Post-Riot Act Moneygrab

[Kaius]

Is it just me, or are PJ/Ed just a complete embarrassment now?

I can't imagine how lost and alone the part of you that still hopes for a reassuring answer to this question must be. It's gotta be really tragic...like those people who record Minecraft songs and make music videos for them, or something.

Well, he's got me...

[McParadigm]

Sorry is the fool who trades his love for high rise rent
Throws it all away, when he could use it to invest
Love is notable
For being disposable
It's a loss you'll soon forget

[CopperTom]

that was way too much work

It was worth it. That is a beautiful gif.

[PryTo]

Eh, fairly bushleague at this point. (See what I did there?) Honestly, I'm more offended at the umpteenth overpriced special anniversary collector's edition reissue of Ten. The Dropbox thing puts their money in the hands of some fairly shady folks, but I probably have money invested in companies with fucktards sitting on their boards, too. For a band that does Target commercials, sells $40 "love bone" dog collars (now dipped in real Andy Wood blood!), and private shows for salesforce.com, this is small potatoes.

The latest Ten reissue is yet another blatant and direct fuck you to the fanbase. It's taking money from their fans just because they can. There's zero point to the reissue; the fans don't get anything of value from it. I find it a lot more distasteful because that call came directly from the band, whose members are apparently so cynical at this point they'll okay something like this. What were there, 2000 copies? It's not even that much money to a band that commands their sort of concert fees. Pointless on all fronts and disappointingly cynical. I'm telling you, these guys actively despise their fanbase at this point. I do, too, for the most part, so I guess I don't entirely blame them.

I'm surprised Ed's not in this picture somewhere. Maybe he was at Target that day.

[Birds in Hell]

I'm telling you, these guys actively despise their fanbase at this point. I do, too, for the most part, so I guess I don't entirely blame them.

It's kind of a shame how things have turned out but I think this is pretty accurate.

[malice]

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/04/09/pearl-jams-dropbox-hypocrisy/

i agree with this guy and all, but doesn't it strike anyone as funny that a guy writing for CNN Money is talking about how a part of him just died upon hearing this news?

Why? I have worked in the stock market my entire life and have felt disappointed by Pearl Jam's actions the last decade as much or more than most of the people on here. Why can't I be a capitalist and not like it when a band I respect does a hypocritical 180?

the answer is, of course you can.
no one is immune to being disappointed - and you know, i thought i was for a good 10 years of Pearl Jam's career... just that sometimes it's a joke to read it coming from part of the establishment that slowly swallowed the reasons for having a band like them, i guess.

I ain't stupid though, i know money is a great thing to make and have and use and enjoy, i look down my nose at no one (not for that anyway) I just figure the guy who writes a column for the likes of cnn money has a better shot at properly gauging his disappointment if he was writing that article for some hold out website that caters to washed up philosophies about not bowing to the almighty dollar instead of one that participated in the destruction of that kind of thing.

don't be angry at me, matty, i respect your right to be successful, and I'm not taking a shot at you, i'm just making cynical cluckings of my tongue so i can feel validated in my lack of success or something.

[Heathen]

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/04/09/pearl-jams-dropbox-hypocrisy/

i agree with this guy and all, but doesn't it strike anyone as funny that a guy writing for CNN Money is talking about how a part of him just died upon hearing this news?

Why? I have worked in the stock market my entire life and have felt disappointed by Pearl Jam's actions the last decade as much or more than most of the people on here. Why can't I be a capitalist and not like it when a band I respect does a hypocritical 180?

the answer is, of course you can.
no one is immune to being disappointed - and you know, i thought i was for a good 10 years of Pearl Jam's career... just that sometimes it's a joke to read it coming from part of the establishment that slowly swallowed the reasons for having a band like them, i guess.

