing your opinion on a very limited amount of information and facts. There is lots of other information available about the band that would maybe change your mind if you were aware of it. But, then again, maybe not, since you seemed to have already made up your mind. And that is your prerogative, but, please don’t come here and claim to be the voice of reason among us frenzied fans. Just as a simple example …


The eventual huge settlement tells me that Felder clearly had a legitimate grievance. So his behavior was only "derisive" to those who did not get away with something they were wrong to do.

I could be wrong, but this statement makes me wonder how aware you are of the details of the settlement.

Many of us here do not believe that there were any angels in this band and none of them deserves to bear all the blame for what went down. Glenn is the focus and center of most of the disputes because he was the leader of the band and the one that was expected to address the issues. By, his own admission, he didn’t always handle everything as well as he could have, but to place all of the blame on him is very unfair.

Let me close by saying that, I, personally, choose to avoid the subjects of religion and politics here since, to me, they are emotionally-charged no win topics.

[sodascouts]

I'm ok with politics being discussed here as it pertains to the Eagles but anti-Democrat/liberal or anti-Republican/conservative rants are not appropriate here. If you want to talk politics outside of the context of the Eagles, start a thread in "Cheap Talk and Wine." Debate is fine as long as it's respectful and reasonable.

[Vector]

What I'm saying is that I don't consider Glenn a bully. I consider him a shrewd and tough businessman. As the primary managing member -- CEO "Chief Eagle Officer" if you like, it was Glenn's right if not his responsibility to "push the envelope" when he felt it necessary.

May I suggest that you are looking at this from a fan based lens? I say this because there are thousnads of examples of where CEO's are not brutes that rule with an iron fist, yet manage to have wildly successful companies. Warren Buffet comes to mind, and Berkshire Hathaway is not exactly small potatoes.


You don't have to like his decisions, but you have to respect his right as co-founder of the band to make them. You don't have to like his tactics or his attitude either. I think he could have shown a little less temper and a little more tact, but I'm not judging him.

I believe the first thing I disagree with, is your characterizing him as the "co-founder" of the group, as if to imply he and Henley were two of two, and picked up L-eadon (aka Felder ;) ) and Meisner as sidehands.

Based on my research all four of them had negative experiences with members being cast as sidemen, and they desired to be a group of equals. Furthermore, when Geffen suggested Frey not try to be a solo artist and form a group, that is exactly what he set out to do.
So it never started with the notion of it being Glen Frey and the Widgets, rather he set out to find a group of guys with mastery of their respective talents, to form what many would call a super group. The only reason they were not called such a thing was because none of them had made a significant name for themselves, even though they were known within the music industry as being very talented.
Yet I give the man credit as he chose wisely. Of that I am certain we both agree.:cheers:


My second objection to your post is limiting your criticism by only saying "a little less" temper and "a little more" tact. He could have done much better, even by his own admission. When you resort to, or cause others to want to have a physical confrontation, you have gone well beyond the pale. I know the drug and alcohol use were cited as examples, but to me it comes across as more of an excuse for his and the others poor behavior.

Lastly, unlike you, I am judging him, which is part of my disillusionment with the band.

The importance of Felder's contribution to the band is subjective and will probably be debated into the next millennium.

Yes it is, but only to degrees. I do not believe anyone, especially true fans could argue that had they not brought in Felder, they would not have reached the great heights they did.
Additionally Frey's vision for the groups transformation into a more R&R band was achieved precisely because he chose to bring him on board. Heck give Frey credit where credit is due, even if it means Felder get more credit as well.

As to the 1/5 th or full-fledged member argument -- again, I think of it in business terms. Just because I offer a new employee a profit sharing plan as part of our deal at the time of hire, doesn't mean that I can't dissolve that plan tomorrow.

No personal offense is intended with my next comment, but you are characterizing it incorrectly. Felder was not hired as an employee. If he had been your analogy would be sound. Instead he was brought in as a 1/5 partner, so he was a partial owner equal to every other member of the band. The irony is that it was again Frey who, through his force of will, insisted on it. Heck L-eadon who was Felders best friend, grumbled about it to no avail. Of course part of his objection was based on the direction Frey wanted to take the band, and adding his buddy Felder was a step in that direction. Had Felder just been hired as a sideman, he could have been jettisoned with any trouble.


If I feel that an employee is becoming more of a detriment than an asset to my organization, then he's either asked to leave or I can change my mind "mid-stream" and see that he is paid proportionately to his value to me. IMO that's not being a bully. That's being a boss.

Without the need to be redundant, your comparative analogy does not fly. They all signed a contract and Incorporated as equals within the corporation. So they were all bound to each other legally, and no mid-stream changes could occur.

On a side note, things are much worse than that in my view, but I am going to save that for later as it involves Azoff, and what I perceive as his conflict of interest. Don't get me wrong, the guy was/is shrewed and knew where the bread was buttered. But being the Eagles manager and also each individual members manager was a conflict waiting to happen.


`

[Vector]

`

First let me say I intend on responding to everyone, but it might take some time. Also thanks to everyone who offered a warm welcome. As a lifelong fan I knew many would welcome me, but I also knew that my critisism/view would draw the ire of others.

`


Vector...

Your post was going sooooo well until you decided to bad mouth Democrats (Liberals). As if any politician is real trustworthy or as is Republicans or any political party isn't in the pockets of Lobbyists and you and I are that last thing on their minds. Too bad you had to add that. At least us liberals tend to be against invading other countries and killing their people for no good reason. Republicans seem to think thats A O K. Not to mentions spending trillions on these bogus wars that later Republicans want to save on important things like Health insurance for Americans or rebuilding our infrastructure. Republicans hate thinking about spending on Health Insurance for all Americans...and rebuilding our old infrastructure...If Democrats suggest that we are "spenders". But as soon as a Republican President decides to spend Billions a week on killing people overseas you gusy have no problem with that.


Yeah, Republicans make so much sense.

To be perfectly honest with you, I knew it would be risky to mix in the political aspect, especially this being my first post/thread. I do not plan on getting into a partisan debate, and will elaborate on that further when I respond to Sodascouts thoughtful reply.
Suffice it to say, it is but one aspect of the overall picture, and will be dealt with on a limited basis from a personal perspective.

`

[AEW21]

Sadly (or actually, maybe for the best) the older we get, the more we're able to see that our "idols" are not perfect, and have faults, just like the rest of us. Frankly, if you peer into the minds and reasonings of any creative type, you're going to find things you might not like or approve of, or disappoint you. The question is, can you separate those feelings from your feelings for the art they've created? In other words, can you "dislike" the artists, but still love the art they made? it's different for everyone. For me, while I might not agree with everything my favorite actor or director or singer, whatever, does in their personal life, it doesn't, for the most part, affect my love for the performance itself. Once released into the world, it has a life separate, some might say bigger, than the artist him/herself. I now pretty much detest Mel Gibson, but I still love his work in "Year of Living Dangerously." I in no way approve of Elia Kazazn's participation in the naming names during the Hollywood Blacklist era, but that doesn't mean I don't think "On the Waterfront" is a masterpiece.

So when you say the doc has tainted your view or the band and their music--don't your personal memories regarding a song trump notions stirred up by the doc? Cling to where you were and why you loved it when you heard "Lying Eyes" or "Take it Easy" or "Hotel California," and how the song made/makes you feel personally. The guys always intended the songs to be bigger than them and whatever personnel made up the band at that time. The music speaks for itself, and how it speaks to you, more importantly than anything else. Band politics or politics of any kind shouldn't interfere with your enjoyment of the music. If it does, I'd advise to take a step back, and let your associations with the doc cool down. Hopefully you'll be able to listen to an album in a month or so and rediscover what made you love them in the first place, before you knew what was "behind the curtain," so to speak. You don't have to approve of all their choices and statements by liking their songs again. Apprecisting their craft dorsn't mean you blanket-accept them at their best and worst. It just means you appreciate how the creative alchemy of those men made some damn good music.

As for the "Glenn was a bully" generalization--could he have handled things better over the years? Sure. Did all of his comments and actions in the doc thrill me? No. But I have no idea what it is like to lead a super-selling band, so who am I to question him? (And I'm sure much more went on behind the scenes than we know, thst went past just Glenn. He's the "press secretary," so to speak, that is the public face of these decisions, but I think Irving and Don play a much larger role than the doc let on.)

It's an accomplishment to have a band last for over 40 years, and I think that was always his and Don's goal--to have the band---No, the band's music--endure past all the fads and ups and downs of music, and the ups and downs of personalities. For them to accomplish that legacy, they felt they had to add or lose members as time went on. One of them said once, the band outgrew certain members, and in think, in their logic, that was true. It's sad and it sucks and maybe the way they went about it wasn't as gracious as it could have been, but the music has always survived, and I think that's what Glenn always wanted. Band business and politics ain't pretty, but a band isn't some magical utopia with no conflict. Nothing in this world is a utopia with no conflict. They did they best they could, and everyone know seems the happier (or at least content) with the changes. Even Don Felder, while he might wish he was in the band again, must appreciate the creative freedom of being on his own now.

In comparison to the ups and downs and dramas of other rock groups, I think the Eagles are typical or even rather mild. It's a success that they've lasted 40 years, and the members have all survived past their excesses into family men in their 60s. if they hadn't made those tough decisions and separations at various times, who knows what the status of the men and the music would be now?

Lord, sorry, this was really long!!

[bluefox4000]

Short Answer.....and I'm totally serious. I've never put a band I like on a pedestal. Closest I came was the beatles. I quickly came out of that though. I couldn't care less what dealings go on backstage. Do I like the music? Good....I'm in.

Mick

[RebeccaLovesEagles]

Very well said AEW:thumbsup:

[desperado]

Short Answer.....and I'm totally serious. I've never put a band I like on a pedestal. Closest I came was the beatles. I quickly came out of that though. I couldn't care less what dealings go on backstage. Do I like the music? Good....I'm in.

Mick

well said bluefox!

[Topkat]

This is a sticky point for me too. I feel that Glenn made him a full partner with the best of intentions. Then as Bernie and others started to leave, he realized it didn't have to be that way in order for the band to work, but by then Glenn was stuck. It did become a major source of friction and I can understand how Felder felt being cut out of what the band had agreed

RebeccaLovesEagles

I think a lot of the Felder/Frey stuff would have been avoided if Frey hadn't had him become a partner and just a member of the Eagles. Felder himself said he was surprised by the offer in his book and even Bernie wasn't happy about it.

That being said, Felder was made a full partner but that meant he should have had the right to see and vote on matters IMO but if you are constantly going against the other 2 partners that is going to cause trouble. I know if in my job if one person is constantly causing all the trouble, that person doesn't stay for long. Felder made that choice and if you think about it, he might have had the right but it wasn't smart. That being said I do think Glenn and Don should have included Felder, Bernie and Randy in the decisions as partners. I don't know how if everyone had an equal share how that was loss. I'd think it would have had to have been voted on, like a board of directors.


When you say here that Felder was "causing all the trouble" do we really have any real information as to exactly what this "trouble" was??? It is speculated that he didn't "agree that Henley & Frey deserved more money than him"....So you expect him to agree to that?? Do you just expect him to say, "Sure guys just take more money than me, you deserve more?" Of course not. Who could blame him for that??? I don't know if there were other arguments, if they were having creative differences or about anything else, but mainly it was about the written contract that they had about the money, so he was fighting for what he believed he deserved & what was in his contract.

[RebeccaLovesEagles]

RebeccaLovesEagles


When you say here that Felder was "causing all the trouble" do we really have any real information as to exactly what this "trouble" was??? It is speculated that he didn't "agree that Henley & Frey deserved more money than him"....So you expect him to agree to that?? Do you just expect him to say, "Sure guys just take more money than me, you deserve more?" Of course not. Who could blame him for that??? I don't know if there were other arguments, if they were having creative differences or about anything else, but mainly it was about the written contract that they had about the money, so he was fighting for what he believed he deserved & what was in his contract.

I agree with everything you said. :hilarious::hilarious:

I just meant regrettably as it was if you are 1/3 going against 2/3 it usually means right or not ; things won't go your way. I never said it was right actually i said I do think Glenn and Don should have included Felder, Bernie and Randy in the decisions as partners. I don't know how if everyone had an equal share how that was loss. I'd think it would have had to have been voted on, like a board of directors.

[Henley Honey]

I appreciate your POV, Vector. We'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

[TimothyBFan]

AEW21, very well said and a lot of fuel for thought. Especially the part about the music being larger than the Eagles themselves. That's why I can overlook the bad stuff-their music is like an old friend who's been with me through thick and thin.

[EaglesKiwi]

The question is, can you separate those feelings from your feelings for the art they've created? In other words, can you "dislike" the artists, but still love the art they made?
Firstly, welcome Vector. I appreciate the amount of thought you put into your posts. As I was reading I was mentally composing my response, then saw that AEW21 has covered most of it off brilliantly (and bluefox - so succinct!).

I will just add - everybody in our lives will do things that we don't agree with, and if they're important (e.g. family) we learn to separate the behaviour from the people. In this case perhaps you can separate the behaviour from the music.

Also - they didn't have to make a documentary that exposed their less-than-angelic behaviour. In choosing to do so, I feel they're allowing us to see that the music does transcend the personalities and conflicts. JMHO.

[Vector]

I must say that I am impressed with the civility and well thought out replies. Heck every time I sit down to take the time to respond to Sodascouts reply(it will take some time since it covers so many aspects of this discussion), I read another great reply like TimotyBfans. So even though I've skipped a few to address others, I will certainly enjoy responding to everyone.


If you are really that interested in reading it as you say, you can certainly feel free to read any of the threads on the board.

Well I signed up weeks ago, but held off on posting because I was still in the midst of reading the books/articles and doing further research. That includes getting a feel for this site and a couple of posts helped lead me to different sources of information.


The one down side of the documentary for me is that it does serve as a catalyst to open up this discussion again.

To you this might all be old hat, but to others such as myself it is all new. As TimothyBfan so eloquently pointed out, there are other reasons the Doc has had a negative effect on some of us. However what true Eagles fan could have resisted watching it.

I do want to address some points in your post though. First of all, I am amazed that you claim to be unbiased in your opinion unlike the rest of us Eagles fans here. You are no less biased than anyone else here - in fact, even maybe more so.

Maybe I am missing something, but I'm not sure how much more unbiased one could be, starting with the premise of only knowing two of the seven band members name when I started on this quest. Outside of a person who hummed along to certain tunes but didn't even know a group called the Eagles recorded them, I was about as blank of a canvas as could be.

I even provided a disclosure saying if I did have a slight bias, it would be in Frey's favor because Tequila Sunrise was playing during my sons birth, and therefore became one of my favorite Eagles songs.

I think the only thing I failed to mention was that my perception of why they broke up long ago was due to Frey and Henley not getting along. Since they were the only two I'd heard of back then, I just assumed it was true. Needless to say the Doc seemed to gloss over their conflicts and inability to work with each other toward the end. However as we know from other sources, they were at odds much more than they want us to believe.

By your own admission, you are basing your opinion on a very limited amount of information and facts.

Again, maybe I am missing something, but between watching both parts of the Doc several times(also going back and forth to sections with my DVR), and reading all the books I listed except for one on backorder, how much more is there? I've watched several interviews (i.e. 60 Minutes), read different articles, some of which I found linked here, and so on.

There is lots of other information available about the band that would maybe change your mind if you were aware of it. But, then again, maybe not, since you seemed to have already made up your mind. And that is your prerogative, but, please don’t come here and claim to be the voice of reason among us frenzied fans.

First, please list any and all information outside of what I listed in the OP, you think might be helpful/relevant to understanding the bands history. My view is not yet set in stone, but is certainly forming based on many things being confirmed by cross referencing at least two sources, sometimes more.
So if the way I worded my OP was clumsy enough to suggest my view is intractable, that was a failing on my part.
Lastly, I did not intend to demean fans on this forum for being biased toward their particular favorite. My only intention was to point out that fans of anything can tend to see things with a bias they may not be able to control, or even are aware of.
I on the other hand do not have a horse in the race, so I do believe my research and perspective is arrived at from a less biased viewpoint.



I could be wrong, but this statement makes me wonder how aware you are of the details of the settlement.

My knowledge does not go beyond what is publicly known without the benefit of any special sources.
If you have details/sources that can further educate me on this, please feel free to provide them as I will take the time to investigate them.

Many of us here do not believe that there were any angels in this band and none of them deserves to bear all the blame for what went down.

I agree to a certain extent in that no one person is totally to blame. Yet I cannot bring myself to believe that out of the original 5, Randy Meisner was as bad as some of the others. By all accounts he was about as inoffensive as a person could be. He seemed very laid back, shy, naive, etc., and it even comes across listening to him in interviews, both past and present. As to the two "newer guys" Schmit seems to be out of the same mold. While not part of much of the conflict, he became aware of it early on, yet kept his head down. He handles himself with grace and dignity even in the face of his recent battle with cancer. As to Walsh and his multiple personalities(I say that affectionately) he also is more of a go along type of guy. Though I really enjoyed his Doc segments, I think he made an inaccurate statement by describing everyone but Meisner as all "Alphas". Certainly Schmit was more assertive on stage and in his self confidence, but he was no Alpha in the group. For that matter neither was Walsh when it came to bucking heads with Henley or Frey. I believe it is in part because of as he put it, he was in awe of those two, and not as confident in his abilities. That came as a surprise to me, but he is also humble enough to be that forthright.
But I digress.

Glenn is the focus and center of most of the disputes because he was the leader of the band and the one that was expected to address the issues. By, his own admission, he didn’t always handle everything as well as he could have, but to place all of the blame on him is very unfair.

I think we can agree here to some extent as well. As captain of a ship, it is up to you to keep things in order and make certain decisions. However it is also your responsibility to make sure the ship makes it safely to harbor with everyone aboard.
So when he made the self admission he could have handled things better, I respected him for that.
However where he really hurt himself was in the next breath he pat himself on the back saying he had done a better job this time around. I'm sure from his perspective he did. Clearly he is older, wiser, and presumably drug and alcohol free. That combined with much less vinegar flowing through his veins, and he probably is not as confrontational.

Yet by his demand and insistence he and Henley get more money as he put it, he started off on the wrong foot, and ultimately sowed the seeds of discontent when they started anew.



`

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Welcome to The Border, Vector!

[sad-cafe]

I don't agree with you at all, Vector. The band is a business -- just like a bakery is a business. Just because their "product" strikes a place in your soul rather than your stomach, doesn't mean it isn't first and foremost a business.

Frey & Henley as equal managing partners started the business with a shared vision. Each brought individual strengths and weaknesses to the partnership and between them had sufficient drive and determination to make it happen and reach their goals. If a business is to be successfully maintained or substantially increased, then change is inevitable. If their relationships with Glyn Johns, Geffen, Bernie and Felder were not in the best interest of the business as they saw it, then things needed to be changed.

Felder might have been the greatest guitar player on the planet, but if you are trying to run a successful business and you have an employee whose behavior on a day-to-day basis is derisive and contrary, then things need to be changed.

IMO, Glenn was and continues to be the driving force behind the band. He has fought to maintain his and Henley's original vision. I don't see him as the primary antagonist. I see him as a smart and savvy businessman who has also proved himself as an extraordinary musician, composer and arranger.

As far as their "political leanings" I'm glad that they are not complacent in this area. I'm glad that they are concerned about the world that they and their children live in. If their higher profile gives them greater influence to bring about change and they use that influence when and how they choose, then good for them.

Just my opinion.


Agreed

[sad-cafe]

Vector...

Your post was going sooooo well until you decided to bad mouth Democrats (Liberals). As if any politician is real trustworthy or as is Republicans or any political party isn't in the pockets of Lobbyists and you and I are that last thing on their minds. Too bad you had to add that. At least us liberals tend to be against invading other countries and killing their people for no good reason. Republicans seem to think thats A O K. Not to mentions spending trillions on these bogus wars that later Republicans want to save on important things like Health insurance for Americans or rebuilding our infrastructure. Republicans hate thinking about spending on Health Insurance for all Americans...and rebuilding our old infrastructure...If Democrats suggest that we are "spenders". But as soon as a Republican President decides to spend Billions a week on killing people overseas you gusy have no problem with that.


Yeah, Republicans make so much sense.


yup! I was quite offended at the "liberal Kook" label, but being new, didn't want to really address the politics. I LOVE that my Eagles are Democrats and very active in trying to make the world a better place!

[Topkat]

I don't agree with you at all, Vector. The band is a business -- just like a bakery is a business. Just because their "product" strikes a place in your soul rather than your stomach, doesn't mean it isn't first and foremost a business.

Frey & Henley as equal managing partners started the business with a shared vision. Each brought individual strengths and weaknesses to the partnership and between them had sufficient drive and determination to make it happen and reach their goals. If a business is to be successfully maintained or substantially increased, then change is inevitable. If their relationships with Glyn Johns, Geffen, Bernie and Felder were not in the best interest of the business as they saw it, then things needed to be changed.

Felder might have been the greatest guitar player on the planet, but if you are trying to run a successful business and you have an employee whose behavior on a day-to-day basis is derisive and contrary, then things need to be changed.

IMO, Glenn was and continues to be the driving force behind the band. He has fought to maintain his and Henley's original vision. I don't see him as the primary antagonist. I see him as a smart and savvy businessman who has also proved himself as an extraordinary musician, composer and arranger.

As far as their "political leanings" I'm glad that they are not complacent in this area. I'm glad that they are concerned about the world that they and their children live in. If their higher profile gives them greater influence to bring about change and they use that influence when and how they choose, then good for them.

Just my opinion.


I will have to disagree with this. As you say, this is a "business", but when they formed this band, there was an "equal partnership" between them. Randy, Don Felder & Bernie were not "Hired Help" here. There were legal contracts drawn up between them, which included financial & decision making in the band, so to say that Frey & Henley were equally managing partners is not really correct.
Their relationships with all of them including Johns, & Geffen contributed hugely to their success. They wouldn't be where they are today if not for the contributions of all of these other people. Once again, the Eagles are a band, not just Frey & Henley.

[sad-cafe]

Felder wasn't even an original Eagle. He didn't join until the 3rd album. He is disgruntled and comes off as a whiner and he just needs to "get over it"

[Vector]

I'm just about to head off to dinner, but will return later tonight to catch up on some replies.

In the mean time I just want to touch on the political aspect a few have objected to. First when I said "liberal kooks", I was not referring to (D's) in general, nor anyone here.
Rather I specifically mentioned Jerry Brown (aka Gov Moonbeam) and Sen Alan Cranston. Both of them were mentioed in the book/doc and were on the fringes of the political left.
As I've mentioned, while I personally lean right, I've voted for (D's) and will continue to, if they are the right person for the position.

While this discussion might involve a little political comment as it pertains to the Eagles(in both the doc/books), I'd prefer not to get mired down in partisan debate.

So let's just discuss the merits or lack thereof of what you think about my research/view, and how it compares with yours.
:cheers:

`

[Ive always been a dreamer]

First of all, I neglected to welcome you in my first post, Vector, so let me officially say “welcome” now.

I want clarify that I am an old hat Eagles fan and have been discussing the acrimony in the band in varying degrees since Felder was fired, so, personally, I really have grown tired of the whole thing. However, I realize that this isn’t all about me, and I understand that fans still find it worth talking about. So, I didn’t mean to sound chastising about it, but, at the same time, I don’t have much else to add to the discussion aside from giving my opinion if I think something is being unfairly represented.

Vector, you believe that less information makes you more objective. I happen to believe if you don’t have all the facts in a situation, then there is no way that you are able to judge the situation in an unbiased manner. So, that includes all of us here, since none of us are in that position. But, the more information and perspectives that you do have enables you to judge a situation more objectively. Unfortunately, some of the information that is available about the band can’t all be found on the internet. In particular, I’m referring to articles and interviews that were given throughout the band’s history. Soda acquired lots and lots of them and used to have them posted on the online sites. However, she took them down due to potential copyright issues, but I read virtually all of them, in addition to every known published book. I’m sure that there are even more out there that I haven’t read, but for me, the more I read, the more insight I have gotten about the band. I don’t mean to sound like I know it all, but, for me, more is better.

As far as the information about the lawsuit, there is a lot of information about it in Felder’s Heaven and Hell book thread. There are lots of opinions in that thread, but there is also a lot of factual information as well, particularly about the details of what is publicly known about the lawsuit.


Yet by his demand and insistence he and Henley get more money as he put it, he started off on the wrong foot, and ultimately sowed the seeds of discontent when they started anew.

With regard to this comment, I get the impression that most fans who feel Felder was treated unfairly feel the same as you do. Folks are certainly entitled to that opinion, but there are many others who believe it was absolutely fair. As Glenn said in the documentary, Joe and Timothy were also okay with it, but Felder was not. However, he did sign the contract and, to me, should have been at peace with his decision upon doing so. By continuously complaining many years after agreeing to the terms, the other viewpoint is that Felder sowed the seeds of discontent. I happen to believe that the contract was just part of the problem, and all of the events leading up to Felder’s firing are more complex. But, again, I have already explained my view on this many other times, so I am going to leave it at that.

[WalshFan88]

Felder wasn't even an original Eagle. He didn't join until the 3rd album.

This is a band where the original lineup was NOT the best lineup IMO, nor the most successful. I'll leave it at that.

[Tori]

My stance on this is that I could not care less about the business side of this band. The Felder thing happened - yeah, it was badly handled and all that, but the past is behind us. As long as these guys keep making music, I'm good. I do have specific feelings about how Frey and Henley handled the situation.... but that's all I'm going to say about that, I think. I could go so much more in depth with this, but I have AP Chemistry homework and honestly, arguing with people on the Internet - even if they have well thought out, respectful opinions and arguements - is a waste of my time.

[AstraeaLunaAvani]

Welcome, Vector! Sorry i'm a few days late in replying, I don't get online often.

I found it quite interesting that this documentary made you like the band less, where it made me like them more! In fact I became obsessed immediately as I watched it, and before this I was only a casual fan who only liked maybe 3 or 4 songs! Interesting how this documentary has affected people differently!

I do agree with most of what you said though, and that probably makes no sense given what my previous paragraph said, :hilarious: but even though I love a band, I can still see the flaws and love them anyway. For me, it's more about the music than the politics or the business aspect. Honestly, I pay very little attention to that when I get into a band. I wish music didn't have to involve business. Music is art, it's creative expression. Which is pretty much the opposite of what a business is. So sad they have to go hand in hand in order for a band to make it big.

[Houston Debutante]

I must say that I am impressed with the civility and well thought out replies.


In my experience, everyone here is free to express their opinions ~ even Felder apologists ~ as long as they do it respectfully. I like that. You'll see some people handle debate better than others though. I'm glad you're not one of those people who gets all affronted and pouty if someone challenges them.

[Prettymaid]

I'm glad you quoted that part HD. I'm proud of our group for that reason.

Welcome to The Border, Vector! I hope you'll stick around and join other discussions.

[Vector]

Welcome, Vector! Although I am saddened by your disillusionment with the band, I respect the amount of time and thought you put into your post.

If you cannot appreciate a band's music any longer because you do not like certain members' personalities/actions, then that is your right and I certainly am not going to try to convince you that such a viewpoint is invalid.

Thanks for the welcome and certainly for the thoughtful reply.

I have not lost my appreciation for the bands music that I always enjoyed. I suspect however that their newer material might be less likely to catch on with me. My overall perception of them has changed, and not for the better in many cases as we will see.

However, I also don't approve of drug use, but if I were to refuse to listen to any musician who ever did drugs, I would have a pretty empty CD shelf.

It is funny that you would mention the drug use, as that is something that bothered me as well. Despite coming of age in the 80's, I never did a single drug in my life. This despite me looking like I did with longer hair very similar to Frey's & Meisner's. My father would always say after I got back from a haircut, "which one of them did you have cut".
Having said that, in those days I really didn't care who was doing what drug because I was not aware of all the negative aspects it had on others, and society as a whole. I left it out of my OP since I was already mentioning a bunch of other disturbing revelations about the band, but it is another thing I find not to like about them.


While Glenn was definitely the main guy butting heads with Glyn Johns at the outset, when Desperado flopped, even Bernie - who was Johns' favorite - was saying "Glyn Johns missed it." And, as much as I love it (it's my favorite Eagles album), Desperado was most definitely not a successful album commercially.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but lets not forget Johns was a world famous producer who helped make some of the greats R&R bands in the world. So he most likely knew what he was talking about.
I'm sure he felt vindicated when those songs and the album became such a smash.

As to the Bernie comment, you certainly got the wording correct, but I was under the impression he was saying the band had felt "that Johns had missed it", not specifically himself. I'd need to go back and listen to it again to be sure.
Regardless, them leaving Johns might very well have been a blessing in the long run, as he might not have allowed them to develop into the R&R side of things as much. This is therefore an example of how Frey might have helped make the right decision, but was never the less caustic in the way he went about things. Hence it made my list despite possibly being the right move.


I assume you got this out of one of the books you read, since it wasn't in the documentary... could you remind me what your source/evidence is for this conclusion? Based on the documentary, Glenn was the reason they went to Geffen in the first place, and they all were fine with him until Geffen sold Asylum (Geffen left, not them). After Geffen left, they wanted their publishing money back and Geffen refused. That's why the lawsuit was filed... not because of some personal vendetta by Glenn.

Although the books are the freshest in my mind, I have read many a magazine interview, watched interviews like 60 Minutes or the plethora of ones on Youtube that all seem to meld together. In one of the interviews it was mentioned that Azoff felt he needed to stand up for them, and Frey relished the thought. It was said that Frey actually enjoyed how Azoff "terrorized" the powers in the front office.
Now I agree with you that Geffen and Frey were tight in the beginning, gave Frey great advice, and later through Frey's persistence, gave the Eagles their first shot. As to who left who, I think Geffen probably was right to separate his new position from managing them, hence the reason he broke off Azoff and Elliott to watch over the Eagles. Clearly the Eagles saw it differently, but there was a lesson to be learned there by Azoff that he never applied as it pertained to him eventually managing Eagles Ltd., and also being each individuals members manager as well. Felder clearly saw the conflict as things developed, but by then Henley and Frey were locked at the hip, and Azoff knew where his bread was buttered. The Doc does cover Geffen giving the publishing money back to Jackson Brown, which prompted the Eagles to say "where the hell is ours". However at the time, it was not a common industry practice, and Geffen "thought it very ungrateful of them". From Geffen's point of view he gave the Eagles their start, convinced a reluctant world renowned producer to take them on, and helped them through several successful albums.

Now of course Henley made an interesting comment saying "lets face it, we were idiots to have signed that contract", but at the time, it was standard fare.
That is not to say they should never have negotiated a better one down the road, but to up and file a lawsuit based on not getting what another artist got, was a slap in the face to Geffen.
In fairness to the Eagles, they were also concerned that the Asylum sale/merger with Warner Communications would include the Eagles copyrights. So there are certainly no innocent parties involved in big time business decisions like the one between Geffen and the Eagles.

As for the rest, Glenn definitely was involved in the band member conflicts, but he was the leader. The leader is the one who has to deal with things like Randy freaking out and refusing to perform his job, or Felder being dissatisfied and refusing to sign his contract.

I agree, but also believe that you can lead with the carrot or the stick. Some find the right balance like a coach with different personalities of team members.
Some need just a simple pat on the back, others need fawning/encouragement, and still others need a swift kick in the a$$. The issue with Meisner was deplorable in my view based on everything I've researched. This comes mainly from sources outside the Doc. Watching the way it was explained in the Doc, you'd be left with the impression that because Meisner was concerned about his voice and ability to hit the high notes after a night of debauchery, that was his only reason for occasionally refusing to sing it.
However there were plenty of other things going on behind the scenes that helped to tear down his fragile confidence. Regardless, you don't take one of your best guys (who lets not forget was a equal partner), and who sang one of the most popular songs, and just badger him until he quits. A great leader would either find a way to reach him, or find someone else who could.

As to Felder refusing to sign a contract, again we get back to Frey taking a "my way or the highway" attitude. That is not being a great leader, especially in dealing with a fellow owner of the group. So while I respect Frey as a gifted songwriter, singer, and musician, he was ill suited to be the leader of men.

Regarding politics....

I understand where you're coming from in a way. My parents are extremely conservative Republicans and I used to be one. While I became disenchanted with the party and became an independent, I am by no means a liberal either. I'm kind of an issues voter nowadays, I guess. What I've never done, though, is "punish" people who disagree with me politically by refusing to patronize their businesses/buy their products. I'm not saying you're wrong for doing that, but for me, we shouldn't just define people by their political party. That kind of thinking has led to a divisive spirit that is tearing this nation apart.... but I digress.

This is a touchy subject, but it certainly played a part in my view on them, so I included it in my OP. I certainly do not want to get into a partisan debate between various forum members about their politics. Suffice to say that if someone like Ted Nugent was not known to be a bombastic right winger, yet one of his unknowing liberal fans discovered that about him, it might change their perspective somewhat.
That is not to say they would stop listening to their favorite hits of his, but it might have them decide not to financially support him in the future.
Regardless, I'd like to keep that aspect to a minimum unless it pertains directly to the Eagles.

Regarding your examples: Jerry Brown has been kissing up to musicians (literally in some cases *cough*Linda Ronstadt*cough*) for decades. Have you also sworn off the other legions of 70s musicians Brown has gotten money from?

The Eagles supported Cranston because he was anti-nuclear. It turns out that he also happened to be very corrupt, but how were they to know that? They were young and naive.

Like I said, I really never have paid attention to what goes on behind the curtain with musical groups, including the Eagles. If they were generally (D's) or (R's) it would not have fazed me. Even if they put signs out on their lawn and that was seen on the Doc, I would not have cared as that is the American way. But when I see them doing fundraisers for some of the most liberal (and in Browns case kooky) politicians, it gives me pause. Young and naive or not, they were actively supporting people on the extreme left, not reflective of typical (D's) of the time.


Regarding all this, I wonder how the other band members felt? I have not read or heard about L-eadon or Meisners politics. Yet most country musicians who speak out tend to be (R's), so L eadon might have not liked Frey/Henleys enthusiasm for ultra liberal causes/politicians?
Meisner was from Nebraska, not exactly a blue state. Yet he seemed so easy going, I doubt he had any strong political leanings, one way or the other.
Felder comes across as ambivalent, but gleening his personality from his book, he might very well have not liked Cranston. Yet how could he butt heads with Frey/Henley at that point if they were making most decisions for the band.

Anyway, I think entertainers would be well served to keep their political views to themselves, lest they upset one half of their fan base, or the other.

`

[Topkat]

Quote from Vector
QUOTE]
Regarding all this, I wonder how the other band members felt? I have not read or heard about L-eadon or Meisners politics. Yet most country musicians who speak out tend to be (R's), so L eadon might have not liked Frey/Henleys enthusiasm for ultra liberal causes/politicians?
Meisner was from Nebraska, not exactly a blue state. Yet he seemed so easy going, I doubt he had any strong political leanings, one way or the other.
Felder comes across as ambivalent, but gleening his personality from his book, he might very well have not liked Cranston. Yet how could he butt heads with Frey/Henley at that point if they were making most decisions for the band.

Anyway, I think entertainers would be well served to keep their political views to themselves, lest they upset one half of their fan base, or the other.
[/QUOTE

Regarding Don Felder, he said in his interview that he didn't follow politics at that time, & had no idea who Cranston was or what he was about, which is why he made the statement, "I think" that made Glenn so furious with him, which turned into the concert from hell with the two of them about to duke it out right on the stage....In my opinion, Frey over reacted here & took this to a whole new level... Felder said he was not involved in politics, so he was just clueless about this guy.

[Vector]

First and foremost, welcome Vector!!!

When I pulled up the board a bit ago, the title of this thread popped out at me and so I clicked it first and might I say, I love how you expressed yourself very respectfully with your point of view.

Thanks for the welcome, and let me say yours is a reply I can relate to on several levels.

That being said, there are certain things in your post I could not have said better. Count me as one of those long time fans that have become disillusioned by my favorite band also and, to a degree, I'm sorry I ever watched the documentary. There's something to be said about the old saying, "ignorance is bliss".

When it comes to the Eagles, I almost wish I were still in ignorant bliss. I cannot explain why this Doc grabbed me in the way it did, because I am normally not into stuff like this. Heck I will not even watch the SB anymore until the game starts because of all the back stories about every players upbringing and opinion. As I mentioned earlier, I was more or less a blank canvas when it came to who they were as individuals, and why they broke up. I more or less thought it was a spat between Henley & Frey and didn't give it another thought. My only hope was that some day they would get back together, and that I'd make every effort to see them, even if it were a one off concert.

I've said on this board several times that I own all the books about these guys, and even tho the books are in my possession, I've yet to read a one of them, mainly for fear of what I might read to make me think they are less than the rock n roll Gods I have built them up to be for the several decades I have loved them. Some will say that's my own fault because I have put them on those pedestals and they are human, just like everyone else, and entitled to mistakes, etc... I get that.

