|
Post by curiousgirl on Sept 10, 2016 19:52:14 GMT
However new members don't normally start with their first two posts having a dig at current members posts. Please explain what these "digs" might be. I've read both posts and I don't see any digs.
I didn't read them as digs either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2016 20:07:23 GMT
However new members don't normally start with their first two posts having a dig at current members posts. I can see why you say that but it does depend on how you read them. I thought one comment wasn't a dig but a funny pun on musical instruments. And more of a tease. Maybe not the best way to introduce yourself but sometimes, it hard to join in here when you all get going. You know what CG I can see the pun now on "harping on" I think I did read it wrong so I apologise to misstrees and Killagorilla.
|
|
|
Post by killagorilla on Sept 10, 2016 21:35:24 GMT
I can see why you say that but it does depend on how you read them. I thought one comment wasn't a dig but a funny pun on musical instruments. And more of a tease. Maybe not the best way to introduce yourself but sometimes, it hard to join in here when you all get going. You know what CG I can see the pun now on "harping on" I think I did read it wrong so I apologise to misstrees and Killagorilla. No apology necessary but yes, I am for real.
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Sept 10, 2016 21:35:24 GMT
The judge in 86 said rick n Francis are "the public face of the band"
I thought they both had 50% each?
Given the "duo" marketing ever since, quite shocked that one could legally carry on without the other. My guess is that no solicitor would give us a clear answer
Francis has obviously changed his mind since the SQ autobiography , when he was very clear the pubic weren't interested in him without Rick
|
|
|
Post by paradiseflats on Sept 11, 2016 6:50:46 GMT
The judge in 86 said rick n Francis are "the public face of the band" I thought they both had 50% each? Given the "duo" marketing ever since, quite shocked that one could legally carry on without the other. My guess is that no solicitor would give us a clear answer Francis has obviously changed his mind since the SQ autobiography , when he was very clear the pubic weren't interested in him without Rick As we both know expecting band members to be consistent with previous quotes is difficult to say the least. Whatever the case he refers to the future as 'semi retirement' so the only real issue is the Winter tour. They have proven they can go ahead without him. Whatever I or others think of this. If Rick us incapable of performing he can hold on to the rights and make more money from any tour than Rhino and Andy. As if he can't perform he would lose most likely any case. I hope Rick returns for the Winter tour but for me I wouldn't have been there anyway. My days are over and have been for some time.
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Sept 11, 2016 8:01:02 GMT
paradiseflats I've no doubt at all you are correct regarding the "last tour of the electrics", featuring Rick on all the posters, PR etc Beyond that, I think it must be legally murky. I think it's disrespectful for the band to be putting dates in for 2017 given the situation. I reckon it must be putting some strain/stress onto Rick. He can't possibly want SQ to continue and finish without him, and the others surely would know this. I also think Rick has probably had his fill of legal cases. You can't go to law without stress, expense, risk of losing, hassle etc, plus he's never had to shoulder any burden alone before. My mind has returned to the post a few months back, about raised voices heard in hospital between Rick and Simon Porter. At best, things are not right
|
|
|
Post by paradiseflats on Sept 11, 2016 8:19:12 GMT
paradiseflats I've no doubt at all you are correct regarding the "last tour of the electrics", featuring Rick on all the posters, PR etc Beyond that, I think it must be legally murky. I think it's disrespectful for the band to be putting dates in for 2017 given the situation. I reckon it must be putting some strain/stress onto Rick. He can't possibly want SQ to continue and finish without him, and the others surely would know this. I also think Rick has probably had his fill of legal cases. You can't go to law without stress, expense, risk of losing, hassle etc, plus he's never had to shoulder any burden alone before. My mind has returned to the post a few months back, about raised voices heard in hospital between Rick and Simon Porter. At best, things are not right I agree with what you say. I think if Rick I'd no longer able to play, he's best off just taking the money from the holding company that runs Status Quo. If the others want him to leave they will have to buy him out. Unless someone who knows more about company law can tell us more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 11:39:30 GMT
Does Rick have the power to prevent the use of the name Status Quo if he is not involved? YES, 100%.
All Directors (and their %age share of the company) are available to view via companies house or through the many on-line company accounts agencies.
If you pay around a fiver you can get a full financial report, directors names, and associated directorships, etc.
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Sept 11, 2016 14:07:42 GMT
I wonder if Rick has said no to more dates being announced? Since the Rock the boat thing....there's been nothing more added
Suspect the boat thing was booked without him being consulted, with a financial loss to all for a cancellation. Seems strange to have two dates for Oct 2017, with nothing else?
|
|
|
Post by paradiseflats on Sept 11, 2016 14:09:45 GMT
I wonder if Rick has said no to more dates being announced? Since the Rock the boat thing....there's been nothing more added Suspect the boat thing was booked without him being consulted, with a financial loss to all for a cancellation. Seems strange to have two dates for Oct 2017, with nothing else? What are they ?
|
|
|
Post by MrWaistcoat on Sept 11, 2016 14:19:32 GMT
I wonder if Rick has said no to more dates being announced? Since the Rock the boat thing....there's been nothing more added Suspect the boat thing was booked without him being consulted, with a financial loss to all for a cancellation. Seems strange to have two dates for Oct 2017, with nothing else? What are they ? Sat 21st Oct Rock The Boat 2017 Departs Sydney Australia 16th Oct 2017. www.chooseyourcruise.com.auSun 22nd Oct
|
|
|
Post by paradiseflats on Sept 11, 2016 14:44:27 GMT
Obviously this is just my guess. They were announced to show the band will continue.Next year I dont think they will tour. Solo album from Rossi. A few special appearances. Regrouping in 2017 for Aquostic 3.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Flittersnoop on Sept 12, 2016 2:31:38 GMT
Don't know the answer. But in the interview with Francis that americanquo posted up - its with a Canadian radio station from 2014, Francis reveals that Rick is uninsurable. And that might affect his power over the group's future. As I understood it, in 198something, Alan had rights in the band, but the court ruled that (because of the record company's stipulations) if he got his petition (which was I think to prevent the others from using the band name), it would be destructive to the band's future. Future as a business, that is ... It does seem that you can leave a business partnership, but you can't just stop the other participants from participating. PS I think that is why Roger lost his case against Flloyd, too.
|
|
|
Post by rockonquo on Sept 12, 2016 4:56:09 GMT
Does Rick have the power to prevent the use of the name Status Quo if he is not involved? Rossi has been there since 1962, his band unfortunately. Like to see Rick form PLC instead.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs Flittersnoop on Sept 12, 2016 9:44:41 GMT
Does Rick have the power to prevent the use of the name Status Quo if he is not involved? YES, 100%.
All Directors (and their %age share of the company) are available to view via companies house or through the many on-line company accounts agencies.
If you pay around a fiver you can get a full financial report, directors names, and associated directorships, etc.
He may have director or partnership rights, he jolly well ought to after all this time, but he would probably lose in court, just like Alan did. Particularly as he is unwell, and it's not the other directors' fault that he can't play his part. I doubt it will ever come to court, though. Having rights and having the power are not the same thing ... I have the right to use a zebra crossing, but if there is a moving bus (or roadworks, or a hole in the ground) in the way, I won't have the power. Rick faces both the moving bus (Quo's obligations and future business operations) and roadworks (his illness and recuperation process).
|
|