QUOTE (Jack44 @ Mar 17 2007, 09:38 AM)

Gotta go with Samper on this. I am getting two things here: First, yup, Seger probably just wanted to get out of there. Who can blame him. Second, Security should NEVER manhandle someone in this situation but then again we dont have all the details. Regardless, sounds like a bad deal.
If Seger DID blow them off, we have to keep in mind that the man is human and is prone to display all the range of emotions and actions that humans with a great deal of power are capable of displaying.
Personally, I DO believe Seger has a pretty big ego. After all, he IS a rock star folks!!!AND a perfectionist.
I'm not buying for a minute that this tour has been about "letting his kids see him onstage". TOTAL B.S.
He did the tour for the money, to push the new record, and because he wanted to rock again AND it would be cool for his kids to see him.
I feel his ego shines through here by kind of dissing the fans that have wanted a tour for a decade or so
by kind of implying that our love for his music and desire to see him onstage was NOT the main reason for him to get back out there. EGO. Maybe he doesnt want to admit that he needs us as much as we need him, LOL.
I am sure he has a big ego and so be it. I would never think less of him for it. He rocks. Great performer. Great songwriter. And the folks who HAVE met him say that hes awesome in person, lol.
I'm curious as to where you develop the "big ego" theory from? From interviews? From behavior on stage? From personal experience with him one on one?
Being a rock star doesn't automatically create a big ego. Nor does being a perfectionist. In fact, "perfectionism" involves, by definition, strict criticism of one's self and work and constant desire to do "better".
As for doing the tour for alterior motives... money, promote FTP, etc.: I think money has nothing to do with it. Bob hurts for NOTHING and DEMANDED that ticket prices remain affordable. Nothing like the $100+ other "old guys" (Billy Joel, Rod Stewart, etc.) are demanding. He remains very sensitive to the fact that not all can afford the insane ticket prices these days. And he's the ONLY one who kept the pricing low enough for most to afford at least for one show.
But why NOT promote a new piece of work? Why NOT go out and rock one more time? We all wanted to rock one more time, didn't we? What you might be missing, however, is that the last time he toured, the kids were only 1 and 3 or 4, I think. Far too young to really grasp what Dad does at "work".
Knowing you are Bob's kid and having never seen him perform in front of an audience? It's ridiculous to think of that scenario as reality! He has said over and over again that the kids are of an age now where they really wanted to see Dad in action. Remember, too, that doing this is a huge burden and sacrifice for the families of the entire band, crew, staff, etc. He wouldn't have done this without their wanting it as badly as he might have.
The way Bob talks about being involved with the kids' day to day lives, etc., I can't believe for a second that he would consider touring without their 110% support and desire to see it happen. I'm going to go with the words straight from Bob's mouth: The kids really wanted to see Dad in action on a grand scale (not just playing guitar in the basement for their own circle of friends).
It's a legacy and wonderful set of memories for us who don't even know him... imagine how great it would be for the kids!
I really hope you rethink your evaluation on his ego. As far as most are concerned by what is published, he's just a down to earth guy who has to take the trash out tomorrow, like everyone else in his neighborhood. He just has a different job that most don't even have an opportunity (talent, desire, etc.) to pursue.
Finally, I would have to agree with Mark D. In these very insecure times, security is a major issue. Bob probably has absolutely no say in what he can and can not "do" at venues as far as mingling with attendees, etc. For instance, if he hires security and goes against the contract by hanging around the back entrance and chatting it up with people and something happens, security would then not be responsible for anything that happens. In that case, why have security at all?
JMHO