Why I no longer am happy with my favorite band

[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..

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.

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.