Iron Maiden's management: What went wrong?

Christopher Baines said:
I dont even think its anything to do with being more commercial or popular, i just think Rod has been out of touch with the music business and what the fans want for years. I think Maiden are as big and as good as they are DESPITE of Rod.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the loyality of fans made Maiden successful, not Rod which probably doesn't care that much about commercial success. I suppose even if at some point of their career the audience lost interest in Maiden he wouldn't be surprised or sad. There's some kind of mistery why the band didn't find someone better, more connected and operative in the past. Maybe I'm wrong but Smallwood isn't a kind of person I would trust, after whole decades he still thinks just how to cut the costs and save, instead how to earn more and promote Iron Maiden among the new generation of fans.
 
Last edited:
I don't know, at the end of the day, I think for a band that made 14-minute songs about dead birds sinking boats and 18-minute songs about blimp crashes to be out there selling out arenas and stadiums globally they probably about hit their ceiling.

Rush was a more radio-friendly band and I'd say Maiden sales-wise was on par with them in the states without having that sort of backing in the media.
 
Flaming Blimp Crash said:
I don't know, at the end of the day, I think for a band that made 14-minute songs about dead birds sinking boats and 18-minute songs about blimp crashes to be out there selling out arenas and stadiums globally they probably about hit their ceiling.

Rush was a more radio-friendly band and I'd say Maiden sales-wise was on par with them in the states without having that sort of backing in the media.
Click to expand...
Oh no, Rush has always been bigger in States, not in the other regions but in the States for sure. Generally, Maiden’s achievements are result of fans loyality and band's musical vision, Rod even couldn't do anything to make them more acclaimed by music industry.
 
Nomadd said:
Exactly, the loyality of fans made Maiden successful, not Rod which probably doesn't care that much about commercial success. I suppose even if at some point of their career the audience lost interest in Maiden he wouldn't be surprised or sad. There's some kind of mistery why the band didn't find someone better, more connected and operative in the past. Maybe I'm wrong but Smallwood isn't a kind of person I would trust, after whole decades he still thinks just how to cut the costs and save, instead how to earn more and promote Iron Maiden among the new generation of fans.
Click to expand...
Tbh i even remember thinking at the time 20yrs ago what an old fuddy duddy Rod sounded on the early days DVD. It was quite embaressing. All that said its Steves band, hes always done what he thinks is right and hes done okay hasnt he lol. Personal id have done a few things a bit differently over the past 20yrs but its not my band.
 
Rush's peak was higher in the states and they were able to sustain success longer without falling in a hole in the 90s like Maiden. But, just a glance comparing both, it looks like after the reunion era got rolling for Maiden they were both about the same in terms of albums selling and their respective chart positions. Were also drawing about the same out on the road.
 
Flaming Blimp Crash said:
Rush's peak was higher in the states and they were able to sustain success longer without falling in a hole in the 90s like Maiden. But, just a glance comparing both, it looks like after the reunion era got rolling for Maiden they were both about the same in terms of albums selling and their respective chart positions. Were also drawing about the same out on the road.
Click to expand...
In mentioned aspect - you are right. I'm wonder why Iron Maiden felt so hard in the States back in the 90s, why did American fans abandon the band? Was it just the result of trend shifting process? Irons were always out of trends, so that situation shouldn't affect them that much. Weird ...
 
Nomadd said:
In mentioned aspect - you are right. I'm wonder why Iron Maiden felt so hard in the States back in the 90s, why did American fans abandon the band? Was it just the result of trend shifting process? Irons were always out of trends, so that situation shouldn't affect them that much. Weird ...
Click to expand...
I'm not a Rush fan, so I can't speak as to why Rush was able to still do seemingly well through the 90s, but Maiden's changes to their sound as well as the loss of their popular frontman (and subsequent replacement with someone who could never [not knocking you, Blaze, sorry!] fill those shoes) didn't help matters.
 
Nomadd said:
In mentioned aspect - you are right. I'm wonder why Iron Maiden felt so hard in the States back in the 90s, why did American fans abandon the band? Was it just the result of trend shifting process? Irons were always out of trends, so that situation shouldn't affect them that much. Weird ...
Click to expand...
The casual fans followed the trend of grunge, and having lived through that era as a fan in the US, it wasn't all that cool to be a Maiden fan during that time. The press was particularly brutal in making any metal band that wasn't changing with the times uncool, both in America and the UK. Maiden stood out as a VERY traditional metal band, which made them a target. Yet, by the time grunge was dying out after a few years and metal started a resurgence with several reunions going on, oh look, here comes the music press kissing their asses again. Go figure.
 
I don't have the figures but it has been noted on this forum before that Maidens peak popularity in the US was the World Slavery Tour. Sales and interest were down by the time SiT came out. So yes, grunge rose and metal fell in the 90s but that may not be the whole story.

Maybe Rod has been sabotaging Maiden since as early as 1986, what a bad, bad man(ager)
 
Christopher Baines said:
I dont even think its anything to do with being more commercial or popular, i just think Rod has been out of touch with the music business and what the fans want for years. I think Maiden are as big and as good as they are DESPITE of Rod.
Click to expand...
who would you prefer? who else is like the 6th / 7th member of the band they manage? this is of course sometimes can be a bad thing in maiden's case there is mutual respect and a keen friendship between the band members and the manager. (sheriff of huddersfield etc...) do you see any other manager - band - artist relatioship like this outside of maiden and also very succesful?

and most of all: he is a nice guy. we bumped into him several times when following maiden members in the city (haha) and he was always nice. and he does these charity campaigns, roll his bicycle in his age for kilometers and arrange everything. these are hard things to do and more: he doesn't have to do at all... on the other hand it's very easy to talk bad about someone.
 