Reading the books can be a double edged sword. On the one hand it will certainly fill in a lot of the gaps and inconsistencies. However it will further expose the seedy underbelly the Doc did not cover. While I commend both Frey and Henley allowing "others to have their say", you get the feeling they had sugar coated some of their flaws and accentuated other peoples.
So while I'd encourage any fan who likes information about what goes on behind the scenes to read the books, I'd caution those who do not want to see the Eagles grounded with oil on their feathers.

But to be honest, my disillusionment started a few years back. The price of the tickets, the picture taking policies, the no standing at concerts, and the members of the band actually calling people out for it, sometimes in the middle of songs, all added up and just put me off to some degree.

While I have read a few of these accounts, fortunately I never experienced it. Then again, I've only seen them once since they got back together, early on during HFO. If I were a fan and was treated that way, I'd be pissed off also.

But nothing deterred me from still loving the music and the musicians. Afterall, they had been with me through most of my life and had actually gotten me through some very tough times of loss, etc...with their music.

I'm with you in that regard. Even if I thought Frey was Hitler & Satan all rolled into one, how could I not get a warm feeling when Tequila Sunrise came on the radio. Fortunately my view of him is not anywhere near that bad, but he certainly put me off more than any other member of the band. Then again if you read Felder's book, it seems as if Henley was certainly not an angel either. Heck some of Frey's personal issues might be attributable to Henley and his demand for perfection. Felder is very complimentary about both of them, yet he paints a picture of how their habits/quirks affected each other, and other members of the band.


Then came the documentary....

I had looked forward to this documentary with as much anticipation as the next person. After watching it the first time, with everyone else the night it aired, I was left with a bittersweet taste in my mouth. LOVED all the behind the scenes stuff, loved the interviews with those who were there through it all and knew these guys, etc... but some of the stuff I saw just made me angry.

Again, you hit the nail on the head. My motivation was to see early concert footage and hear some live performances I would otherwise never have a chance to. I also wanted to hear what they said about the lyrics of Hotel CA as that has always puzzled me. I figured it would be better hearing it straight from the horses mouth, rather than what some stoner from the 70's thought it meant.

I've discussed, at great length with other fans and did my own research and found enough online and through the conversations to know, I'm not the only one that felt this way and saw things that really put them off with some of the members of the band. I learned shortly after I posted my first thoughts in the documentary thread, that I was better off just keeping my mouth shut on here because, as you put it, there were those that will defend them at all cost. I'm ok with that and so I just gave up trying to defend my opinion.

That is where we are different. I never allow others to shout me down or try to bully me into submission. While this is an internet forum where anything can be said without consequence, I take comfort knowing the keyboard commandos would not act like that in person.
Now as you mentioned I do understand the "homer" instinct to defend ones family/loved ones. I suspect some here would marry these guys given a chance, but they are after all human with flaws. That blind adulation should not cause them to act like they are defending their spouse or children.
I bet many of them would not have put up with some of the shenanigans dished out by these guys during their nasty moods. I know I certainly wouldn't have. Pouring a beer of Frey's head would have been the least I would have done.

As for the political stuff, I really don't care which way they lean as long as they're not ramming it down my throat. I hate when I pay money for a concert ticket, and get the artist ranting and raving about their political views-- (That's you Ted Nugent!!! I will not easily forget the political rally I attended last summer when I thought it was suppose to be a concert).

Not to be redundant, but it is one thing to vote, and even place a sign on your front lawn. However what makes any entertainer think they know about particular issues better than everyone else. When you think about it, you had 5 guys, most drugged out of their minds half the time, wanting to convince fans and others to support a cause they were probably ignorant of themselves. Look no further than their anti-nuke beliefs and how the years have proved their uneducated fears to be wrong.
I do like how you used Ted Nugent as the opposite end of the spectrum, and I borrowed that analogy. If I were to go to a concert of his, I'd expect to hear his music, not a political rant. If I wanted to hear that stuff, I'm sure I could find and listen to him at a NRA convention. Just because I might find his message more palatable from a political standpoint does not mean I want to be lectured to by him if I paid to listen to his music.

Since watching the doc the first time, I've only watched bits and pieces of it since and haven't even pre-ordered it yet. I know I will purchase it, if for no other reason because I want the bonus dvd of the concert footage.

I will not be able to bring myself to pay for it for several different reasons aside from their politics. These guys started out dirt poor, yet now their is way too much focus of cashing in. Granted they are entitled to make a great living for being so talented and having millions of fans. However greed is an ugly trait that stems from money being the root of most evil. Their hypocrisy in this area is too much for me to get beyond, especially having read how they think about themselves.
For instance, one of the things that stood out about them money wise in Felder's book was how they were raising money for politic causes, yet they were not doing anything to enrich their road crew beyond the money they were paid. Felder said he suggested they do a one off benefit concert with the money going to all the guys in their entourage/crew. It would help set them up for retirement, and be a way of saying thank you for all the loyal work that helped run the Eagles machine. This idea was dismissed by "the gods" as Frey & Henley were referred to. Yet when they wanted to support some political cause, no meeting or vote was taken, everyone was just expected to participate.

I will always love this band and they will always be my favorite band of all time. How could they not be, they've been that since I was 11 or 12 years old, so for decades now. But I guess that's also why I can say that I have the right to be somewhat disappointed in them and some of their behavior

Exactly
The memory of laying on a beach at sunset with someone special as their tunes lofted in the breeze will not change. We may be less enamored with them personally, but their creative artistry will forever be appreciated by us.

`

[pueblo47]

TBF is much more articulate than me, so I consider the majority of her opinions to echo mine. Since you started this thread, I and many others have followed it with great interest and appreciation for the time and thoughtfulness you have put into the discussion.

The one thing that stands out in the documentary that has everyone going one way or the other is Frey's, and to a lesser extent, Henley's arrogance all the way through it. Since this has been discussed, defended and talked about with no end in sight, I won't add any more except to express disappointment.

They are and will remain a fabulously talented bunch of artists.

[sodascouts]

While Glenn was definitely the main guy butting heads with Glyn Johns at the outset, when Desperado flopped, even Bernie - who was Johns' favorite - was saying "Glyn Johns missed it." And, as much as I love it (it's my favorite Eagles album), Desperado was most definitely not a successful album commercially.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but lets not forget Johns was a world famous producer who helped make some of the greats R&R bands in the world. So he most likely knew what he was talking about.

I'm sure he felt vindicated when those songs and the album became such a smash.

As to the Bernie comment, you certainly got the wording correct, but I was under the impression he was saying the band had felt "that Johns had missed it", not specifically himself. I'd need to go back and listen to it again to be sure.

Regardless, them leaving Johns might very well have been a blessing in the long run, as he might not have allowed them to develop into the R&R side of things as much. This is therefore an example of how Frey might have helped make the right decision, but was never the less caustic in the way he went about things. Hence it made my list despite possibly being the right move.

Remember that Glenn Frey was the one who recommended Johns in the first place; he understood that the man knew what he was talking about. However, he didn't like not having creative control, and he wasn't the only one. Johns didn't want to mic the drums for Henley either, and Randy also chafed at the "no drugs" policy. Only Bernie, I believe, has voiced no complaints against Johns, but even he was ready to leave after the failure of Desperado.

I think the guys were willing to take out what Johns dished at first precisely because of the reason you mentioned for the first album; plus, they were insecure then. However, again, I must remind you that Desperado was NOT a smash. It was a commercial failure. I think that's what gave the band the courage to leave Johns in spite of his pedigree. They did not leave Johns until AFTER the sales figures for Desperado came in. You may wish to believe that Bernie was expressing band sentiments and not his own with his statement "Glyn Johns missed it"; you may wish to believe that he secretly wanted to remain with Johns. However, as he didn't say so in the documentary or in any other interview that I'm aware of, I think that belief is difficult to support.

If Johns felt vindicated, it wouldn't be through the failed Desperado but for "Best of My Love." It was the last song they recorded with Johns and it appeared on On the Border. Unlike Desperado, it WAS a smash hit. I'm sure he took pleasure in that.

There was no confrontation with Johns; indeed, by then, Johns seems to have tired of the Eagles. Therefore, I really don't see Glenn acting so terribly here. You have some good points in other segments of your argument, but I think holding the leaving of Johns against Glenn is a stretch.




I assume you got this out of one of the books you read, since it wasn't in the documentary... could you remind me what your source/evidence is for this conclusion? Based on the documentary, Glenn was the reason they went to Geffen in the first place, and they all were fine with him until Geffen sold Asylum (Geffen left, not them). After Geffen left, they wanted their publishing money back and Geffen refused. That's why the lawsuit was filed... not because of some personal vendetta by Glenn.

Although the books are the freshest in my mind, I have read many a magazine interview, watched interviews like 60 Minutes or the plethora of ones on Youtube that all seem to meld together. In one of the interviews it was mentioned that Azoff felt he needed to stand up for them, and Frey relished the thought. It was said that Frey actually enjoyed how Azoff "terrorized" the powers in the front office.

As webmistress of a network of Eagles sites, I too have read, summarized, and cataloged an entire database of articles - including the ones you mentioned - that I was forced to later take down because of a copyright troll. Despite that, I have no recollection of such a statement. Now, perhaps I've just forgotten it - that's not impossible - but I'm afraid without a citation, I'm not ready to just accept such a condemnation without proof. I think it is probable that you are remembering wrong - such as your mistaken assertion that Desperado was a "smash hit."



Now I agree with you that Geffen and Frey were tight in the beginning, gave Frey great advice, and later through Frey's persistence, gave the Eagles their first shot. As to who left who, I think Geffen probably was right to separate his new position from managing them, hence the reason he broke off Azoff and Elliott to watch over the Eagles. Clearly the Eagles saw it differently, but there was a lesson to be learned there by Azoff that he never applied as it pertained to him eventually managing Eagles Ltd., and also being each individuals members manager as well. Felder clearly saw the conflict as things developed, but by then Henley and Frey were locked at the hip, and Azoff knew where his bread was buttered. The Doc does cover Geffen giving the publishing money back to Jackson Brown, which prompted the Eagles to say "where the hell is ours". However at the time, it was not a common industry practice, and Geffen "thought it very ungrateful of them". From Geffen's point of view he gave the Eagles their start, convinced a reluctant world renowned producer to take them on, and helped them through several successful albums.

Now of course Henley made an interesting comment saying "lets face it, we were idiots to have signed that contract", but at the time, it was standard fare.

That is not to say they should never have negotiated a better one down the road, but to up and file a lawsuit based on not getting what another artist got, was a slap in the face to Geffen.

In fairness to the Eagles, they were also concerned that the Asylum sale/merger with Warner Communications would include the Eagles copyrights. So there are certainly no innocent parties involved in big time business decisions like the one between Geffen and the Eagles.
I understand why Geffen perceived the lawsuit as ungrateful. However, the band - not just Glenn, as you stated in your OP - saw it differently. Holding the lawsuit against Glenn in particular seems to be another stretch to me. As far as I know none of the other Eagles has stated they didn't want to sue Geffen, and I daresay none of the Eagles refused to take back their share of the publishing rights once they were granted as a result of the lawsuit.




As for the rest, Glenn definitely was involved in the band member conflicts, but he was the leader. The leader is the one who has to deal with things like Randy freaking out and refusing to perform his job, or Felder being dissatisfied and refusing to sign his contract.

I agree, but also believe that you can lead with the carrot or the stick. Some find the right balance like a coach with different personalities of team members.

Some need just a simple pat on the back, others need fawning/encouragement, and still others need a swift kick in the a$$. The issue with Meisner was deplorable in my view based on everything I've researched. This comes mainly from sources outside the Doc. Watching the way it was explained in the Doc, you'd be left with the impression that because Meisner was concerned about his voice and ability to hit the high notes after a night of debauchery, that was his only reason for occasionally refusing to sing it.

However there were plenty of other things going on behind the scenes that helped to tear down his fragile confidence. Regardless, you don't take one of your best guys (who lets not forget was a equal partner), and who sang one of the most popular songs, and just badger him until he quits. A great leader would either find a way to reach him, or find someone else who could.

As to Felder refusing to sign a contract, again we get back to Frey taking a "my way or the highway" attitude. That is not being a great leader, especially in dealing with a fellow owner of the group. So while I respect Frey as a gifted songwriter, singer, and musician, he was ill suited to be the leader of men.

You're entitled to your opinion; however, when I look at the fact that the Eagles are the most successful rock'n'roll band in the history of recorded music and are filling arenas with fans to this day, it seems reasonable to conclude that his leadership style was fairly effective in the end.




Regarding your examples: Jerry Brown has been kissing up to musicians (literally in some cases *cough*Linda Ronstadt*cough*) for decades. Have you also sworn off the other legions of 70s musicians Brown has gotten money from?

The Eagles supported Cranston because he was anti-nuclear. It turns out that he also happened to be very corrupt, but how were they to know that? They were young and naive.

Like I said, I really never have paid attention to what goes on behind the curtain with musical groups, including the Eagles. If they were generally (D's) or (R's) it would not have fazed me. Even if they put signs out on their lawn and that was seen on the Doc, I would not have cared as that is the American way. But when I see them doing fundraisers for some of the most liberal (and in Browns case kooky) politicians, it gives me pause. Young and naive or not, they were actively supporting people on the extreme left, not reflective of typical (D's) of the time.

Regarding all this, I wonder how the other band members felt? I have not read or heard about L-eadon or Meisners politics. Yet most country musicians who speak out tend to be (R's), so L eadon might have not liked Frey/Henleys enthusiasm for ultra liberal causes/politicians?
Meisner was from Nebraska, not exactly a blue state. Yet he seemed so easy going, I doubt he had any strong political leanings, one way or the other.
Felder comes across as ambivalent, but gleening his personality from his book, he might very well have not liked Cranston. Yet how could he butt heads with Frey/Henley at that point if they were making most decisions for the band.


Here is what I know about the other band member's viewpoints:

Felder is quoted in this article (http://books.google.com/books?id=WeUCAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=%22squeezing+money+out+of+rock%22&source=bl&ots=JQuFxYOXt8&sig=kN2Yft0odibTiZfg-eIqjB20dBQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JdRqUZi2H4e49QTt9YDYCA&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22squeezing%20money%20out%20of%20rock%22&f=false) praising the "kooky" Jerry Brown and is happy to play a benefit for him. He includes himself as part of the decision to support Brown over Ted Kennedy after "shopping" multiple anti-nuclear candidates. I direct you to the bottom of the first page and the top of the second page to read his (admittedly shallow) statements for yourself. I realize this contradicts his statement in the documentary that he didn't like political benefits, but there you have it in black and white. What he didn't like for sure was doing a benefit for Cranston in particular; that indeed can be laid at Glenn's door.

You may take comfort in the fact that more recently, Felder has become actively involved with the Republican party, and now plays GOP fundraisers (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/80074.html). However, if you find such involvement in politics distasteful regardless of party, Felder comes off no better than the others.

Joe Walsh recently came out in support for Democratic congressional candidate Tammy Duckworth, as stated in this article (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/joe-walsh-supports-congressional-opponent-of-rep-joe-walsh-20120613).

As far as I know, Timothy, Bernie and Randy have not made their political viewpoints known in interviews. I do have a 1974 bootleg where Bernie criticizes Nixon from the stage. Oops! Another political activist! ;)

So it's not as black and white as it may seem; perhaps your heroes and villains are more alike than you think.

[sodascouts]

I've discussed, at great length with other fans and did my own research and found enough online and through the conversations to know, I'm not the only one that felt this way and saw things that really put them off with some of the members of the band. I learned shortly after I posted my first thoughts in the documentary thread, that I was better off just keeping my mouth shut on here because, as you put it, there were those that will defend them at all cost. I'm ok with that and so I just gave up trying to defend my opinion.

That is where we are different. I never allow others to shout me down or try to bully me into submission. While this is an internet forum where anything can be said without consequence, I take comfort knowing the keyboard commandos would not act like that in person.
Now as you mentioned I do understand the "homer" instinct to defend ones family/loved ones. I suspect some here would marry these guys given a chance, but they are after all human with flaws. That blind adulation should not cause them to act like they are defending their spouse or children.
I bet many of them would not have put up with some of the shenanigans dished out by these guys during their nasty moods. I know I certainly wouldn't have. Pouring a beer of Frey's head would have been the least I would have done.

I suggest you look at the treatment you have received here and ask yourself if you feel bullied. Willie is a sweet person who doesn't enjoy heated debate, so when several members vehemently disagreed with her, she decided not to continue arguing. However, she has not been bullied. She wouldn't put up with that either (would you Willie? ;) ), nor would I.

[Vector]

Hi Vector and Welcome to the Border


Thank you


This is a sticky point for me too. I feel that Glenn made him a full partner with the best of intentions. Then as Bernie and others started to leave, he realized it didn't have to be that way in order for the band to work, but by then Glenn was stuck.

Interesting you would put it that way. It seemed that once the writing was on the wall, Frey already was sizing up someone else who could replace the guy who was going to leave. Now if Frey was not the primary antagonist in the member leaving, it would be viewed as a sharp/smart move. However when he is motived in part because he knows someone else is waiting in the wings, you begin to wonder.

It did become a major source of friction and I can understand how Felder felt being cut out of what the band had agreed to.

If you accept most of Felder's version of events, it went beyond just the money issue. When L-eadon and Meisner had ideas for songs or expected to sing a certain number, they were essentially told no, or ridiculed. If the contract stipulated that each guy was to sing at least two songs per album, you can certainly see where the ones who were left out felt slighted. It is funny how the Doc seemed to make that a huge bone of contention regarding Felder/Victim of Love, yet Felder was very complimentary of Henley's voice and the final outcome with the song.
Another book [Eagles/Jackson] indicated that Frey and especially Henley were not too pleased when L-eadon insisted that Patti Reagan get a song writing credit for "I wish You Peace". Nor were they happy with the song being included on the record. Henley went so far as to characterize the inclusion of the song as "a cuckoo in the nest".
So it is clear that the original contract did in fact lead to more problems than any of them probably imagined. However they were damn successful, and trying to change things mid-stream was a mistake. Lets face it, if you own 1/4 or 1/5 of something, how well would you handle 2 of the partners saying it's our way, like it or leave?

I think a lot of the Felder/Frey stuff would have been avoided if Frey hadn't had him become a partner and just a member of the Eagles. Felder himself said he was surprised by the offer in his book and even Bernie wasn't happy about it.

I totally agree. If not for wanting Felder to help get them closer to the goal of being more a R&R band, Frey might not have insisted on making Felder a full partner. As you will recall, when L-eadon spoke up, it was Azoff who made a compromise suggestion that Felder only get a portion of the albums proceeds equivalent to his contribution to that album. Then from that point on, he was an equal partner with the other four.

That being said, Felder was made a full partner but that meant he should have had the right to see and vote on matters IMO but if you are constantly going against the other 2 partners that is going to cause trouble. I know if in my job if one person is constantly causing all the trouble, that person doesn't stay for long. Felder made that choice and if you think about it, he might have had the right but it wasn't smart.

One of the most interesting things in the contract dispute issue was Felder's passive nature. In the beginning he was trying to play the peacemaker between his buddy L-eadon and Frey/Henley. He was also trying to help keep Meisner in the band and didn't like the way he was being treated. After Meisner left Felder felt alone/isolated despite being friends with Walsh, and eventually Schmit. However before the other two guys departure, he began to notice things like greater expenditures by Frey/Henley for their entourages, while the other three guys barely had any personal support staff. Now one could say he was being petty because Henley had back problems, so he needed special beds, a masseuse and chiropractor traveling along. Yet if those expenses were coming out of everyones profit, who wouldn't speak up about it? So he started to ask more questions of Azoff, but didn't insist on a time frame for answers. Once L-eadon & Meisner were gone, it was 2/3 vs 1/3 with Azoff always going along with what Frey/Henley wanted.


That being said I do think Glenn and Don should have included Felder, Bernie and Randy in the decisions as partners. I don't know how if everyone had an equal share how that was loss. I'd think it would have had to have been voted on, like a board of directors.

One of the things I'm curious about is what happened to Eagles Ltd. once any member of the band "quit". None of the books, including Felder's explain what happened to L-eadons or Meisners shares/interest in the group. It is almost implied that the only money they continued to receive was related to songs they wrote/co-wrote.
Now according to Felder, when he was sacked, an immediate offer was proffered to him in the form of a check that was sent for his shares in the company. Had he cashed the check that would have been the end of it, so maybe that is what happened with L-eadon/Meisner when they quit?

Obviously Felder didn't agree to the firing nor did he cash the check. I just cannot find any source which goes into detail what happened to L-eadon/Meisner interests in the corporation.


As for Glenn and Felder being the reason the Eagles separated in 1980, I think it was just a final straw. In alot of interviews in the break Felder wasn't mentioned. It was always DH and GF that were not seeing eye to eye. They couldn't write songs together anymore and they weren't agreeing on things. Without that relationship it seemed IMO it was making the whole band teeter and the Felder scene just pushed it over the edge.

My limited understanding at the time was exactly that. Frey & Henley were at a crossroads which led to the breakup of the Eagles. I later got the impression Henley just wanted to take some time for the band after the blowup, as did everyone except Frey. When Frey called it quits, it came as a blow to Henley, who got very depressed about it(among other things).

Any trouble between Glenn and Henley was glossed over in the Documentary but they and their friends talked about it a lot during the break.

That was one of the biggest inconsistencies of the Doc to me. When you read articles, watch interviews from the early 90's, and read the books, it is clear those two were fed up with each other, including their inability to write together.


This is where I wish Azoff had more of a proactive hand in making sure these guys had more time off, and apart from each other. Either due to fear about his own position of crossing them, or maybe his own greed to get it now while the getting was good, he failed to see they were being driven too hard by both themselves, and the label.

I understand in the real world people will be people and money brings out a lot of bad characteristics.

Sadly, that seems to be an overriding theme with them. While I am at a place in life to be able to afford $100+ tickets now(if I were to want to go), many people cannot. If they are also being petty with fans regarding cameras, standing, or other such things, that makes it all the worse.

I am glad that the 4 of them are still playing and see happier.

That is something else I wonder about. They seemed happy on the surface before the breakup, and also before the Felder firing. According to Felder's book, it was all for show, sticking to their policy of not airing dirty laundry. While that is always a smart thing to do, we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. Supposedly they all keep to themselves while traveling and only come together for the concerts. If Walsh and Schmit are passive, I imagine the only thing that could go wrong is if Frey/Henley have it out again.
Yet if they are making 2-3 times the amount of the others, they have self serving reasons to grin and bear it. The others including Smith might have a go along to get attitude.
Then again Smith is not treated as an equal, rather a hired hand. So it would seem on the surface everything is ok. Yet the cynical/suspicious side of me thinks it is partly because no one is rocking the Frey/Henley gravy train.


I'm loving that Bernie will be rejoining for a bit this tour. I still love Felder and have went to see him tour and he seems happy and is still very talented. I still hold out the hope that maybe he can rejoin for a few shows, but until he stops rehashing past problem that is going to be difficult(it is his choice but I dodn't think its a good on if he wants to rebuild relationships). Still I hope.

You wonder how Henley/Frey would react if they asked Felder to go on tour with them again, and he were to say "fine, but I want just as much money as you two are getting". On principle he could ask for it, but I think hell really would freeze over before Frey would ever agree to it.

`

[RebeccaLovesEagles]

COLOR=blue]One of the things I'm curious about is what happened to Eagles Ltd. [/COLOR]once any member of the band "quit". None of the books, including Felder's explain what happened to L-eadons or Meisners shares/interest in the group. It is almost implied that the only money they continued to receive was related to songs they wrote/co-wrote.
Now according to Felder, when he was sacked, an immediate offer was proffered to him in the form of a check that was sent for his shares in the company. Had he cashed the check that would have been the end of it, so maybe that is what happened with L-eadon/Meisner when they quit?


Thank you for responding :) I believe according to Felder's book since Bernie and Randy quit their shares reverted back to Eagles LTD. so it would have went from 5/5 to 4/4 to 3/3

[Vector]

Let me start with your last post first.


I suggest you look at the treatment you have received here and ask yourself if you feel bullied. Willie is a sweet person who doesn't enjoy heated debate, so when several members vehemently disagreed with her, she decided not to continue arguing. However, she has not been bullied. She wouldn't put up with that either (would you Willie? ;) )

I never said or implied I was bullied on this site. I merely pointed out how I will not allow myself to be bullied or shouted down.
On the contrary, my treatment here has been great, and the discussion I've invited has been civil and thoughtful. Even if someone gets passionate about disagreeing with me, I would not consider it inappropriate nor bullying.


Remember that Glenn Frey was the one who recommended Johns in the first place; he understood that the man knew what he was talking about. However, he didn't like not having creative control, and he wasn't the only one. Johns didn't want to mic the drums for Henley either, and Randy also chafed at the "no drugs" policy. Only Bernie, I believe, has voiced no complaints against Johns, but even he was ready to leave after the failure of Desperado.

I see no disagreement with that at all. I would only mention what I am sure you will recall from the Doc, where the Frey/Johns relationship was described as oil & water.

I think the guys were willing to take out what Johns dished at first precisely because of the reason you mentioned for the first album; plus, they were insecure then.

Agreed

However, again, I must remind you that Desperado was NOT a smash. It was a commercial failure. I think that's what gave the band the courage to leave Johns in spite of his pedigree.

What I meant was that it became a smash, not that it was immediate.

They did not leave Johns until AFTER the sales figures for Desperado came in.
If Johns felt vindicated, it wouldn't be through the failed Desperado but for "Best of My Love." It was the last song they recorded with Johns and it appeared on On the Border. Unlike Desperado, it WAS a smash hit. I'm sure he took pleasure in that.

Personally I believe he took pride in both. He alluded to it as well.

I did not mention/cover it, but as to them not leaving John's until sales figures came in, I'm not really sure that was their main motivation. As you correctly point out, other issues such as the drum mic's, no drugs, being on time, etc. were a source of contention for everyone involved. The On The Border album that was co-produced by John's and Szymczk(sp?) was still much more country than rock, so my comment also alludes to him(at least at the time) believing they were more of a country/harmony band.

You may wish to believe that Bernie was expressing band sentiments and not his own with his statement "Glyn Johns missed it"; you may wish to believe that he secretly wanted to remain with Johns. However, as he didn't say so in the documentary or in any other interview that I'm aware of, I think that belief is difficult to support.

It is not so much what I wish to think, as it has no bearing on me whatsoever. Bernie was country, and John's felt that was their wheelhouse. So it stands to reason L-eadon would not be as compelled to leave as Frey who wanted a harder edge. As to the comment, I said I was not sure, and needed to go back and see if L-eadon was referring to himself making the comment, or if it was the overall bands feeling.

There was no confrontation with Johns; indeed, by then, Johns seems to have tired of the Eagles. Therefore, I really don't see Glenn acting so terribly here. You have some good points in other segments of your argument, but I think holding the leaving of Johns against Glenn is a stretch.

I did not mean to imply there was a physical confrontation, as John's was a much older guy by then. Rather as above, I am referring to Frey and him being so much at odds that they were referred to as oil & water. John's undoubtedly got tired of them as the conversation between Bill S and John's indicated in the Doc, "better you than me mate".

Still I will concede it was not Frey alone who caused the switch.


As webmistress of a network of Eagles sites, I too have read, summarized, and cataloged an entire database of articles - including the ones you mentioned - that I was forced to later take down because of a copyright troll. Despite that, I have no recollection of such a statement. Now, perhaps I've just forgotten it - that's not impossible - but I'm afraid without a citation, I'm not ready to just accept such a condemnation without proof. I think it is probable that you are remembering wrong - such as your mistaken assertion that Desperado was a "smash hit."

The term "smash" I already spoke to above. As to a copyright troll, that is a loss to everyone.

If this point about the main person being Frey who authorised Azoff to file the lawsuit is important to you, I will re-read/view some of the material hoping to catch it among the other info.

I will have to finish my post later as somehow it posted mid-reply, and I need to do something else at the moment.

`

[TimothyBFan]

Just as I started this post, Tequila Sunrise came on Sirius The Bridge. Pretty cool!!!



I have not lost my appreciation for the bands music that I always enjoyed. I suspect however that their newer material might be less likely to catch on with me. My overall perception of them has changed, and not for the better in many cases as we will see.

Exactly!!! Even tho I got a real eye opener about Glenn Frey's behavior and personality, it would never deter me from listening and loving this music. And that goes for Eagles or Glenn's solo stuff. I love it, have always loved it and will always love it. If I let every bad thing I've ever read or seen about an artist dictate how I feel about their music, I'd not be listening to much music. And I can't imagine my life without my Zeppelin, Doors, Eagles, etc... music.




It is funny that you would mention the drug use, as that is something that bothered me as well. Despite coming of age in the 80's, I never did a single drug in my life. This despite me looking like I did with longer hair very similar to Frey's & Meisner's. My father would always say after I got back from a haircut, "which one of them did you have cut".

Having said that, in those days I really didn't care who was doing what drug because I was not aware of all the negative aspects it had on others, and society as a whole. I left it out of my OP since I was already mentioning a bunch of other disturbing revelations about the band, but it is another thing I find not to like about them.

Let me first say I have never taken a drug in my life, never had the desire to try them. Was around them a LOT in my younger days but just didn't get it. I did, however, do my fair share of drinking and have been completely sober for 17 years now.

BUT, even tho I felt this way about drugs, I could care less what or who is doing drugs in the music business. Never cared one way or the other. If I like the music, I like the music. If they wanted to get coked up and perform, don't care--- that is, as long as it didn't make a difference in the performance I might be paying to see. I may have been young when I first discovered the Eagles but I wasn't stupid. I knew what was going on (I had seen it enough with my older cousins). All I knew was they were putting out some amazing music and that's what I cared about. It's unfortunate that we've lost so many good artist to drugs but that was their life choice, not mine.


I suggest you look at the treatment you have received here and ask yourself if you feel bullied. Willie is a sweet person who doesn't enjoy heated debate, so when several members vehemently disagreed with her, she decided not to continue arguing. However, she has not been bullied. She wouldn't put up with that either (would you Willie? :wink: ), nor would I.

"A sweet person". :blush: Thank you.

No, I can honestly say, I never felt bullied by anyone that responded to my posts in the doc thread at any time. The main reason I finally just walked away from the discussion was that no matter what I posted about MY feelings about how I saw Glenn Frey in that documentary, I was told it wasn't the case, that I was seeing it wrong, that he wasn't as bad as I was perceiving it, etc.... That got tiresome very quickly.I wasn't trying to change anyone's mind about how they felt, was just stating my opinion. But felt as if I was being told I was just wrong in how I perceived it. I love the fact that we have members (myself included) that will fight to the death to defend the music of the Eagles but I do think that some members just can't admit that they will have the same faults as any other human and feel that it is, somehow, unfaithful to admit that Glenn came off as a not so nice guy in much of that documentary, and not just with the whole Don F thing. I will reiterate what I've said several times, it has nothing to do with defending Don F, which I've seen people say a few times. If I was the only one that thought so, I'd say I was wrong but I saw in so many blogs, articles, etc... that others were seeing him in the same light as I was.

I was asked why it "shocked" me so much? I wasn't shocked---trust me, I've seen a lot of stuff in my life time that was a lot uglier than Glenn's behavior. I think what really "shocked" me was that there were those that thought his behavior was ok, made excuses for it and justified it as being ok. I dare say, that if they had had a boss ("leader") that acted that way toward them or a fellow co-worker, they would think it was out of line. And the fact that he seemed almost proud of the way he handled things. Yes, he admitted that some things could of been handled better but I didn't see much regret in the way he presented himself in the doc. (Example of regret was when Bernie talked about dumping the beer over Glenn--he didn't seem proud of that at all) I will maintain that Glenn Frey is the reason why Randy left, Bernie left and Don F left. In my opinion, if you want to talk bully, Glenn seemed to be it.BUT I will also say that I know he has treated several of our members here and many fans so respectfully and sweetly in encounters with him. I'm thankful for that because it does make me believe that he has that side but the business side of him can get pretty ugly. Sorry, I know I will offend a lot of people here, but I'm being honest in the way I feel.

[Houston Debutante]

No, I can honestly say, I never felt bullied by anyone that responded to my posts in the doc thread at any time. The main reason I finally just walked away from the discussion was that no matter what I posted about MY feelings about how I saw Glenn Frey in that documentary, I was told it wasn't the case, that I was seeing it wrong, that he wasn't as bad as I was perceiving it, etc.... That got tiresome very quickly.I wasn't trying to change anyone's mind about how they felt, was just stating my opinion. But felt as if I was being told I was just wrong in how I perceived it.

I go into discussions ~ especially controversial ones ~ prepared for the fact that not everyone will think I got the right impression, so it doesn't bother me. We're all different though and if it upsets you that everybody isn't telling you you're right, it's definitely best to bow out. Smart move.

[TimothyBFan]

I go into discussions ~ especially controversial ones ~ prepared for the fact that not everyone will think I got the right impression, so it doesn't bother me. We're all different though and if it upsets you that everybody isn't telling you you're right, it's definitely best to bow out. Smart move.

Maybe I worded that wrong? I never meant to give the impression that I wanted people to say "you're right--I change my mind".:hilarious: That's funny that you think that would upset me. Absolutely not,I don't upset that easy. --- I might be completely wrong and reading Glenn wrong. I even admitted that maybe I was reading more into it and that he might have been "acting" like he did when it actually happened, as someone suggested. It was more that I seemed to be offending people when I spoke of my disappointment in what I saw and how dare I say things negative about Glenn. To be fair, it wasn't like the whole freaking membership of The Border was doing that--of course not. In fact, I totally agree with several of these same members on so many other things we discuss. No hard feeling at all toward anyone and I hope the same with them. It just seemed that anything that is said that may be negative about Glenn and how he came across to some of us in the doc was jumped on and told that he isn't like that. How do any of us here actually know what kind of business man he is or how easy he would be to see on a day to day basis and work with? None of us have the opportunity to actually work with the man on that level. I said he's never gave the impression that he's anything but respectful and happy to be sociable to his fans when some of the members here have gotten the chance to meet him.

That's the last of what I'm going to say on that because it's back to beating a dead horse again. Some people saw him as being one way and others saw him as being the other. I can live with that. No problem. And I won't tell anyone they are wrong in the way they feel about it. We just see things differently. That's what makes a good discussion if everyone can be civil about it.

[Vector]

Just trying to find the time to finish responding to this reply and get to other previous ones. Thanks for the links to the articles you posted regarding the politics. I will read them later and see what impression they leave on me.





I understand why Geffen perceived the lawsuit as ungrateful. However, the band - not just Glenn, as you stated in your OP - saw it differently. Holding the lawsuit against Glenn in particular seems to be another stretch to me. As far as I know none of the other Eagles has stated they didn't want to sue Geffen, and I daresay none of the Eagles refused to take back their share of the publishing rights once they were granted as a result of the lawsuit.

If I am not mistaken, Frey & Henley were already pairing off and making decisions for the band business wise, much to the dismay and frustration of the others. I did not read or see anything that would indicate a strenuous objection on the part of a single member to the lawsuit. Yet to assume L-eadon, Meisner or Felder were the main ones behind the lawsuit would be a real stretch.
If Frey was the defacto leader as most people claim, he cannot be credited with captaining the ship in a positive way, yet only be a regular member of a presumed democratic process during the more controversial decisions.

You're entitled to your opinion; however, when I look at the fact that the Eagles are the most successful rock'n'roll band in the history of recorded music and are filling arenas with fans to this day, it seems reasonable to conclude that his leadership style was fairly effective in the end.

There is no doubt Frey made great choices when helping to assemble the original group of guys. His decision to add Felder as a 5th member also served to create a more R&R sound, and collaborative artistry that brought them to the pinnacle of success.
When L-eadon got fed up and left, Frey was instrumental in bringing in Walsh, which again added to the special mix which made them about as R&R as they were going to get.
When Meisner was driven out, again he made a wonderful choice in Schmit who brought a soulful sound and added to their harmony. So just as he is getting criticism for being an antagonist, he also deserves much of the credit for assembling great talent.

Yet, we will never know what great albums could have been produced with various original bands members driven to the point of quiting. We will also never know what new material they could have come up with had the Frey not called it quits for 14 years. One could argue that he was acting like a petulant child taking his ball home, and leaving everyone else standing around, not able to play.

One wonders what would have happened if Henley/Felder as 2/3 or maybe even sole owners of Eagles Ltd. decided to carry on without him. Maybe after a rest, it might have forced Frey's hand to either keep the group going, or he would be left out of future Eagles projects.

`

[Houston Debutante]

One wonders what would have happened if Henley/Felder as 2/3 or maybe even sole owners of Eagles Ltd. decided to carry on without him. Maybe after a rest, it might have forced Frey's hand to either keep the group going, or he would be left out of future Eagles projects.
If they had gone on without Glenn, I'll tell you what it would have been: Don Henley and his back-up band. That's not me saying that ~ Don said it himself according to Shapiro's book, but you can see how it would be true. Before HFO, Timothy had one Eagles song under his belt, Joe had two, and Felder had one. Let's say they do a new album and they each sing three songs on that. So basically it would be Don singing everything except a few songs, unless you include the new ones that no one cares about and a bunch more James Gang / solo stuff. Maybe Felder could've performed material off of Airborne. That sure would bring the house down. :lol:

I'm a huge Don fan but that would not be an Eagles show. It would be a joke.