I ain't stupid though, i know money is a great thing to make and have and use and enjoy, i look down my nose at no one (not for that anyway) I just figure the guy who writes a column for the likes of cnn money has a better shot at properly gauging his disappointment if he was writing that article for some hold out website that caters to washed up philosophies about not bowing to the almighty dollar instead of one that participated in the destruction of that kind of thing.

don't be angry at me, matty, i respect your right to be successful, and I'm not taking a shot at you, i'm just making cynical cluckings of my tongue so i can feel validated in my lack of success or something.

no, you're right, it's stupid to be mad at this kind of things when you're part of it yourself

[Mine]

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/04/09/pearl-jams-dropbox-hypocrisy/

As recently as last November, front-man Eddie Vedder was quoted as saying that "we're still cleaning up the mess that they made all those years ago."
But apparently five months heals all wounds, because today Pearl Jam effectively partnered up with one of the war's architects: Condoleezza Rice.

Well this may shock some people but Pearl Jam isn't synonymous or Eddie Vedder. Pearl Jam has never been an anti commercial/capitalist band despite the myths and some quotes by Eddie Vedder. Even the Ticketmaster issue is largely idealised by people - they may had as well been trying to get a bigger piece of the pie with that. If that had anything to do with not-money-grabbing/popularity they would have skipped playing big venues all together and yes they did care if they're music was liked(= how much money made them) at the time maybe even more than they do now.

This threads look like a succession of posts from people who were pushing a guy high on a pedestal 15 years ago and are now "hurt" he doesn't fit on there.

[Lament]

Honestly the simplest explanation for everything is that Eddie Vedder stood for things because Pearl Jam hit the scene at a time when standing for things was good for your career. He'll probably continue to do so because it's part of his persona. The Rolling Stone article from 1996 is probably way more accurate than people want to believe.

[Mine]

Honestly the simplest explanation for everything is that Eddie Vedder stood for things because Pearl Jam hit the scene at a time when standing for things was good for your career. He'll probably continue to do so because it's part of his persona. The Rolling Stone article from 1996 is probably way more accurate than people want to believe.

I don't have an issue with people expressing any criticism and most are at least in part valid. But why does it have to be about Vedder alone, when he's one of the 5 people of the band. It just sounds like resentment towards him.
For instance the fact that Tim Bierman really likes to point out how his friend Jeff Ament brought him in to run the 10C to make it financially viable always brings a sarcastic expression to my face because of how cynically ironic it is. But RM ignores it because it's Ament not Vedder.

You think he's that cynical? Musicians were standing for things since forever, it's not the best career move either since you systematically turn part of your audience off by doing so - and Ed is no exception here.

[stip]

Honestly the simplest explanation for everything is that Eddie Vedder stood for things because Pearl Jam hit the scene at a time when standing for things was good for your career. He'll probably continue to do so because it's part of his persona. The Rolling Stone article from 1996 is probably way more accurate than people want to believe.

All those things that he stood for are values I deeply believe, and I continue to be unbothered by most of this because they're not particularly contradictory or troubling at anything beyond a very superficial level. And as much as I think the corporate form of organization, especially in an age of finance capitalism and really narrow conceptualizations of what it means to be a stakeholder, is seriously damaging our country and our world, I don't think touching them gives you cooties.

There are lots people who will tell you that the two major American political parities are basically the same and be pretty pleased with the level of sophistication of that comment. But it's not true, nor is it particularly insightful--it is the conclusion you end up with when you stop thinking moments after you start. The world is a very complicated place, and a story that is too simple probably isn't a very accurate one. It could be entertaining, or smug, or self-righteous, or painful, but probably not correct.


I doubt much of this has anything to do with a persona--other than the fact that a persona is likely to exaggerate the basic facts of who you are (something every message board regular should understand). It's easy to say irresponsible things or to get way out in front of your opinions in an ill-considered way when you are full of adrenalin and have a room full of people cheering you on, and the fact that we turn a few heat of the moment concert comments into a political philosophy is silly.

Using the songs makes more sense, since these are deliberate, edited, considered. The fact remains that most of Eddie's political writing isn't insightful (although some is emotionally powerful), especially anything about money and greed. Much of it is pretty dumb. Superficial. Lashing out at really complicated ideas in pretty emotional and judgmental terms. Eddie seems to be a pretty empathic person, and so he is often looking in the right direction--his moral compass steers him reasonably well in terms of the conclusions he draws. But I wouldn't look to him or anyone in the band to serve as an intellectual guide, and I wouldn't use a few random comments over the course of a long career to pillory someone for things they do now. I wouldn't do it positively or negatively. If you're going to look at anything, and if you're going to actually think instead of judge (more work/less fun) you need to look at the consequences of actions.