Starblind said:
who would you prefer? who else is like the 6th / 7th member of the band they manage? this is of course sometimes can be a bad thing in maiden's case there is mutual respect and a keen friendship between the band members and the manager. (sheriff of huddersfield etc...) do you see any other manager - band - artist relatioship like this outside of maiden and also very succesful?

and most of all: he is a nice guy. we bumped into him several times when following maiden members in the city (haha) and he was always nice. and he does these charity campaigns, roll his bicycle in his age for kilometers and arrange everything. these are hard things to do and more: he doesn't have to do at all... on the other hand it's very easy to talk bad about someone.
Click to expand...
Sales had descent due to streaming & downloading. They play in venues that in the 90s they couldnt. I dont see the point of this theme. No one belived in the 90s that they were going to reach the actual level again. At least not me.
 
This whole conversation makes no sense. Why? Because Maiden are as big as ever now. The 90's were a rough time for traditional metal, but let's not forget that rock is more mainstream than metal. Maiden made the change in 1995 - and it was different from all their albums before that, this was their choice after some ''experiments'' like everyone else back then. And despite the success in the charts, the mainstream FOTD wasn't accepted by the majority of the critics. The thrash scene since the mid-80's (the US), the new interests in the 90's, times were changing, but Rod can't tell what songs the band to write. Bruce wanted to try different styles and approaches, who knows if the albums would have been successful if he had stayed, Blaze had no chance in this impossible situation. Maybe Kiske (Helloween made a successful change in the 90's with vocalists, not the style in the early 90's, Priest did it with Painkiller, which was expected after their different styles since the 70's), but the material could/should have been more classic, probably. Comparison with bands from the 70's is not fair, Maiden were old in the public eye, but at the same time in their prime as a band in the 90's. They don't need to be more mainstream or more successful (how much more?), they have all the respect in the media, they do big promotions, play full stadiums, sale are good even nowadays... I mean, what else. It's a pointless discussion. They will always do what they want, being mainstream/very popular is nothing without good material. Recognition is earned through albums/songs and live playing (Maiden, Priest, Black Sabbath- check!), the biggest awards being the opinions of the fans. Nothing else, that's it. Music business, TV appearances... it was something for back in the day, but not now and not for (the big success of) Maiden. Rod is more than a manager, he's like a band member to them.

Maybe they should have made NPFTD (the same songs) really heavy or something? I admit, I want to hear that. Like I said before, Bruce's AOB is probably the heaviest and different Maiden could have sounded at the time.
 
Kalata said:
This whole conversation makes no sense. Why? Because Maiden are as big as ever now. The 90's were a rough time for traditional metal, but let's not forget that rock is more mainstream than metal. Maiden made the change in 1995 - and it was different from all their albums before that, this was their choice after some ''experiments'' like everyone else back then. And despite the success in the charts, the mainstream FOTD wasn't accepted by the majority of the critics. The thrash scene since the mid-80's (the US), the new interests in the 90's, times were changing, but Rod can't tell what songs the band to write. Bruce wanted to try different styles and approaches, who knows if the albums would have been successful if he had stayed, Blaze had no chance in this impossible situation. Maybe Kiske (Helloween made a successful change in the 90's with vocalists, not the style in the early 90's, Priest did it with Painkiller, which was expected after their different styles since the 70's), but the material could/should have been more classic, probably. Comparison with bands from the 70's is not fair, Maiden were old in the public eye, but at the same time in their prime as a band in the 90's. They don't need to be more mainstream or more successful (how much more?), they have all the respect in the media, they do big promotions, play full stadiums, sale are good even nowadays... I mean, what else. It's a pointless discussion. They will always do what they want, being mainstream/very popular is nothing without good material. Recognition is earned through albums/songs and live playing (Maiden, Priest, Black Sabbath- check!), the biggest awards being the opinions of the fans. Nothing else, that's it. Music business, TV appearances... it was something for back in the day, but not now and not for (the big success of) Maiden. Rod is more than a manager, he's like a band member to them.

Maybe they should have made NPFTD (the same songs) really heavy or something? I admit, I want to hear that. Like I said before, Bruce's AOB is probably the heaviest and different Maiden could have sounded at the time.
Click to expand...
All in all you are right, let's wait and see what will happen next.
 
Whilst Maiden could be even bigger had they made some different decisions in the 80s and 90s, I think it is undeniable that Rod has done an excellent job - for the most part - managing them.

His approach of being friends with journalists meant that the band rarely got a bad review in the metal press (a journalist who likes a drink or three once said that Rod put “hospital” in “hospitality”; he always knew how to treat them so they would always butter Maiden up). He also made the most of the partisan metal vs other styles of music attitude in the metal community. The often repeated claims of Maiden being successful in spite of never being played on the radio (I might have dreamt seeing them on MTV or listening to their songs in commercial radio in Spain in the 80s/90s) gave their success an aura of authenticity that other bands didn’t have.

How he managed to get away with people believing that “never sold out” propaganda whilst the band were releasing multiple versions of their singles to try and get top 5 singles (or a number 1 with BYDTTS) clearly demonstrates that he was a great manager, one who made his band commercial with people not realising that was the case.

For what is worth, Judas Priest are a smaller band worldwide popularity wise, yet they were often changing their sound to try and make it big in the USA. They were very big there for some time in the 80s, but not anymore (or at least they are a smaller band than Maiden in North America). I would argue that Rod’s approach has been more commercially successful whilst at the same time keeping that (made-up) aura of authenticity.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top