Better for Don to continue with his hugely successful solo career than be part of something like that, and he knew it.

You have a problem with Glenn breaking up the Eagles because it left others 'not able to play.' Well, they could play, they just couldn't make as much money. Still, if Glenn doesn't want to do it because he's unhappy, is he supposed to just show up out of pity for the other guys because they can't get anyone to buy their solo material ~ other than Don, of course? That's ridiculous.

[Vector]

I agree with your post, especially the part of still enjoying the music without it being tainted by the current revelations. Heck many an artist had personal issues/demons, yet you can still enjoy and separate their work from the rest. I did however want to comment on one thing you brought up.



As for the "Glenn was a bully" generalization

Bully might not be the best word, yet you have to wonder why he acted the way he did. One can be a leader without using an iron fist.
Using Frey's favorite analogy of quarterbacks for example, Joe Montana and Ken Stabler were both great leaders, yet kept everyone calm in the most stressful situations.
Let's not forget that Frey nor the other guys are that big physically, despite looking larger than life to the fans while on stage.
One wonders how Frey would have acted if the guys had not been his own size, but rather much more physically imposing. It is funny because one of the books describes them being surprised how in dealing with the labels, Azoff(who is a tiny guy) got away with his antics, and never got his face smashed in.

I also remember in Felder's book when he described the beer incident, he said L-eadon poured the entire beer over Frey's head, all the while staring him down. L-eadon was in the best shape of any of them, and apparently knew karate, so Frey just sat and took it, rather than risk losing a fight.

Anyway, Frey does have positive attributes, but he left a lot to be desired as the self described "team leader".

[Vector]

I appreciate your POV, Vector. We'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

I am not trying to stir things up with you, but when people agree to disagree, it normally involves opinion, not fact.

In the case of our discussion you contend that Glenn was the boss or as you waggishly put it, "Chief Eagle Officer".
Yet that is not representative of the facts. He was one of 4 owners, eventually 5 owners, which he insisted upon.
Now if all the other owners had no problem with him being the boss, we would not be discussing how two of the five quit, and one was improperly fired.

If what RebeccaLovesEagles points out is entirely accurate how Eagles Ltd was structured, once a member quit, their shares revert back to the other owners. So at one point that would have made Felder a 1/3 owner, not an employee that was offered a "profit sharing plan".

`

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Vector - As I stated earlier, I was going to try stay out of this thread unless I felt facts were being misrepresented. Ohers are free to respond to you as they wish, but, as moderator of this thread, I am going to respond to several of your last posts. You are certainly free to express your opinion here, and it's nice that you have the time to respond to everyone in this thread, but, honestly, I don't have that kind of time. Therefore, I'll be brief for now. You say that Soda and Henley Honey don't have their facts straight, yet, your posts are riddled with misinformation and factual errors. I don't have time to make a fact-checking list right now, but I'll try to get to it when I have more time. But, as a brief example, in your last post, Glenn was not a self-appointed leader, he was, in fact, elected to the position by his fellow bandmates. So, that one piece of misinformation leads to flawed logic and conclusions in your posts. As I said earlier, there is some information about the band's finances in Felder's book and in the Heaven and Hell book thread that you may find helpful. If you are not trying to stir things up, then the best way to do that is to make sure that you have the facts straight. This is exactly the reason I think the more information you have, the better.

[Houston Debutante]

I am not trying to stir things up with you, but when people agree to disagree, it normally involves opinion, not fact.In my experience it simply means the person doesn't want to bother arguing with you anymore.

[Vector]

Firstly, welcome Vector. I appreciate the amount of thought you put into your posts. As I was reading I was mentally composing my response, then saw that AEW21 has covered most of it off brilliantly (and bluefox - so succinct!).

I will just add - everybody in our lives will do things that we don't agree with, and if they're important (e.g. family) we learn to separate the behaviour from the people. In this case perhaps you can separate the behaviour from the music.

Also - they didn't have to make a documentary that exposed their less-than-angelic behaviour. In choosing to do so, I feel they're allowing us to see that the music does transcend the personalities and conflicts. JMHO.

Thanks for the welcome.

What I failed to do is give Frey/Henley props for their willingness as co-owners of the Eagles to let others have their say.
One could easily see how the History of the Eagles could have only come from their perspective, and those who would only offer admiration. It is hard to imagine that a narcissistic "star" of today would be willing to allow critics to say their piece of mind.

That said, it did seem as if Henley/Frey had the lions share of the Doc time, and one wonders how much editorial control they had as well. I say this because they have always been a tightly managed band when it comes to keeping things in house. Combined with an almost cursory look into their rift and one might come away thinking it had always been Frey/Henley love fest, with everyone else being the primary reasons for their troubles.


`

[Vector]

You say that Soda and Henley Honey don't have their facts straight, yet, your posts are riddled with misinformation and factual errors.

I believe you mischaracterized my position in regard to Soda. I do not recall saying she has her facts wrong, rather my recollection is a little different than hers.
For example I said I would go back and listen to L-eadons comment regarding John's, to see if he was speaking for himself as an individual, or the band as a whole. I know she got the words right, I just do not recall the context. So until one of us or someone else checks/recalls, it is up in the air.

As to Henley Honey's position, I'll let you or others be the judge who has their facts incorrect.
Her stated position is that Frey was the boss, and Felder was an employee. My position is that Frey was an owner and Felder was also an owner.

As to my posts being "riddled with misinformation and factual errors", please let me know where you believe this to be the case. Remember, I am not claiming to be an authority, just a recently educated person with a strong interest. I also do not have a horse in the race, so I am not looking through a individual members fan based lens.

All that is not to say I am infallible, incapable of error, or misunderstanding.



`

[Vector]

Welcome to The Border, Vector!

Thank you :thumbsup:

[Vector]

yup! I was quite offended at the "liberal Kook" label, but being new, didn't want to really address the politics. I LOVE that my Eagles are Democrats and very active in trying to make the world a better place!

I addressed this in another post, but in case you missed it, let me talk to you directly. I was referring to Jerry Brown, not (D's) in general, nor any individual member here.

Let's face it, there are kooks/zealots/wacko's on both sides of the aisle. Depending on ones own personal perspective, one persons kook might be another persons favorite politician. I still believe Governor Moombeam is a kook, but nothing personal was intended by the comment.

Hopefully this personal reply will suffice, lest you think I was calling you or all (D's) kooks.

[Glennhoney]

I've been reading this "post" for the past several days and I'm left wondering why you, Vector, would want to join "The Border" if you're so unhappy with your "favorite" band? As you may have noticed, the "borderers" LOVE their EAGLES and are very well informed and passionate about the "boys". Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but why start an "I hate Glenn Frey" campaign (my opinion only) on our beloved Glenn Frey page? I for one, love Glenn for his music and his savvy in the music world...but I certainly do not know him personally and therefore, would NOT judge his actions or inactions, whatever they may be. All I know is that a Michigan teenager made a huge impact in the music world and after 40 years, he still is...and frankly, that's all that REALLY matters....:thumbsup:

[GlennLover]

I for one, love Glenn for his music and his savvy in the music world...but I certainly do not know him personally and therefore, would NOT judge his actions or inactions, whatever they may be. All I know is that a Michigan teenager made a huge impact in the music world and after 40 years, he still is...and frankly, that's all that REALLY matters....:thumbsup:

Here, here GH! But, I do welcome you to The Border, Vector. You are certainly entitled to state your views & to discuss your disillusion with the band. :-) I know that I am biased so I think I will stay out of it.

[Glennhoney]

Here, here GH! But, I do welcome you to The Border, Vector. You are certainly entitled to state your views & to discuss your disillusion with the band. :-) I know that I am biased so I think I will stay out of it.
Vector..you are DEFINATELY welcomed to THE BORDER....to state your opinions like everyone else..:thumbsup:

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Thank you :thumbsup:

You're welcome! I would invite you to look around the board and get to know us and give us your thoughts on other topics. There's a lot more to us than this one topic, and I've not seen you post elsewhere. Just want to toss out the welcome mat and make sure you know to feel at home everywhere.

[AEW21]

Golly, I love your avatar, Glennlover. Not often we ever got to see the long hair back in a ponytail... :)

Back to topic--Like others, I would really love to know what "final cut" approval, or editing control, and of the band or Irving had on the film. Really, it should have been none, if they wanted it objective. But I did at times feel there was a narrative being forced upon the film and its events--at certain times, as others have said, it felt as if Glenn and Don's comments and voiceovers were scripted or rehearsed into becoming forced transitions into different parts of the film.

And to me, if the "real life" story wasn't coming together enough for them to stitch together the film, that's the filmmakers' faults for not asking the questions that needed to be asked and not getting the footage that needed to found/filmed. As much as I enjoyed the doc, it was lacking in terms of pacing and cohesion at times, and I thinks its those qualities that are contributing to the questions and qualms many are having. Not to say that is the film was "made better" that it would excuse the behavior of any individuals or make everything seem hunky-dory... But I think a little more information and depth would do a lot in clarifying matters.

(Could you claim that maybe Glenn and Don stonewalled the filmmakers at certain points, hence the ambiguities? Maybe, but I don't think so. They're fairly blunt in what they say, and don't come off as being afraid. To be frank, at times, they don't come off in the best light, and if they were controlling the film and its ultimate edit, I don't think we'd see that. I think it was the director who became so overwhelmed with the task that she couldn't see the forest for the trees," so to speak and got things muddled. The unbalance in time and quality between Pt. 1 and Pt. 2 alone attest to an inequality in questions and coverage...)

To me, of all the former members, Bernie comes off the best and gets the best overall treatment to his Eagles journey. We see clearly why and how he joined the band; they reiterate several times what his issue was with the band's progress, and we hear clearly from several sources why and when he left. Neither Randy or Felder got such compete "arcs." Randy really gets the worst of it--there had to be a 30 minute+ stretch where he wasn't spoken or at all, in footage or modern "talking head" interview. It could have been due to his health or due to not remembering things, or that the interviewer simply didn't ask the right questions to illicit a story from him that could make it on the screen. But the fact we don't hear from him about his feelings about leaving the band is an egregious error on the filmmakers' parts. As for Felder, his saga devolves into a "He said/They said" game that clarifies nothing. The entire lawsuit is glossed over, and what exactly each side was fighting for, past just money but RE: contract specifics, isn't delved into at all. A good filmmaker would have covered that--this film seemed content to leave it vague in the worst possible away for all involved in the conflict.

Perhaps what I liked best about the Bernie section, and why we all keep coming back to it, it that it seems like the only bit of drama in the band where "time seems to have healed all wounds." Bernie and Glenn all seemed to have distance from it and look back more objectively. I like that we heard Bernie's side afterward, remorseful perhaps for the way he went about it, but happy that he knew it was the right move for him in the long run to leave the band. And I got from Glenn that he knew his "adamant and animated speech" was a bit too much, and that he chuckled at the memory of Bernie pouring the beer. None of it seemed bitter or raw--the entire segment has a reflection and graciousness I wish the rest of the film had. (The only other segments that have this cohesion and compasssion are those regarding Joe's personal journey.)

And this is totally off-topic from what I've been saying, but since Glyn Johns' name has been bandied about--this is a 2012 essay (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sponsored/in-the-know/9530705/eagles-glenn-frey-london.html) Glenn wote on he and the Eagles' time in London of the UK Telegraph. It's actually a really good read, and touches a bit on Johns:

Golf aside, the reason The Eagles first came to London was to find a new sound; something different to all those other California bands. I thought we should get a British producer – who knew about the rhythm section – and that’s how we came to meet Glyn Johns. He’d worked with The Beatles on Get Back, so I knew we were in good hands. I look back on those times fondly. There are people who think of The Eagles as a dysfunctional band – it’s true that we’re all passionate guys – but for the most part, we just had an absolute blast making our first record.

If only that came off more in the film...

[Henley Honey]

I am not trying to stir things up with you, but when people agree to disagree, it normally involves opinion, not fact.

In the case of our discussion you contend that Glenn was the boss or as you waggishly put it, "Chief Eagle Officer".
Yet that is not representative of the facts. He was one of 4 owners, eventually 5 owners, which he insisted upon.
Now if all the other owners had no problem with him being the boss, we would not be discussing how two of the five quit, and one was improperly fired.

If what RebeccaLovesEagles points out is entirely accurate how Eagles Ltd was structured, once a member quit, their shares revert back to the oowners. So at one point that would have made Felder a 1/3 owner, not an employee that was offered a "profit sharing plan".

`

I've been dying to says this since you started posting -- and only those who are fans of the the movie "Airplane" will get it, but:
"What's your vector, Victor?". And stop calling me Shirley!!! But, I digress . . .

My reply to you that we should agree to disagree was actually my polite way of saying I really don't care to rehash this subject anymore. I appreciate the fact that you are a new member and therefore you would like to continue the discussions and express your fresh pov. That's all well and good and in this forum is perfectly acceptable. My "agree to disagree" statement was my way of saying that for me, personally, I've got a "been there -- done that -- sort of attitude about the subject and I don't care to debate it anymore. But I welcome you to the board and I look forward to hearing your differing point of view!

[Vector]

Felder,,, He is disgruntled and comes off as a whiner and he just needs to "get over it"

I am not sure what you are basing this on?

He seemed to come across ok in the Doc for the most part, and reading his book went even further to humanize him. Now there is no way of knowing how skewed his perspective is in his book, but much of it matches up with the Doc and other books. Heck I was amazed at the detail he recalls from those days, since all of the Eagles were drinking and doing drugs along the way. I think the only one that cleaned up was L-eadon toward the end. When I watched the Doc for the second time, it seemed as if they used portions of the Felder book as cliff notes. There were some details that I find strange that so many of them were able to recall, considering their altered states.

Now if Felder lost the lawsuit, or it was settled for little more than the cost of lawyers, I'd have to assume his complaints were merit-less, and petty. However he does make a case for improper conflicts of interest, special treatment Henley and Frey were getting at the expense of everyone, etc.

That is not to say his view is 100% right. However if even 50% was accurate, it still looks bad. I actually started to feel for the guy because I know people with his type of personality. Some people are in your face, and intend to resolve the issue one way or the other. Others are totally passive, and go along to get along, even if they are not happy about it. Felder is one of these guys who was typically not confrontational, but spoke up about things he was not happy with every once in a while. He allowed himself to be put off by Azoff on a regular basis, always hoping he would get answers to his questions. Instead of making demands or letting it go, he allowed it to eat him up over time, which prompted a periodic complaint or question Henley/Frey/Azoff didn't want to deal with.

`

[Vector]

This is a band where the original lineup was NOT the best lineup IMO, nor the most successful. I'll leave it at that.

This is another one of those interesting perspectives. This is of course based on opinion/preference, so there is no right or wrong way to see it.

For me, I think I am on the fence. There is no doubt different versions of the Eagles (original 4 vs +Felder vs -two originals +Walsh and Schmit) created different sounds/songs/fans.
Still you have to give props to the original 4 as most of the songs on their first Greatest Hits album were just those guys and some with Felder.
Yet there move toward a more R&R band hit it's pinnacle with the addition of Walsh. Though Schmit came more toward the end of 1977, he added a distinct sound which blended about as well as anyone.

My guess is that fans of the more country sounding Eagles preferred the original guys the best. Others who were more into rock certainly enjoyed the later incarnation.

`

[WalshFan88]

This is another one of those interesting perspectives. This is of course based on opinion/preference, so there is no right or wrong way to see it.

For me, I think I am on the fence. There is no doubt different versions of the Eagles (original 4 vs +Felder vs -two originals +Walsh and Schmit) created different sounds/songs/fans.
Still you have to give props to the original 4 as most of the songs on their first Greatest Hits album were just those guys and some with Felder.
Yet there move toward a more R&R band hit it's pinnacle with the addition of Walsh. Though Schmit came more toward the end of 1977, he added a distinct sound which blended about as well as anyone.

My guess is that fans of the more country sounding Eagles preferred the original guys the best. Others who were more into rock certainly enjoyed the later incarnation.

`

Yeah I certainly dislike folk/bluegrass/country and am all about rock n' roll and so I definitely prefer the Walsh era. It just is better IMO. I'm not a huge fan of the 71-75 album, it's just not my thing. It has some songs I like, but ultimately I'd take Hotel California (the single album) over any other album studio, greatest hits, live, etc they've ever done. I certainly think it's better than the 71-75 collection. There is not one bad song on that album and it's where they really made their group a supergroup with Walsh and really came into huuuge success. They still did softer stuff (ala NKIT) to please some of their early fans, but man for us electric guitar rock n' rollers it was heaven. IMO it started heading in the right direction with Already Gone, then One Of These Nights was pleasing to us with that great electric solo and playing but more into the RnB thing, and then when you get Hotel California you are in classic rock heaven. So many good rockers on HC. HC, LITFL, VOL, etc.

I think HC covers every kind of song you could want from the band in that one album. It leaves no stone unturned.

Obviously it's to each his/her own.

[Victim of Love]

Welcome Vector....and to each his own!

[Vector]

My stance on this is that I could not care less about the business side of this band. The Felder thing happened - yeah, it was badly handled and all that, but the past is behind us. As long as these guys keep making music, I'm good. I do have specific feelings about how Frey and Henley handled the situation.... but that's all I'm going to say about that, I think. I could go so much more in depth with this, but I have AP Chemistry homework and honestly, arguing with people on the Internet - even if they have well thought out, respectful opinions and arguements - is a waste of my time.

AP Chem? Heck we should not see you again until your semester is over. ;)

I'd like to think we are not arguing, rather having a discussion and exchanging different points of view.
It is not as if there are posters here who hate the Eagles and want to tell us how great rap is.

[tjrrockandrollmaster]

Hey Vector, I know your pain.

The Eagles' feud luckily was not as bad as (per se) Pink Floyd's was. Roger Waters' power trip makes Don Henley and Glenn Frey look humble by comparison (regardless of Waters having duetted with Henley on Roger's Amused to Death album and Roger returning the favor by doing benefit concerts with Don).

Glenn reducing his singing worked out for the band as Henley had the better voice (and the voice most associate with the band) intentionally (I can see why, starting with Desperado (the best four man era album IMHO and I wasn't alive when released in 1973 (disadvantage to being born in 1976) but on first listen as a 9 year old in December, 1985 LOVED IT). Now Roger Waters, on the other hand, reduced guitarist/singer/songwriter David Gilmour, drummer/sound effect master Nick Mason and (rest his soul) keyboard player/songwriter Rick Wright to his sidemen starting with Animals (whereas all albums from the More Soundtrack through Wish You Were Here had Gilmour and Wright writing most (if not all) of the music and Waters handled most of the lyrics and what not). Roger rejecting Wright's ideas and much of Gilmour's ideas for Animals (hence why Gilmour and Wright did solo albums in 1978) and distanced himself from the band to fly to shows via helicopter whilst the rest of the band either shared or had separate limos. Roger never liked Rick and he wasn't friends with Gilmour really as well (Waters is still somewhat resentful that Gilmour and Mason and Wright carried on as PF without him). First order of business on The Wall was Roger kicked Wright out during the mixing of The Wall but Wright stayed as a salaried musician and did the album and tour (was only member of PF to make money on that tour). During The Wall shows, the band members all had separate trailers as they hated each other.The Final Cut was Roger's way or the highway (Nick Mason's drums are absent and Gilmour's guitar and vocals and contributions were mute and Gilmour and Waters did have a couple fistfights during The Final Cut sessions, I do know luckily The Eagles never had fistfights in the studio though came close on stage).

Glenn (to his credit) at least didn't pull a Roger Waters and sue his bandmates (Roger sued Gilmour and Mason (whom both brought back Wright into the band after Waters QUIT on his own choice and declared PF "OVER")). I had an opportunity to see The Eagles in 1994 but Pink Floyd won out that year (coincidentally was the final time they toured). I'm considering this tour so I can scratch seeing The Eagles off of my "bucket list" (at least their tickets are cheaper than Mick Jagger and Keith Richards' circus).

I apologize for bringing the Pink Floyd into the thread (my Autism can manifest itself).

[Vector]

Welcome, Vector! Sorry i'm a few days late in replying, I don't get online often.

I found it quite interesting that this documentary made you like the band less, where it made me like them more! In fact I became obsessed immediately as I watched it, and before this I was only a casual fan who only liked maybe 3 or 4 songs! Interesting how this documentary has affected people differently!

Thanks for the welcome, and I fully agree it striking people differently. We share the fact we both became more interested in the band, but just in different ways. I expected to watch it, enjoy it, then move on. Instead I found myself baffled at some of the stuff, and some of it not making any sense. So I started on this quest to educate myself and see where it would lead me.

Music is art, it's creative expression. Which is pretty much the opposite of what a business is. So sad they have to go hand in hand in order for a band to make it big.

Indeed
I think that is why so many artists/groups want to find the right manager and leave the business aspect to them. As long as they can trust the guy, why allow all the other junk get into the way of making great music.
The Eagles seemed to start out with the best of intentions, yet got sucked into the business side because of greed. They did not like the idea of so many different people making money off them, even though much of it was standard practice of the time. So they went and started doing their own publishing, promotion, etc. to make even more money.
On the one hand there is nothing wrong with that, but it certainly has you thinking and worrying about other things rather than fine tuning your craft.
When Felder started to wonder why Frey/Henley and Azoff were making more money off these ventures than the other guys, it created friction. According to his book he was told that "those guys are single, so they have more money". Yet Felder thought to himself, how come Azoff can afford to invest so much. He later found out that different aspects of the Eagles business were being steered to Azoff's interests, presumably with Frey and Henley's knowledge.
At that point ones wonders whether Frey took the same attitude that he and Henley(with the help of Azoff) should make more money, just like he would many years into the future. Now that is purely speculation on my part, but considering Frey's attitude years later, it does not seem like too much of a stretch.

`

[Vector]

In my experience, everyone here is free to express their opinions ~ even Felder apologists ~ as long as they do it respectfully. I like that. You'll see some people handle debate better than others though. I'm glad you're not one of those people who gets all affronted and pouty if someone challenges them.

Why single out Felder apologists vs. apologists of other band members? I ask because I see few to none of the posters names or avatars with Felder, yet a ton of Frey and Henley. There are a few Walsh, Schmit and L-eadon fans, but poor Felder seems like the odd man out.

Rest assured I will not let a few words ruffle my eagle feathers.



I'm glad you quoted that part HD. I'm proud of our group for that reason.

Welcome to The Border, Vector! I hope you'll stick around and join other discussions.

Thanks for the welcome.

I am still on my quest to learn with more articles to read via links provided, and the other book I ordered from the library. So I will likely be around for at least a few more weeks. You guys have until then to try and hook me into staying. :partytime:

[Vector]

Regarding Don Felder, he said in his interview that he didn't follow politics at that time, & had no idea who Cranston was or what he was about, which is why he made the statement, "I think" that made Glenn so furious with him, which turned into the concert from hell with the two of them about to duke it out right on the stage....In my opinion, Frey over reacted here & took this to a whole new level... Felder said he was not involved in politics, so he was just clueless about this guy.

You do have to wonder who was making these decisions to do various fund raisers when they could all be taking some much needed time off. I don't care how well you like someone, you need a break from each other now and then. That is especially true of people you work with, even if they are your good friends. So between touring, flying back and forth to the studios, and everything else that demanded their time, political gigs probably should have been avoided.

As I mentioned, you are likely going to alienate half your fans by publicly pushing your political views. I like Clint Eastwood as an actor and director. Yet I was not really interested in him getting up at the (R) convention and doing his unscripted talk. My guess is his (D) fans enjoyed it even less.

`

[tjrrockandrollmaster]

Thanks for the welcome, and I fully agree it striking people differently. We share the fact we both became more interested in the band, but just in different ways. I expected to watch it, enjoy it, then move on. Instead I found myself baffled at some of the stuff, and some of it not making any sense. So I started on this quest to educate myself and see where it would lead me.

Music is art, it's creative expression. Which is pretty much the opposite of what a business is. So sad they have to go hand in hand in order for a band to make it big.

Indeed
I think that is why so many artists/groups want to find the right manager and leave the business aspect to them. As long as they can trust the guy, why allow all the other junk get into the way of making great music.
The Eagles seemed to start out with the best of intentions, yet got sucked into the business side because of greed. They did not like the idea of so many different people making money off them, even though much of it was standard practice of the time. So they went and started doing their own publishing, promotion, etc. to make even more money.
On the one hand there is nothing wrong with that, but it certainly has you thinking and worrying about other things rather than fine tuning your craft.
When Felder started to wonder why Frey/Henley and Azoff were making more money off these ventures than the other guys, it created friction. According to his book he was told that "those guys are single, so they have more money". Yet Felder thought to himself, how come Azoff can afford to invest so much. He later found out that different aspects of the Eagles business were being steered to Azoff's interests, presumably with Frey and Henley's knowledge.
At that point ones wonders whether Frey took the same attitude that he and Henley(with the help of Azoff) should make more money, just like he would many years into the future. Now that is purely speculation on my part, but considering Frey's attitude years later, it does not seem like too much of a stretch.

`

Not many bands kept managers for long. How The Eagles stayed with Irving Azoff for 40 years is a mystery.

Peter Grant of Led Zeppelin and Steve O'Rourke who handled Pink Floyd were the managers who changed the name of the game. Grant and O'Rourke negotiated deals that were unheard of (sans Steve Miller who initially made 45 cents per album when he signed to Capitol whilst The Beatles made 12 cents per album. Then Steve eventually went to $1.50 earned per album in latter years with Capitol.

Zeppelin and Floyd weren't afraid to play hardball. Atlantic never bothered Led Zeppelin and Peter Grant was a promoter and record label's worst nighmare. Watch The Song Remains the Same and you'll see Grant's "TAKE NO PRISONERS TAKE NO S===" disposition. Peter's death was the beginning of the end of the great rock managers who were about to perish.

Floyd controlled their recordings once Dark Side made them rich beyond the wildest dreams. They formed Pink Floyd Music Ltd which would license albums to CBS/Sony and EMI for distribution from Wish You Were Here forward and also created David Gilmour Music Ltd, Richard Wright Music Overseas Ltd and Nick Mason Ltd for the solo deals (Roger Waters didn't create his until after he left the band) and also Pink Floyd (1987) Ltd. My favorite Steve O'Rourke PF story was when CBS Records called Steve at 2 AM UK time (9 PM EST) whining about the Wish You Were Here sleeve being hidden by blue shrinkwrap to which Steve responded with "F=== OFF". Then the label wanted to give the band smaller royalties for The Wall and Roger Waters won a coin toss which allowed him and the band to keep their normal royalty rate. Another was Steve buying a record exec from CBS a watch reminding him never to be late for a business meeting again. Shame that Steve died so young at 63.

Only bands I know that own their catalogs are Pink Floyd (who now own their whole catalog and since EMI is no more will probably take catalog to Sony as Warner won't do squat with Floyd), Iron Maiden (same deal and will go Universal or Sony), Queen (same thing when they went to Universal for the world and were with Hollywood (who went from Elektra to PolyGram to Universal over the years)), Genesis (under the individual band members' names and license to Virgin/Universal all over the world sans the US/Canada which is Warner Music), The Rolling Stones (Sticky Fingers onward, been distributed by the big three over the years), AC/DC (went from Warner to Sony and took its catalog with them).

[Vector]

TBF is much more articulate than me, so I consider the majority of her opinions to echo mine. Since you started this thread, I and many others have followed it with great interest and appreciation for the time and thoughtfulness you have put into the discussion.

The one thing that stands out in the documentary that has everyone going one way or the other is Frey's, and to a lesser extent, Henley's arrogance all the way through it. Since this has been discussed, defended and talked about with no end in sight, I won't add any more except to express disappointment.

They are and will remain a fabulously talented bunch of artists.

Thanks for your kind comment.

I cannot imagine how long these debates/discussions have been going on because the Doc has not been out that long, many do not have Showtime, and it has not yet been released for purchase.

Regardless, to people like me who are new to this forum, I am eager to explore what others think, and to see if some of their views mirror mine?

I have focused more on Frey than Henley, but he too came off bad in certain parts of the Doc, and in various books/articles. I would really like to be a fly on the wall if they were to stick Geffen and Henley into a room and let them rehash what really happened both times Geffen was dropped. Clearly there is still some venom between them.

The fact that Frey/Henley are putting on a united front in the Doc and barely touching on their own conflicts is also obvious. Each seemed to have habits/quirks which drove the other crazy, yet nary a peep was mentioned in the Doc. If you never read the books or did any further research, you'd come away thinking everything external of those two caused the split.

`

[Vector]

COLOR=blue]


Thank you for responding :) I believe according to Felder's book since Bernie and Randy quit their shares reverted back to Eagles LTD. so it would have went from 5/5 to 4/4 to 3/3

Rest assured anyone who leaves me a reply will get one in return. It just may take me a little time to get around to it with so many to reply to.

You are correct regarding Felder's book as I just confirmed it on page 325. Yet it is still a little ambiguous about what exactly happens to ones shares. I remembered him saying Frey/Henley proffered him an offer for his shares after they thought they could fire him, but he refused. Now the question is if L-eadon or Meisner were ever offered a price for their shares after they quit?

Here is the exact wording for you or others to interpret;

"Three people own Eagles Ltd.- Don Henley, Glenn Frey, and Don Felder. We own rights to the name the Eagles, including the right to use that name on record or on tour and the right to license it for use on merchandise. There was a major difference between my so-called departure and that of Bernie and Randy. I never quit, and I never surrendered or offered up my shares of stock. According to our corporate agreement, which is still valid, someone had to leave of his own volition for that to happen. They couldn't just boot me out of the company, then try to buy my shares back at whatever price they deemed fair. Their offer was both arrogant, and misguided. It also made me realize what I had to do."

So does anyone know if L-eadon or Meisner walked away with nothing, or were they offered and accepted a share buy out?

The other thing I mentioned in another post was whether or not Henley & Felder could have used Frey essentially quiting to coerce him in returning, or lose his shares in all Eagles profits from the day he called it quits?

`

[Freypower]

Hey Vector, I know your pain.

The Eagles' feud luckily was not as bad as (per se) Pink Floyd's was. Roger Waters' power trip makes Don Henley and Glenn Frey look humble by comparison (regardless of Waters having duetted with Henley on Roger's Amused to Death album and Roger returning the favor by doing benefit concerts with Don).

Glenn reducing his singing worked out for the band as Henley had the better voice (and the voice most associate with the band) intentionally (I can see why, starting with Desperado (the best four man era album IMHO and I wasn't alive when released in 1973 (disadvantage to being born in 1976) but on first listen as a 9 year old in December, 1985 LOVED IT). Now Roger Waters, on the other hand, reduced guitarist/singer/songwriter David Gilmour, drummer/sound effect master Nick Mason and (rest his soul) keyboard player/songwriter Rick Wright to his sidemen starting with Animals (whereas all albums from the More Soundtrack through Wish You Were Here had Gilmour and Wright writing most (if not all) of the music and Waters handled most of the lyrics and what not). Roger rejecting Wright's ideas and much of Gilmour's ideas for Animals (hence why Gilmour and Wright did solo albums in 1978) and distanced himself from the band to fly to shows via helicopter whilst the rest of the band either shared or had separate limos. Roger never liked Rick and he wasn't friends with Gilmour really as well (Waters is still somewhat resentful that Gilmour and Mason and Wright carried on as PF without him). First order of business on The Wall was Roger kicked Wright out during the mixing of The Wall but Wright stayed as a salaried musician and did the album and tour (was only member of PF to make money on that tour). During The Wall shows, the band members all had separate trailers as they hated each other.The Final Cut was Roger's way or the highway (Nick Mason's drums are absent and Gilmour's guitar and vocals and contributions were mute and Gilmour and Waters did have a couple fistfights during The Final Cut sessions, I do know luckily The Eagles never had fistfights in the studio though came close on stage).

Glenn (to his credit) at least didn't pull a Roger Waters and sue his bandmates (Roger sued Gilmour and Mason (whom both brought back Wright into the band after Waters QUIT on his own choice and declared PF "OVER")). I had an opportunity to see The Eagles in 1994 but Pink Floyd won out that year (coincidentally was the final time they toured). I'm considering this tour so I can scratch seeing The Eagles off of my "bucket list" (at least their tickets are cheaper than Mick Jagger and Keith Richards' circus).

I apologize for bringing the Pink Floyd into the thread (my Autism can manifest itself).

I am not posting in this thread but I cannot agree with this statement. I have always thought, and I still do, that it was wrong for Glenn to reduce his vocals so drastically. I cannot agree that Henley's is the voice most associated with the band or that it is 'better'. I have nothing more to say on this issue but I could not let that pass.

I will say this though; Glenn's cutting back on his vocals to allow Henley to shine shows a generosity of spirit on Glenn's part & an acknowledgement of talent that some seem incapable of recognising. He did not turn the band into a vehicle for himself; in fact he did the reverse.

[Glennhoney]

I am not posting in this thread but I cannot agree with this statement. I have always thought, and I still do, that it was wrong for Glenn to reduce his vocals so drastically. I cannot agree that Henley's is the voice most associated with the band or that it is 'better'. I have nothing more to say on this issue but I could not let that pass.

I will say this though; Glenn's cutting back on his vocals to allow Henley to shine shows a generosity of spirit on Glenn's part & an acknowledgement of talent that some seem incapable of recognising. He did not turn the band into a vehicle for himself; in fact he did the reverse.


SO AGREE WITH THIS...:thumbsup:

[tjrrockandrollmaster]

SO AGREE WITH THIS...:thumbsup:

It is true that Glenn can be generous much of the time. The first album Glenn and Randy had three tracks each while Don and Bernie each had two as lead vocals go.

Desperado had Glenn and Don each have three lead vocal tracks apiece, one where they split 50/50. Bernie had two and Randy had one.

On the Border saw Glenn have two sole lead vocal tracks (Already Gone and James Dean), Henley had three which he was lead singer (title cut, Never cry and Best of My Love), the two sharing lead on two tracks (Ol' 55 and Good Day in Hell), Randy had two tracks (Midnight Flyer and the uderrated Is it True?) and Bernie had one lead vocal (My Man).

Then One of These Nights (the first #1 album for the band) had Henley have two lead vocal tracks (title cut and Hollywood Waltz), Randy had two (Too Many Hands and the Top 5 Take It to the Limit), Bernie (I Wish You Peace) and Felder (Visions) and Frey (the Top 5 Lyin' Eyes) each had one apiece, Glenn and Don split one track (After the Thrill).

Hotel California and The Long Run (both chart toppers as well) had Henley sing the lion's share of tracks (five on HC (title cut, Life in the Fast Lane, Wasted Time, Victim of Love and the masterpiece Last Resort) and five on TLR (title cut, Disco Strangler, Those Shoes, Greeks and Sad Cafe)) with Glenn having one lead vocal on each (the #1s "New Kid in Town" and Heartache Tonight), The Long Run had Henley/Frey sharing lead on two songs. Joe had a lead vocal on each (Pretty Maids on HC and In the City on TLR). Randy had one on Hotel (Try and Love Again) and Timothy B Schmit on The Long Run (I Can't Tell You Why).

Glenn could play a good lead guitar as well but he knew he couldn't compete with Joe Walsh nor Don Felder as far as shredders could go and even told Redbeard that Walsh and Felder could play more guitar in one day than he could in his entire life.

[Freypower]

It is true that Glenn can be generous much of the time. The first album Glenn and Randy had three tracks each while Don and Bernie each had two as lead vocals go.

Desperado had Glenn and Don each have three lead vocal tracks apiece, one where they split 50/50. Bernie had two and Randy had one.

On the Border saw Glenn have two sole lead vocal tracks (Already Gone and James Dean), Henley had three which he was lead singer (title cut, Never cry and Best of My Love), the two sharing lead on two tracks (Ol' 55 and Good Day in Hell), Randy had two tracks (Midnight Flyer and the uderrated Is it True?) and Bernie had one lead vocal (My Man).

Then One of These Nights (the first #1 album for the band) had Henley have two lead vocal tracks (title cut and Hollywood Waltz), Randy had two (Too Many Hands and the Top 5 Take It to the Limit), Bernie (I Wish You Peace) and Felder (Visions) and Frey (the Top 5 Lyin' Eyes) each had one apiece, Glenn and Don split one track (After the Thrill).

Hotel California and The Long Run (both chart toppers as well) had Henley sing the lion's share of tracks (five on HC (title cut, Life in the Fast Lane, Wasted Time, Victim of Love and the masterpiece Last Resort) and five on TLR (title cut, Disco Strangler, Those Shoes, Greeks and Sad Cafe)) with Glenn having one lead vocal on each (the #1s "New Kid in Town" and Heartache Tonight), The Long Run had Henley/Frey sharing lead on two songs. Joe had a lead vocal on each (Pretty Maids on HC and In the City on TLR). Randy had one on Hotel (Try and Love Again) and Timothy B Schmit on The Long Run (I Can't Tell You Why).