The ticketmaster thing is a good example. Did pearl jam want a larger slice of the pie. They may very well have. But the ticketmaster stand was still powerful and useful and concrete. You can have multiple motives, and they don't have to negate each other.


Based on what we know, pearl jam is investing in a technology that they use for part of their music and probably think is exciting. It sounds like they were invited to do so by someone who is a huge fan. I bet they think this is a really opportunity they can be a part of. I'm sure they won't mind making money off of it, because the issue in their songs has never been about making money, and making money doesn't make you greedy. What matters is what you did to make it. McParadigm, and presumably others, are smart enough to understand this if they wants to. It's just more fun to ignore it.

As far as the Condi Rice thing goes, corporations bring in political Rolodex people all the time for their boards. They should. It's very smart for them. Her presence guarantees them access to important people in and out of government that they would never have without her there. Unless dropbox is figuring out a way to transfer bombs there probably isn't a whole lot of neo-con foreign policy applications to this technology. I wouldn't refuse to buy a hybrid car if she was on the board of a company that made one either.

Having said that, I bet the board meetings will be awkward.

[stip]

Eh, fairly bushleague at this point. (See what I did there?) Honestly, I'm more offended at the umpteenth overpriced special anniversary collector's edition reissue of Ten. The Dropbox thing puts their money in the hands of some fairly shady folks, but I probably have money invested in companies with fucktards sitting on their boards, too. For a band that does Target commercials, sells $40 "love bone" dog collars (now dipped in real Andy Wood blood!), and private shows for salesforce.com, this is small potatoes.

The latest Ten reissue is yet another blatant and direct fuck you to the fanbase. It's taking money from their fans just because they can. There's zero point to the reissue; the fans don't get anything of value from it. I find it a lot more distasteful because that call came directly from the band, whose members are apparently so cynical at this point they'll okay something like this. What were there, 2000 copies? It's not even that much money to a band that commands their sort of concert fees. Pointless on all fronts and disappointingly cynical. I'm telling you, these guys actively despise their fanbase at this point. I do, too, for the most part, so I guess I don't entirely blame them.

How much did this thing cost? If there are only 2000 copies unless they're charging a thousand bucks a pop no one is retiring off of these things. I think all this stuff is overpriced and unnecessary and I'm not a collector so I don't buy it. They've been pretty clear that there is a part of their fanbase that really likes collecting this stuff, and so they make it for them. A number of people on RM like it. They are happy purchasing it. It's a non-essential product made for hobbyists. I'd be bothered if they stuck a new song on it to make people feel like they HAD to buy it.

Most of this has nothing to do with the 'fanbase'. It's creating something for collectors to collect. Ask the people who got one if they would rather pearl jam stop making these things. Ask them if they feel exploited by the 10club. Enabled, maybe.

It's not pointless to them. It's not cynical to them. It's pointless to me, and because this is a narrow niched thing I can just ignore it. What's been compromised or tainted as a result?


The question I'd ask is 'should pearl jam stop making harmless and inessential things that a narrow set of intense fans really loves to have?' If your answer is yes, what are you basing that off of besides 'I don't like it.'?

[McParadigm]

Are you guys debating this, like its a real thing?

This shit is comedy. That's all it is. You don't need to feel disappointed, because its really, really funny. You don't have to defend it because the combinational choices are so far beyond ridiculous it's too late for any defense to have a prayer. Pearl Jam is Kiss. Finkle is Einhorn. How you could possibly not find it amusing as shit to watch play out is beyond me.

It's like RM started a joke, and the band has been following up on it for us. All things considered, trading in their passion for music in an experiment to see how many zeros they can add to their bank accounts is the MOST entertaining thing they've done in years.

