No mini tour in 2003

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:26 am

According to Brain Damage, Gilmour will not be doing and mini tour this year and it will be 2004 now: although some one off shows will happen.

http://www.brain-damage.co.uk

quicksilver · Post by **quicksilver** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 2:49 pm

I find that kind of odd. What about his solo album?

I wonder if this has something to do with Pink Floyd possibly touring in 2004. He has said in the past that he wouldn't tour Floyd without a new album; maybe they're working on some ideas.

Spinoza · Post by **Spinoza** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 5:18 pm

i was just thinking the same, quicksilver. It's also rather suspicious that Wright hasn't made a solo-album after Broken China, which he had promised to do.

quicksilver · Post by **quicksilver** » Wed Jan 15, 2003 7:51 pm

Yea, Spinoza there's something going on here- It smells like fish and it's not Friday.

Do you think Dave could be worried that Nick could get back together and eventually tour with Roger and start something up? and he wants insure that won't happen.

If Dave had plans of touring Floyd after his solo stuff was over, Nick touring with Roger could put a fork in that.

I'm sure Rick would jump on right away.

Real Pink in the Inside · Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:28 pm

He is reportedly not going to tour this year. Why? Probably because his solo album will not be out until the end of the year.

You guys are looking way too much into this.

As for Nick, David could tour with a bunch of wage musicians and claim to be Pink Floyd if he really wanted to. Do you really think Nick and Rick could derail the Pink Floyd machine from touring? No way.

Spinoza · Post by **Spinoza** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 8:43 am

Real Pink in the Inside wrote:He is reportedly not going to tour this year. Why? Probably because his solo album will not be out until the end of the year.

You guys are looking way too much into this.

As for Nick, David could tour with a bunch of wage musicians and claim to be Pink Floyd if he really wanted to. Do you really think Nick and Rick could derail the Pink Floyd machine from touring? No way.

Yes, they could !

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 1:12 pm

RRITI, your comment is either that from an uneducated person about all things Floyd or from somebody who is making a point with certain undercurrents that are currently banned on this forum. It is true that we are in a different era of leadership in Pink Floyd but in no way would Pink Floyd be Pink Floyd with just David Gilmour. To suggest that, in seriousness, is a very odd point. It contadicts your vast knowledge on Pink Floyd. Perhaps it was sarcasm, satire, fun?

Real Pink in the Inside · Thu Jan 16, 2003 8:11 pm

Pink Floyd is just a trademark. I thought we already established this and have agreed to not be upset by ANY line-up of Pink Floyd.

If Rick and Nick decided they did not want to tour as Pink Floyd even if David felt like touring under the banner Pink Floyd, do you really think they're going to refuse David's wishes? Hell, David could just slip them a pretty penny each and I'm sure there would be no problems whatsoever. Or he could fire one of them, similar to the time Rick was fired during The Wall sessions, and then pay off the other one. GNR only has Axl Rose for an original member. Lynyrd Skynyrd are not made up of any original members any more, as far as I know. Fleetwood Mac are another example of a farce. What makes you think the same thing can't happen with the "beloved" Pink Floyd "trademark"?

People would go to a Pink Floyd show even if it was made up of no current members. As long as it's said to be Pink Floyd and the lightshow is there it will sell. And I have no doubt in my mind that David could manage to tour as Pink Floyd by himself with a bunch of wage musicians if he REALLY wanted to do so. You gotta be kidding me if you actually think Nick and Rick have enough power to stop David from doing whatever he wants to do.

Who cares what it's about as long as the kids go? That's the bottom line with Pink Floyd these days.

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 8:19 pm

I think pink floyd as a band are pretty much dead. No life left in them.

Spinoza · Post by **Spinoza** » Thu Jan 16, 2003 9:29 pm

RPITI: it's a huge jump from the current floyd ( Gilmour Mason Wright ) to a Pink Floyd ( only Gilmour ) , don't you think ? Even now, Waters has a vote in All things Pink Floyd, he admits that he is outvoted by the 3 other members. I think there is a kind of democracy in the group. All four have a vote each. Point is that you try to convince the others to follow your opinion. What could Dave do to let the others agree to let him tour as Pink Floyd on his own ? a crustless pie for Mason maybe ?????

Real Pink in the Inside · Thu Jan 16, 2003 11:00 pm

RPITI: it's a huge jump from the current floyd ( Gilmour Mason Wright ) to a Pink Floyd ( only Gilmour ) , don't you think ?

I don't see any jump.