Glenn could play a good lead guitar as well but he knew he couldn't compete with Joe Walsh nor Don Felder as far as shredders could go and even told Redbeard that Walsh and Felder could play more guitar in one day than he could in his entire life.

Thanks; I am well aware of the breakdown of lead vocals. I was not referring to his ability as a guitarist, but I would submit that he is underrated.

My point is that he recognised the talent of other people & sometimes he seemed to emphasise that to his own detriment. And I repeat that some will not give him credit for this or acknowledge that it was as much part of his leadership role as coercing his bandmates & giving them orders.

[Vector]

If they had gone on without Glenn, I'll tell you what it would have been: Don Henley and his back-up band.

My thinking would not be so much that Frey be left out if he wanted to return, because he has to many signature songs that would sound different without him. Look at how Take It To The Limit sounds without Meisner for example. Or even the other songs that Felder was prominent on sound different.

Instead I was wondering if Frey would have given up his shares in Eagles Ltd. if Henley and Felder essentially said return or your out? Keep in mind that we are speaking with the knowledge they did get back together in the mid 90's. What would happen if Frey just continued to refuse to this day, and all the others wanted to go forward?


That's not me saying that ~ Don said it himself according to Shapiro's book, but you can see how it would be true. Before HFO, Timothy had one Eagles song under his belt, Joe had two, and Felder had one. Let's say they do a new album and they each sing three songs on that.

First, is that book worth the read compared with all the others I've read so far?

Here I think you are giving Frey too much credit, or not enough to the other guys. When faced with coming up with material, they would have created more songs. Henley had taken the lead in the number of vocals anyway, singing the lions share even with Frey.
Additionally, Walsh certainly has had plenty of hits over the years, and Schmit was no slouch either. While Felder was not a strong lead singer, his voice is not bad, and lets not forget how he added so much to many of the songs with his creative music/playing.

Lastly, it is not inconceivable that L-eadon and/or Meisner may have come back once Frey was no longer with them.
Food for thought.


Better for Don to continue with his hugely successful solo career than be part of something like that, and he knew it.

Maybe so, but the allure of being in a band seemed fairly strong with him as it is in several books/articles, as well as in the Doc.

You have a problem with Glenn breaking up the Eagles because it left others 'not able to play.' Well, they could play, they just couldn't make as much money. Still, if Glenn doesn't want to do it because he's unhappy, is he supposed to just show up out of pity for the other guys because they can't get anyone to buy their solo material ~ other than Don, of course? That's ridiculous.

Again this comment is with hindsight in mind. First, as talented as Frey is, there was no assurance that he would be successful. I know of quality albums sitting out there on shelves collecting dust because they didn't catch on for one reason or another.
Regardless, you talk about Frey's unhappiness as if his had higher value than the other guys. Many of them were unhappy, but they still wanted to go on.
Based on everything I've watched and read, Henley, Felder, Walsh, and Schmit all wanted to carry on, it was only Frey who decided to call it quits. That is another reason why I wonder about the Eagles Ltd. By-Laws. If there was a clause in there about quitting equated to a loss of ones shares(as in what likely happened with L-eadon & Meisner) why did Frey not lose his?



`

[Vector]

I've been reading this "post" for the past several days and I'm left wondering why you, Vector, would want to join "The Border" if you're so unhappy with your "favorite" band? As you may have noticed, the "borderers" LOVE their EAGLES and are very well informed and passionate about the "boys". Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinions, but why start an "I hate Glenn Frey" campaign (my opinion only) on our beloved Glenn Frey page? I for one, love Glenn for his music and his savvy in the music world...but I certainly do not know him personally and therefore, would NOT judge his actions or inactions, whatever they may be. All I know is that a Michigan teenager made a huge impact in the music world and after 40 years, he still is...and frankly, that's all that REALLY matters....:thumbsup:

Maybe from your point of view this is an anti-Frey thread, but that is not the way I see it. Isn't it possible that any criticism of him causes his fans to be more sensitive than say a Schmit fan might be?

As to your overall question as to why I am here, my initial way of finding this forum was when I was setting up research material. I decided that I needed to be better informed other than just watching the Doc. Keep in mind I still cannot explain why I got so interested, because I play and watch sports, am fairly busy day to day, and into all sorts of things not related to R&R band drama. I am also the captain of a amateur sports team and make the decisions for 18+ guys, so I know what it takes to be the leader of men. That is probably why I see faults in the way Frey and Henley went about things. In putting their interest above others, it was a recipe for the problems they faced down the road.

I guess it is just because I enjoyed the Eagles music so much, that I got intrigued listening to them explain why it all fell apart.
Had it gone along the narrative of "Frey & Henley wanted to kill each other and mutually called it quits", I might not have been as interested because that is what I'd heard as the reason from years ago.
But the Doc almost ignored their conflict, and instead made it seem as if all sorts of problems were outside of those two. Then when you hear Frey and Henley sounding not to kind about their bandmates and business associates, it didn't add up.

it might also be that I thought much better of Frey and Henley, but they came off as being jerks at times.
Let me give you an example of where I'd have been predisposed to totally be on Henley's side until I watched the Doc.
Obviously the Eagles had problems with Geffen and eventually sued him. Not that I would have cared, but I had no clue. So I was then surprised to hear that Henley went back with him during his solo career, only to once again leave him after he was successful. Listening to them both, I'm thinking Geffen might have a point, so I want to learn more about this. [I should point out that I am involved in the business as a side line, so that might be part of the reason on this aspect].
The bottom line is that I would have given Henley the benefit of the doubt because I like him, and do not like Geffen on a personal level at all. Still the Doc made Geffen seem like he was on the right side of things in some aspects, so I was left shaking my head wanting to know more.


`

[Freypower]

Instead I was wondering if Frey would have given up his shares in Eagles Ltd. if Henley and Felder essentially said return or your out? Keep in mind that we are speaking with the knowledge they did get back together in the mid 90's. What would happen if Frey just continued to refuse to this day, and all the others wanted to go forward?




Very briefly, this would not have happened because Frey was the leader of the band & Henley & Felder were in no position to make such a demand. When Frey left, the band broke up. This was accepted by the other four. They made no attempt to continue. Also, they could not have reformed if Frey had not wished to do so.

As others have tried to explain to you it would have been Henley & his backing band & it would not have worked. You can speculate all you like. You can deride Frey all you like. It would not have worked.

Now as far as I am concerned I have made the only response to you I wish to make. All else to me to use a line I am sure TJ would recognise is 'running over the same old ground' and I am not going to do it.

[Vector]

Very briefly, this would not have happened because Frey was the leader of the band & Henley & Felder were in no position to make such a demand.

I still am catching up on other replies but I'll address this one real quick.

You say it would not have happened, and it obviously didn't. However I suspect not for the reasons you think.
Just as Frey/Henley felt as 2/3 owners they could fire Felder, I suspect Henley/Felder could have attempted the same with Frey. Needless to say it would not have been successful, just like it wasn't when Frey/Henley tried it.
Yet that is not what I am saying.

If fellow owners L-eadon & Meisner walked away and presumably lost their shares in Eagles Ltd., so too could it have happened to Frey, as he was not a majority owner.

When Frey left, the band broke up. This was accepted by the other four. They made no attempt to continue. Also, they could not have reformed if Frey had not wished to do so.

I disagree, and it is not backed up by the facts. Everyone wanted to go on(if not after a break), but they wanted everyone, including Frey to come back to the nest. Most even said so in the Doc, much less it being backed up elsewhere. Heck they even got back into the studio again, all hoping Frey was coming(as Azoff had said), yet he was a no show.

I can tell you this much. If I were one of the other 4 guys, especially either Henley or Felder as 2/3 owners, I'd have taken a vacation, then got on the phone with Frey and tried to get him to come back. If he refused, I'd have given him the same ultimatum the others guys who left received.
If you are quiting the group, your shares are forfeited back to Eagles limited unless you return.
Of course my goal would be to get him back as it would be best for everyone. However after you go through A-Z with praise and cajoling in between, and the guy basically tells you to pound sand, he would suffer the same fate he put the other original members through business wise.

As others have tried to explain to you it would have been Henley & his backing band & it would not have worked. You can speculate all you like. You can deride Frey all you like. It would not have worked.

It is not a matter of deriding Frey, as I've also been complimentary toward him as well.

As to it not working, let me ask you a simple question then. Had Frey refused to come back after 14 years, would you prefer the Eagles never play another note of music together? Even if 4, or even 6 of the original members all wanted to go on tour together?

[Shadowland07]

It seems to me like you just can't accept the fact the the Eagles NEED Glenn. Glenn started the band and he ended it. Why? The Eagles are HIS band. Just like the Beatles were John's.

[Freypower]

I still am catching up on other replies but I'll address this one real quick.

You say it would not have happened, and it obviously didn't. However I suspect not for the reasons you think.
Just as Frey/Henley felt as 2/3 owners they could fire Felder, I suspect Henley/Felder could have attempted the same with Frey. Needless to say it would not have been successful, just like it wasn't when Frey/Henley tried it.
Yet that is not what I am saying.

If fellow owners L-eadon & Meisner walked away and presumably lost their shares in Eagles Ltd., so too could it have happened to Frey, as he was not a majority owner.

When Frey left, the band broke up. This was accepted by the other four. They made no attempt to continue. Also, they could not have reformed if Frey had not wished to do so.

I disagree, and it is not backed up by the facts. Everyone wanted to go on(if not after a break), but they wanted everyone, including Frey to come back to the nest. Most even said so in the Doc, much less it being backed up elsewhere. Heck they even got back into the studio again, all hoping Frey was coming(as Azoff had said), yet he was a no show.

I can tell you this much. If I were one of the other 4 guys, especially either Henley or Felder as 2/3 owners, I'd have taken a vacation, then got on the phone with Frey and tried to get him to come back. If he refused, I'd have given him the same ultimatum the others guys who left received.
If you are quiting the group, your shares are forfeited back to Eagles limited unless you return.
Of course my goal would be to get him back as it would be best for everyone. However after you go through A-Z with praise and cajoling in between, and the guy basically tells you to pound sand, he would suffer the same fate he put the other original members through business wise.

As others have tried to explain to you it would have been Henley & his backing band & it would not have worked. You can speculate all you like. You can deride Frey all you like. It would not have worked.

It is not a matter of deriding Frey, as I've also been complimentary toward him as well.

As to it not working, let me ask you a simple question then. Had Frey refused to come back after 14 years, would you prefer the Eagles never play another note of music together? Even if 4, or even 6 of the original members all wanted to go on tour together?

You cannot & will not accept that Frey is/was the leader & had/has veto power. It does not matter what anyone else tells you. Therefore it is useless trying to argue with you.

As for your simple question I would have thought that you might have worked out from my user name, avatar & signature what my answer would be. But as you insist on it, my answer has to be yes. I see no need to elaborate except that to me the Eagles without Glenn Frey could not exist.

Like it or not Frey backed by Henley fired Felder & again you can deny that all you like and say it 'wasn't successful'. It happened. Henley would not & could not have fired Frey. I don't know why I am bothering to tell you this but doesn't the fact that no such attempt was made tell you anything? You refer to his no show. Doesn't the fact that no reunion was attempted without him tell you anything? You are so obsessed with this alleged equal ownership stuff that you ignore the basic power structure.

Now I say once more, you can say 'what if' all you like. It will not change anything.

[Vector]

It seems to me like you just can't accept the fact the the Eagles NEED Glenn. Glenn started the band and he ended it. Why? The Eagles are HIS band. Just like the Beatles were John's.

Accepting peoples personal opinions are one thing, especially if you decide that no amount of reason or reality will make a difference in their point of view.
I think saying Frey started the band has both merit and flaws. I certainly give him credit for his wise choices in helping to assemble an incredible group of talent. Yet he, by his own force of will did not create Frey and the Widgets.
Rather he helped to create a group that was talented and equal. You and others can certainly think he is your favorite Eagle, yet you cannot deny the fact that in the eyes of the law, he was 1/4, then 1/5, and eventually 1/3 owner. Why some of you put him atop Mount Olympus, and say he was a god among mere mortals, and his wish was the others command, is emotion based, not reality.



You cannot & will not accept that Frey is/was the leader & had/has veto power. It does not matter what anyone else tells you. Therefore it is useless trying to argue with you.

I do not consider trying to discuss an issue and reason with you, having an argument.
Maybe you are aware of something I am not. Did/does he have "veto power" according to any contract or articles of incorporation I am not aware of?
If so, please direct me to the pertinent information so that I may further educate myself.

As for your simple question I would have thought that you might have worked out from my user name, avatar & signature what my answer would be. But as you insist on it, my answer has to be yes. I see no need to elaborate except that to me the Eagles without Glenn Frey could not exist.

Well if we are to discuss this issue within the realm of your personal bias in favor of Frey, then yes, we could say that all the other Eagles (past or present), combined talent cannot even begin to touch the outskirts of Frey's abilities. Then again it sounds as if I am willing to enter the world of a drug induced hallucination in an effort just to interact with you. ;)

Like it or not Frey backed by Henley fired Felder & again you can deny that all you like and say it 'wasn't successful'. It happened. Henley would not & could not have fired Frey.

You brought up two different things. First, Frey and Henley may have believed they had the right to fire Felder, and pay pennies on the dollar for his shares of Eagles Ltd.
However I believe anyone would logically agree they were not successful in that they settled out of court for a substancial amount of money.

As to firing Frey, I never said anything about being fired. Rather Henley, could have(with the help of Felder) insisted Frey either bring his ball back to the field so everyone could play, or forfeit his shares, just like what was done to L-eadon & Meisner.

You refer to his no show. Doesn't the fact that no reunion was attempted without him tell you anything?

Look, on this point we are not that far off. I grant you that the reunion did not occur. I only posed a hypothetical scenario where Henley and Felder could have in fact used the same tactics Henley and Frey did with regards to the other original members shares in Eagles Ltd.
As it turns out Frey has Henley to thank for it never happening, and Felder as well.
In Felders case, he did not seem to have the gumption to assert himself until the day Frey and Henley decided to make a power play against him.
They probably calculated he would acquiesce as he had in the past. Needless to say they misjudged him. Then again, they left him with little choice, which helped to stiffen his spine. It cost them dearly as a result.

You are so obsessed with this alleged equal ownership stuff that you ignore the basic power structure.

No offense is intended, but you can deny the sun will rise and set tomorrow, but it does not change the facts. I am merely pointing out how it not only looks to me, but how it played out after the lawsuit was filed. If Frey/Henley were in fact entitled to fire Felder, they never would have settled out of court for mega bucks.



`

[Vector]

Here, here GH! But, I do welcome you to The Border, Vector. You are certainly entitled to state your views & to discuss your disillusion with the band. :-) I know that I am biased so I think I will stay out of it.

Thanks for the welcome.

As to your bias, it is great you can acknowledge it, and frankly there is nothing wrong with it. That said, hopefully you can still see fault/flaws within a person or group without totally denying they exist. The more I find out about the Eagles, the less I like them on a personal level(or at least some of them). The Doc and the info out there have done them no favors in that regard. Yet that should not preclude you in being able to express your point of view, biased or not.





Vector..you are DEFINATELY welcomed to THE BORDER....to state your opinions like everyone else..:thumbsup:

:grin:


You're welcome! I would invite you to look around the board and get to know us and give us your thoughts on other topics. There's a lot more to us than this one topic, and I've not seen you post elsewhere. Just want to toss out the welcome mat and make sure you know to feel at home everywhere.

Part of the reason I have not posted elsewhere is due to the fact this subject alone is taking a lot of time for me to digest and express my thoughts. I still have one book to go(possibly two if another posters confirms it's value in reading) and some articles I'm currently reading about their various politics.
I gather from casual observations, many of the topics here will not hold my interest like this subject does. Still I might start to wander around if something looks interesting. The Doc thread has a similar theme in some ways, but I am not basing my view on the Doc alone. In my view it left a lot out, probably on purpose. :(

`

[NYC Fan]

I have a avoided posting here because frankly the political part of the op turned me off. Also the dissecting of everyone's responses is way too lawyer-ish for my tastes.

But I will say this, and I said this in another thread. Trust the art, not the artist.

They are a great band. End of. Why isn't that enough to be able to enjoy their art? I don't understand.

And really, no need to respond to me. This is all just opinion on my part, with no facts to back it up...

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Part of the reason I have not posted elsewhere is due to the fact this subject alone is taking a lot of time for me to digest and express my thoughts. I still have one book to go(possibly two if another posters confirms it's value in reading) and some articles I'm currently reading about their various politics.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=blue]I gather from casual observations, many of the topics here will not hold my interest like this subject does. Still I might start to wander around if something looks interesting. The Doc thread has a similar theme in some ways, but I am not basing my view on the Doc alone. In my view it left a lot out, probably on purpose.

I've been able to tell that this is the topic that interests you. I just wanted to remind you that the Eagles are far more than this one sad topic and so are we. I can relate to the time issue and I have to admit that with working 60-70 hours a week, I've not done more than glance over the posts in this thread...anything more than 250 words and I can't justify the time.

I am curious about what the final outcome of your research materials will be. I would hate for any quote of mine, and certainly my name, to show up in a blog or magazine article somewhere.

[StephUK]

This is a very interesting thread. I live in the UK and haven't yet seen 'The History of the Eagles. However, like every film/TV programme about the career of any band, I anticipate that there will be things which I don't want to hear, or which may annoy me.

I've been a fan of the Eagles music for many years. Until 1976 when the Hotel California album became BIG in the UK, I didn't know their names or what they looked like!!!

Although they're my favourite band, I don't expect them to be perfect - after all, they're still only human like the rest of us.
Greed, infighting, and egoism exists in every walk of life. That's where the human race has got to. Sad, but true.

I listen to lots of bands/solo performers who I don't know anything about.
I can see that it might be upsetting to find out the more unsavoury things about your favourite band, and might make you think about the individuals in the band in a different way. It's sad that this can stop you wanting to listen to the music.
Most of the long-time successful bands have a history of members falling out with each other, alcoholism, drugs, arguments with record companies & managers etc

I too have issues about the Eagles ticket prices, the inconsistent rules on photography, their hatred of YouTube and other social networking(although this seems to be some band members only, not all), and Don's eagerness to sue everybody! I also have some problems with the attitude towards their fans - we don't always get the respect we deserve. As a band they do seem to be a bit paranoid about some things.

In the UK also nowadays we have famous people 'representing' political parties and backing their campaigns. I don't like this very much either. It's like when they get celebs to advertise cars or make up etc - we're supposed to think if we buy the products we'll look like they do, or our life will become like that of the celeb - who wants that? not me; they can keep it.


I DON'T want to be given a 'political address' when I go to a concert. I want to hear the music. To be honest, I've seen the Eagles quite a few times and Don Henley also, and I haven't heard them express any political views at a show.
Our political parties are a bit different over here as we have a Right Wing party(Conservative) a Left Wing party(Labour) and a Liberal party(which is sort of in the middle). I think the Eagles views which I have heard expressed would fall into the area of the Liberal party. So to me they can't be called extremists.

I don't read the tabloids or the glossy celeb mags, so I don't get to know all the sleaze. The world of celebrity has nothing to do with me. I'm just not interested. I have read some of the Eagles books; but I also take those quite lightly.

I love music & I can't and don't want to imagine what life would be like without it. The music comes first with me. So even though I have the aforementioned issues, I'll still buy the albums & go to the show when I can.

[TimothyBFan]

Very well said, Steph!!! Exactly!!!

[GlennLover]

Very well said, Steph!!! Exactly!!!

Steph, that is exactly what I was thinking as I was reading your post. :nod:

I guess great minds do think alike, Willie! ;)

[Houston Debutante]

I believe you mischaracterized my position in regard to Soda. I do not recall saying she has her facts wrong, rather my recollection is a little different than hers.
For example I said I would go back and listen to L-eadons comment regarding John's, to see if he was speaking for himself as an individual, or the band as a whole. I know she got the words right, I just do not recall the context. So until one of us or someone else checks/recalls, it is up in the air.

I watched the documentary multiple times. Soda is right.


I am not sure what you are basing this on?

He seemed to come across ok in the Doc for the most part, and reading his book went even further to humanize him. Now there is no way of knowing how skewed his perspective is in his book, but much of it matches up with the Doc and other books. Heck I was amazed at the detail he recalls from those days, since all of the Eagles were drinking and doing drugs along the way. I think the only one that cleaned up was L-eadon toward the end. When I watched the Doc for the second time, it seemed as if they used portions of the Felder book as cliff notes. There were some details that I find strange that so many of them were able to recall, considering their altered states.

Actually Felder referenced other Eagles books to fill in the gaps in his memory. He admits it in his book. Guess you missed that part, but I'm glad you were so impressed with how he humanized himself in his own autobiography. What a hero. I especially enjoyed the part where he whines about how his wife wasn't paying enough attention to him because of her jewelry business so he divorced her... this from a man who spent years away from his wife and has sex with hundreds of groupies and she stood by him, but he can't handle that she has a jewelry business and missed a 'date' with him? Yeah, he was humanized alright.

I think Felder settled because he knew he couldn't win. If his case had merit, why not take it all the way? Unlike the Eagles ~ who wanted to get the case over with so they could put out a new album ~ Felder had nothing to lose by refusing the settlement and taking the lawsuit to trial... unless he knew in his heart he couldn't win.

[Houston Debutante]

Why single out Felder apologists vs. apologists of other band members? I ask because I see few to none of the posters names or avatars with Felder, yet a ton of Frey and Henley. There are a few Walsh, Schmit and L-eadon fans, but poor Felder seems like the odd man out.

Yeah, Felder doesn't inspire much passion. People like his guitar playing and some think his voice is OK, but otherwise, eh.

There's more vocal Tim fans than Henley fans here. It's kind of funny, because you wouldn't think that would be the case, but it is. If anybody started attacking Tim, there would be hell to pay. Truth be told, if you dissed Tim the way you've been dissing Don Henley and Glenn ~ ie calling them 'jerks' ~ you wouldn't find yourself at the center of a pile of roses.


First, is that book worth the read compared with all the others I've read so far?

I like it.


Here I think you are giving Frey too much credit, or not enough to the other guys. When faced with coming up with material, they would have created more songs. Henley had taken the lead in the number of vocals anyway, singing the lions share even with Frey.
Additionally, Walsh certainly has had plenty of hits over the years, and Schmit was no slouch either. While Felder was not a strong lead singer, his voice is not bad, and lets not forget how he added so much to many of the songs with his creative music/playing.

Lastly, it is not inconceivable that L-eadon and/or Meisner may have come back once Frey was no longer with them.
Food for thought.Why would they have both Randy and Tim?! This 'alt Eagles' without Glenn just gets more and more ridiculous. Reality check about 'plenty of hits' ~ um. no. Do some 'research' on the post-Eagles careers of these guys and see what you come up with.

[Houston Debutante]

Sorry for all the replies in a row but putting all of this in one post is just too much for people to read.


Accepting peoples personal opinions are one thing, especially if you decide that no amount of reason or reality will make a difference in their point of view.
I think saying Frey started the band has both merit and flaws. I certainly give him credit for his wise choices in helping to assemble an incredible group of talent. Yet he, by his own force of will did not create Frey and the Widgets.
Rather he helped to create a group that was talented and equal. You and others can certainly think he is your favorite Eagle, yet you cannot deny the fact that in the eyes of the law, he was 1/4, then 1/5, and eventually 1/3 owner. Why some of you put him atop Mount Olympus, and say he was a god among mere mortals, and his wish was the others command, is emotion based, not reality.

Maybe there are a couple people here who occasionally get carried away but it's not the majority. Glenn isn't even my favorite Eagle and you just dismissing people who disagree with you as crazy Frey fans is insulting.

I don't think you give Don Henley enough credit. I never got the impression from anywhere that Glenn 'commanded' him. Glenn made final decisions but it seemed to me from the documentary that they were partners in every way and that Don Henley was cool with all of his decisions eventually.

[Houston Debutante]

I am curious about what the final outcome of your research materials will be. I would hate for any quote of mine, and certainly my name, to show up in a blog or magazine article somewhere.

As if this kind of thing would get published in a magazine! No fear there! Some crappy blog that nobody cares about, maybe.

[Vector]

Back to topic--Like others, I would really love to know what "final cut" approval, or editing control, and of the band or Irving had on the film. Really, it should have been none, if they wanted it objective. But I did at times feel there was a narrative being forced upon the film and its events--at certain times, as others have said, it felt as if Glenn and Don's comments and voiceovers were scripted or rehearsed into becoming forced transitions into different parts of the film.

I agree, and because of the way it was done, it begged more questions than it answered. So while I certainly give them credit for allowing some opposing points of view so to speak, there is a lot more that could/should have been covered.

And to me, if the "real life" story wasn't coming together enough for them to stitch together the film, that's the filmmakers' faults for not asking the questions that needed to be asked and not getting the footage that needed to found/filmed.

To me, of all the former members, Bernie comes off the best and gets the best overall treatment to his Eagles journey. We see clearly why and how he joined the band; they reiterate several times what his issue was with the band's progress, and we hear clearly from several sources why and when he left.

I agree, and enjoyed his segments and perspective.


Neither Randy or Felder got such compete "arcs." Randy really gets the worst of it--there had to be a 30 minute+ stretch where he wasn't spoken or at all, in footage or modern "talking head" interview. It could have been due to his health or due to not remembering things, or that the interviewer simply didn't ask the right questions to illicit a story from him that could make it on the screen. But the fact we don't hear from him about his feelings about leaving the band is an egregious error on the filmmakers' parts.

Again, I feel the same. I just assumed it was in keeping with his shy nature and unwillingness to be confrontational. Even from early clips of him being asked questions, he seemed short and sweet, never seeming to be upset, frustrated or anything negative. Out of all the guys I think he came off as the most sympathetic, and the least at fault.


As for Felder, his saga devolves into a "He said/They said" game that clarifies nothing. The entire lawsuit is glossed over, and what exactly each side was fighting for, past just money but RE: contract specifics, isn't delved into at all. A good filmmaker would have covered that--this film seemed content to leave it vague in the worst possible away for all involved in the conflict.

Indeed, and this was one of things that raised more questions than it answered. Part one almost left you with the impression that Frey and Henley were not having any problems, save those created by others which started to effect their relationship. Many casual Eagles fans will be left with the idea that Frey and Felder not getting along were the main cause the Eagles broke up. Maybe that explains why there seems to be so much animosity toward him compared to the other members of the group?

(The only other segments that have this cohesion and compasssion are those regarding Joe's personal journey.)

I believe we see things in a very similar light. Walsh also came across as not only genuine, but more of a B type of personality than I would have imagined. When he was speaking of the guys being "alpha's", I would have thought he fit that category, and maybe he was to an extent. However he is humble enough to say he was in awe of the other guys, and had feelings of inferiority. This coming from a guy who was/is a great guitar player, who was also very successful in his own right prior to joining.

And this is totally off-topic from what I've been saying, but since Glyn Johns' name has been bandied about--this is a 2012 essay (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sponsored/in-the-know/9530705/eagles-glenn-frey-london.html) Glenn wote on he and the Eagles' time in London of the UK Telegraph. It's actually a really good read, and touches a bit on Johns:

Thanks, I will read it soon.


`

[Vector]

As if this kind of thing would get published in a magazine! No fear there! Some crappy blog that nobody cares about, maybe.

:laugh: :headscratch:

I just noticed this post after replying to another one, so I will make a quick comment.

I am not sure, but I detect a little hostility on your part. :mrgreen:

[Vector]

I've been dying to says this since you started posting -- and only those who are fans of the the movie "Airplane" will get it, but:
"What's your vector, Victor?". And stop calling me Shirley!!! But, I digress .

Funny enough, I was up flying the other day, and the young pilot I was speaking with said he had never heard that before. I am not old by any means, but I expected a pilot, even one still wet behind his ears to have heard that classic line.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVq4_HhBK8Y


I say "don't call me Shirley" a couple of times per week any chance I get.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A5t5_O8hdA


My reply to you that we should agree to disagree was actually my polite way of saying I really don't care to rehash this subject anymore. I appreciate the fact that you are a new member and therefore you would like to continue the discussions and express your fresh pov.

I understand, and am glad you see why I, as a new poster, am interested in doing so.

:cheers:

`

[Vector]

Yeah I certainly dislike folk/bluegrass/country and am all about rock n' roll and so I definitely prefer the Walsh era. It just is better IMO. I'm not a huge fan of the 71-75 album, it's just not my thing. It has some songs I like, but ultimately I'd take Hotel California (the single album) over any other album studio, greatest hits, live, etc they've ever done. I certainly think it's better than the 71-75 collection. There is not one bad song on that album and it's where they really made their group a supergroup with Walsh and really came into huuuge success. They still did softer stuff (ala NKIT) to please some of their early fans, but man for us electric guitar rock n' rollers it was heaven. IMO it started heading in the right direction with Already Gone, then One Of These Nights was pleasing to us with that great electric solo and playing but more into the RnB thing, and then when you get Hotel California you are in classic rock heaven. So many good rockers on HC. HC, LITFL, VOL, etc.

I think HC covers every kind of song you could want from the band in that one album. It leaves no stone unturned.

Obviously it's to each his/her own.

I know exactly where you are coming from, hence the reason I am torn between the pre-Felder/Walsh era and after.

Funny enough I never really considered the Eagles earlier albums country in the true sense of the definition. Back in those days, country music consisted of Merle Haggard, Conway Twitty and other such twangy sounding artists.
So the Eagles were in that nexus between the two genres. One could argue that todays country is more R&R than ever before, and the Eagles may very well be part of the reason.

I certainly give props to Frey for wanting to go even more R&R, and the groups decision to add Felder to the original lineup helped to bring them to new heights.
The addition of Walsh and him playing off Felder added yet another dimension which made them as you put it, a "supergroup".
I have little doubt the original 4 guys would have continued to be very successful, but they would not have had such a wide audience.


`

[Vector]

Welcome Vector....and to each his own!

Thanks for the welcome.

I guess I just have the misfortune of getting started here late as some of the posters here seem to be argued out over this subject. Still I'd assume they would like a fresh perspective, and one that does not come with a built in bias. Since my goal is to discuss rather than argue, I'd assume that is also a welcome change compared with some of the things I've read in other threads.

[Vector]

Pink Floyd into the thread

What is this Pink Floyd you speak of.

Some type of a British cocktail?

[Vector]

Not many bands kept managers for long. How The Eagles stayed with Irving Azoff for 40 years is a mystery.



Based on your posts, you have forgotten more behind the scenes band history than I will ever know.

As to Azoff, he is shrewed and savvy, but certainly not beyond being a hypocrite regarding conflicts of interest. He knew full well that attaching himself to Frey & Henley was the smart play, yet he pretended as best he could that he had all the band members interests equally in mind.

[Vector]

I will say this though; Glenn's cutting back on his vocals to allow Henley to shine shows a generosity of spirit on Glenn's part & an acknowledgement of talent that some seem incapable of recognising. He did not turn the band into a vehicle for himself; in fact he did the reverse.

There is something to be said for this in my view. I honestly believe Frey started out with the best of intentions, and wanted everything split equally, and not just the money. He assembled 3 other guys and eventually a 4th as equals, whom in theory would be expected to write songs and sing.
Yet somewhere along the way the idea that lets do "what is in the best interest of the Eagles" morphed into most everyone else's role being diminished(except Henley of course).
Who is to say that other songs would not have sounded good with Frey singing them? It is hard to imagine since we love and are use to so many classic songs with Henley on lead vocals.
Clearly Frey did not have the pipes/range to sing Take It To The Limit like Meisner did, but he certainly has a fine overall voice.
If Henley were to have died, quit, etc., would that have meant the end of the Eagles? I don't think so, nor would that apply to any other individual band member.

`

[Glennhoney]

There is something to be said for this in my view. I honestly believe Frey started out with the best of intentions, and wanted everything split equally, and not just the money. He assembled 3 other guys and eventually a 4th as equals, whom in theory would be expected to write songs and sing.
Yet somewhere along the way the idea that lets do "what is in the best interest of the Eagles" morphed into most everyone else's role being diminished(except Henley of course).
Who is to say that other songs would not have sounded good with Frey singing them? It is hard to imagine since we love and are use to so many classic songs with Henley on lead vocals.
Clearly Frey did not have the pipes/range to sing Take It To The Limit like Meisner did, but he certainly has a fine overall voice.
If Henley were to have died, quit, etc., would that have meant the end of the Eagles? I don't think so, nor would that apply to any other individual band member.

`

"If Henley would have died"????????...GOOD LORD..ENOUGH with the "what ifs" already!! :-x

[Vector]

I am almost caught up with replies to every response, but will just make a quick comment on this new one.


"If Henley would have died"????????...GOOD LORD..ENOUGH with the "what ifs" already!! :-x

Death is a part of life.
Considering many a drug user has died early, and considering how much the Eagles were doing back in the day, they are all lucky none of them overdosed, wrecked their car, etc.
I'm not sure what your objection is to including such a possibility, but if the mere mention of peoples mortality, even that of a R&R god bothers you, lets just say he was no longer able to perform. :mrgreen:

[Shadowland07]

"If Henley would have died"????????...GOOD LORD..ENOUGH with the "what ifs" already!! :-x

I know right lol. Just stick to the facts if you're going to make any arguments Vector. What if what if what if. What if Felder had actually stopped being a nuisance and just played instead of whining? What if Glenn didn't listen to Geffen's advice and tried going solo from the beginning? What if they had never broken up and continued into the 80s? Oh my!!! My head hurts just thinking about it aaaaahhhhh :brickwall:

[Vector]

I have a avoided posting here because frankly the political part of the op turned me off.

When I was a kid, my parents were strict about not putting money in peoples pockets they didn't like by buying their products. Funny enough my Godfather had the same practice. For example he refused to buy anything Japanese because of the Pearl Harbor sneak attack. Movies with Jane Fonda would be another example.
While this practice was not typically enough to have a major effect without many more people boycotting, I was taught it was the principle that was important.
Still not a penny of their hard earned money was going to enrich those who stood for something they did not believe in.

As I've matured I also see the merit in this practice. As this relates to politics, it has caused me to not go and watch a movie that I would otherwise have paid to see if certain outspoken actors are in it. If I really want to see it, I will just wait until it is released on TV.
So you can imagine my dismay over finding out that one of my favorite bands were actively supporting politicians who I considered to be on the extreme fringe. All the while I was buying their albums and went to their concerts back in the day. There is nothing I can do to take back the money I spent back then, but I can certainly make sure not to spend any further money on them now.
This may seem like a foreign concept to some of you, and others might think it is :crazy:
To me, it is putting my money where my mouth is, and not putting it elsewhere so to speak.

Also the dissecting of everyone's responses is way too lawyer-ish for my tastes

This is funny because as some of you might imagine, I have received a few PM's. The authors will remain nameless of course, but they have been to support me, for saying what they would like to, but do not want to catch flack for. One mentioned liking my "dissecting style being very cool" and "and the lawyer-ish method is very enjoyable". I did not put two and two together until reading your post, which must have touched a nerve with them, so they sent the PM as a means of countering your post.

Anyway, I am not a lawyer, just someone who tries to avoid misunderstandings. If I address individual points within a post, I do not miss anything.

BTW - I am so paranoid about letting PM's build up, I tried to store them like you can on other platforms without exceeding my limit, and respond later. But I somehow managed to erase all but one, so my apologies for not responding back.

They are a great band. Why isn't that enough to be able to enjoy their art? I don't understand.

That is certainly a fair question. Aside from what I've already said, I certainly get how fans could be willing to put everything negative aside and still be fans.
I still listen to my CD's, and since I went on this knowledge quest, I've listened to them more than usual to see how they sound different with the addition or loss of certain individual members. This has led to both good and bad revelations. More on this later when I have more time.


`

[Glennhoney]

I know right lol. Just stick to the facts if you're going to make any arguments Vector. What if what if what if. What if Felder had actually stopped being a nuisance and just played instead of whining? What if Glenn didn't listen to Geffen's advice and tried going solo from the beginning? What if they had never broken up and continued into the 80s? Oh my!!! My head hurts just thinking about it aaaaahhhhh :brickwall:

EXACTLY...IT IS WHAT IT IS...!!!!!!!..GET OVER IT!!!:brickwall:

[Vector]

I am curious about what the final outcome of your research materials will be. I would hate for any quote of mine, and certainly my name, to show up in a blog or magazine article somewhere.

Have no worries about that. I've spent far more time on this than I ever planned.
I do not have a blog about things I have a passion for, much less a behind the scenes look into the shenanigans of a R&R band.

As to a final outcome, I have already formed some views, but they are not set in stone. I still have one book to read, maybe two at most.
Another poster mentioned a book I was not aware of. I looked it up and it is called The Story of The Eagles: The Long Run, written by Shapiro. They didn't say if it was any good or not. Anyone else read it, and if so is it worth the time?


`

[Vector]

This is a very interesting thread. I live in the UK and haven't yet seen 'The History of the Eagles. However, like every film/TV programme about the career of any band, I anticipate that there will be things which I don't want to hear, or which may annoy me.

I've been a fan of the Eagles music for many years. Until 1976 when the Hotel California album became BIG in the UK, I didn't know their names or what they looked like!!!