[Sgt. Crackpot]

[PryTo]

How much did this thing cost? If there are only 2000 copies unless they're charging a thousand bucks a pop no one is retiring off of these things. I think all this stuff is overpriced and unnecessary and I'm not a collector so I don't buy it. They've been pretty clear that there is a part of their fanbase that really likes collecting this stuff, and so they make it for them. A number of people on RM like it. They are happy purchasing it. It's a non-essential product made for hobbyists. I'd be bothered if they stuck a new song on it to make people feel like they HAD to buy it.

Most of this has nothing to do with the 'fanbase'. It's creating something for collectors to collect. Ask the people who got one if they would rather pearl jam stop making these things. Ask them if they feel exploited by the 10club. Enabled, maybe.

It's not pointless to them. It's not cynical to them. It's pointless to me, and because this is a narrow niched thing I can just ignore it. What's been compromised or tainted as a result?

The question I'd ask is 'should pearl jam stop making harmless and inessential things that a narrow set of intense fans really loves to have?' If your answer is yes, what are you basing that off of besides 'I don't like it.'?

If my post indicated that I’m super upset by this or something, I’m not. It’s just another example of how little the band cares about its fans. I’m not on the “PJ sold out” bandwagon because they’ve never aspired to be Fugazi. Mariah Carey really is closer to home. Ed was eerily on point with that comment.

And I get the impulse to collect cool stuff. I really do. I’ve done some non-PJ collecting myself over the years, although I tend to lose interest quicker than others. But I completely understand why people collect stuff like this. Where I disagree with you is that I don’t see this an example of the band doing something positive for its collector fans. If they wanted to do that, they’d put some thought into what they were putting out there. This is a just a quickie with no thought whatsoever. Point taken about not adding bonus tracks or whatever, but that’s partially my point, too – there’s nothing “special” about this latest trinket whatsoever. They keep reissuing the same thing. How about a reissue of avocado so the fans don’t have to keep paying $300 for it on eBay? How about a reissue of Benny Hall on vinyl? That would be “doing” something for the fans, without having to exert any more energy than was required to reissue Ten one more time.

When the band does put thought into these types of things the results are spectacular. The example I’m thinking of is the Ten and Vs./Vitalogy box sets. Those were amazing. I didn’t buy them because they were expensive, but they clearly offered a lot of bang for the buck and were packed with all sorts of cool things. A real treat for the fans, with some real care put into them. The latest reissue is sort of the opposite of that. A way to make a quick few grand (as if they need it) with zero thought or care put into the product.

But seriously, I’ve already spent more time thinking about this than I intended. My larger point was that I really don’t care all that much about the Dropbox “scandal.”

[Birds in Hell]

They've been pretty clear that there is a part of their fanbase that really likes collecting this stuff, and so they make it for them. A number of people on RM like it. They are happy purchasing it.

LET THE FREE MARKET DECIDE, EH GENTS?

*puff, puff*

Are you guys debating this, like its a real thing?

This shit is comedy. That's all it is. You don't need to feel disappointed, because its really, really funny.

McParadigm, ever the voice of reason.

[McParadigm]

Are you guys debating this, like its a real thing?

This shit is comedy. That's all it is. You don't need to feel disappointed, because its really, really funny.

McParadigm, ever the voice of reason.

Dev is not gonna be pleased.

[Tuolumne]

As the "blind fanboy" of this bunch, I'm willing to hear all of the arguments that they've "sold out". But I see no balance in the critique. No acknowledgement of the ongoing and even growing committment to their causes, how they play even longer shows than they ever have, playing rarities over last 5 years they've never previously touched, etc, etc. No mention of that. Some of the critiques seem to have some validity to them, but they hold no water with me cause there is no balance to it or any acknowledgement that there's another side to their growth the last decade. Like reading the argument of a kid pretending to be a lawyer.

[Heathen]

Yeah guys, if you're going to criticize the band for something they did and if you want to be taken seriously, you need to include some nice comment about something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

"Pearl Jam did a 180 on everything they stood for" = not good

"Pearl Jam did a 180 on everything they stood for BUT I have to admit Ed has nice nails" = good

[Norah]

See, now you're credible!