When I think of Pink Floyd, I think of Roger, David, Rick, and Nick together, with Syd's band also coming to mind, although I must admit I think of Syd's Pink Floyd as being a completely different group (Although PATGOD is still one of my favorite albums).

I certainly don't think of Anthony Moore, Polly Samson, Jon Carin, David Gilmour, Richard Wright, Nick Mason, and a plethora of other characters working together when I think of Pink Floyd.

Pink Floyd is ultimately just a trademark. I, for one, could care less who uses this trademark in the future.

Even now, Waters has a vote in All things Pink Floyd, he admits that he is outvoted by the 3 other members.

Roger does not have a vote on "All things 'Pink Floyd.'"

There are essentially two "Pink Floyd" companies now: The old one, Pink Floyd Music Ltd.; and the "new" one, Pink Floyd Music (1987) Ltd.

Roger has no say in this "new" company.

As David once put it:

"...any decisions made by the board, we have to call a full board meeting because there are now two Pink Floyd companies. The old one and the new one. The old one we all belong to and the new one. Anything to do with the old one of which Roger is a shareholder, we have to call a meeting. We invite Roger, who condescends to come along, and we all sit around a table with our respective lawyers and we have a vote on the issue. Roger says no, and myself and Nicky say yes, and we all go home. It is such a stupid waste of time." (Note: This was said in 1987. The same holds true today except Rick is now a "member")

I think there is a kind of democracy in the group. All four have a vote each.

Whatever. David is the largest shareholder in the new company. His vote has the largest weight in this "new company," no doubt. In fact, in this new company he almost surely has veto power, and it wouldn't surprise me if he was the dictator.

Point is that you try to convince the others to follow your opinion. What could Dave do to let the others agree to let him tour as Pink Floyd on his own ? a crustless pie for Mason maybe ?????

It probably doesn't even matter what they think. But if it did, you could guarantee them a certain percentage of the profit that will be generated by the tour. Or you could simply buy out their shares in the company. There are obviously plenty of things he could do.

bong · Post by **bong** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 12:00 am

Real Pink in the Inside wrote:

People would go to a Pink Floyd show even if it was made up of no current members. As long as it's said to be Pink Floyd and the lightshow is there it will sell. And I have no doubt in my mind that David could manage to tour as Pink Floyd by himself with a bunch of wage musicians if he REALLY wanted to do so. You gotta be kidding me if you actually think Nick and Rick have enough power to stop David from doing whatever he wants to do.

Thats the biggest load of shit you've ever posted in your life, and you've posted alot of it. Maybe it is posible that 4 "new" people could tour as pink floyd, but do you really think that anyone but the most uninformed so called "pink floyd fans" would buy tickets?? By saying that, you insult everyone who knows anything about the band.

As for Gilmour touring as "pink floyd" without Nick or Rick, Yes thats possible too, but despite what you might think, or imply, he would know better.

Real Pink in the Inside · Fri Jan 17, 2003 12:39 am

Maybe it is posible that 4 "new" people could tour as pink floyd, but do you really think that anyone but the most uninformed so called "pink floyd fans" would buy tickets??

The vast majority of people who go to Pink Floyd shows are UNINFORMED about the members behind the group. I guarantee you if Gilmour, Wright, and Mason were to tour together under a name OTHER THAN PINK FLOYD their tour would not be nearly as successful as The Division Bell and Momentary Lapse of Reason tours were.

The current line-up of Lynyrd Skynyrd have proven that a band can be successful even without any original members. The latest line-up of GNR are selling out shows easily despite the fact Axl Rose is the only original member remaining.

It's all about the already established name.

flashback · Post by **flashback** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 4:06 am

Personally Real Pink when you get down to it they are 3 Pink Floyd's, 1st-Syd Roger Rick & Nick ,2nd- Roger Rick Nick & Dave, 3rd-Dave Rick & Nick.You can bury your head in the sand & say the last one isn't Pink Floyd but you would be wrong.No matter how bad you hate the last that is the last version of P-F,all this said I have to say I find the 2'nd version of Pink Floyd to by far and away the best.Some people would even say there was a 4th- the short time of Roger Rick Nick as well as Dave & Syd.

Tommy · Post by **Tommy** » Fri Jan 17, 2003 4:53 am

I agree with RPITI 100%, i bet if you asked the average person at a pink floyd concert if they had ever heard of a certain syd barrett they would give you a strange memorable look

No mini tour in 2003

Looking forward to Gilmour's next performance?

No mini tour in 2003