I can see where being across the pond might make you even less knowable about who they were as individuals. That is especially true back in those days before the internet. I really didn't know all there names until recently. Even during their "reunion", I was wondering who they all were, not realizing the guy in the back playing to bongos for example was not part of the Eagles.

Although they're my favourite band, I don't expect them to be perfect - after all, they're still only human like the rest of us.
Greed, infighting, and egoism exists in every walk of life. That's where the human race has got to. Sad, but true.

That is a very pragmatic way of looking at it, and for the most part it was how I felt. Yet when some things didn't add up, and others seemed hypocritical, it helped to start me on my quest.

I listen to lots of bands/solo performers who I don't know anything about.
I can see that it might be upsetting to find out the more unsavoury things about your favourite band, and might make you think about the individuals in the band in a different way. It's sad that this can stop you wanting to listen to the music.

As strange as it might sound to some of the members who are involved in this thread that think I hate Frey, I was rooting for him not to be as bad as he came across. While he did himself no favors in the Doc, I liked the guy from what little I knew of him prior to watching it. I mean it is not like he was a child molester like that guy over in the UK named Glitter(sp?).

My other issue with the Eagles breaking up was being deprived of the music. When it is something like a band member dies, or in the case of Def Leopard's drummer losing a limb, you accept that nothing can be done. Heck Def Leopard were decent enough to wait for the drummer to re-learn how to play and stuck with him, so they certainly receive a gold star for loyalty in my book. However when bands break up over petty crap, that is not a legitimate excuse in my mind.


Most of the long-time successful bands have a history of members falling out with each other, alcoholism, drugs, arguments with record companies & managers etc

I too have issues about the Eagles ticket prices, the inconsistent rules on photography, their hatred of YouTube and other social networking(although this seems to be some band members only, not all), and Don's eagerness to sue everybody! I also have some problems with the attitude towards their fans - we don't always get the respect we deserve. As a band they do seem to be a bit paranoid about some things.

I know, but I cannot stomach hypocrasy. The issues with the label/producer after they started with nothing, and became successful looked very bad on them in the Doc. Then when you read how they treated other long time people like members of their entourage and road crew, it puts them in a decidely negative light.

In the UK also nowadays we have famous people 'representing' political parties and backing their campaigns. I don't like this very much either. It's like when they get celebs to advertise cars or make up etc - we're supposed to think if we buy the products we'll look like they do, or our life will become like that of the celeb - who wants that? not me; they can keep it.
I DON'T want to be given a 'political address' when I go to a concert. I want to hear the music. To be honest, I've seen the Eagles quite a few times and Don Henley also, and I haven't heard them express any political views at a show.
Our political parties are a bit different over here as we have a Right Wing party(Conservative) a Left Wing party(Labour) and a Liberal party(which is sort of in the middle). I think the Eagles views which I have heard expressed would fall into the area of the Liberal party. So to me they can't be called extremists.

I have studied about the Irish political system, and an Irish Republican is much different than an American one.
Having looked into the "Troubles" in the north of Ireland, I began to get a feel for British politics. Heck I even started watching the weekly segment on C-SPAN broadcasting the Prime Minsters questions. I found it fascinating in how different it is from most countries.

So even though I have the aforementioned issues, I'll still buy the albums & go to the show when I can.


I just cannot bring myself to spend my money on anything new of theirs. Frankly, and I know I will probably catch some slack for saying this, but something is missing from their current performances from what I can tell listening to their concerts recorded on YouTube before it gets taken down.

For example, Smith is no Felder. To me, you could tell that Felder and Walsh fed off of each other with similar talent. Walsh would try to keep up with Felder, and Felder would try to keep up with Walsh. It made for some spectacular sounding R&R. In a YT preformance I watched a few weeks ago, Hotel California sounded bland. Smith was competent, but playing HC in the Eagles is not something you want to hear played without the energy. You could tell Walsh was playing to let Smith try to keep up with him. So aside from my other issues with not wanting to put more money in their pockets, I certainly do not want to lighten my wallet by hundreds of dollars to hear HC and other guitar heavy tunes played that way.

`

[Vector]

I watched the documentary multiple times. Soda is right.

I never said she is wrong, I just remember it slightly differently. So I wanted a few others who might have specifically remembered to voice their recollection. Out of the 4, L-eadon seemed to have the least reason to feel that way, so it is perplexing he would be speaking only for himself with the comment in question.
Funny enough, I cannot go back and see for myself because my DVR fried out and Comcast replaced it with a new one. Naturally Showtime does not have the Doc playing now, so I have no access to it.

And no, I am not buying the DVD. :-P



Actually Felder referenced other Eagles books to fill in the gaps in his memory. He admits it in his book. Guess you missed that part,

I guess so, because I read it and am still missing it as I still have his booked checked out. With a cursory look it reveals no such revelation.


but I'm glad you were so impressed with how he humanized himself in his own autobiography. What a hero.

I don't mean this to sound condescending, so don't take it that way. When I said humanize, you must have assumed it was a totally positive connotation. Instead to me it means a willingness to expose both ones virtues and sins. He exposes himself as both righteous and flawed with what I perceive to be an honest assessment. Sure it is his side of the story, but it is not as if his book was a "whoa is me", then it would not have had much validity.


I especially enjoyed the part where he whines about how his wife wasn't paying enough attention to him because of her jewelry business so he divorced her

If that is how you would sum up what you read, then I see your point. To me, he seemed to have admitted his faults, acknowledged how his wife struggled to be a full time parent without much help from him. They apparently went to counseling for years after his infidelity. The jewelry business he encouraged her to do eventually became her all consuming passion, just as his music and life with the Eagles did with him. As time went by, they fell out of love and became distant with each other.

... this from a man who spent years away from his wife and has sex with hundreds of groupies and she stood by him, but he can't handle that she has a jewelry business and missed a 'date' with him?

The missed date seemed to be a metaphor of where their relationship was, and the final straw that helped him to coalesce the big picture(at least to him).
I think what surprised me the most was that she did not seem to be on the same page with him in wanting a divorce. He certainly could have stuck it out longer, considering how she stuck it out with him. He said more counseling was not going to make a difference, so at some point he had lost the desire to try and recapture what he perceived as a lost cause.
Still he lavished praise upon her throughout the book, even after the divorce. He never sugar coated his mistakes/flaws, and emphasized how she went above and beyond by raising their kids alone most of the time, and supported him through his ups and downs. He even said she deserved and received half of his lawsuits proceeds because she "more than deserved it". He went on to say "she suffered minute by minute and day by day at his side, and that she was as much a part of the Eagles as he was".

So it surprises me a little that a female perspective would not give him credit for that.



I think Felder settled because he knew he couldn't win.

You base this on what exactly?

If his case had merit, why not take it all the way? Unlike the Eagles ~ who wanted to get the case over with so they could put out a new album ~ Felder had nothing to lose by refusing the settlement and taking the lawsuit to trial... unless he knew in his heart he couldn't win.

We definitely came away with different views here. I could buy into your premise if the settlement was substantially smaller, but as greedy as the triad of Frey/Henley/Azoff were, there is no way they would had settled for such a large amount. Nuisance lawsuits are settled for legal costs and maybe a bone thrown in. No one, much less greedy people, settles for tens of millions of dollars if they are in the right.

As to Felder having nothing to lose going to trial, you sound like an inexperienced novice. Lawyers will always hedge their bets and tell their clients they could lose as nothing is 100%. Get the wrong jury or judge, and anything can happen.
Heck I was sued once for something I was not even responsible for, yet because I was the one with money/resources, I was targeted. Sure enough my 100% innocence meant nothing when a key defense witness disappeared. My lawyer uncovered how the plaintiff intimidated the witness, and we even got him on tape admitting as much. Yet the judge was left with the litany of false claims to obfuscate what really happened, and had to rule on what was presented, not what actually happened. :censored:

Regardless, for those of us who have been through lawsuits, you can be 100% right, but grow weary of the endless years of back and forth legal shenanigans.
That is especially true in cases where one side has a financial advantage and can afford to play the game.

`

[Vector]

Yeah, Felder doesn't inspire much passion. People like his guitar playing and some think his voice is OK, but otherwise, eh.

Now this is only opinion, and most of it based on my limited time on this forum.
I suspect the Felder fans feel as if they are under siege to a certain extent. I have not seen venom directed toward any of the band members like it seems to be directed at Felder.
Now one might suspect it is because some novice fans watching the Doc feel as if Felder & Frey blew up the band. Between those two, most probably didn't even know Felder's name, much less what he brought to the band.
But it must run deeper than that, because the Doc has not been out that long. Maybe it has to do with Felder writing the book and airing the bands dirty laundry?

There's more vocal Tim fans than Henley fans here. It's kind of funny, because you wouldn't think that would be the case, but it is. If anybody started attacking Tim, there would be hell to pay. Truth be told, if you dissed Tim the way you've been dissing Don Henley and Glenn ~ ie calling them 'jerks' ~ you wouldn't find yourself at the center of a pile of roses.

Well I don't like to put it this way, but unlike some of the others, it is hard to find fault with Schmit. To me, he along with Meisner seem to be the two sympathetic members. Things seems to have happened having little to do with them, and in some cases, in spite of them.

Dissing? While I unfortunately know what you mean by that, please do not lower yourself to repeating ignorant slang that came from the ghetto.

To the point, is mentioning someones flaws or actions being disrespectful? Despite you being a fan, doesn't it bother you that Frey both helped to assemble a great band that we loved, but also helped to destroy it?
Then even when Henley and the others wanted to get back together and were in the studio waiting for his promised arrival, he was a no show. I'd think as a Henley fan, you might be mumbling under your breath just like Henley was.
Also the Doc seemed to gloss over the conflict between Frey and Henley as being one of the primary reasons the band broke up. Then again, as a Henley fan, you might be grateful since that would have likely exposed some of his less attractive tendencies.

I like it.

Ok, I'll give it a shot as soon as I finish the To The Limit book.

Why would they have both Randy and Tim?!

I'll answer your question with a question. Why not?!

One of the things you have to give the Eagles is they were not some boy band put together because of looks, dancing, and maybe an ability to sing. All of them are great singers and musicians. So if one played bass guitar, the other could be playing an acoustic and visa versa. I'd also love to hear both Meisner and Schmit singing together since both of their voices are incredible. Just imagine the harmonies of those two combined with the others. :partytime:

This 'alt Eagles' without Glenn just gets more and more ridiculous. Reality check about 'plenty of hits' ~ um. no. Do some 'research' on the post-Eagles careers of these guys and see what you come up with.

I have never claimed the Eagles would be better without him talent wise. Instead I have proffered that they could have continued on without him.
This is especially true if you consider a few things, like him refusing to rejoin the group. Don't forget, that had already happened once, with everyone sitting around and him being a no show. As Felder put it, "Almost the Eagles".

As to their solo careers, be careful what you ask people to research, as you may not like what you find out.
Sure Henley and Frey did well. However one thing I've never seen mentioned anywhere, is why Walsh is not included in that discussion.

Remember when Frey arrogantly pronounced he wanted more money for he and Henley for keeping the Eagles alive in the publics consciousness?
Well Walsh certainly did well, even better than Frey if you count collective album charting success.
Here is what my research came up with;

Out of 7 albums Frey did solo wise, only 3 charted.

Out of the 8 albums Walsh did, 6 charted.
That of course does not include his other solo albums of which there were 4 more, all of which charted.

So when Walsh and the radio stations were playing all these songs that kept the Eagles alive as Frey claimed(for himself and Henley), Walsh was strangely left out of the conversation.
I wonder why?


`

[VAisForEagleLovers]

[COLOR=blue]Dissing? While I unfortunately know what you mean by that, please do not lower yourself to repeating ignorant slang that came from the ghetto.


I seriously hope you meant this as a joke. For it to be serious is completely out of line. We all use this term a lot, so if that's truly your opinion of us ghetto-types, I'm shocked you're here looking for our ignorant opinions.

[sad-cafe]

VA,

I have tried to stay out of this because right from the start this person was looking for a (many) fight. I am glad you called a spade a spade. It is getting very old.

[NYC Fan]

VA,

I have tried to stay out of this because right from the start this person was looking for a (many) fight. I am glad you called a spade a spade. It is getting very old.

Agreed, and thank you VA. My jaw dropped when I saw the "ghetto" comment.

And for what it's worth, M-W.com recognizes diss/dis as a slang variant of disrespect. Funnily enough, no reference to it being "ghetto".

[Vector]

VA,

I have tried to stay out of this because right from the start this person was looking for a (many) fight. I am glad you called a spade a spade. It is getting very old.

Interesting how one can genuinely express their dismay with the group/members on certain things, and it is interpreted by you as looking for a fight.

I believe I have been polite and reasoned in my responses, even when I fundamentally disagree. When I concur it is also genuine. While you or a couple others might not like my style of posting, it is not intended to come across as looking for a fight.
Instead I am looking for an expression of similar and opposing points of view. Hopefully the discussions that ensue will be both informative, entertaining, and done with most peoples feelings not getting bruised.


`

[Houston Debutante]

It's obvious to me that because Vector wasn't getting replies, he decided to up it a notch and get insulting.

Congrats, Vector, people are talking to you again. :)

So you didn't see where it was said that Felder's book borrowed from other books? I have to find it for you? SIGH. If you read the writer's preface and acknowledgements in Felder's book, you'd see the statement that info was borrowed from other books such as Eliot's. Anything else you'd like spoon-fed?

And I hate to correct you, but it was clearly stated by Glenn that he was talking about the eighties in terms of solo success. I know, I know, you haven't watched the documentary lately so you forgot that, right? I love how you endlessly offer opinions on something you've only watched once and apparently barely remember.

It's also amusing that you argue that the Eagles must have settled because they couldn't win, but when I say Felder must have settled because he couldn't win, you ask me what I base it on! I'm just using your logic.

I must thank you for telling me how to feel as a woman and a Don Henley fan, two areas which you of course are obviously the unbiased expert, like you are on so many topics ~ as you are happy to repeatedly tell us with statements like:


I'd assume they would like a fresh perspective, and one that does not come with a built in bias. Since my goal is to discuss rather than argue, I'd assume that is also a welcome change compared with some of the things I've read in other threads.Yes, we are all SO grateful to you for gracing us with your fascinating insights that are not at all argumentative. :rolleyes:

So you read other threads? It's telling that you only choose to reply in the one you started, with the self important title 'Why I am no longer happy with my favorite band.' Vector's unhappiness = front page news that gets its own thread!

Reality check ~ your condescending posts are not refreshing, they are insulting. You were 'respectful' up to a point but you've abandoned that, unless you consider these statements 'respectful':


you sound like an inexperienced novice


Dissing? While I unfortunately know what you mean by that, please do not lower yourself to repeating ignorant slang that came from the ghetto.

Yeah, that was REAL respectful.

And PLEASE don't feel obliged to reply to me.

p.s. Look up how to quote in vbulletin so you don't have to keep typing in blue. It's not that difficult, and if you're going to keep quoting old posts in the absence of new replies, it'd be nice if you'd bother to do it right.

[EagleLady]

What is this Pink Floyd you speak of.

Some type of a British cocktail?


I hope you are joking. Surely everybody must know who Pink Floyd is. but That's not the subject here.

[TimothyBFan]

Interesting how one can genuinely express their dismay with the group/members on certain things, and it is interpreted by you as looking for a fight.

I believe I have been polite and reasoned in my responses, even when I fundamentally disagree. When I concur it is also genuine. While you or a couple others might not like my style of posting, it is not intended to come across as looking for a fight.
Instead I am looking for an expression of similar and opposing points of view. Hopefully the discussions that ensue will be both informative, entertaining, and done with most peoples feelings not getting bruised.


`
Rest assured, some of us do enjoy your sometimes different point of view and respectful way you do it and as for myself, I thank you.

[TimothyBFan]

It's obvious to me that because Vector wasn't getting replies, he decided to up it a notch and get insulting.

Congrats, Vector, people are talking to you again. :)

So you didn't see where it was said that Felder's book borrowed from other books? I have to find it for you? SIGH. If you read the writer's preface and acknowledgements in Felder's book, you'd see the statement that info was borrowed from other books such as Eliot's. Anything else you'd like spoon-fed?

And I hate to correct you, but it was clearly stated by Glenn that he was talking about the eighties in terms of solo success. I know, I know, you haven't watched the documentary lately so you forgot that, right? I love how you endlessly offer opinions on something you've only watched once and apparently barely remember.

It's also amusing that you argue that the Eagles must have settled because they couldn't win, but when I say Felder must have settled because he couldn't win, you ask me what I base it on! I'm just using your logic.

I must thank you for telling me how to feel as a woman and a Don Henley fan, two areas which you of course are obviously the unbiased expert, like you are on so many topics ~ as you are happy to repeatedly tell us with statements like:

Yes, we are all SO grateful to you for gracing us with your fascinating insights that are not at all argumentative. :rolleyes:

So you read other threads? It's telling that you only choose to reply in the one you started, with the self important title 'Why I am no longer happy with my favorite band.' Vector's unhappiness = front page news that gets its own thread!

Reality check ~ your condescending posts are not refreshing, they are insulting. You were 'respectful' up to a point but you've abandoned that, unless you consider these statements 'respectful':



Yeah, that was REAL respectful.

And PLEASE don't feel obliged to reply to me.

p.s. Look up how to quote in vbulletin so you don't have to keep typing in blue. It's not that difficult, and if you're going to keep quoting old posts in the absence of new replies, it'd be nice if you'd bother to do it right.

WOW!! Just WOW!!!:sad:

[Shadowland07]

It's obvious to me that because Vector wasn't getting replies, he decided to up it a notch and get insulting.

Congrats, Vector, people are talking to you again. :)

So you didn't see where it was said that Felder's book borrowed from other books? I have to find it for you? SIGH. If you read the writer's preface and acknowledgements in Felder's book, you'd see the statement that info was borrowed from other books such as Eliot's. Anything else you'd like spoon-fed?

And I hate to correct you, but it was clearly stated by Glenn that he was talking about the eighties in terms of solo success. I know, I know, you haven't watched the documentary lately so you forgot that, right? I love how you endlessly offer opinions on something you've only watched once and apparently barely remember.

It's also amusing that you argue that the Eagles must have settled because they couldn't win, but when I say Felder must have settled because he couldn't win, you ask me what I base it on! I'm just using your logic.

I must thank you for telling me how to feel as a woman and a Don Henley fan, two areas which you of course are obviously the unbiased expert, like you are on so many topics ~ as you are happy to repeatedly tell us with statements like:

Yes, we are all SO grateful to you for gracing us with your fascinating insights that are not at all argumentative. :rolleyes:

So you read other threads? It's telling that you only choose to reply in the one you started, with the self important title 'Why I am no longer happy with my favorite band.' Vector's unhappiness = front page news that gets its own thread!

Reality check ~ your condescending posts are not refreshing, they are insulting. You were 'respectful' up to a point but you've abandoned that, unless you consider these statements 'respectful':



Yeah, that was REAL respectful.

And PLEASE don't feel obliged to reply to me.

p.s. Look up how to quote in vbulletin so you don't have to keep typing in blue. It's not that difficult, and if you're going to keep quoting old posts in the absence of new replies, it'd be nice if you'd bother to do it right.


THE HEAT IS ON!!! Sorry I had to :partytime:

[Glennhoney]

THE HEAT IS ON!!! Sorry I had to :partytime:


bahahahaha...good one...:hilarious:

[sodascouts]

It is apparent to me that this discussion has devolved into disrespect on both sides and there have been intolerant attitudes expressed by more than one person. The thread doesn't appear to be very productive at this point, honestly.

Indeed, I am quite dismayed at the turn this thread has taken. It seems to have become a bash-fest. That's not what this board is about.

To those who don't appreciate Vector's viewpoint, I recommend you simply avoid this thread rather than argue with him. You are accomplishing nothing except feeding into the drama. If you do wish to engage Vector, do so in a polite manner. There is no need to be snarky and unpleasant.

Vector, you are starting to repeat yourself, and you recently have lost much of the respectful, thoughtful manner that I initially appreciated. Basically, you are saying the same things as before, only less politely. I would hate to see this trajectory continue. I know it is difficult when people don't agree with you or point out errors in your facts/logic, but getting insulting never helps matters. If you want to become a contributor to this community in any meaningful way, you must avoid that. You also might investigate finding a new horse to ride; after more than 13 pages of increasingly inflammatory circular discussion, I believe this one is dead and no longer needs to be beaten.

One more note: I daresay I am a rather literate person. Still, I use the term "diss" regularly and without compunction. Vector, I'm not sure of your age, but nowadays most do not label the slang of a certain group of people "ignorant"; in fact, a variety of groups feel comfortable using it. Be careful before you make such harsh pronouncements as "ignorant" and "ghetto" when referring to the words people use. Some might find that rather offensive - where I live, in Memphis, calling something "ghetto" is a very racially charged insult. Let's just say few would applaud it as "respectful."

ETA: Please do not feel compelled to reply to me.

[Vector]

I am very busy today, so it will take some time to finish catching up like I've been trying to do.

To those who think I am being redundant, understand that I try to respond to everyone, it has just taken this long to catch up on 12 of the 14 pages.
Also have no fears about insults directed toward me. I do not encourage it as civil discourse is always better than insults, but I am a guy with thick skin, so no worries on that front.

I did want to quickly share something I never expected to find, and it relates to the following exchange between Houston and myself;

Why would they have both Randy and Tim?!

I'll answer your question with a question. Why not?!

One of the things you have to give the Eagles is they were not some boy band put together because of looks, dancing, and maybe an ability to sing. All of them are great singers and musicians. So if one played bass guitar, the other could be playing an acoustic and visa versa. I'd also love to hear both Meisner and Schmit singing together since both of their voices are incredible. Just imagine the harmonies of those two combined with the others. :partytime:

In doing my general research last night, I came across this gem. Meisner & Schmit fans will really appreciate this, as should we all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu8g3NTfpTs


:cheers:

[HiredHand]

I say we just enjoy the music and go about our day. :grouphug:

[RebeccaLovesEagles]

cool video :)

[Vector]

I know a couple of posters have said I am not as unbiased as my OP claims. For instance a post now gone missing by sad-cafe, which to paraphrase said about me;
"watch him turn out to be a Felder Freak".


The first thing I'd say in reply to you is, watch it newbie, I've been here longer! :mrgreen:


In all seriousness, I was about an open book as could be when I started this quest. Heck I didn't even know Felders name, much less be a huge fan. Sure I loved the guitar riffs, but they could have been done by Frey for all I knew. Remember most of my knowledge of the Eagles was listening to them on the radio, not seeing any footage on TV. Even when I did see them, I didn't have a clue who was who name wise.
Being a guy, I didn't pay attention to their looks, so Meisner could have been the drum player for all I knew. All I cared about before was they created some great music, and like a bunch of fools, broke up when they were still making hit records.


Now on to bigger fish to fry.



I watched the documentary multiple times. Soda is right.


Incorrect


Just as I thought, I watched the Doc again now that it is back on Showtime and my DVR is working.
Right after Frey does his British accent describing what Johns said about the Eagles not being a R&R band like the Who, about the 57-58 minute mark, L=eadon is speaking and he says word for word the following (emphasis added to key wording)


"After each of those records the band freaked out and said we've made a huge mistake - Glyn Johns missed it"


So I was correct, not Soda.


Now the goal is to prove it to you, without you taking it in some negative/emotional way. Lets see how well I do;


My initial comment that started the disagreement in the OP was this about Frey;


Despite two successful albums and a 3rd in the works, he is the main guy to butt heads with Glyn Johns.


Then Soda in post 9 replied


"While Glenn was definitely the main guy butting heads with Glyn Johns at the outset, when Desperado flopped, even Bernie - who was Johns' favorite - was saying "Glyn Johns missed it."


My reply in post 44 (with my emphasis added on the key parts)


As to the Bernie comment, you certainly got the wording correct, but I was under the impression he was saying the band had felt "that Johns had missed it", not specifically himself. I'd need to go back and listen to it again to be sure.


To which Soda replied in post 48


You may wish to believe that Bernie was expressing band sentiments and not his own with his statement "Glyn Johns missed it";
I think that belief is difficult to support.


My reply in post 52


As to the comment, I said I was not sure, and needed to go back and see if L-eadon was referring to himself making the comment, or if it was the overall bands feeling.

So, there is irrefutable/verifiable proof that you are incorrect in saying Soda was right. Let's see if you can acknowledge such without getting emotional or attaching some underlying meaning.


------------------------------------------


On a side note, I've started to read To The Limit and it seems like a well written book. I am not sure how much it will effect my perception of the band at this point, but I am eager to find out. I should be done by this weekend, and possibly come up with some conclusions by then.





`

[sodascouts]

How about instead of HD I reply to my own statement that you feel is incorrect?

Challenging HD to acknowledge you were right when she didn't even make the original comment seems unnecessarily confrontational. Certainly it is not in the "respectful" spirit I was hoping my above post would encourage.

Sad-cafe's post is no longer there because she agreed that it was too personal. We don't like that kind of thing here. The fact that you "paraphrase" it anyway instead of letting it go despite the fact that original poster agreed to its removal is another move that seems designed to provoke confrontation.

Anyway, you quoted me as stating:
"You may wish to believe that Bernie was expressing band sentiments and not his own with his statement "Glyn Johns missed it";
I think that belief is difficult to support."

You bolded the words you thought were essential, but you (accidentally?) neglected to bold one very important word... AND.

That little word "and" is at the heart of my meaning: that the sentiments are not those of everyone else in the band BUT Bernie. They are the sentiments of everyone else in the band AND Bernie.

What I've been saying, and what I was saying there if you recall the context, is that it's difficult to support your belief that Bernie felt differently from the rest of the band about leaving Johns. You still can't support that - not from what's been presented. Bernie was expressing BOTH the band sentiments AND his own from every indication.

Bernie never says "the band except for me freaked out" or anything along those lines which would express his disagreement. He says "The band freaked out." There is no reason to believe he is not including his own sentiments when he is expressing band sentiments. He was a band member, after all!

Thus, you have yet to prove that Bernie felt differently from the rest of the band. I'm afraid your self-congratulations are a bit premature. ;)

Congrats on your DV-R fortuitously working again.

[Vector]

How about instead of HD I reply to my own statement that you feel is incorrect?

You are welcome to do so as you did, which has nothing to do with "HD" responding as well.

Challenging HD to acknowledge you were right when she didn't even make the original comment seems unnecessarily confrontational. Certainly it is not in the "respectful" spirit I was hoping my above post would encourage.

I disagree with your characterization. If a fellow forum member essentially tells another the information is accurate/inaccurate, then they should account for such when the evidence is presented.

Furthermore, I believe HD has gone out of their way to try to undermine my credibility since she does not care for my view on certain things related to members of the Eagles. That is fine by me, and I do not take it personally. However facts are facts, and I am going to point out such things when they can be proved.
I liken it to a clique that rallies behind a fellow member, against a perceived outsider. Any potential flaw in the outsiders view is attacked to discredit them, while the clique member is given a pass.

Sad-cafe's post is no longer there because she agreed that it was too personal. We don't like that kind of thing here. The fact that you "paraphrase" it anyway instead of letting it go despite the fact that original poster agreed to its removal is another move that seems designed to provoke confrontation.

First of all, I had no idea who removed it, nor why. Again it did not bother me, so I see no reason to remove how they felt, as they are certainly entitled to their opinion. I actually used it as a means to razz them a little about being here less time than my vast time here is. Hence the:nahnah: :mrgreen:
I also wanted to point out how I did not come into this forum as a Felder fan since I didn't even know who he was. I think that is a fair reason to reply.

Anyway, you quoted me as stating:

You bolded the words you thought were essential, but you (accidentally?) neglected to bold one very important word... AND.

That little word "and" is at the heart of my meaning: that the sentiments are not those of everyone else in the band BUT Bernie. They are the sentiments of everyone else in the band AND Bernie.

What I've been saying, and what I was saying there if you recall the context

Maybe that was your main point, but it was not mine. I never implied L-eadon was against it, just considered that he might not have been as eager since Johns wanted them to stay more country. By all accounts, that was where L-eadons mindset was as well. So while I can concede I don't know exactly what was going on in his head, he used specific words which you called into question.
The implication was he was speaking about his view, not the band. Where as I said he was specifically saying "the band felt", not speaking for himself alone. A slight distinction maybe, but an important one from an exact verbiage standpoint.
There is no need to belabor the issue with each other since it is now apparent we were focused on different points.


Congrats on your DV-R fortuitously working again.

Actually I got hit with a double problem all at once. I had it recorded on my DVR, and it fried out. That however was not the only problem. When the new DVR was delivered it of course was empty.
So I not only lost all my recordings, but when I went to watch it in the Showtime On Demand section, it was no longer playing. :enraged:
It only was put back on this week, hence me being able to re-watch it.

I would have no way of knowing, but I wonder if the released DVD's have any more footage than what is playing on Showtime?



`

[Scarlet Sun]

one thing to keep in mind is who produced the Bernie Leadon - Michael Georgiades Band album

[pueblo47]

"I would have no way of knowing, but I wonder if the released DVD's have any more footage than what is playing on Showtime?"

Other than the 30+ minute bonus dvd of the concert from March 21, 1977, it appeared the same as it was on Showtime. To me anyway. Too bad the entire show wasn't released.

[Vector]

one thing to keep in mind is who produced the Bernie Leadon - Michael Georgiades Band album

8-)

I still need to catch up on a few other posts before this one, but it intrigued me to look it up.
Sure enough Johns produced L-eadon.
So it does help to lend credibility to my thought about L-eadon being the least likely to have wanted to leave Johns.
Still while I was correct about the exact wording in the Doc regarding what L-eadon actually said, there is no way of knowing how he personally felt, because it was not addressed.

I am currently reading To The Limit so maybe there is something in there about it. Anyone know if my conjecture about L-eadon has ever been put to print anywhere?

[Vector]

Considering how often I was posting, it is hard to believe I have let a week go by. I know I still need to respond to a few posts yet, but I've been swamped. My only excuse has been that I am closing on a new property, and my only spare time outside of regular activities has been reading To The Limit.

For those of you who are apologists of Frey and Henley, yet still like the book, I must say I do not get how.
If anything this book is even more critical of them than any other I've read. Sure the Felder book took some issue with them, but he was also very positive and complimentary of them as well. This book seems to explore the tension between Frey and Henley more, and exposes some quirks the others did not.
About the only thing that has soften my stance on Frey so far is the dynamic between him, and Geffen.
Then again, I did mention my bias against Geffen earlier as I do not care for him on a personal level. So while he may have been screwed over by the Eagles from his perspective, it was also a two way street.
Then again, the Eagles wanted to change the rules to increase their profits above and beyond the norm back then. That is not to mention the contract they themselves signed.

Regardless I am halfway through this book, and I see even greater examples of hypocrisy on the part of Frey and Henley, where they complain about others, yet are guilty of many of the same things during their tenure as the self appointed decision makers of the group. Interestingly enough, this is one of the few books that Meisner seems to have a voice in to where he has some not so nice observations as well.

I will try to get back and finish up with the replies to the posts by the end of this weekend. Hopefully I will be done with this book by then, but I am becoming dubious of it making the guys look much better.

[Vector]

All I can say is wow in regards to the To The Limit book I'm still reading. My time is currently limited, so it has been a slow read, but not for it being boring or anything like that. Just the opposite, it is covering things some of the other books, videos and Doc does not. It certainly exposes Henley to much greater scrutiny than any of the other books, and I'm only about half way through it.

A couple of quick questions if anyone knows the answers.

In the book it says Felder was the first to produce a solo album called Heavy Metal. I've been under the impression from other sources he only produced one album entitled Airborne. Any clue?

Second, when discussing the Eagles break up, it makes it sound like Frey did not finish out the scheduled tour after the blow up at the Cranston fund raiser. Even if Frey had continued on, at some point it makes it seem as if he was not there during the last show in Japan where "Glenn Frey became the chant from the crowd he [Henley] couldn't ignore during the band's last show in Japan". Again, any clue?

`

[TimothyBFan]

In the book it says Felder was the first to produce a solo album called Heavy Metal. I've been under the impression from other sources he only produced one album entitled Airborne. Any clue?


`

I noticed no one has answered your questions yet. I believe I can answer the first one for you.

Heavy Metal (Takin' A Ride) is from the 1981 movie Heavy Metal. Don's first album was produced by him and released in 1983.

I thought that was right so I looked it up on Wikipedia. Here's the Wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_%28Don_Felder_album%29

[Freypower]

I wish to correct a couple of misapprehensions:

''Last show in Japan' means ''last show in Japan'', not the band's final ever show which was the Cranston benefit in July 1980, as the documentary makes clear. The stuff about the crowd calling out ''Glenn Frey'' in Japan appears to be an attempt by Eliot to get inside Henley's head. They had gone to Japan after finishing The Long Run, months prior to the Cranston benefit.

Eliot's statement that Frey called Azoff & said he would not be available for the rest of the tour is incorrect. There was no tour. No Eagles dates were played without Frey.

[Vector]

Thanks to both of you as that makes more sense than what the book implies.
While much of it seems fairly accurate when compared with the other books I've recently read, a few things are claimed without any other source Doc, books, or interviews that I've seen to corroborate it with.

[Vector]

There is so much to cover, and I haven't even responded to all the questions/posts yet. My excuse is that I've been preoccupied with the new property purchase and trying to get it in shape for the summer vacation season.
But I've still kept my thirst for knowledge everything Eagles intact. Trouble is that I continue to be disturbed by certain members behavior, and feeling greater empathy for the guys who I never even knew their names prior to the Doc.
For instance, my impression of Henley after reading Eliot's book is decidedly less flattering. But those of you who have read it will understand why. Heck, if even half of it is true and unembellished, Henley certainly has his hangups and demons.

The book also leaves little doubt that based on Frey's and especially Henley's personalities, they had much more control over the Doc than they let on publicly.
But that is part of why this whole thing is so interesting to me, even if it shows the bands unflattering under belly.

`

[AEW21]

Frankly, I've never been able to seriously look at Marc Eliot's "To The Limit" as a source for Eagles' history and lore, purely because it's riddled with so many factual errors on dates and events that he easily could have researched and cross-checked to get right. And even background on members is wrong--he says Glenn was raised by a single mother with one brother after his alcoholic father left, while in fact Glenn's mother remarried when he was quite young and had two younger brothers. It's like he skimped on research so he could glob on the gossipy bits.

And to me, his tone is just too petty, and he inserts himself waaaay too often into the narrative of the book. Any objectiveness is gone when you realize what an axe he has to grind with Henley over the book's publication. I often found myself asking, "Is this really true, or he he embellishing it just to get back at Don?" The book is sort of symbolic of the Eagles' saga--small, petty interpersonal dramas overtake the big picture--Marc Eliot's perceived personal issues with Don just color the credibility of the book to me. (But, whoa, did Randy Meisner get a chance to unload in it...)

Ben Fong-Torres' take is equally as tough on Don and Glenn, but less...bitchy in tone, and much better researched, as far as concert Eagles' musical milestones are concerned. And it has a better sense of musical history than Eliot's book, which focuses on personality more than musical passion. Really, though, for my money, Barney Hoskyns' "Hotel California" is the best primer on Eagles' rise and fall in the 70s. Yes, it covers the entire Laurel Canyon music scene at the time, but I think you need that context to understand how the band approached their career and their fame, and understand Glenn and Don's goal to run a tight ship in order to avoid the musical failures of other acts they saw crash and burn at the Troubadour. It doesn't apologize for Don and Glenn's behavior, but it doesn't demonize them, either. To me, it's the best read of the three of them. Eliot's is the worst--he just makes it too much about him.

[GlennLover]

I agree with most of what you said, AEW21.

[Topkat]

Originally Posted by Henley Honey

I don't agree with you at all, Vector. The band is a business -- just like a bakery is a business. Just because their "product" strikes a place in your soul rather than your stomach, doesn't mean it isn't first and foremost a business.

Frey & Henley as equal managing partners started the business with a shared vision. Each brought individual strengths and weaknesses to the partnership and between them had sufficient drive and determination to make it happen and reach their goals. If a business is to be successfully maintained or substantially increased, then change is inevitable. If their relationships with Glyn Johns, Geffen, Bernie and Felder were not in the best interest of the business as they saw it, then things needed to be changed.

Felder might have been the greatest guitar player on the planet, but if you are trying to run a successful business and you have an employee whose behavior on a day-to-day basis is derisive and contrary, then things need to be changed.

IMO, Glenn was and continues to be the driving force behind the band. He has fought to maintain his and Henley's original vision. I don't see him as the primary antagonist. I see him as a smart and savvy businessman who has also proved himself as an extraordinary musician, composer and arranger.

As far as their "political leanings" I'm glad that they are not complacent in this area. I'm glad that they are concerned about the world that they and their children live in. If their higher profile gives them greater influence to bring about change and they use that influence when and how they choose, then good for them.

