Should Dave Gilmour give up the pink floyd name?

makram · Post by **makram** » Thu Sep 25, 2003 10:58 pm

I think David Gilmour and nick mason are pink floyd.
So why does he has to kill the name of pink floyd???

maltjik · Post by **maltjik** » Fri Sep 26, 2003 10:35 am

i don't think he should give it up.
I definetly think they should use it more.

the solo projects are good but when the boys work together as a team it somehow turns great

Real Pink in the Inside · Mon Sep 29, 2003 12:58 am

I think they should SELL it to Boy George. It will still be Pink Floyd, right??

Useful Idiot · Post by **Useful Idiot** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:13 am

I'm saving up to purchase the Pink Floyd name. Anyone wanna chip in?

SomeGhostsStepOut · Post by **SomeGhostsStepOut** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 3:20 am

I think I should give up my name.

Pugs on the Wing · Post by **Pugs on the Wing** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 1:47 pm

Let's put it on eBay and see what happens!

madcap69 · Post by **madcap69** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:30 pm

your to late I gave Dave a Turkey Drumstick for the name.

princessDungan74D · Post by **princessDungan74D** » Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:42 pm

oh darn I would have given dave a life supply of junk food for the name

Post by **mosespa** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 2:48 am

Pugs on the Wing wrote:Let's put it on eBay and see what happens!

Classic post...and an interesting idea.

I'd love to know how many bids it got before eBay shut it down.

fs · Post by fs » Tue Sep 30, 2003 8:02 am

nothing happened in the last ten years anyhow... if someone wants to resurrect the Floyd and come with a new album involving at least two former members that can write some good songs it's OK with me.

As far as the past goes: it served Roger well that Dave was allowed to keep on carrying the name, Roger's ego was getting far too big. OK he can write good songs (though I wonder if he really writes the scores for each instrument involved... I just cannot believe it: I am more into believing that he just wants the credits) but he's a rather poor player.
I once heard: if you're not good at playing the guitar you can try the bass...if that doesn't work either you can always try to MAKE guitars (might be a nice side-activity for Roger)

Vlad The Impaler · Post by **Vlad The Impaler** » Tue Sep 30, 2003 1:32 pm

1. No, he shouldn't have to give up the name.
2. It's a moot point.....he's not using it anyway.

rosm · Post by **rosm** » Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:17 pm

fs wrote:... if someone wants to resurrect the Floyd and come with a new album involving at least two former members that can write some good songs it's OK with me.

Does anyone have the phone number of Bob Close or that crazy teacher with whom they worked in the mid sixties. If I can persuade them it might work...

thepinkfloydmanuver2001 · Tue Oct 14, 2003 5:51 pm

Dave does hold some right to the pink floyd name because he has been part of the group and has made up most of the music(with roger of course) for pink floyd going for more than a decade. but at the same time dave should give it up. he is old he is making the floyd into something it is not, and pink floyd is not pink floyd unless the WHOLE band is making the music. i am not just standing up for roger because rick is not in the group at this point (so i have heard)thus david should give up the name and become dave and the two man band.

loblollyboy · Post by **loblollyboy** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 6:37 pm

As far as i can see pink floyd is history, it's over. Being in posession of the band name is now just necessary for still making money with the old stuff.

seamusz · Post by **seamusz** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 6:42 pm

loblollyboy wrote:As far as i can see pink floyd is history, it's over. Being in posession of the band name is now just necessary for still making money with the old stuff.

I cannot say that you are wrong, but I strongly disagree.

Should Dave Gilmour give up the pink floyd name?

what's the difference?

Re: what's the difference?