VH Reunion Contract Situation

**right-here-i-say** · 01.25.07, 09:40 AM

After hearing about the reunion, and contracts, it got me thinking. What would be "fair" to all the individuals involved?

Here is my take. The main question is "how would removing 1 person from the reunion impact the gross revenue from the tour." If Dave were not to be part of it, how would that impact the tour? If Ed were not part of it, how would that impact the tour?

If it was an original reunion (with Michael), it would be great if it was 25% each. However, this is not reality.

So, to be fair. Here is how I see this reunion.

Dave 45%
Ed 45%
Alex 9%
Wolfgang 1%

Ed and Dave are required participants because if either of them do not show up, then the tour is a total failure. If Alex or Michael do not show up, it is still a success. ( maybe not as much of a success)

Kind of like Kiss, with Gene and Paul. They are absolutely necessary, which is why Peter Criss and Ace Frehley don't get 25% each.

**Vinnie Velvet** · 01.25.07, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by right-here-i-say

After hearing about the reunion, and contracts, it got me thinking. What would be "fair" to all the individuals involved?

Here is my take. The main question is "how would removing 1 person from the reunion impact the gross revenue from the tour." If Dave were not to be part of it, how would that impact the tour? If Ed were not part of it, how would that impact the tour?

If it was an original reunion (with Michael), it would be great if it was 25% each. However, this is not reality.

So, to be fair. Here is how I see this reunion.

Dave 45%
Ed 45%
Alex 9%
Wolfgang 1%

Ed and Dave are required participants because if either of them do not show up, then the tour is a total failure. If Alex or Michael do not show up, it is still a success. ( maybe not as much of a success)

Kind of like Kiss, with Gene and Paul. They are absolutely necessary, which is why Peter Criss and Ace Frehley don't get 25% each.

For Wolfgang, he gets to bring his PS3 along with him on the tour.

That and a lot of twinkies.

**bb3000ma** · 01.25.07, 09:43 AM

The way things are these days with Van Halen, if you swap Dave and Al's percentages, you would be a lot closer.

**VH2001** · 01.25.07, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by bb3000ma

The way things are these days with Van Halen, if you swap Dave and Al's percentages, you would be a lot closer.

Yeah...that's probably what was offered to Dave...9%...which is the reason for the holdup!!
Should be something like 30/30/30/10...the 10% being Wolfie....that's not bad...IF Wolfie is full time bassist.

BUT...there really has not been ANY announcement yet...or OFFICIAL word! The Rolling Stone article is new, in print,
but, probably a month old...and still does NOT say they've come to any agreement.
I'm sure that the Van Halen's rehearsed with Dave...got him all pumped up for a tour...then made him some kind
of unfair offer (ie: 15% of a reunion deal or something)...so, the ball has been in his court...he WANTS to
work/tour with them...cuz he knows it would be huge...but, he also wants his fair share. I bet that this is what is happenning.
Eddie has pulled this crap before...ie: cutting Mike out...re-working the royalty deals when Sammy was in the band and
then Dave was making jack shit...like .10 to their $1.00 share each.
I'm obviously speculating...but, probably not too far off!!

All these news outlets are ONLY running with the non-story that is in Rolling Stone!!

**It's Mike** · 01.25.07, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by right-here-i-say

After hearing about the reunion, and contracts, it got me thinking. What would be "fair" to all the individuals involved?

Here is my take. The main question is "how would removing 1 person from the reunion impact the gross revenue from the tour." If Dave were not to be part of it, how would that impact the tour? If Ed were not part of it, how would that impact the tour?

If it was an original reunion (with Michael), it would be great if it was 25% each. However, this is not reality.

So, to be fair. Here is how I see this reunion.