Just my opinion.
quote from SpringBo

I don't agree that musicians should think of themselves as a business first and foremost. To me that's for the record companies and managers. I would hope the musicians would be in it for their love of music, not their love of money. When I was a teenager in the early '70's, a record company would stick with a band even if their first or even second album wasn't commercially successful, because it was the music that mattered. Back then an artist was given a chance to grow, and so much great music came from that time because of that. Joe addressed it in the doc when he said that the record company just wanted an album from the Eagles, and if they had gone into the studio and "farted" (Joe's word), the record company would have sold it because all they cared about was the bottom line. I work for a large corporation and I know that myself and the rest of us peons who work there are easily replaceable, but I don't think it's the same in a band where each individual brings his or her own special talents to the mix. JMHO.

SB, I have to agree with you on this one. A band is not a business & nothing like running a "bakery"
Frey & Henley admittedly took over the control as leaders of the band..I don't think there was any question of that...Nobody elected them the leaders, but that aside, how is Don Felder an "employee " behaving badly???? Wow, Felder was brought in as an equal partner & it was put into a binding contract, so he should have equal say in things, but that is not how Henley & Frey wanted it. I do not think that Frey is the driving force behind the band, & that musically it is Don Henley who is...But that's just my opinion. Was there a vision they had for the band in the 70's?? I'm not even so sure about that because things kept changing.

Many people have said that certain things were done "for the good of the band" Well, if things were so good, how did the whole thing fall into pieces & was in such a mess that the break up lasted for the time period of 14 years???Obviously, things weren't going so good.

Frankly, the band is making the money & having the success from their old songs from the 70's...that's the reality of it. The new music they put out for LROOE was moderately successful, but they no longer play anything from that album in concert...The success of HFO, was predominately the old songs as well. so they have become successful replaying their old music, like many other 70's bands out there...Frankly, I feel that much of the success of the band is due to the management by Irving Asoff. I think that without him, they wouldn't be where they are today...I think maybe even Henley & Frey would agree with that.

[WalshFan88]

Agreed SB. It should be about the music first, money second. Those who are in bands for the money are easy for me to tell and I can't stand them. But it has to be about the love of music, rather than a way to make lots of money or any other perk like that. Joe and Don F truly are in it for the music and as DF has said in a recent interview, he started because he loved music - not to get rich, famous, etc and even when he was rich and famous, that wasn't his reason for still playing music. I don't like to think of music as a product. It's way more important than that.

[Freypower]

Originally Posted by Henley Honey

quote from SpringBo


SB, I have to agree with you on this one. A band is not a business & nothing like running a "bakery"
Frey & Henley admittedly took over the control as leaders of the band..I don't think there was any question of that...Nobody elected them the leaders, but that aside, how is Don Felder an "employee " behaving badly???? Wow, Felder was brought in as an equal partner & it was put into a binding contract, so he should have equal say in things, but that is not how Henley & Frey wanted it. I do not think that Frey is the driving force behind the band, & that musically it is Don Henley who is...But that's just my opinion. Was there a vision they had for the band in the 70's?? I'm not even so sure about that because things kept changing.

Many people have said that certain things were done "for the good of the band" Well, if things were so good, how did the whole thing fall into pieces & was in such a mess that the break up lasted for the time period of 14 years???Obviously, things weren't going so good.

Frankly, the band is making the money & having the success from their old songs from the 70's...that's the reality of it. The new music they put out for LROOE was moderately successful, but they no longer play anything from that album in concert...The success of HFO, was predominately the old songs as well. so they have become successful replaying their old music, like many other 70's bands out there...Frankly, I feel that much of the success of the band is due to the management by Irving Asoff. I think that without him, they wouldn't be where they are today...I think maybe even Henley & Frey would agree with that.

I am afraid I will have to be fairly blunt here.

As usual, you slam Glenn Frey every chance you get. To say that only Henley is the 'driving force' musically & Frey is not is grossly unfair. If the songs Frey sang mean nothing to you, OK, but you don't speak for me & many other people on this board. As for their vision, they achieved it. They wanted to become thie biggest band in America. They did so.

LROOE sold over 5 million copies & they do in fact still play How Long from it (many of us wish they would play more) but to just dismiss it out of hand the way you do is again unfair. To use your logic they shouldn't even have bothered releasing it.

You have changed your tune about Irving. You used to say that he had nothing to do with their success. Now you say much of their success is due to him, because once again, you wish to slam Frey & to a lesser extent Henley as much as you can. Of course they wouldn't be where they are without him. They also wouldn't be where they are if they were not extremely talented singers, songwriters & musicians.

Yes, they broke up & that lasted 14 years, but since they reformed, they have been together ever since. As usual, however, all you ever want to talk about is negative stuff. The changes that were made were 'for the good of the band' at the time & they all contributed to the ongoing success. Unfortunately in 1980 there was one major factor that contributed to the breakup.

I don't know how often it has to be stated that although Felder was an equal partner at one time, once the reunion occurred, he was not. I am not going over the same old ground on this again.

Music is a business & to say it is not, is just fantasy.

[Topkat]

I am afraid I will have to be fairly blunt here.

As usual, you slam Glenn Frey every chance you get. To say that only Henley is the 'driving force' musically & Frey is not is grossly unfair. If the songs Frey sang mean nothing to you, OK, but you don't speak for me & many other people on this board. As for their vision, they achieved it. They wanted to become thie biggest band in America. They did so.

LROOE sold over 5 million copies & they do in fact still play How Long from it (many of us wish they would play more) but to just dismiss it out of hand the way you do is again unfair. To use your logic they shouldn't even have bothered releasing it.

You have changed your tune about Irving. You used to say that he had nothing to do with their success. Now you say much of their success is due to him, because once again, you wish to slam Frey & to a lesser extent Henley as much as you can. Of course they wouldn't be where they are without him. They also wouldn't be where they are if they were not extremely talented singers, songwriters & musicians.

Yes, they broke up & that lasted 14 years, but since they reformed, they have been together ever since. As usual, however, all you ever want to talk about is negative stuff. The changes that were made were 'for the good of the band' at the time & they all contributed to the ongoing success. Unfortunately in 1980 there was one major factor that contributed to the breakup.

I don't know how often it has to be stated that although Felder was an equal partner at one time, once the reunion occurred, he was not. I am not going over the same old ground on this again.

Music is a business & to say it is not, is just fantasy.

FP, Can you show me where I said that Irving had nothing to do with the band's success? I don't believe I ever said anything like that, as I always thought he was a huge part of the bands success...My feeling that Henley was the driving force of the band ( and here I mean musically ) is not exactly slamming him...is it? .

Also, how is it that once the band reunited in 1994, did Felder's position change? They had contracts & they wanted to change his contract, but I believe that legally they didn't have the right to do that.....

I do not believe that a band is all business...I thought it was about the music, but I guess to some people it is just about money. Yes, many bands crashed & burned in the music business, but I do think that was due to poor management & some crooks in the business that robbed some bands blind....That was very unfortunate. I'm glad that the Eagles have survived & thrived, but I still don't believe that it's ALL business.

As for LROOE. I am one that does really like this album, but in the grand scheme of things, the album has been pretty much ignored once the LROOE tour ended with the exception of How Long, which to me is not even close to being the best song on the album.....I am hoping that the new tour will bring back some of the songs from this album, but I guess we'll see. It wouldn't surprise me if they still just do that one song off this album.
I'm not going to get into talking about Glenn. I just think that he is given most of the credit for the bands success, and I really don't agree with that, but that is my opinion & I think I'm entitled to it.

[Shadowland07]

I am afraid I will have to be fairly blunt here.

As usual, you slam Glenn Frey every chance you get. To say that only Henley is the 'driving force' musically & Frey is not is grossly unfair. If the songs Frey sang mean nothing to you, OK, but you don't speak for me & many other people on this board. As for their vision, they achieved it. They wanted to become thie biggest band in America. They did so.

LROOE sold over 5 million copies & they do in fact still play How Long from it (many of us wish they would play more) but to just dismiss it out of hand the way you do is again unfair. To use your logic they shouldn't even have bothered releasing it.

You have changed your tune about Irving. You used to say that he had nothing to do with their success. Now you say much of their success is due to him, because once again, you wish to slam Frey & to a lesser extent Henley as much as you can. Of course they wouldn't be where they are without him. They also wouldn't be where they are if they were not extremely talented singers, songwriters & musicians.

Yes, they broke up & that lasted 14 years, but since they reformed, they have been together ever since. As usual, however, all you ever want to talk about is negative stuff. The changes that were made were 'for the good of the band' at the time & they all contributed to the ongoing success. Unfortunately in 1980 there was one major factor that contributed to the breakup.

I don't know how often it has to be stated that although Felder was an equal partner at one time, once the reunion occurred, he was not. I am not going over the same old ground on this again.

Music is a business & to say it is not, is just fantasy.

AGREE

[VAisForEagleLovers]

I am afraid I will have to be fairly blunt here.

As usual, you slam Glenn Frey every chance you get. To say that only Henley is the 'driving force' musically & Frey is not is grossly unfair. If the songs Frey sang mean nothing to you, OK, but you don't speak for me & many other people on this board. As for their vision, they achieved it. They wanted to become thie biggest band in America. They did so.

LROOE sold over 5 million copies & they do in fact still play How Long from it (many of us wish they would play more) but to just dismiss it out of hand the way you do is again unfair. To use your logic they shouldn't even have bothered releasing it.

You have changed your tune about Irving. You used to say that he had nothing to do with their success. Now you say much of their success is due to him, because once again, you wish to slam Frey & to a lesser extent Henley as much as you can. Of course they wouldn't be where they are without him. They also wouldn't be where they are if they were not extremely talented singers, songwriters & musicians.

Yes, they broke up & that lasted 14 years, but since they reformed, they have been together ever since. As usual, however, all you ever want to talk about is negative stuff. The changes that were made were 'for the good of the band' at the time & they all contributed to the ongoing success. Unfortunately in 1980 there was one major factor that contributed to the breakup.

I don't know how often it has to be stated that although Felder was an equal partner at one time, once the reunion occurred, he was not. I am not going over the same old ground on this again.

Music is a business & to say it is not, is just fantasy.

FP, I'm actually kind of shocked at your response. I'm not sure why you expect anything different here. The entire thread has about three positive things posted in it. Even the title is negative. So I'm not sure why you would come here looking for something positive. It gets to a point that when a topic or person or people dwell(s) on more negative than positive, it's really not worth the effort it takes to get upset about it or even try to set them straight. I learned the hard way. I for one do not trust people or entities who focus on the negative, focus on the things they're not rather than what they are, which is why I've posted little to no actual content here or other threads that focus on negative. I have enough to deal with in my life, I don't need negativity in a virtual setting, and I'm certainly not going to spin my wheels trying blast The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow to people who are convinced the silver lining in every cloud is actually a toxic substance.

As for the music vs. business, it comes down to this. If you pay taxes on what you call your passion, it's a business. If you don't, either it's a hobby or you're wanted for tax evasion. People who don't actually get that concept can't be leaders in a band that makes millions, and their opinions when it comes to the business side of things can't be trusted. It is about the music, but with income of that proportions comes responsibility and it's not fun and games. It's my opinion that anyone who wants to make their way in music, acting, painting, cooking, anything where an art is your living (or anything where you get a 1099 instead of a W2), you're doing yourself a disservice by not taking a business class or two.

[Freypower]

FP, I'm actually kind of shocked at your response. I'm not sure why you expect anything different here. The entire thread has about three positive things posted in it. Even the title is negative. So I'm not sure why you would come here looking for something positive. It gets to a point that when a topic or person or people dwell(s) on more negative than positive, it's really not worth the effort it takes to get upset about it or even try to set them straight. I learned the hard way. I for one do not trust people or entities who focus on the negative, focus on the things they're not rather than what they are, which is why I've posted little to no actual content here or other threads that focus on negative. I have enough to deal with in my life, I don't need negativity in a virtual setting, and I'm certainly not going to spin my wheels trying blast The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow to people who are convinced the silver lining in every cloud is actually a toxic substance.

As for the music vs. business, it comes down to this. If you pay taxes on what you call your passion, it's a business. If you don't, either it's a hobby or you're wanted for tax evasion. People who don't actually get that concept can't be leaders in a band that makes millions, and their opinions when it comes to the business side of things can't be trusted. It is about the music, but with income of that proportions comes responsibility and it's not fun and games. It's my opinion that anyone who wants to make their way in music, acting, painting, cooking, anything where an art is your living (or anything where you get a 1099 instead of a W2), you're doing yourself a disservice by not taking a business class or two.

You are absolutely correct. It is just that occasionally, the constant negativity gets me down.

[Vector]

I've been extremely busy, and as a result have not had time to post as much as I'd like. However I will make a quick observation regarding so called negativity. Much of what is observation and disillusionment in this thread is considered negativity, just because some people here are fans and do not want their idols warts to be exposed.

To that end, any criticism of a particular member is met with fans who are such apologists, they cannot see beyond their own bias. For instance in another thread I mentioned how Felder was complimentary to Frey several times in his book, and a couple of posters said they could not remember anything but criticism. Needless to say they are incorrect, but from their biased lens, the positive was totally overshadowed by the negative.

Sure it is predominately a fan site, but that does not mean we must put them on a throne and defend the indefensible.
Whether some of you believe it or not, I started out this journey without preconceived notions, other than Henley and Frey had trouble getting along, and that eventually led to the band breaking up. That was from the 1980's, and I never heard much since regarding the Eagles and their behind the curtain issues.

Since then, and in no small part due to the Doc, I learned a lot about the history/make up of the band members, and more than I ever wanted to. Some members were not the wonderful guys they wanted the public to believe they were, and in the Doc they come off poorly. Heck if it had not been for their own words and discussed actions, I'd probably have continued to live in ignorant bliss. But certain things did not add up, so I went on a quest that has had me read multiple books, listen to multiple interviews, and so on.
Every time I think I have heard the worst about one member or the other, the next book is even more critical. The Eliot book which I finished recently is certainly not a puff piece on Henley. Instead it gives a yet unheard voice to the most inoffensive of the group, Meisner. It also shows a side of Henley that is very unflattering. Some is backed up by other sources, some things are discussed for the first time. Even if only 50% is accurate, it still is not a pretty picture.

Anyway, I've already taken more time than I have tonight, but lets keep things in perspective when it comes to calling opinion of unflattering behavior nothing more than negativity. I still have one more book to read before I get my PhD as an Eagles expert, but I doubt it is going to dramatically contradict what most of the other sources have said. Then again I might be in for a surprise or two.
`

`

[thelongrun]

Gee... How much I missed I can see (long time out of the Boder, dut to work).

What I can say as a starter, from the E´s History DVD, and looking at Vector words, is:

I always tought Randy was a cool and calm member of the Band, but we saw no, he had his own Demons those Days... and...

I think that's it. Very cool unrelaesed stuff, but no surprises. Thanks God.

[Vector]

Gee... How much I missed I can see (long time out of the Boder, dut to work).

What I can say as a starter, from the E´s History DVD, and looking at Vector words, is:

I always tought Randy was a cool and calm member of the Band, but we saw no, he had his own Demons those Days... and...

I think that's it. Very cool unrelaesed stuff, but no surprises. Thanks God.

He did have his own personal troubles, but he seemed the least offensive toward his fellow band mates(not including Schmit to come later).

You read about most of them having physical issues at one time or another, but when Meisner had them, it was magnified by Frey and Henley.
You also read about how he resented being scolded by Henley for doing the Chuck Berry walk with Walsh. He essentially was thinking, "who is Henley to tell me what to do since I am an original and equal member of the band and am just entertaining the fans and having some fun with Walsh".
He was soon to find out what L-eadon saw, and Felder and Walsh were to learn, that Frey and Henley decided among themselves that they were above everyone else in the band, and it would be their way or the highway.

`

[Ephi82]

I'm new here, so forgive me for re-igniting this long and passion filled thread!

This is my take:

I learned to play guitar to their first two records, and loved all they did through One of These Nights and Hotel.

I stopped listening to their stuff around Hotel California and yawned when they re-united. I was burnt out on the music, and grew to dis like the public displays of arrogance and ego from Fry and Henley. (as well as Henley coming to my home state of MA and telling us what to do with Walden Woods.) I also didn't want to put money in their pockets.

In the last month, the doc and the re-mastered box set of their albums has me listening and loving the music again. Their music is simply some of the best in my life.

However, after reading Eliot's book, and watching the doc, I don't respect Henley and Fry for any more than their music.

RE Felder:

I dont see him as a victim, as he's led a very nice life.

I do think he may have failed in that he didn't form and keep a close relationship with Fry and/or Henley and had no leverage within the band.

Remember, Fry originally liked him so much that he came in as a full partner. What happened? You can't rule out that for some reason, he became unlikable to his partners.

Also, I ask myself why an incredibly talented and famous guitarist like Felder hasn't teamed up with another "A" list band/songwriter?

Last, Meisner was probably the most underrated musician in the band. Grab a bass and try to cop his lines in any of his Eagles songs

[SoaringRockyMountainWay]

I don't know that much about politics or what the Eagles did in the 70s because I'm only 15. I discovered the Eagles from the documentary and now I think they're the best band ever! I think they write amazing songs and all the band members are so funny. I don't know what I'd do without the Eagles even though I've only known them for a few months. They help me through life. I'm listening to them right now!

[Vector]

Wow, it has been 3 months since I even visited the board.

I am sure some have rejoiced in my absence, maybe a few have hoped for my return. Either way, I will start to contribute again, and listen to others to see if they are still koolaid drinkers, or have been willing to look at members of the bands seedy underbelly.

Then again, prior to watching HOE, I probably never would have dived into the real history of the Eagles, not the contrived made for TV and promotional one.
Since my last visit my research seems to be complete with a visit to the Troubadour and discussing what the guys were like back in the day with some very knowledgeable people. I didn't fly out there for that purpose, but while in LA twice since my last visit here, I just had to make it to the strip a few times. It has changed dramatically in just 10 years, much less what it must have been like 30-40 years ago.

There is so much to cover, I don't even have the time now, but rest assured the Eagles (mainly Frey and Henley) are not looking any better from a personal standpoint.
That goes for their greed, ultra liberal politics, and general narcissism. But more on that later.

`

[pueblo47]

Welcome back. I'm looking forward to your posts as your perspective on the band is always very thought-provoking and realistic.

[The Thrill Is Never Gone]

I had not seen this thread before (but I am fairly new). I need to read through the whole thread before I make a comment.

[UndertheWire]

I wasn't around when you posted before, but I came to this with a similar level of ignorance as you but perhaps a greater awareness of my own bias. I've done my research and ended up in a different place to you.

I can add to some of the earlier discussions. The first is about the relationship with Glyn John's whether Bernie was including himself when he talked about how the band felt. This is a quote from Barney Hoskyn's Hotel California book.


`There'd always been disagreement with Glyn,' says Bernie Leadon. `Randy Meisner had wanted to fire him after the first album and record the whole album over again. When Desperado didn't sell, we were all like, "It's all Glyn's fault!"'
Note the "we were all" and also that it was Randy Meisner who was most unhappy.

[Tony Trout]

Don't shoot me but...I totally and completely and 100% agree with the OP. As someone posted on Glen's FB page recently: "Glen Frey is the biggest (expletive) in the music business." Honestly, I hope that Glenn will see it and read it and, most of all, THINK about how he has treated former members of the band (Meisner & Felder). Glenn getting pissed off at Randy because he didn't want to sing, "TITTL", due to being sick (and having been up the night before partying) was very unfair to Randy. No one - absolutely NO ONE - should be forced to perform if they're not feeling well or they don't feel that they can offer their best to the audience.

After watching the HOE documentary on DVD, I have come to the above conclusion, myself. If I had a choice between having lunch with either Glenn or the rest of the band, I would choose everyone but Glenn.

Again, this is just my opinion.

[Houston Debutante]

That goes for their greed, ultra liberal politics, and general narcissism.


What's wrong with having 'ultra-liberal politics'?

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Either way, I will start to contribute again, and listen to others to see if they are still koolaid drinkers, or have been willing to look at members of the bands seedy underbelly.

I am assuming the term 'koolaid drinkers' is a slam and personal put-down for those who don't have the same opinion that you do?



That goes for their greed, ultra liberal politics, and general narcissism. But more on that later.

`

We do not, as a rule, discuss politics on this board. There are other forums for that sort of discussion. Discussing the political leanings of the band is one thing, but discussing all the reasons why a particular leaning is good or bad is not suitable here. Those types of discussions typically produce personal attacks and flaming and it's best to nip those in the bud at the very beginning of a 'discussion'. We have a very wide range of political beliefs here and we all manage to get along. It would be nice if we could keep it that way.

[zeldabjr]

Thank You VA!!...well said...

[sad-cafe]

What's wrong with having 'ultra-liberal politics'?


NOTHING at all!

[GlennLover]

Glenn getting pissed off at Randy because he didn't want to sing, "TITTL", due to being sick (and having been up the night before partying) was very unfair to Randy. No one - absolutely NO ONE - should be forced to perform if they're not feeling well or they don't feel that they can offer their best to the audience.
Again, this is just my opinion.

Randy shouldn't have been up all night drinking & partying if it meant he was going to be able to do his job properly. Lots of performers go on when they are sick & feeling miserable. "The show must go on"! JMO

[The Thrill Is Never Gone]

I grew up in the 70's. The Eagles were my favorite group from day one. I have seen all 7 of them in concert at some time. They are all wonderful musicians, singers and songwriters. And nothing will change that. When I hear Hotel California, the best part for me is when Joe and DonF start playing opposite of each other. I see Joe with his bandana, making faces and putting it all out there. I see DonF with his suspenders, concentrating and playing his music with pride. That's a vision that will never grow old.

I have seen the DOC about 10 times, I have read all the books, articles, online stuff and heard all the interviews. Does it change how I feel about there music, no. The music is still great and the words and songs all still have a lot of meaning to me today.

Do I feel that Glenn contributed heavily to the departures of Bernie, Randy and Don F. Absolutely. Did Don H have a hand in it. Absolutely.

So next week I will go to see them on November 20th in Tampa. I will love every moment of it but one. I do not like Glenn's version of TITTL.
(This is my opinion, I am not trying to tell anyone else how to feel about it). To me this will always be Randy's song. I know everyone says that Glenn does a good job with it, that the audience loves it and that they dedicate the song to their good friend, Randy Meisner. When their good friend Randy Meisner needed a friend in 1977, they were no where to be found.

Again this is my opinion. Remember opinions are like butts (I cleaned that up) everyone has one.

As far as politics go, I do not discuss them with anyone, not even my family. Politics can become a very heated discussion very quickly. I will keep my views to myself.

Vector, I did not know you were on this board. Welcome back from the thrill.

[lizzyplays]

And this is why I love you. :love:


First and foremost, welcome Vector!!!

When I pulled up the board a bit ago, the title of this thread popped out at me and so I clicked it first and might I say, I love how you expressed yourself very respectfully with your point of view.

That being said, there are certain things in your post I could not have said better. Count me as one of those long time fans that have become disillusioned by my favorite band also and, to a degree, I'm sorry I ever watched the documentary. There's something to be said about the old saying, "ignorance is bliss". I've said on this board several times that I own all the books about these guys, and even tho the books are in my possession, I've yet to read a one of them, mainly for fear of what I might read to make me think they are less than the rock n roll Gods I have built them up to be for the several decades I have loved them. Some will say that's my own fault because I have put them on those pedestals and they are human, just like everyone else, and entitled to mistakes, etc... I get that. But to be honest, my disillusionment started a few years back. The price of the tickets, the picture taking policies, the no standing at concerts, and the members of the band actually calling people out for it, sometimes in the middle of songs, all added up and just put me off to some degree. But nothing deterred me from still loving the music and the musicians. Afterall, they had been with me through most of my life and had actually gotten me through some very tough times of loss, etc...with their music. Then came the documentary....

I had looked forward to this documentary with as much anticipation as the next person. After watching it the first time, with everyone else the night it aired, I was left with a bittersweet taste in my mouth. LOVED all the behind the scenes stuff, loved the interviews with those who were there through it all and knew these guys, etc... but some of the stuff I saw just made me angry.

I've discussed, at great length with other fans and did my own research and found enough online and through the conversations to know, I'm not the only one that felt this way and saw things that really put them off with some of the members of the band. I learned shortly after I posted my first thoughts in the documentary thread, that I was better off just keeping my mouth shut on here because, as you put it, there were those that will defend them at all cost. I'm ok with that and so I just gave up trying to defend my opinion.

As for the political stuff, I really don't care which way they lean as long as they're not ramming it down my throat. I hate when I pay money for a concert ticket, and get the artist ranting and raving about their political views-- (That's you Ted Nugent!!! I will not easily forget the political rally I attended last summer when I thought it was suppose to be a concert).

Since watching the doc the first time, I've only watched bits and pieces of it since and haven't even pre-ordered it yet. I know I will purchase it, if for no other reason because I want the bonus dvd of the concert footage.

I will always love this band and they will always be my favorite band of all time. How could they not be, they've been that since I was 11 or 12 years old, so for decades now. But I guess that's also why I can say that I have the right to be somewhat disappointed in them and some of their behavior.

[Henley Honey]

Welcome back. I'm looking forward to your posts as your perspective on the band is always very thought-provoking and realistic.


Let's not forget snarky and inflammatory.

[pueblo47]

Let's not forget snarky and inflammatory.

That was not my opinion of his comments and I consider such remarks as unnecessary and very personal.

That said, my post is neither a complaint or a criticism. Merely MY opinion. Chill out.

[Henley Honey]

That was not my opinion of his comments and I consider such remarks as unnecessary and very personal.

That said, my post is neither a complaint or a criticism. Merely MY opinion. Chill out.


I'm extremely chilled. Just stating my opinion.
It was not an attempt to put words in your mouth.
You stated your opinion and I stated mine.

[Houston Debutante]

An opinion I agree with, Henley Honey. He just got proven wrong on the Bernie thing ~ thanks for the info, UndertheWire ~ how is getting your facts wrong realistic?

If you come to this board simply to hate on the band, what's the point? What's fun about that?

[Edited out the part that would tick off a lot of people ~ although I might post it again later :lol:]

[Glennsallnighter]

An opinion I agree with, Henley Honey. He just got proven wrong on the Bernie thing ~ thanks for the info, UndertheWire ~ how is getting your facts wrong realistic?

If you come to this board simply to hate on the band, what's the point? What's fun about that?

[Edited out the part that would tick off a lot of people ~ although I might post it again later :lol:]

Please do post it again, and I totally agree. If I don't like a band I just move on!! Why waste my time trying to convince other people to hate it too? Doesn't make sense to me!!

[pueblo47]

An opinion I agree with, Henley Honey. He just got proven wrong on the Bernie thing ~ thanks for the info, UndertheWire ~ how is getting your facts wrong realistic?

If you come to this board simply to hate on the band, what's the point? What's fun about that?

[Edited out the part that would tick off a lot of people ~ although I might post it again later :lol:]

That's ok, I have your original post but it didn't tick me off. I just have a few more things to say.

Vector started this thread and for those of you who keep saying why come in here if you hate the band so much, etc., the title of this thread is Why I Am No Longer Happy With "MY FAVORITE BAND." He doesn't hate the Eagles, he has just been posting his opinions and impressions about Frey and Henley from the doc and the books he has read. There are a lot of members in here who agree with his opinions but are afraid to say anything because some of you get so upset that it turns into derogatory remarks designed to demean and insult the poster.

The mods keep insisting that everyone is free to post their opinions as long as it's kept friendly and mature but it does get out of hand sometimes. Several of us like to read Vector's posts as it's from a different viewpoint and brings into play some things that makes us think about it. Yes, he has made some errors with his facts, we all do that, and he accepts the corrections and moves on.

Without Frey, with the assistance of Henley, there wouldn't be a band called Eagles. Right or wrong in their handling of personnel, it still works and they are still on top. And there are many songs that I prefer to hear only Frey sing and the same for Henley, though the original four have always been my preference.

All I ask is that you let others offer their opinions without ganging up on us and getting upset about it. I have always enjoyed this board but all the one-sided fighting has kept a lot of us from coming here much anymore. That's all I have to say. Please don't take anything in this post as a personal criticism or complaint aimed at anyone in particular. It's not meant that way.

[TimothyBFan]

And this is why I love you. :love:

Well thank you!!! I appreciate it. Right back at ya!

P47--- well said!! And I agree. Like I said in the post Liz quoted, I pretty much agree with Vector. They've always been my favorite band, I know no other way but I'm sorry I ever watched that d*mn doc. The things I saw put me off on several things. I'm ok with the people here who love Glenn & didn't/don't see anything wrong with the way he handles things so all I ask is that you respect my opinion also. I'm very thankful for Glenn & Don & I LOVE their music, band or solo but as people, not so much, I'm afraid.

Enough said. :shrug:

[Midnight Visitor]

I have seen the DOC about 10 times, I have read all the books, articles, online stuff and heard all the interviews. Does it change how I feel about there music, no. The music is still great and the words and songs all still have a lot of meaning to me today.

Do I feel that Glenn contributed heavily to the departures of Bernie, Randy and Don F. Absolutely. Did Don H have a hand in it. Absolutely.

So next week I will go to see them on November 20th in Tampa. I will love every moment of it but one. I do not like Glenn's version of TITTL.
(This is my opinion, I am not trying to tell anyone else how to feel about it).

You lucky devil! You get to see them on Joe's birthday. I always wanted to go to a birthday show.

I have to agree with you on all of the above. The band's personal business has nothing to do with how much I like them or don't. I don't get overly involved with stuff like that. It's really none of our business. I feel the documentary is doing nothing but telling a story. Most stories have ups and downs. That is, if it's a good story.

Have fun at the show!

[UK TimFan]

I know I'm not expressing myself very well but . . .

There's a saying which goes something along a the lines of 'if your kids are naughty you should reassure them that you love them but that you don't love their behaviour'. Other family members would tell them the same, though a complete stranger would probably look at your kids and think what total brats they are.
I think the 'Glenn (and to a degree Don H) has been naughty but we still love you' scenario is what Vector, Pueblo and TBF are trying to convey, but the other 'family members' (i.e. FMs) seem unable to acknowledge that at times their hero(es) have been guilty of any wrongful deeds. And this is what upsets the 'we love you in spite of what you did' fans.

Do I love my kids? Yes. Do I believe that they have always said or done the right thing? No. They're like me and everybody else in the world, not perfect.

[UndertheWire]

Returning to another of the earlier discussions on this thread, I have something about bands forming corporations. It's written by John Hartmann who was the Eagles manager early on. He left Geffen-Roberts about the time Azoff joined and managed Poco and America. He writes about band memers returning their shares when they leave and about keeping the corporation going even if one or more band members try solo careers. He uses Eagles, Glenn Frey and Don Henley as an example.

http://theholodigm.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/question-of-day-breaking-brand-july-20.html

When Bernie and later Randy left, they appear to have given back their shares of the corporation and the band continued without them. I would say that the same could have happened when Glenn "left" except that the others decided not to continue without him. Instead of trying to get him to surrender his share, they kept the corporation going in the hope that he would come back.

The Don Felder situation shows that the band can continue even if a former band member does not return his shares. However, I imagine this makes it difficult for the corporation when negotiating deals as would an unresolved legal challenge from that former member. I'll come back to that.

[The Thrill Is Never Gone]

TBF, Pueblo 47 and Midnight Visitor, I agree with all of you.

I am hoping that because it is Joe's Birthday that it is extra special and extra good. I will let you know.

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Okay – I’m going to step in here to address why we are unable to discuss these controversial topics on this forum from my perspective.

To start out with, I read posts like pueblos, UK Timfan’s, and others and I just shake my head. After they read my post, they will probably do exactly the same thing. You see, we, obviously, don’t see eye-to-eye on these things, so no matter how many times it comes up, we're not going to persuade the other side. Even though we are all repeating the same things that have been said dozens and dozens of times already, since several of you have presented your side, let me try to present the other …


All I ask is that you let others offer their opinions without ganging up on us and getting upset about it. I have always enjoyed this board but all the one-sided fighting has kept a lot of us from coming here much anymore. That's all I have to say. Please don't take anything in this post as a personal criticism or complaint aimed at anyone in particular. It's not meant that way.

This is a well-expressed post, but to me, the main problem is that it states that this is all ‘one-sided fighting’ – which is a polite way of laying all of the blame on the ‘other’ side. 'It's not me causing the problem - it's them' ... and that is exactly the reason that some of you perceive this as being ‘ganged up on’. So as long as we have folks on either side with this mentality, any discussion will inevitably end up in confrontation. Remember, it takes two sides to argue.

Additionally, this is a fan board and from the feedback I get, the large majority of the members are not interested in going around in circles to just to rehash negative stuff, especially when it may or may not be factually correct. There are pages and pages in this thread where Vector (and others) has expressed his opinion, and many other threads where others have made their opinion well-known, so to claim that you can’t express your opinion here is simply not the case. Just because not everyone agrees with your opinion doesn’t mean you weren’t allowed to give it. If Vector has new information about the band that is appropriate, fact-based, and substantiated, he can post it if he does so respectfully, and anyone interested is free to respond in the same manner. But, I am convinced that most of our members are not interested in a repeat of the ‘same ole, same ole’. I believe they would prefer to come to this board and have fun and unapologetically talk positively about the band. So, for those of you who prefer to continuously discuss all the negative stuff, why are you so interested in using a fan board where it is not what most members want to hear? There are plenty other forums on the internet where you can do that - no one will care, and you are free to say whatever you wish with like-minded fans without conflict.


There's a saying which goes something along a the lines of 'if your kids are naughty you should reassure them that you love them but that you don't love their behaviour'. Other family members would tell them the same, though a complete stranger would probably look at your kids and think what total brats they are.

I think the 'Glenn (and to a degree Don H) has been naughty but we still love you' scenario is what Vector, Pueblo and TBF are trying to convey, but the other 'family members' (i.e. FMs) seem unable to acknowledge that at times their hero(es) have been guilty of any wrongful deeds. And this is what upsets the 'we love you in spite of what you did' fans.

Do I love my kids? Yes. Do I believe that they have always said or done the right thing? No. They're like me and everybody else in the world, not perfect.

Although I believe no harm was meant, many of us actually take offense to this kind of mentality considering the numbers of times we have stated that we don’t believe any of the guys in the band were angels and they all were at fault. The implication here is that we don't really mean what we say (i.e. lying). But, even if it were true that we are ‘unable to acknowledge that at times my hero has been guilty of any wrongful deeds’, why should that upset anyone else? See, it doesn’t bother me that you don’t agree with me or share my favorite. But, what does bother me is the constant undermining of any band member and of his fans. I have really tried to look at this from another lens, but for the life of me, I can’t understand how anyone thinks one group is unable to acknowledge the faults of their favorite any more than another. Well, no matter how politely it's written, it’s insulting to individual fans of the band members to be grouped together or singled out as being more sensitive and defensive than other member's fans. Let’s be real – if any of the band members are repeatedly attacked on this board, some of his fans will become outraged. But, the response to this is usually something along the lines of ‘Yeah, but my guy isn’t attacked because he doesn’t deserve to be, he didn’t do all those bad, mean things. He was the victim’. I rest my case on this one.


So, with regard to no one being able to express their opinion here, if that were true, we wouldn’t already know how you felt. As far as folks feeling they are being ganged up on ... well, guess what – it seems that some on both sides feel exactly the same way. Therefore, it really doesn’t serve any purpose to continue going back and forth about this. It appears that the only thing that will make some happy is to have everyone agree with their opinion. And even then, I’m not convinced that would work.

Folks, it seems that we are at an impasse here, and apparently beyond the point where we are able to discuss these matters without disagreeing. So, the bottom line is that this is Nancy’s board and when there is a divisive issue such as this, then she needs to do what she feels is best for the community as a whole, which is to do what she can to keep this board fun, positive, and informative. For all of us who choose to participate here, we don’t always need to agree with her wishes, but we do all need to respect them.

[Houston Debutante]

Well said Dreamer. I can only imagine how the s**t would hit the fan if Timothy or Randy got attacked the way Don Henley and Glenn do, for instance, yet some people act as if Don and Glenn fans are out of line simply for standing up for their favorites when they get blasted.

There are people giving their negative opinions right and left in this thread, while at the same time complaining that they can't give negative opinions....???? What have they been doing for all these pages then?

Another thing. I must have missed all the posts where Don and Glenn fans claim they're perfect. I read several where they say they're not perfect, but I've never read one where they say they are. Perhaps one of you making that claim about Don and Glenn fans could point me to an example. Surely it won't be too hard for you to find one, right, since it's such a big problem?


Yes, he has made some errors with his facts, we all do that, and he accepts the corrections and moves on.

I must also have missed the part where he accepted corrections and moved on.... seems like he's letting the rest of you speak for him instead....

[zeldabjr]

you're very right HD...the shit would hit the fan!!!...I would feel like a lioness protecting her cub!...and I can only imagine that's how the Glenn and Don fans feel...none of us like her favorite attacked in any way...everyone has a right to his or her opinion...but to come on a fan site...where people obviously love these guys no matter what...and be negative about them...is beyond me...of course you're going to get it back in your face!...attack Timothy...whether you have merit or not...and you're gonna get a faceful from me!...just sayin'...I was on a fan site on FB the other night...and this guy called Don and Glenn Aholes...now come on...and then said he wasn't lookin' for a fight...really?...

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Just a reminder - the point of my previous post was to deter all of the endless back and forth bickering, not to spur it on. As I said, it is very unproductive to keep dwelling on the negativity. So let's move forward. For those who want to contribute positively, we encourage you to do so. For those who want to express things that they feel they can't express here, we encourage you to stick around, and find another place on the net to vent about the really negative stuff about the band.

[UndertheWire]

After I saw the documentary, I went looking to see what other people thought about it and then became a bit frustrated by what I saw. Many people seemed to make up their minds about villains and victims based on very little information. Sure, it's a gut reaction, it's how they feel but it doesn't mean they understand what was going on. The reality is sure to be far more complex and everyone involved has both good and bad parts of their personality.

You know what I think is remarkable about the band compared to most of their contempories? It's that they managed to stay together for so long in each incarnation - four years with Bernie, six years with Randy, 6+7 years with Don Felder. That's quite an achievement. Compare that to Poco or the promising bands that only lasted a couple. For perspective, try reading about CSN&Y.

I find it fascinating but I have to remind myself that when I try to make sense of it that it's just my version of a story and it's nothing like Don Felder's, Glenn Frey's, Randy Meisener's or anyone else's.

Sorry for the ramble.

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Another thing. I must have missed all the posts where Don and Glenn fans claim they're perfect. I read several where they say they're not perfect, but I've never read one where they say they are. Perhaps one of you making that claim about Don and Glenn fans could point me to an example. Surely it won't be too hard for you to find one, right, since it's such a big problem?

Exactly. They weren't and aren't perfect, which is just one thing I like about them. Perfect is so incredibly boring, and we established in the Blokes thread that I like the bad boys! They did some bad things. They did some good things. They sound like angels but they aren't. As my Grandma always said, "If you can't say anything good keep your mouth shut." We don't need to be sycophants, recognizing the good with the bad is far healthier than wearing rose-colored glasses, but I have enough negativity in my life, I don't need it in my virtual world.

I have my favorite, obviously, but I love all these guys and have a huge amount of respect for their talent, their drive and ambition. I'm a fan of them, which explains why I'm here on an Eagles fansite.

[The Thrill Is Never Gone]

Once upon a time, oops, sorry wrong part of the story. THE END!!!!!!!!

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Many people seemed to make up their minds about villains and victims based on very little inform, it's a gut reaction, it's how they feel but it doesn't mean they understand what was going on. The reality is sure to be far more complex and everyone involved has both good and bad parts of their personality.

I so totally agree with your post, especially this part.


I have a question bases on UndertheWires comment above (sorry if it's been addressed already) but when they say that Berne and Randy returned their shares of the corporation or surrendered them, does that mean they were bought out?

LR - According to Felder's book and other documentation, there was a clause in all member's contracts that required them to sell back their shares of the corporation for a nominal sum upon their departure from the band.

[Brooke]

Exactly. They weren't and aren't perfect, which is just one thing I like about them. Perfect is so incredibly boring, and we established in the Blokes thread that I like the bad boys! They did some bad things. They did some good things. They sound like angels but they aren't. As my Grandma always said, "If you can't say anything good keep your mouth shut." We don't need to be sycophants, recognizing the good with the bad is far healthier than wearing rose-colored glasses, but I have enough negativity in my life, I don't need it in my virtual world.

I have my favorite, obviously, but I love all these guys and have a huge amount of respect for their talent, their drive and ambition. I'm a fan of them, which explains why I'm here on an Eagles fansite.

I agree with everything here. Thank you VA!

[The Thrill Is Never Gone]

Yes we are all here because we love the eagles and their music. There is no denying that.

You have your opinion and I have mine. Why don't we all just, GET OVER IT!, and move on.

[SoaringRockyMountainWay]

Yes we are all here because we love the eagles and their music. There is no denying that.

You have your opinion and I have mine. Why don't we all just, GET OVER IT!, and move on.

I TOTALLY AGREE!

[Vector]

For those who have read and/or participated in this thread, you know my journey with the Eagles has gone from a naive fan who liked them more than any other, to disillusionment with all the behind the scenes stuff I learned about after HOE documentary. It caused me to read every book and watch most interviews related to their history and demise.
I even sat down with someone at the Troubadour who knew them from their humble beginning to try and find the truth as best as I could.
The conclusions I came to were far from popular with some of the posters here, yet others were publicly and certainly privately expressing their similar feelings. It is sad so many had to speak off the record or via email since they felt ridicule expressing their views publicly on this forum (more on this in a moment).

I also got to the point of not being able to hear the Eagles songs without thinking of how petty, egocentric, greedy or downright stupid they could be to destroy such an incredible array of talent. I pronounced I would never see them in concert again (in their present form), nor purchase anything that could put money into their pockets.
I also wished I had never seen the HOE doc to begin with, and just enjoyed their music in ignorant bliss.

Yet with all the aforementioned, I found myself looking for ways to excuse, if not forgive, the bands actions.
After all, being a fan of their music, I'd prefer to feel good about them rather than thinking negatively. I wanted to get back to enjoying their music without thinking of what could have been.
So I started thinking if XYZ happened to heal the old wounds between them, that would work for me. The first and most obvious thing would be for them to just call each other, agree to have a beer, and let the egos and pettiness go.

Never happened.

Then I thought Frey/Henley could invite the former members back to the group. While this was the most unrealistic, having all 7 living members up on stage preforming (like they did during the HOF induction) would be great.
What fan could possibly not want that to happen?
Yet as the years rolled by with the rift between the former members and the current ones seeming to go on without end, I figured it was a lost cause.

Never happened.

Yet every time a significant member of another band would pass away, you'd see former "enemies" within the group open their hearts, and remember the good times & old days. I'd think to myself, you guys are not getting any younger, so you'd better not wait until one of you gets sicks or dies, then it will be truly too late.
So when I heard the Eagles were having a Farewell Tour, I thought this might be the chance to heal the wounds. Needless to say with Bernie Leadon rejoining, I was heartened. Yet the lack of Randy Meisner and Don Felder was enough to keep me from seeing them. Heck even having them play just a few songs (TITTL for Meisner & HC/OOTN for Felder) might have done the trick. Needless to say it never happened.

My next thought that would suffice was when the Eagles were to receive the Kennedy Award. I thought, ok guys, this is an easy one. Just as you did during the HOF award, invite everyone back to receive the honor. Just like with the Travis Tritt video for "Common Threads", that might be the spark that could cause them to forgive and forget. Sadly not only was Frey sick, but either he and/or Henley had not decided to invite any of the 3 other members, including Leadon. :scowl:
I certainly didn't expect Frey to pass, yet it crossed my mind that I'd bet this episode might enlighten him to realize his own mortality and make amends when he recovered. I'd like to think he would have, but sadly we will never know.
So when Henley decided to only have the 3 honored (with Glen posthumously so via his wife), I though, ok, that is it, my favorite band and their music is going to be lost to me. :censored:

Never happened.

However, not wanting to hold a grudge and still wanting to get beyond my current state when I hear their songs, I figured they could do a tribute tour (with all the members), and have fellow friends musicians fill in for Frey. Such as Brown, Seger, Tritt, etc., etc.
Then Henley does an interview saying the Eagles are no more. :cuss::cuss:

Never happened.
But what is the old saying, never say never?

Well low and behold, just when I was about to give up all hope, I hear the Eagles are supposedly going to reform for this east coast - west coast concert thing. I have no clue what it's reason for existence is, but have heard rumors that the Eagles will have all current and former members together. :woah:
I know it is just rumor at this stage, and some fans might not even want to see it happen.
But my desire to get beyond my present state of mind with them has me hoping it is true. All the living Eagles on stage would likely do the trick. Heck, just like a parent who sets the bar for forgiveness very low for their own kids, I'd even be happy if Henley (lets face it, he decides, no one else) just invited the other 3 to be a part of it. So even if Meisner is too ill/messed up, Felder is on tour, Leadon is off surfing, just the mere olive branch gesture of inviting them would be enough for me.

I am cautiously optimistic and keeping my fingers crossed. Needless to say, I am interested in your points of view on my lengthy journey and hope for them reuniting.


`

[Delilah]

As much as I would LOVE to see the 3 former members join the rest of the band this summer to perform and pay tribute to Glenn, that's just not realistic. I read about that rumor too and didn't take it seriously. At all. Well except for Bernie. I think there's a chance he could be part of it. That would be great.

[New Kid In Town]

Vector - Just MHO, but you are taking this too personal. Don H. and Glenn had no problems with Randy and Bernie. Bernie toured two years with them for the HOTE tour. Randy was asked but was too ill to tour with them. Don and Glenn paid all of Randy's medical bills, including months of rehab he needed after his chocking incident. They had no objection to them receiving the KCH.
They have not and will probably never make amends with Don Felder. You can not sue and write a tell all book trashing former band members and expect to be welcomed back into the fold so to speak. You have to remember that most bands have gone through the same thing with members. The Eagles are not the only group this has happened to. In fact, there are more groups this has happened to than not happened to.
Remember that when most of this went down, they guys were all in their 20's. They were young and famous beyond their wildest dreams. Their behavior was not any different than most R&R groups. Did they always handle everything well ? Not always. Don H. and Glenn long ago made amends with Bernie and Randy. It will probably never happen with Felder.
As to who will play at the two concerts with them, I would guess that Randy will not be able to participate due to his poor health. Hell could freeze over before Don H. shares a stage with Felder. I would not be surprised if Bernie participates like he did for the HOTE tour. As to whom the "family and friends" will be we will just have to wait and see. You should not let something that happened 40 years ago stop your enjoyment from listening to the Eagles.

[Vector]

As much as I would LOVE to see the 3 former members join the rest of the band this summer to perform and pay tribute to Glenn, that's just not realistic. I read about that rumor too and didn't take it seriously. At all. Well except for Bernie. I think there's a chance he could be part of it. That would be great.

Well I agree about Bernie, as they do seem to have gotten beyond their rift.

With Randy, I'd think a public invitation, regardless of his ability to actually participate, would be a nice gesture. Remember, Henley could have asked him to attend and be honored for the Kennedy Awards, and all that would have required is him to sit and enjoy the evening.

Randy could politely decline a current invitation, and everyone is a winner, even if only for optics. Still I'd bet Randy would still appreciate the offer.

[Vector]

Vector - Just MHO, but you are taking this too personal. Don H. and Glenn had no problems with Randy and Bernie. Bernie toured two years with them for the HOTE tour. Randy was asked but was too ill to tour with them. Don and Glenn paid all of Randy's medical bills, including months of rehab he needed after his chocking incident. They had no objection to them receiving the KCH.
They have not and will probably never make amends with Don Felder. You can not sue and write a tell all book trashing former band members and expect to be welcomed back into the fold so to speak. You have to remember that most bands have gone through the same thing with members. The Eagles are not the only group this has happened to. In fact, there are more groups this has happened to than not happened to.
Remember that when most of this went down, they guys were all in their 20's. They were young and famous beyond their wildest dreams. Their behavior was not any different than most R&R groups. Did they always handle everything well ? Not always. Don H. and Glenn and long ago made amends with Bernie and Randy. It will probably never happen with Felder.
As to who will play at the two concerts with them, I would guess that Randy will not be able to participate due to his poor health. Hell could freeze over before Don H. shares a stage with Felder. I would not be surprised if Bernie participates like he did for the HOTE tour. As to whom the "family and friends" will be we will just have to wait and see. You should not let something that happened 40 years ago stop your enjoyment from listening to the Eagles.

I agree that I might be letting things get to me more so than just about anything else so remote to my direct life.
Then again the Eagles music seems to touch many of us in ways that are not rational.
Heck just look at the fans on this site alone, who feel a personal connection to the music, and even the band members themselves.
I certainly cannot explain why a rational pragmatic guy like myself has become so intrigued with the dynamics of the Eagles.

While I do think Leadon has been forgiven and welcomed back int the fold (at least enough to be a paid sideman), Meisner has a much more strained relationship with Frey/Henely than most realize.
It was not until Eliot's book, did Randy finally have a voice in how he felt betrayed and screwed over by Henely/Frey and Azoff. I too have heard that Frey/Henley have paid some of his medical bills, which of course is commendable.
However to think he is even in financial need of other members to help him says a lot.
He was driven away, and according to him his career sabotaged via Henley through Azoff. So if a founding member is poor and the others all multi-millionaires, that is an indictment in and of itself, don't you think?

Regarding Felder, nice play on words with "hell freezes over". I could of course counter that Henley should "get over it".
The fans would love to see everyone back on stage, performing for what will likely be the last ever opportunity.
Like you point out 40 years is a long time. Grown men who were once friends and help to make each other rich/famous should be able to tolerate being in the same room with each other, much less creating an environment where they work together to make even more money than they could being apart.

[New Kid In Town]

Vector - Amends will never be made with Don Felder. That is just the way it is. Felder is not an innocent angle either - there are three sides to every story - your, mine and the truth. Don F's book should be taken with a grain of salt. I personally think he came off as whinny and ungrateful. He blamed everyone else for his actions. He seems quite happy now with his own band.

If you remember in Elliott's book, he indicates, and Don H. concurred, that Glenn got along well with Randy for the most part. Don H. and Randy were never close. Glenn was described as having much more patience with Randy. I had read somewhere that Randy's continued drinking and drug use sabotaged his career in the 80's. Randy's refusal to sing TITTL during the HC tour made Glenn angry. People expected to hear that song with Randy singing it. Also, IMHO it was unrealistic for Randy to expect to be included in the HFO tour when he had quit the band 16 years before. Especially when he refused to sing any lead songs. And you know the fans would have expected TITTL every night. His stage fright and refusal to sing was one of the reasons he quit(along with trying to save his marriage).

I do not believe Randy is broke. A few years ago he gave an interview stating life was good for him. He had good investments and a good business manager. He of course does not have the same amount of money as Don and Glenn but, he has stated numerous times in interviews I have seen that money was not that important to him. Don't forget, he continues to make money every year from their GH vol.1, which is a gold mine. Bernie has stated he makes good money every year from the sale of the album. Don and Glenn paid ALL of Randy's medical bills. If they were not getting along, they probably would not have done so.

So, just try to listen to the Eagles music and enjoy it for the great music it is. And remember, we do not know what really went on in that band - we were not there. We do not know what is is like to experience that kind of fame at such a young age. Glenn had stated in numerous interviews that he regrets the way some things went down in the 70's. Remember, alcohol and drugs brought out the worse in ALL of them.

[Vector]

Vector - Amends will never be made with Don Felder. That is just the way it is. Felder is not an innocent angle either - there are three sides to every story - your, mine and the truth. Don F's book should be taken with a grain of salt. I personally think he came off as whinny and ungrateful. He blamed everyone else for his actions. He seems quite happy now with his own band.

If you remember in Elliott's book, he indicates, and Don H. concurred, that Glenn got along well with Randy for the most part. Don H. and Randy were never close. Glenn was described as having much more patience with Randy. I had read somewhere that Randy's continued drinking and drug use sabotaged his career in the 80's. Randy's refusal to sing TITTL during the HC tour made Glenn angry. People expected to hear that song with Randy singing it.

I do not believe Randy is broke. A few years ago he gave an interview stating life was good for him. He had good investments and a good business manager. He of course does not have the same amount of money as Don and Glenn but, he has stated numerous times in interviews I have seen that money was not that important to him. Don't forget, he continues to make money every year from their GH vol.1, which is a gold mine. Bernie has stated he makes good money every year from the sale of the album. Don and Glenn paid ALL of Randy's medical bills. If they were not getting along, they probably would not have done so.

So, just try to listen to the Eagles music and enjoy it for the great music it is. And remember, we do not know what really went on in that band - we were not there. We do not know what is is like to experience that kind of fame at such a young age. Glenn had stated in numerous interviews that he regrets the way some things went down in the 70's. Remember, alcohol and drugs brought out the worse in ALL of them.

There is value is some of your comments. However, while I agree Felder is no angel, he seems to long ago have made his peace with the band. He has offered to re-join the others, which says a lot. But my focus is not so much on Felder alone, as there was some history and bad blood on both sides of the divide. Yet is seems as if Feder is the one holding out the olive branch.

As to Eliot's book, I think we read the same words, but came away with very different impressions. Remember, I came into this without a horse in the race. I didn't know Meisner from Felder, from Henley. Sure I loved the Eagles music, but didn't have a clue who they were as individuals.
However when I read that one equal member was telling another how to do something, and what not to do (i.e. Meisner & Walsh having fun on stage playing and entertaining the crowd), I can empathize with how Randy felt. I would have told Henley to pound sound, and if he persisted I'd make it clear he had better steer clear of trying to boss everyone around. Bernie told Frey to take a leap and poured a beer over him to push the point home. Frankly, if I were any of the three that were being treated like 2nd class members of the group, things would have gotten ugly if the bullying didn't stop quick.

As to Meisner being well off, or even ok financially, then why on earth would he need help paying medical bills?
I don't know the answer, but something does not add up if that is to be believed.

BTW - The way you said it (maybe not intentionally) Meisner refused to sing TITTL all throughout the HC tour,. Needless to say that is an exaggeration at best. To hear Meisner's version, he just was not able to sing it on one or two particular nights when he was sick, too boozed up, or his throat was bothering him. Meisner did point out how when Frey or Henley were not up to snuff, then everything came to a halt. This was confirmed in other books as well.

[Delilah]

While I do think Leadon has been forgiven and welcomed back int the fold (at least enough to be a paid sideman), Meisner has a much more strained relationship with Frey/Henely than most realize.
It was not until Eliot's book, did Randy finally have a voice in how he felt betrayed and screwed over by Henely/Frey and Azoff. I too have heard that Frey/Henley have paid some of his medical bills, which of course is commendable.
However to think he is even in financial need of other members to help him says a lot.
He was driven away, and according to him his career sabotaged via Henley through Azoff. So if a founding member is poor and the others all multi-millionaires, that is an indictment in and of itself, don't you think?


This is the second time I've read a recent post on this forum that Randy is in financial need simply b/c his band mates made a kind, benevolent gesture, implying that it was done out of pity rather than genuine affection. There is no evidence of Randy being destitute yet apparently that doesn't prevent speculation about it as if it were fact.

Eliot's book was released more than 15 years ago; Randy has said since in an interview (posted in his sub-forum) that he holds no ill will and that the book caught him at a bad time. People who know Randy personally describe him as kind and humble and not one to bad-mouth his band mates. From what I've read, Randy's absence from the HOTE tour was due to his own health and possibly other factors, not b/c Glenn was unforgiving or unwelcoming. He genuinely mourned Glenn's death.

Don H is a little bit of a different story. I don't know what happened between them, but at any rate, he praised Randy for the first time in a televised intervew a few months ago. That may not seem like much, but it's a big step. I'd like to think that means he has softened his opinion about Randy despite the KCH snub. So at this point, I don't believe the relationships are/were as strained as they used to be. It took awhile for Henley to come around, perhaps, but better late than never.

[New Kid In Town]

Delilah - Don made those comments during a CBS This Morning interview at the time of the KCH. I was surprised by the nice things he said too, but was glad he did.

Vector - From what I have read(and I have read about 6 books) Randy had to be talked into singing almost the whole HC tour. This was implied in the HOTE. I have never heard of any concerts in the 70's being cancelled due to illness for Don and Glenn. And, I have been a fan since 1972.

IMHO, this went on over 40 years ago. Randy and Bernie have gotten over any anger and made amends. Don Felder has not and continues to make nasty remarks about Glenn and Don. Maybe you should try to lighten up and just enjoy the music instead of going on and on about stuff that happened 40 plus years ago. Don't let that keep you from listening to the Eagles.

[UndertheWire]

As to Meisner being well off, or even ok financially, then why on earth would he need help paying medical bills?
I don't know the answer, but something does not add up if that is to be believed.

I have a few ideas on this.

1. I've read of Henley and Frey or the Eagles paying for medical treatment for other people, so perhaps it's just something they do. It's possible that providing medical care for former employees is an allowable expense for a corporation.

2. Randy was married throughout his time in the band and I understand that his first wife may have a substantial interest in any income that arises from his time in the band. This means that Randy himself will have received less that other band members because he's splitting his share with his ex-wife and family.

3. A payment of medical bills was something that would benefit Randy directly with noone else having any claim on the payments.

4. Income from album sales has decreased substantially since streaming became popular. Successful acts make more money from touring than from record sales. Randy retired from touring at least ten years ago for health reasons. Therefore, Randy will certainly have seen a significant decrease in his income in recent years.

[Funk 50]

I became an Eagles fan, just as they split up, in 1980 but I was still blissfully unaware of most of the previous machinations within the band. It was definitely a good policy to retain anonymity during the seventies. Even the beer over the head story seemed like cartoon fun rather than genuine friction.

Thatt all changed with the Felder bombshell. I thought Frey was to blame in 1981. When the band sided with Glenn and Don (F) was ousted in 2001, I think I got a clearer picture. The Rock'n'Roll Hall Of Fame reunion showed that the guys didn't hold grudges. Everybody contributed to the HOTE documentary. In 70s classic rock band terms, all the guys showed a continued pride, sense of allegiance and respect for the band.

I'm sure Felder instructed his lawyers to get as much out of the 'gods' as he could to compensate for his sacking. Any kind of reconciliation could really complicate the legal details of their separation so, although Bernie and Randy have been invited back into the fold, I presume the fifth Eagle, Plaintiff, didn't make any legal provision for a future reconciliation.

I haven't been happy with Eagles turning into a legacy band with a procession of Greatest hits tours and Lifetime achievement awards but I hope Glenn's death and the inevitable reappraisals and re definitions that follow will have a positive rather than negative impact on the work of the 6 remaining Eagles. :|

[Brooke]

Vector, really? Honestly, do you think they would EVER ask Felder to rejoin the band? After the sueing them for millions and writing a nasty book?

How many times do we have to go over it? Ain't gonna EVER happen! This horse has been beat to death.

Why give up on their music? Listen, and get over it! :headscratch:

[thelastresort]

The Rock'n'Roll Hall Of Fame reunion showed that the guys didn't hold grudges.

Are you joking? They all looked like they'd rather have been in a nuclear genocide than stood on that stage together. It was so awkward.

And no, I don't want Felder anywhere near the Eagles either. If he's so desperate to be back in the fold he should have thought of that before writing a tell-all book about a band who traditionally kept everything, certainly any dirty laundry, well away from public view. Even after that, Glenn continued to speak highly of Felder's ability whilst the latter sued the backside off them all. Felder is an exceptional guitarist, but his conduct over the past 15 years leaves me stone cold. If I was Don H. (as the surviving 'leader') I wouldn't want him in the same time zone as them.

[Funk 50]

I consider it commendable that they all endured major public discomfort in honour of the unity and respect of both their band and the Hall Of Fame.

You can't expect band members from different eras to instantly become best buddies, especially when there is probably plenty of un-addressed baggage in the room. ;-)

We may see Stevie Nicks and Joe Walsh sharing a stage with Don Henley this summer. There's definitely a back story there but I'm sure it'll all pass off without causing a distraction from Don's birthday celebration. :-)

[Vector]

Delilah - Don made those comments during a CBS This Morning interview at the time of the KCH. I was surprised by the nice things he said too, but was glad he did.

Vector - From what I have read(and I have read about 6 books) Randy had to be talked into singing almost the whole HC tour. This was implied in the HOTE. I have never heard of any concerts in the 70's being cancelled due to illness for Don and Glenn. And, I have been a fan since 1972.

IMHO, this went on over 40 years ago. Randy and Bernie have gotten over any anger and made amends. Don Felder has not and continues to make nasty remarks about Glenn and Don. Maybe you should try to lighten up and just enjoy the music instead of going on and on about stuff that happened 40 plus years ago. Don't let that keep you from listening to the Eagles.

Wow, I cannot fathom where you are getting your information if we have presumably been reading the same books. While Randy may or may not have contributed to problems with his own solo career, you don't get over having an external person (i.e. Henley & Azoff via Henley) sabotage you for spiteful reasons.

As to what you said to Delilah about Henley's comments, I agree that they were unexpected, but certainly welcome.

As to Felder " continues to make nasty remarks about Glenn and Don", again, that is polar opposite of what I and others have heard. If anything, he seems to go out of his way to praise both of them.
What am I missing?

Lastly, as to lightening up, I wish it were that easy. Since it isn't, I am hoping a reconciliation will do the trick.
Henley is no fool, and likely understands having every member of the group back together will boost the box office by at least 20%. He might also have gotten some perspective of how life is fleeting, with Frey's untimely passing. Remember at the HOF induction, he even extended a positive comment and thanks to Geffen who he presumably hated like poison.
If he could cross that bridge, I do not see why he could not make amends with Meisner or Felder.

[Vector]

I have a few ideas on this.

1. I've read of Henley and Frey or the Eagles paying for medical treatment for other people, so perhaps it's just something they do. It's possible that providing medical care for former employees is an allowable expense for a corporation.

2. Randy was married throughout his time in the band and I understand that his first wife may have a substantial interest in any income that arises from his time in the band. This means that Randy himself will have received less that other band members because he's splitting his share with his ex-wife and family.

3. A payment of medical bills was something that would benefit Randy directly with noone else having any claim on the payments.

4. Income from album sales has decreased substantially since streaming became popular. Successful acts make more money from touring than from record sales. Randy retired from touring at least ten years ago for health reasons. Therefore, Randy will certainly have seen a significant decrease in his income in recent years.

1) You my be right and their motives might very well be genuine. As a fan I'd like to think so. However I am not so much a fan to blind me to other possibilities as well.

2 & 4) Even so, Meisner was a large reason for their success, and should have been set for the rest of his life. Instead he took pennies on the dollar, and then had even those future royalties cut when many of the songs he would get paid for were re-recorded. He objected to it, and even pointed out how the new versions did not have the same appeal, so why do it other than for more money.

3) That is a good and plausible point I hadn't thought of. Still I have to wonder how anything could still be touched by the ex-wife after all these years.

I'd like to think Meisner is healthy enough to at least be on stage for one set or even one song per concert, even just one time. Styx does this with bassist Chuck Panozzo due to his poor health.

[Vector]

I became an Eagles fan, just as they split up, in 1980 but I was still blissfully unaware of most of the previous machinations within the band. It was definitely a good policy to retain anonymity during the seventies. Even the beer over the head story seemed like cartoon fun rather than genuine friction.

Thatt all changed with the Felder bombshell. I thought Frey was to blame in 1981. When the band sided with Glenn and Don (F) was ousted in 2001, I think I got a clearer picture. The Rock'n'Roll Hall Of Fame reunion showed that the guys didn't hold grudges. Everybody contributed to the HOTE documentary. In 70s classic rock band terms, all the guys showed a continued pride, sense of allegiance and respect for the band.

I'm sure Felder instructed his lawyers to get as much out of the 'gods' as he could to compensate for his sacking. Any kind of reconciliation could really complicate the legal details of their separation so, although Bernie and Randy have been invited back into the fold, I presume the fifth Eagle, Plaintiff, didn't make any legal provision for a future reconciliation.

I haven't been happy with Eagles turning into a legacy band with a procession of Greatest hits tours and Lifetime achievement awards but I hope Glenn's death and the inevitable reappraisals and re definitions that follow will have a positive rather than negative impact on the work of the 6 remaining Eagles. :|

This more closely mirrors my view in several areas. I too felt the HOF induction was very positive, yet another poster said the opposite. We all have differing views, but I wonder if that poster was channeling their own personal assumptions/feelings, to have come away with such a different perspective?

[New Kid In Town]

Vector - I don't want to get into an argument with you. It appears that is what you want. Don Felder has done nothing but trash Glenn and Don in almost interview he has given. Go back and read the "Don Felder and the Press". How you can think he has made amends is beyond me. Not only does he trash them, but each time he gave an interview he would change the fact and story to where it did not match his versions given in the book. He gave interviews stating " I tried to reach out to them but am just referred to their attorney". This, knowing full well the case was in legation for years, as late as 2013. While Don and particularly Glenn, refused to make any statement regarding all this, Don Felder just continued to trash them over and over. In act, in the the fall of 2015, while Glenn was in the hospital in a coma, Don Felder made fun of Glenn on his Twitter account regarding Glenn and the illnesses that he ultimately passed from. I SAW THIS FOR MYSELF ON HIS TWITTER ACCOUNT. He was called out for this and deleted the posts.

Don't tell me I do not know or understand what I read in the numerous books that have been published that I have read. I am talking about Glenn, not Don Henley. Don H. and Randy never were close. For the most part Glenn got along well with Randy. Why do you keep going on and on about this? What difference dose it make - it will not change anything. These were young guys all in their 20's who reached fame beyond their wildest dreams and what most people can never imagine. Drugs and alcohol change people's personality - not for the better. Randy, as sweet as he was, was no different when it came to this. Just accept the fact that Randy and Bernie long ago made amends with Glenn and Don. Glenn and Don H. paid all his medical bills including months of rehab.
Don Felder is a different story. You can not trash your band mates with a book with half truths/lies while making yourself out to be the innocent victim. Don Felder was no innocent victim, was a full participate in the "sex, drugs and rock and roll". Yet, he made himself out to be this poor innocent victim who saw fit to blamed everyone else for his actions.

[Vector]

Vector - I don't want to get into an argument with you. It appears that is what you want. Don Felder has done nothing but trash Glenn and Don in almost interview he has given. Go back and read the "Don Felder and the Press". How you can think he has made amends is beyond me. Not only does he trash them, but each time he gave an interview he would change the fact and story to where it did not match his versions given in the book. He gave interviews stating " I tried to reach out to them but am just referred to their attorney". This, knowing full well the case was in legation for years, as late as 2013. While Don and particularly Glenn, refused to make any statement regarding all this, Don Felder just continued to trash them over and over. In act, in the the fall of 2015, while Glenn was in the hospital in a coma, Don Felder made fun of Glenn on his Twitter account regarding Glenn and the illnesses that he ultimately passed from. I SAW THIS FOR MYSELF ON HIS TWITTER ACCOUNT. He was called out for this and deleted the posts.

Don't tell me I do not know or understand what I read in the numerous books that have been published that I have read. I am talking about Glenn, not Don Henley. Don H. and Randy never were close. For the most part Glenn got along well with Randy. Why do you keep going on and on about this? What difference dose it make - it will not change anything. These were young guys all in their 20's who reached fame beyond their wildest dreams and what most people can never imagine. Drugs and alcohol change people's personality - not for the better. Randy, as sweet as he was, was no different when it came to this. Just accept the fact that Randy and Bernie long ago made amends with Glenn and Don. Glenn and Don H. paid all his medical bills including months of rehab.
Don Felder is a different story. You can not trash your band mates with a book with half truths/lies while making yourself out to be the innocent victim. Don Felder was no innocent victim, was a full participate in the "sex, drugs and rock and roll". Yet, he made himself out to be this poor innocent victim who saw fit blamed everything everyone else for his actions.

I have no clue why some posters feel as if a difference of opinion equates to wanting to draw someone into an argument. Just as in politics or sports, ideologues and fans can read the same words, or see the exact same play, and draw different conclusions.

I am not on Twitter, and never will be. I cannot imagine having anyone's Twitter account attached to mine (if I had one) so they could pontificate about banal rubbish and think I would care.
Regardless, every interview I have seen with Felder, he has nothing but praise for Frey/Henley. Even a recent radio interview where the DJ ( an obvious Felder fan) was prodding him to take shots at Frey & Henley for "screwing him over". Felder never took the bait and just said they had wonderful years together, and were an incredible song writing duo.
So for my own edification (and others who think as I do), please link some article or video interview that shows us what you mean.

I will say that I find it perplexing that fans of Frey have gone from love of Henley to disgust over this possible reunion. It is not as if Henley has changed his stripes, as he and Frey always had a tumultuous relationship. Granted they banded together for money/fame/etc., yet why would anyone think Henley would not jump at the chance to make a small fortune. That includes sharing the stage with the likes of Meisner and Felder, both of whom he probably does not care for. That alone also pisses off some Eagles fans that feel it would be a slight to Schmit or want to stew with Felder hate for the rest of their lives.

My point being that just as they may not wish this reunion to occur for various reasons, people like myself feel it is needed to heal the old wounds. When I heard Frey had passed away, I was saddened. Not only for the loss of life for his family/friends/fans, but also for the finality of friendships never mended.
I'd like to think that had he recovered, and having come that close to death, he would have had a new perspective on his remaining years. Just like the Tim McGraw song "Live Like You Were Dying", there is a verse that is very prophetic, "and I gave forgiveness I'd been denying". Frey to me might have been more of a leader/bully/taskmaster (depending on your perspective) than Henley, but was generally a happy go lucky guy, who was capable of letting go of things, and forgiveness. At least that is my take from someone who didn't know him personally, just what I've gleaned from all the research I've done.
Needless to say the HOE doc did him no favors, but I digress.

`

[Funk 50]

I believe the starting point for any reconciliation with Felder is an apology from Felder. He's said plenty of positive and complimentary things about all of his band mates but he's never apologised for the negativity he thrust on the band.

During the HFO tour Henley admitted the old frictions hadn't gone away.
It seems Felder was a problem that they wanted to be rid of... and that was before the book and litigation.

The only problem I can see with Randy is his lack of musicianship. Personally I think he's up with the best but he's admitted that Linda Ronstadt didn't rate his playing and that the other guys were always trying to slow him down. I think he plays too fast when the adrenalin and excitement hits.

On one of the Soul Pole recordings, Joe offers Randy a note to tune his bass but by, when Randy answers "no it's OK" Joe snaps, in his own way, at Randy's unprofessionalism.

Knowing that Henley insists on the band playing in tune and in time I can see Henley being frustrated with Randy.

Henley did say that Randy would have taken part in the HOTE tour if he was willing and able so if Henley did have a problem with Randy, it wasn't big enough to keep Randy off that lengthy tour. :|

[UndertheWire]

2 & 4) Even so, Meisner was a large reason for their success, and should have been set for the rest of his life. Instead he took pennies on the dollar, and then had even those future royalties cut when many of the songs he would get paid for were re-recorded. He objected to it, and even pointed out how the new versions did not have the same appeal, so why do it other than for more money.

Why do you believe Meisner only received pennies on the dollar? Bernie Leadon has spoken about how he still received a good income from his time in the band. My understanding was that they received royalties at the same level they would have done within the band for the recordings they made during their time in the band and that includes the "best selling album of the 20th century". Bernie described is being like having an album go platinum every year.

Although Randy would have received no royalties from the HFO album, this did not cut his royalties on the albums he was part of. Indeed, the revived interest in the band lead to increased sales of the back catalogue and so his royalties will have increased. [Of course, Randy would not have known this when he spoke to the press in the mid-90s, but Don Felder should have when he repeated these accusations in his book.]

If you really want to know more about what Randy was paid and don't mind going through his dirty laundry, the information is available online.

Finally, the music business is full of stories about people who made and lost fortunes through mismanagement. Randy Mesiner isn't one of them and in part, that's because there were other people who continued to promote the band and ensure a continuing stream of income.

[New Kid In Town]

Vector - The radio interview you referred to with Don Felder happened not that long ago. Prior to Glenn's death, Don Felder did not have one nice word to say about Glenn Frey. I am not going to go through all the "Don F and the Press" pages. You can just as easily do that yourself and see what myself and other on this board are talking about. I do know that in the numerous interviews Don F. gave before Glenn's passing, he never once corrected the person when they stated he founded the Eagles, wrote all of their songs and/or commented on the beautiful guitar solo he wrote for "I Can't Tell You Why". Which you of course know was written and performed by Glenn on the album.
For the record, I DO NOT have a twitter account. Don Felder's twitter account is public and anyone(including you) can view it. You must be a member to leave a comment. In addition, on Don F.'s Facebook account he is the master about leaving snide comments about Glenn/Don then let his followers proceed to tear them apart. Including making such wonderful comments such as Glenn deserved to die. He can control his account by blocking the comments or leaving a post saying such comments are unacceptable. He has never done so.
I do agree with you regarding the love/hate relationship between Don and Glenn which has gone on apparently since they reformed in 1994. While people can blame Irving for the Eagles participation in the festivals, it would never have happened without Don's ok.

[New Kid In Town]

Regarding Randy's income, when he and his first wife Jennifer divorced, he gave something like 48% of his future income from all Eagles sales to her. At one point, she took him to Court to pay the taxes on this income and lost. Randy gave an interview a few years ago stating he was doing fine financially and his money was well invested by his business manager. He gets less money because he agreed to give all most half of his future income to his ex-wife, not because he was screwed by Don and Glenn.

The Eagles Greatest Hits Vol.1 is the biggest selling album of the 20th Century. A couple of weeks ago I checked the Billboard top 100 and it was listed something like 89th( if I remember right). That is 41 years after it came out. That record is a gold mine that just keeps selling and producing a cash flow, which is amazing. Sorry if I was rambling, but my point is Randy was never screwed by Don and Glenn and that his income is less due to his divorce with his first wife, which he agreed to as part of his divorce settlement.