Dave 45%
Ed 45%
Alex 9%
Wolfgang 1%

Ed and Dave are required participants because if either of them do not show up, then the tour is a total failure. If Alex or Michael do not show up, it is still a success. ( maybe not as much of a success)

Kind of like Kiss, with Gene and Paul. They are absolutely necessary, which is why Peter Criss and Ace Frehley don't get 25% each.

i imagine the percentages could be something in the area of 25/25/25/25

**Massive VH Fan** · 01.25.07, 10:25 AM

I'd bet that Dave will be lucky to get 10% - make no mistake, Ed calls the shots with VH and if he was shrewd enough to force Mikey to sign over all his rights to VH then Dave won't make a killing from this gig. To be sure, he'll do OK mostly because 10% of a VH reunion is better than no tour and hence no income at all, but Id be willing to bet heavy that 25% is off the table-period. If Dave is smart he'll realize that this is his one last shot to make a decent amount of cash before his star capital is completely used up. That goes for Ed and Al too.

**Menlow** · 01.25.07, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by Massive VH Fan

I'd bet that Dave will be lucky to get 10% - make no mistake, Ed calls the shots with VH and if he was shrewd enough to force Mikey to sign over all his rights to VH then Dave won't make a killing from this gig. To be sure, he'll do OK mostly because 10% of a VH reunion is better than no tour and hence no income at all, but Id be willing to bet heavy that 25% is off the table-period. If Dave is smart he'll realize that this is his one last shot to make a decent amount of cash before his star capital is completely used up. That goes for Ed and Al too.

No way. Dave is getting at least 25%.

His ego wouldn't accept less than that, nor should he.

**Greenpaw** · 01.25.07, 11:14 AM

I hope Dave holds out as long as possible, lets dates get booked, let's the brothers hoot and holler to the press about the big tour showcasing Wolfie's amazing talents and then when it's time to sign the contract........................ he takes it, lifts up the flap on his chaps and WIPES HIS ASS WITH IT. Throws it in Ed's face and says:

"That's for fuckin me in 1996. I'm out"

**Lodewijk** · 01.25.07, 11:15 AM

I see it more like this....

Ed - 30%
Al - 30%
Dave - 25%
Wolfie - 15%

And I don't really see it as THAT unfair......

**Menlow** · 01.25.07, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by Lodewijk

I see it more like this....

Ed - 30%
Al - 30%
Dave - 25%
Wolfie - 15%

And I don't really see it as THAT unfair......

That's more realistic.

At least then Dave could perceive anything more by Ed and Al as coming out of Wolfie's end and not his.

**Michaels** · 01.25.07, 11:28 AM

What does it matter how much Wolfie gets...seems like he gets what ever he wants from daddy..I guess this can be like his "own" money to toss around.
Like real life monopoly money...yah. I can't drive to the show....

**right-here-i-say** · 01.25.07, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by Menlow

That's more realistic.

At least then Dave could perceive anything more by Ed and Al as coming out of Wolfie's end and not his.

If I were Dave I would say No Thanks. It wouldn't work anyways because obviosly he is being screwed.

Any drummer could have played on those 1st 6 albums, and sales would have been the same. Take Dave or Ed off those 6 albums, and they wouldn't be going into the HOF.

**Menlow** · 01.25.07, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by right-here-i-say

If I were Dave I would say No Thanks. It wouldn't work anyways because obviosly he is being screwed.

Any drummer could have played on those 1st 6 albums, and sales would have been the same. Take Dave or Ed off those 6 albums, and they wouldn't be going into the HOF.

Even if you're right, trying telling Ed that.

There's no way he would ever acknowledge Dave as being more important as Al and even less chance he would allow dave to be compensated as such.

**VH2001** · 01.25.07, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by right-here-i-say

If I were Dave I would say No Thanks. It wouldn't work anyways because obviosly he is being screwed.

Any drummer could have played on those 1st 6 albums, and sales would have been the same. Take Dave or Ed off those 6 albums, and they wouldn't be going into the HOF.

IMO, it wouldn't be VH or would it have been as good without the 4 original members...
BUT, if you had to pick 2 people to remove...yeah, Alex & Mike.

**Lodewijk** · 01.25.07, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by right-here-i-say

If I were Dave I would say No Thanks. It wouldn't work anyways because obviosly he is being screwed.

Any drummer could have played on those 1st 6 albums, and sales would have been the same. Take Dave or Ed off those 6 albums, and they wouldn't be going into the HOF.

Granted...but as it stands.....Dave has been IN "Van Halen" half as long as Ed and Al........so I'm sure he's not 100% vested yet !