[Glennhoney]

Vector - The radio interview you referred to with Don Felder happened not that long ago. Prior to Glenn's death, Don Felder did not have one nice word to say about Glenn Frey. I am not going to go through all the "Don F and the Press" pages. You can just as easily do that yourself and see what myself and other on this board are talking about. I do know that in the numerous interviews Don F. gave before Glenn's passing, he never once corrected the person when they stated he founded the Eagles, wrote all of their songs and/or commented on the beautiful guitar solo he wrote for "I Can't Tell You Why". Which you of course know was written and performed by Glenn on the album.
For the record, I DO NOT have a twitter account. Don Felder's twitter account is public and anyone(including you) can view it. You must be a member to leave a comment. In addition, on Don F.'s Facebook account he is the master about leaving snide comments about Glenn/Don then let his followers proceed to tear them apart. Including making such wonderful comments such as Glenn deserved to die. He can control his account by blocking the comments or leaving a post saying such comments are unacceptable. He has never done so.
I do agree with you regarding the love/hate relationship between Don and Glenn which has gone on apparently since they reformed in 1994. While people can blame Irving for the Eagles participation in the festivals, it would never have happened without Don's ok.
All true..I've seen many DF interviews online and in print...He's really a pompous a$$!

[Vector]

Why do you believe Meisner only received pennies on the dollar? Bernie Leadon has spoken about how he still received a good income from his time in the band. My understanding was that they received royalties at the same level they would have done within the band for the recordings they made during their time in the band and that includes the "best selling album of the 20th century". Bernie described is being like having an album go platinum every year.

Although Randy would have received no royalties from the HFO album, this did not cut his royalties on the albums he was part of. Indeed, the revived interest in the band lead to increased sales of the back catalogue and so his royalties will have increased. [Of course, Randy would not have known this when he spoke to the press in the mid-90s, but Don Felder should have when he repeated these accusations in his book.]

If you really want to know more about what Randy was paid and don't mind going through his dirty laundry, the information is available online.

Finally, the music business is full of stories about people who made and lost fortunes through mismanagement. Randy Mesiner isn't one of them and in part, that's because there were other people who continued to promote the band and ensure a continuing stream of income.

I take much of what the individual band members say with a grain of salt. It will always be somewhat biased in their favor, even if they are trying to accurately recount what occurred. I'm sure all the booze, drugs and sleep deprivation plays a part as well.

Why so many fans latch on to what their favorite guy says, as if it were gospel is beyond me.
What I tried to do on this endevour is have at least one corroborating source outside the band members when possible. If not, at least two or more guys giving more or less the same account.
So where I am getting the aforementioned related to Meisner, is not only from his account, but also from others who knew Frey/Henley were very keen on getting credit on songs for current and future publishing royalties. This is beyond what they were actually and mainly responsible for.
There are several phrases some of you might be familiar with, that other members and those interviewed knew Frey/Henley were up to. Such as "change three (meaning words) to earn a fee".
Randy was bitter about how many of the songs he and Leadon came up with were dismissed or "tweaked" and had Frey/Henley get credit. He was also unhappy about how songs had been re-recorded for the HFO album & tour, and conspicuously absent were any songs of his and Leadon.

Now you do make a good point about how the reunion revitalized interest in the band, and resulting sales of the previous albums certainly benefited Leadon/Meisner.

As to what Leadon says about making a decent buck to this day, much of that is in the eye of the beholder. Compared to the other guys, I am sure it is crumbs.
Still the shares of Eagles Ltd were worth a kings ransom, and Leadon and Meisner got a scrap compared with Frey/Henley. They tried to do the same thing with Felder, but he fought them with the infamous lawsuit, hence I'm sure Felder has gotten a lot more than Leadon/Meisner.
Still the fattest cats were Frey/Henley at the time, and even now with Walsh/Schmit essentially paid sidemen. Sure any of them is probably wealthy beyond most peoples standards, but it was the underlying problem that helped to destroy the band. It became obvious to the original 4/5 that two were getting than the rest, in part because of greed and control.
This is the theme (aside from ego) in Eliot's book, and one of the few sources where Meisner gets a voice about his perspective.

[Vector]

Vector - The radio interview you referred to with Don Felder happened not that long ago. Prior to Glenn's death, Don Felder did not have one nice word to say about Glenn Frey. I am not going to go through all the "Don F and the Press" pages. You can just as easily do that yourself and see what myself and other on this board are talking about. I do know that in the numerous interviews Don F. gave before Glenn's passing, he never once corrected the person when they stated he founded the Eagles, wrote all of their songs and/or commented on the beautiful guitar solo he wrote for "I Can't Tell You Why". Which you of course know was written and performed by Glenn on the album.
For the record, I DO NOT have a twitter account. Don Felder's twitter account is public and anyone(including you) can view it. You must be a member to leave a comment. In addition, on Don F.'s Facebook account he is the master about leaving snide comments about Glenn/Don then let his followers proceed to tear them apart. Including making such wonderful comments such as Glenn deserved to die. He can control his account by blocking the comments or leaving a post saying such comments are unacceptable. He has never done so.
I do agree with you regarding the love/hate relationship between Don and Glenn which has gone on apparently since they reformed in 1994. While people can blame Irving for the Eagles participation in the festivals, it would never have happened without Don's ok.

^



All true..I've seen many DF interviews online and in print...He's really a pompous a$$!

You guys might think I am just being obtuse, but I can tell you that most every YT or other interview I have heard/read/watched, Felder comes across as humble and/or complimentary toward his former bandmates in the Eagles. [The radio interview I referred to was a local one in south FL. It was to promote Felder's band in concert with other groups like Styx]
I would be dismayed to think he said some of those things you posted regarding Frey's passing, as it seems so out of character.

Frankly it would be a huge blow to what I hope will happen with a future reunion/reconciliation.
Heck, if the rumors are to be believed, all the living members will be up on stage together this summer, and I'd find it hard to think that Henley or any of the others would want Felder there, if he said the things you claim he did.

`

[UndertheWire]

Vector, I don't see anything in your response to support your assertion that Mesiner received "pennies in the dollar". Rather, you bring up completely different points claiming two or more sources but providing none.

Back in the 70s, shares in Eagles Ltd were probably not worth a "King's Ransom" although I agree they would have been worth far more by 2001.

Leadon is probably happy with the income he received in part because he seems to be that kind of guy but also that it's a lot better than most of his music contempories were able to achieve.

I haven't come across the phrase "change three to earn a fee" in any Eagles material I've found. Felder used "change a word to gain a third" and attributed it to Bernie and Randy but I've never seen it as a direct quote from either of them. Nearly all bands argue about songwriting credits and I expect Henley and Frey would have claimed that their polishing made a better song and that contributed to its success. Anyway, the number of songs where Henley-Frey share a credit with Leadon or Meisner are very few, so it can't be that big a deal.

When it comes to things like the "change a word" accusation and the complaint about no Meisner or Leadon songs beng performed on HFO, I find it's worth looking at the actual songwriting credits and trying to see specifically which songs they might be talking about. You'll find a very small number of candidates.

[New Kid In Town]

Vector - Then, you have not seen or read all the interviews. Go back and read "Don F. and the Press" for yourself. I have no reason to make anything up ! Go through his FB posts to see the numerous comments that I referred to (that is if things aren't deleted like he did the twitter comments).
You act as if Marc Eliot's book is gospel. You take every statement by him and Don Felder as fact. When in fact, there are numerous inaccuracies including family information and dates in Eliot's book. And, he went so far as to state the Super Bowl is in October, which is incredible considering even most Americans (which he is) who are not football fans know it is in late January or early February depending on that seasons schedule.
Don Felder was not with Don and Glenn when they wrote all those Eagles songs. Felder is the one who made the snide comment about the credit for the song writing. He was not there ! No matter what people say, you continue to believe only what Eliot and Felder say.
I have been an Eagles fan since 1972, when I first heard TIE in HS. I don't claim to be an authority. However, I do know what I am talking about when I refer to Don F's interviews through the years that I have read and seen. If you doubt me, check with Soda, Dreamer and others who are "Eagles Experts". Or, better yet, read the press section where all the Felder inaccuracies are pointed out. It is very easy to smile and act polite when a person is being interviewed. That dose not mean the person is a good, kind or speaking the truth. It just mean they are good with interviews. In the last six to eight months since Glenn's passing, Don F. has toned down his statements and has finally sometimes refused to discuss Glenn and his passing.
The story regarding Randy and Don F. performing was from a "fake news" gossip site. None of it has been confirmed. From everything I have read Randy is too ill to perform. In addition, I can not see Don Henley sharing a stage with Don Felder no what people want or speculate about. My guess would be Bernie, Jackson, Vince Gill, and perhaps Garth Brooks. Someone here said JD is booked for at least one of the Classic weekends, so unless he cancels his concerts, I cannot see JD being there. As to Randy and his financial situation, read my earlier post. His ex-wife gets almost half his income. That is not Don and Glenn's fault. It was part of his divorce settlement.

[Vector]

Just a quick post, but will elaborate/respond a little later.

I am not saying anyone is lying, as it would make little sense to do so.

It is just that I have not heard Felder bad mouth anyone in the band, even when being baited to do so.
We have all obviously watched/heard the Stern & Lange interviews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhXDx65h-7M

Around 6:30 they start asking about the Eagles and Felder says nothing but complimentary things about Frey & Henley.

Others are all over YT, and none seem to support Felder trashing his bandmates.

So when I ask for links to what someone claims, it is not a challenge to their veracity. Rather an attempt to see what is claiming to have been said, the context, and the credibility of the reporting source. Some tabloids or so called reporters just try to stir things up to sell themselves.
I'd have thought that if someone said despicable things about Frey passing(no matter who it was), it would have been all over the legit news.

Also, as I alluded to, if there is to be a concert with all the former Eagles, why would Henley allow Felder to be on stage after having said the things you'll heard/read about?

`

[UndertheWire]

J
Also, as I alluded to, if there is to be a concert with all the former Eagles, why would Henley allow Felder to be on stage after having said the things you'll heard/read about?

`
NKIT answered this just above your post. There is no credible source for there being a concert with all former Eagles.

[Freypower]

Just a quick post, but will elaborate/respond a little later.

I am not saying anyone is lying, as it would make little sense to do so.

It is just that I have not heard Felder bad mouth anyone in the band, even when being baited to do so.
We have all obviously watched/heard the Stern & Lange interviews.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhXDx65h-7M

Around 6:30 they start asking about the Eagles and Felder says nothing but complimentary things about Frey & Henley.

Others are all over YT, and none seem to support Felder trashing his bandmates.

So when I ask for links to what someone claims, it is not a challenge to their veracity. Rather an attempt to see what is claiming to have been said, the context, and the credibility of the reporting source. Some tabloids or so called reporters just try to stir things up to sell themselves.
I'd have thought that if someone said despicable things about Frey passing(no matter who it was), it would have been all over the legit news.

Also, as I alluded to, if there is to be a concert with all the former Eagles, why would Henley allow Felder to be on stage after having said the things you'll heard/read about?

`

You have been pointed to the Felder in the Press thread where there have been many interviews posted which have Felder mouthing off about how unfair 'the Gods' were. But why bother linking to them? You will continue to say that someone had an agenda & is not credible. You only want your own prejudices confirmed.

Have you read his book? That is a good place to start. Edit; you claim at the start of this thread you DID read it. Interesting. However, I am not going to get involved in a yes it is, no it isn't debate with you when I already know your views. Sorry.

You talk about social media posts being all over the 'legit news'. Why? Why would the 'legit news' report a whole bunch of people being nasty? What is newsworthy about that?

I have eased off on posting here, but it seems that you want everything to be handed to you without doing any investigation yourself. There is no point anyone offering you a different opinion because as far as you are concerned yours is the only one which counts.

[New Kid In Town]

thank you under the wire and frey power

[sodascouts]

Why are you guys even bothering to reply to Vector? Look at the start date of this thread. 2013. He has been trolling for years. And the same arguments he made in his first posts four years ago, arguments which have long since been refuted, he continues to repeat.

He's messing with you all. You don't debate Vector. You don't convince him of anything. You don't accomplish anything. Your replies only serve as a platform for him to spout the same ill-supported inaccurate information,the same inflammatory comments, the same inane replies over and over and over again.

He knows what he's saying isn't accurate. He knows he's making up half this stuff and distorting the other half. Getting the facts straight isn't the point. The point is to annoy you, even anger you, so that you will reply to him. He's so desperate for replies he links to this thread in his signature! I mean, who does that?! Seriously!

Take a look at this man who's eating up so much of your time and energy, who's getting off on pushing your buttons. Ask yourself: "Is it worth it?"

If there were ever an exemplar of the maxim "Don't Feed the Trolls" (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Don%27t_feed_the_Troll), it's Vector.

Let this ancient thread die.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DGNZnfKYnU

[Delilah]

Why are you guys even bothering to reply to Vector? Look at the start date of this thread. 2013. He has been trolling for years. And the same arguments he made in his first posts four years ago, arguments which have long since been refuted, he continues to repeat.

He's messing with you all. You don't debate Vector. You don't convince him of anything. You don't accomplish anything. Your replies only serve as a platform for him to spout the same ill-supported inaccurate information,the same inflammatory comments, the same inane replies over and over and over again.

Let this ancient thread die.


THANK YOU, SODA!! The unsavory direction of this thread was making me cringe. Obviously this guy was baiting--and it worked. I get there are people who don't like Don Felder; as the millenials say, "haters gonna hate." But why pick on Randy? Has he not suffered enough? Geez!

[Vector]

You have been pointed to the Felder in the Press thread where there have been many interviews posted which have Felder mouthing off about how unfair 'the Gods' were. But why bother linking to them? You will continue to say that someone had an agenda & is not credible. You only want your own prejudices confirmed.

Have you read his book? That is a good place to start. Edit; you claim at the start of this thread you DID read it. Interesting. However, I am not going to get involved in a yes it is, no it isn't debate with you when I already know your views. Sorry.

You talk about social media posts being all over the 'legit news'. Why? Why would the 'legit news' report a whole bunch of people being nasty? What is newsworthy about that?

I have eased off on posting here, but it seems that you want everything to be handed to you without doing any investigation yourself. There is no point anyone offering you a different opinion because as far as you are concerned yours is the only one which counts.

You took all that time to type out your objections to my viewpoint, yet cannot even take a few seconds to link me the thread you are talking about?
Unlike you or some here, I am not a regular to where I know where every thread is.
More importantly, many threads are voluminous, so do you really expect me to read every post trying to find various things you and a few others are referring to?

[Vector]

Why are you guys even bothering to reply to Vector? Look at the start date of this thread. 2013. He has been trolling for years. And the same arguments he made in his first posts four years ago, arguments which have long since been refuted, he continues to repeat.

He's messing with you all. You don't debate Vector. You don't convince him of anything. You don't accomplish anything. Your replies only serve as a platform for him to spout the same ill-supported inaccurate information,the same inflammatory comments, the same inane replies over and over and over again.

He knows what he's saying isn't accurate. He knows he's making up half this stuff and distorting the other half. Getting the facts straight isn't the point. The point is to annoy you, even anger you, so that you will reply to him. He's so desperate for replies he links to this thread in his signature! I mean, who does that?! Seriously!

Take a look at this man who's eating up so much of your time and energy, who's getting off on pushing your buttons. Ask yourself: "Is it worth it?"

If there were ever an exemplar of the maxim "Don't Feed the Trolls" (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Don%27t_feed_the_Troll), it's Vector.

Let this ancient thread die.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DGNZnfKYnU

You know Soda, you of all people should appreciate some of my more recent tone, rather than try to pigeon hole me as some type of a troll. I have had some positive things to say about your guy, and even projecting what I'd hope he would have done had he survived from his illness. How you miss that is beyond me.
To characterize me in the manner you have is not only unfair, but not in keeping with your own admonishments as to the civility of the forum. Presumably, you of all people should appreciate that.

I would point out how hypocritical it is pointing out the time this thread has been going, since adulation threads on nothing more than the looks of the guys (long since diminished), their birthdays, and other banal stuff (presumably thought of as positive) have been going for much longer.

Here I am looking for a way back to enjoy the Eagles again, and I am criticized and ridiculed for not being part of Henley/Frey worship club.
Heck if anything, you should appreciate how I at least empathize with how Frey is being diminished by Henley with this potential new tour that looks to treat him like he never existed. I don't think that way, but can see how you and others might.

`

[Vector]

THANK YOU, SODA!! The unsavory direction of this thread was making me cringe. Obviously this guy was baiting--and it worked. I get there are people who don't like Don Felder; as the millenials say, "haters gonna hate." But why pick on Randy? Has he not suffered enough? Geez!

Don't like Don Felder ?
Heck, I have been accused of being a "Felder freak".

Am I in the Twilight Zone with you saying I am picking on Meisner? I have defended the guy more than most.
[And please don't quote the ignorant millennials who bastardize the English language out of laziness]

A few here might be critical of my thinking because I am willing to discuss the underbelly of some of their rock idols. But at least they have their stories straight. You have essentially accused me of deriding the two guys who I defend more than anyone else in the group.

`

[Delilah]

Don't like Don Felder ?
Heck, I have been accused of being a "Felder freak".

Am I in the Twilight Zone with you saying I am picking on Meisner? I have defended the guy more than most.
[And please don't quote the ignorant millennials who bastardize the English language out of laziness]

A few here might be critical of my thinking because I am willing to discuss the underbelly of some of their rock idols. But at least they have their stories straight. You have essentially accused me of deriding the two guys who I defend more than anyone else in the group.

`
I have not accused you of deriding anybody. I was referring to those who took your bait and the opportunity to rehash old grievances by bashing Felder. It's like an itch that must be scratched, I guess. Then it goes further when total lack of respect is shown for Randy by the gossip about his personal life and finances. It's sad to me that more concern is shown for how much $$ is in his pocket than for him or his music.

At this time I'd like nothing more to do with this pointless thread.

EDIT/ADDENDUM: Vector, this last comment was rude and I apologize. You obviously put time and effort into this topic. I wasn't actually referring to the entire thread but rather the direction it had taken recently. But at any rate, it was wrong to call it "pointless." -Delilah

[StephUK]

IS THERE ANY POINT TO THIS THREAD? IF SO, I DON'T GET IT.

Discussion is good; this is not.

[Funk 50]

letting off steam? venting frustrations maybe? I don't think the Eagles are above criticism. "There's three sides to every story baby" and all that.

Eagles fans have almost certainly devoted a lot of time and money to their fandom, so are entitled to an opinion, however accurate, warped or misguided.

I think blind, unquestioned approval is far uglier than passionate dissension, possibly more dangerous too :bye:

[chaim]

No one is going to spend hours browsing through the 72 pages of the Don Felder press/blog thread to look for interviews for people who don't bother to go there themselves. It's all there. If you won't go there yourself, then you won't. :zzz:

To anyone who chooses to comprehend: Personally I didn't have any negative thoughts about Don F until I saw him badmouth Glenn - first in his book and then in countless interviews - even to the point of contradicting himself to make Glenn look bad in an interview. And I mean badmouthing, not just telling his side of a story.

EDIT:

I did say that I'll stop discussing Don F's comments about Glenn that irritate me, but I'll make an exception when someone suggests they might not exist.

EDIT-EDIT:

It seems the interview where Don F changed the "Iron lung" story is no longer online.

[StephUK]

letting off steam? venting frustrations maybe? I don't think the Eagles are above criticism. "There's three sides to every story baby" and all that.

Eagles fans have almost certainly devoted a lot of time and money to their fandom, so are entitled to an opinion, however accurate, warped or misguided.

I think blind, unquestioned approval is far uglier than passionate dissension, possibly more dangerous too :bye:

I don't have 'blind unquestioning approval' of the Eagles. I'm just more interested in their music than in the individual band members, and who did what to whom, and why.
On the 'Three sides to every story'- we're never going to know the 'cold, hard truth'.

[RudieCantFail]

Vector, I apologize that people of my generation use Twitter too much and grammar flies out the window with them. I try not to go down low to that sort of language, but I only do it if it adds some sort of humor to a situation among people my age. I don't even use emojis in texting.

Please don't hate too much on what I'm about to say in regards to this topic's thread. I'm not necessarily no longer happy, but I'm just taking a break from listening to their music religiously. That's what I do when I get into a band or a song. I listen to it constantly, which eventually makes me sick of it. I got into an Eagles kick for almost a year, and now I'm onto Fleetwood Mac. I listened to Don Henley too much. Heck, I'm getting close to an FM fatigue.

However, I thought it was great hearing "The Long Run" on the radio just the other day. It's fun getting an occasional Eagles or Don Henley song played on the radio as a pleasant surprise. It was actually wonderful liking Don's voice once again on the radio. It's not that I didn't like it, but I overdid it on listening to their songs.

[Funk 50]

Eagles always sounded great on the radio. I'd say it was the Eagles music's greatest ally.

StephUK, the 'blind unquestioning approval' comment was a general one. I was an innocent enthusiast about the Eagles music until Felder's response to his enforced exit. I was truly blessed to discover Joe's entire catalog without hearing a word of praise or criticism from anybody else.

There are songs, in the Eagles cannon, that I think I'd enjoy more if I hadn't read or heard some criticism.

[Vector]

EDIT/ADDENDUM: Vector, this last comment was

Hi Delilah,

I just noticed your edit, and while I appreciate the sentiment, it was not necessary.
You are entitled to your viewpoint, and I have thick skin.

I am glad you see how my view is worthy of respect even if you and/or some others do not agree with it. Rest assured there are people behind the scenes on this forum who agree with me, but are reluctant to speak up for fear of derision from fellow fanatic posters.

For my part, I'd like to see the Eagles heal their wounds and bring some closure to all the bitterness. Maybe the upcoming concerts rumored to be occurring will be the elixir.
Yet from what I gather, a decent portion of fans (particularly Frey fans) do not want to see it happen.
Maybe they are feeling like I did back when I didn't want to see the Eagles without some of their excluded members.

[Vector]

In response to StephUK, Funk 50 said;


letting off steam? venting frustrations maybe? I don't think the Eagles are above criticism. "There's three sides to every story baby" and all that.

Eagles fans have almost certainly devoted a lot of time and money to their fandom, so are entitled to an opinion, however accurate, warped or misguided.

I think blind, unquestioned approval is far uglier than passionate dissension, possibly more dangerous too :bye:

Bingo

Earlier I used a sports analogy to describe how some people are in fact fanatics toward their teams, and only see things from a biased perspective. So some guy up in the nose bleed seats claims the refs are blind because their guy just scored a touchdown, but the refs say he stepped out of bounds on the 15 yard line (American Football for those in the UK). This half drunk guy who needs glasses is only saying this because he is biased enough to think he actually could see his players foot stay in bounds from a hundred yards away. Never mind that a neutral ref who is feet from the play said differently.

So it is with fans of individual band members. If they support Frey, they overlook the behavior he dished out, that they would be critical of if it were directed at him. While I like and respect some of Frey's talent/abilities, it does not blind me to his shortcomings.
But to some, uttering such things is tantamount to blasphemy. The same is true of Henley. They then feel compelled to defend them, and impugn the motives of those who see things more clearly.

I made it clear from the beginning of this thread and my subsequent journey, that I was about as unbiased as one could be. The fact I became critical of a couple of members was born out of watching the documentary and then research. This didn't sit well with some here who are deeply invested in certain individuals of the band, and cannot stand the fact an unbiased person could be critical of someone they care about. Blind loyalty might be an understatement in some cases. Thus I have been the subject of derision, with attempts to silence my viewpoint.
Heck, I didn't even know the names of the individual band members, much less have a favorite. I also pointed out how I had not read any books, knew their history, etc.
All I did was know the name of a group who played music I really enjoyed, and that their music was growing on my as they became more R&R than country.
So I was a true fan, without being a fanatic. Granted fan is short for fanatic, but some are more over the top than others.

Now I am looking for a way to get back to enjoying their music without thinking about all the negative things I learned that tore this band apart.

[Vector]

No one is going to spend hours browsing through the 72 pages of the Don Felder press/blog thread to look for interviews for people who don't bother to go there themselves. It's all there. If you won't go there yourself, then you won't. :zzz:

To anyone who chooses to comprehend: Personally I didn't have any negative thoughts about Don F until I saw him badmouth Glenn - first in his book and then in countless interviews - even to the point of contradicting himself to make Glenn look bad in an interview. And I mean badmouthing, not just telling his side of a story.

EDIT:

I did say that I'll stop discussing Don F's comments about Glenn that irritate me, but I'll make an exception when someone suggests they might not exist.

EDIT-EDIT:

It seems the interview where Don F changed the "Iron lung" story is no longer online.

I am not asking anyone to go through a ton of pages for me. Yet, how hard could it possibly be to post the link to the thread you are referring to?

As to you and others saying Felder made disparaging comments about Frey(especially after his passing) just does not jibe with what I have consistently heard and read from him.
Would I stake big money on it?
Of course not, as I don't know Felder from the guy on the street.
It just seems very out of character based on the aforementioned.

[chaim]

I am not asking anyone to go through a ton of pages for me. Yet, how hard could it possibly be to post the link to the thread you are referring to?

As to you and others saying Felder made disparaging comments about Frey(especially after his passing) just does not jibe with what I have consistently heard and read from him.
Would I stake big money on it?
Of course not, as I don't know Felder from the guy on the street.
It just seems very out of character based on the aforementioned.

And how hard could it possibly be to go to the Felder forum and look for the topic with "Felder" and "press/blogs" in the title, which has been referred to many times? Here it is. Took about ten seconds. https://www.eaglesonlinecentral.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4680

So now I have said that Felder has insulted Glenn especially after his passing? This is getting hilarious.

EDIT:

The one example I always remember is Victim of Love. In his book Felder says that he called it "Iron lung", because the riff reminded him of his childhood illness. Later he said in an interview that "someone, probably Glenn" called it "Iron lung" and that he found it offensive. A few days ago I tried to find that interview for you.

I'm not going to choose a corner and keep fighting with all I've got from there even if I make no sense (especially since I don't have anything against you or anyone else here), so I will say that when you go to that thread, you (or anybody else) will probably find occasions where I have misinterpreted something Felder has said as well.

[Funk 50]

For my part, I'd like to see the Eagles heal their wounds and bring some closure to all the bitterness. Maybe the upcoming concerts rumored to be occurring will be the elixir.


Didn't that happen for HFO, and the old frictions soon crept back. Felder was extremely bitter even when he was in the band. I felt Felder's sacking showed that starting afresh was an error they didn't plan on repeating. Glenn's death is a wound that wont heal imho.

The Eagles are a business. If the rewards are worth the work they put in, they'll keep going. I don't sense any bitterness from Don, Joe or Tim. To get to the top of your profession, as Eagles have done, you need a head for business that isn't clouded by such human emotions.

Compared to Glenn and Randy, Felder's a minor loss.

[UndertheWire]

I did go back and look for examples of Felder making snarky remarks in interviews but didn't have much luck. Many of the old interviews, particularly on youtube, are no longer available. From memory, the Jeff Prost interview was pretty obnoxious with an obsequious host encouraging Don to air his grievances. However, what this shows me is that Don has been less negative in recent interviews and that's a good thing.

I think most people - even Frey fans - can understand Felder's side of the story because he's written and said so much. It requires a little more effort and imagination to see Frey's side and Henley's side (not always the same thing) but I think it's worth doing.

Or better still, just stop worrying about things you have no influence over (and which took place long ago) and just enjoy the music.

[Vector]

And how hard could it possibly be to go to the Felder forum and look for the topic with "Felder" and "press/blogs" in the title, which has been referred to many times? Here it is. Took about ten seconds. https://www.eaglesonlinecentral.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4680

So now I have said that Felder has insulted Glenn especially after his passing? This is getting hilarious.

EDIT:

The one example I always remember is Victim of Love. In his book Felder says that he called it "Iron lung", because the riff reminded him of his childhood illness. Later he said in an interview that "someone, probably Glenn" called it "Iron lung" and that he found it offensive. A few days ago I tried to find that interview for you.

I'm not going to choose a corner and keep fighting with all I've got from there even if I make no sense (especially since I don't have anything against you or anyone else here), so I will say that when you go to that thread, you (or anybody else) will probably find occasions where I have misinterpreted something Felder has said as well.

For starters, I didn't know the thread in question would be in the "Felder forum", nor did I know which thread (presumably there are plenty) you were referring to.
But thanks for the link, as I now have a place to look.

Though I do not relish trying to scan through a ton of pages (I think you or someone said 70+), I am curious as to how bad the disrespect might be. Felder is no angel and has admitted as much.
Yet some of the claims I've read about him bad mouthing Frey seem out of character.

Now I am not sure I understand what you mean by what I put in bold. While most posters here seem to have a favorite individual Eagle, some also clearly have at least one member they dislike. Could it be that Felder falls into that category with you?

If a poll was taken on this forum, I have to guess that Felder would be the most disliked. If the poll were public, I'd bet that would be especially true among Frey & Henley fans.
They seem to personalize their dislike of Felder, and I suppose it is because he has pointed out some unflattering things about those two.
Even if they do not actively dislike Felder, they tend to diminish his contributions. This is especially true when they quote Frey from the HOE documentary, making it sound like Felder couldn't sing, and just sent them a bunch of guitar licks with nothing else and they (meaning Frey/Henley) created HC from one of the few usable ones. Needless to say, most of the books/interviews do not back up such a menial role for Felder in the group, but what some of Frey/Henley fans hear from them is taken as gospel.
I imagine the same is true of Felder fans, but who is to say any of their recollection is even accurate?

I ask this not because of them being dishonest per se, nor even the inherent bias in favor of themselves, vs. bias against someone who they are critical of.
Instead it can be the ravages of drugs, booze, sleep deprivation and even time.

[chaim]

For starters, I didn't know the thread in question would be in the "Felder forum", nor did I know which thread (presumably there are plenty) you were referring to.
But thanks for the link, as I now have a place to look.

Though I do not relish trying to scan through a ton of pages (I think you or someone said 70+), I am curious as to how bad the disrespect might be. Felder is no angel and has admitted as much.
Yet some of the claims I've read about him bad mouthing Frey seem out of character.

Now I am not sure I understand what you mean by what I put in bold. While most posters here seem to have a favorite individual Eagle, some also clearly have at least one member they dislike. Could it be that Felder falls into that category with you?

If a poll was taken on this forum, I have to guess that Felder would be the most disliked. If the poll were public, I'd bet that would be especially true among Frey & Henley fans.
They seem to personalize their dislike of Felder, and I suppose it is because he has pointed out some unflattering things about those two.
Even if they do not actively dislike Felder, they tend to diminish his contributions. This is especially true when they quote Frey from the HOE documentary, making it sound like Felder couldn't sing, and just sent them a bunch of guitar licks with nothing else and they (meaning Frey/Henley) created HC from one of the few usable ones. Needless to say, most of the books/interviews do not back up such a menial role for Felder in the group, but what some of Frey/Henley fans hear from them is taken as gospel.
I imagine the same is true of Felder fans, but who is to say any of their recollection is even accurate?

I ask this not because of them being dishonest per se, nor even the inherent bias in favor of themselves, vs. bias against someone who they are critical of.
Instead it can be the ravages of drugs, booze, sleep deprivation and even time.

What I meant was...When I saw Don put down Glenn in his book (starting from the picture choice of Glenn) and in interviews at the time, it irritated me a lot - the way he did it, things he chose to talk about, suggesting to the reader/listener that how he felt about something was the truth about Glenn etc. (the "I'll tell you when" story etc.) And therefore I may have been guilty of misinterpreting something he has said later in that light. I'm not saying that I have, but I may have. I have posted a lot in that thread. Felder was never in my "members I don't like" category. None of them were. But starting with the book and then the interviews at the time, he seemed to have this "let's do everything to destroy Glenn's reputation" agenda. So it's possible that I have seen hints of Glenn bashing even when it wasn't there. And I say this because there are people in this forum who have seen the same things but read them totally differently, and I don't want to claim that my interpretations are always right. And however I feel about what he has said, it doesn't diminish his guitar contributions.

EDIT:

The "bipolar" thing wasn't that nice either. http://www.realrocknews.com/former-eagle-don-felder-in-boston-tv-interview/
But I've said all I've got to say about these ancient interviews years ago, so I won't discuss them again. Just threw an example here I managed to find. A lot of the interviews seem to have disappeared. I agree with UndertheWire in that Don has changed his conduct in interviews and it's a good thing.

[Vector]

Didn't that happen for HFO, and the old frictions soon crept back. Felder was extremely bitter even when he was in the band. I felt Felder's sacking showed that starting afresh was an error they didn't plan on repeating. Glenn's death is a wound that wont heal imho.

The Eagles are a business. If the rewards are worth the work they put in, they'll keep going. I don't sense any bitterness from Don, Joe or Tim. To get to the top of your profession, as Eagles have done, you need a head for business that isn't clouded by such human emotions.

Compared to Glenn and Randy, Felder's a minor loss.

According to the HOE doc, Frey himself admitted to coercing Felder back into the group under the like it or lump it, Henley and I are going to get more scheme.
That sowed the seeds of discontent once again.
Felder was bitter, because he once again saw the hypocrisy of how Frey & Henley made the rules, but didn't feel the need to follow them. Additionally, they seem to get perks the others were not getting beyond money. He unlike previous members/owners was not going to be bullied and remain silent.
The irony is that Frey toward the end of the doc said he had done a better job this time around. Yet it seemed apparent he still had some of his old bullying ways during the HFO tour. The doc made both he and Henley look bad to people who would have otherwise never known some of that stuff.

As to Frey's death being a wound that will never heal, I'd like to think that had he survived, he would have had a greater insight and found a way to bridge the divide.
Now that he is gone and Henley seems intent on having the Eagles reform without Frey, I guess the allure of having all the former members back is too much money for him & Azoff to pass up.
While it is pissing off Frey fans, it would appear Henley is straight up business.

Still I'd like to see all 6 living Eagles on stage, even if someone like Meisner only played a song or two. Needless to say TITTL would be a fan favorite.

[Freypower]

According to the HOE doc, Frey himself admitted to coercing Felder back into the group under the like it or lump it, Henley and I are going to get more scheme.
That sowed the seeds of discontent once again.
Felder was bitter, because he once again saw the hypocrisy of how Frey & Henley made the rules, but didn't feel the need to follow them. Additionally, they seem to get perks the others were not getting beyond money. He unlike previous members/owners was not going to be bullied and remain silent.
The irony is that Frey toward the end of the doc said he had done a better job this time around. Yet it seemed apparent he still had some of his old bullying ways during the HFO tour. The doc made both he and Henley look bad to people who would have otherwise never known some of that stuff.

As to Frey's death being a wound that will never heal, I'd like to think that had he survived, he would have had a greater insight and found a way to bridge the divide.
Now that he is gone and Henley seems intent on having the Eagles reform without Frey, I guess the allure of having all the former members back is too much money for him & Azoff to pass up.
While it is pissing off Frey fans, it would appear Henley is straight up business.

Still I'd like to see all 6 living Eagles on stage, even if someone like Meisner only played a song or two. Needless to say TITTL would be a fan favorite.

There is no evidence that this will occur. There was one 'source' which was never backed up. The only one of them who could perhaps appear is Leadon.

As for Felder, if he was so unhappy he could have quit.

I know you want people to go over & over & over about all of this with you. I am not going to do it.

[New Kid In Town]

Vector - I have one last comment on this thread and then I will never post on this again.
To quote you "For starters, I didn't know the thread in question would be in the "Felder forum", nor did I know which thread (presumably there are plenty) you were referring to. But thanks for the link, as I now have a place to look".

Please, who do you think you are kidding. You know how this board works. You have posted in other threads, including most recently in the one regarding the DC Concert. So, if you expect people to believe you did not know what threads to look for or how to look for them after you have been on this thread since 2013. No matter what people say you keep saying the same shit every time. You will believe what you want to believe end of story. And, that is fine, but for pete sakes, give it a rest !!

Soda - Sorry for the cussing. I apologize.

[chaim]

Vector - I have one last comment on this thread and then I will never post on this again.
To quote you "For starters, I didn't know the thread in question would be in the "Felder forum", nor did I know which thread (presumably there are plenty) you were referring to. But thanks for the link, as I now have a place to look".

Please, who do you think you are kidding. You know how this board works. You have posted in other threads, including most recently in the one regarding the DC Concert. So, if you expect people to believe you did not know what threads to look for or how to look for them after you have been on this thread since 2013 is just plain bs. No matter what people say you keep saying the same shit every time. You will believe what you want to believe end of story. And, that is fine, but for pete sakes, give it a rest !!

Soda - Sorry for the cussing. I apologize.

Perhaps I'll leave this too. We can write about what we think and feel over and over again, but no matter how many times or how forcefully we say it, it will not become the truth (unless our perception happens to be correct, but we still can't be sure). It will still be what we think is the truth. I've said my truth many times already, so it's getting tired. I'm always willing to stand corrected, but the same old arguments will not do that. However, it's not a problem. I don't need to reach a situation where everyone sees everything the same way. If anything, I've learned to offer my thoughts less forcefully lately, and I certainly don't need to have the last word on everything.