Iron Maiden's management: What went wrong?

100% agreed here. These guys could be as big as Metallica if they had a more creative manager in touch with the changing popular music landscape.

Those late 80s albums, as great as they are, would have been the time for them to go in even further on synths and really work towards a hit (Wasted Years was a step in the right direction). Instead, they doubled back on that sound and tried to sound more "street" and "rock" on NPFTD and FOTD. Then the 90s were the perfect opportunity for them to embrace a darker, more aggressive sound - instead they went sad and proggy.

With a proper management team behind them they could have really increased popularity in the 90s. That would, unfortunately, probably mean we wouldn't have gotten the reunion with Bruce, but just think of the possibilities!
The problem is IM musicians just don't care about fitting into any changes, and the management has nothing to do with their artistic directions. Steve mentioned once that artistic independence was the main condition of a management contract.
 
With Death Magnetic they tried to go back to their roots.

Exactly, they tried. Didnt work at all in my ears. For the very same reasons you also mention below.

That album has several good tracks, same with Hardwired. Hell, even 72 Seasons has a couple of songs I find likeable.

Perosnal taste is of course always legit and if you enjoy it, who am I to debate. But I also have to say: if those exact albums were recorded by a newcomer act instead of Metallica, nobody would have noticed. Nobody! Reviews would have been like "just another thrash album, decent, but next please". These albums were noticed because of the Metallica logo, and sold because of the loyalty of the fans.
My take on Metallica is this: Hetfield is the soul of the band.

Probably true.
it feels like he’s outgrown thrash, but hasn’t found a new version of himself musically. Or maybe he has and just doesn’t embrace it. Like, maybe deep down he wants to play southern rock or something, but holds back because he’s afraid of alienating fans. Yeah, that’s just my speculation, but it sort of fits.
It fits indeed. Probably all three thoughts are correct. However, they all result in the same thing: he is not into it any more. Outgrown or different interests, the outcome is the same. It is pure painting by numbers. Creating a product for the market, carefully designed to please and to uphold an image. That's what I mean with garbage. It is all plastic.

They’ve made peace with their thrash past, but it’s not blooming into great records anymore, because their hearts are in a different place now. That’s how I see it.

Exactly.
That said, they still do charity, they care about their fans.

I don't deny that.

Yeah, they’re mainstream now, and sometimes do stuff like singing with Lady Gaga, but they’re not garbage.
Cant be much more trashy than that. I mean, they could have collaborated with some underground act, making a dream come true for them, pushing someone who really needs it. Instead they go for the queen of trash, which is already on top of the world...

If you ask me, that word fits Motley Crue better.
Yeah, they truely are garbage. Definitely more garbage than Metallica. But they always were garbage, Metallica actually were brilliant once.
 
Cant be much more trashy than that. I mean, they could have collaborated with some underground act, making a dream come true for them, pushing someone who really needs it. Instead they go for the queen of trash, which is already on top of the world...

The Metallica/Gaga performance was trash, but through no fault of hers. She's a genuine fan of metal, it was probably a dream come true for her, why does it matter that she is already successful and popular?

If anything it was probably gonna give Metallica a push - not that they need it either - but the whole thing was so badly handled that I doubt it gained them many new fans and just left most watching it confused.
 
The Metallica/Gaga performance was trash, but through no fault of hers. She's a genuine fan of metal, it was probably a dream come true for her, why does it matter that she is already successful and popular?

If anything it was probably gonna give Metallica a push - not that they need it either - but the whole thing was so badly handled that I doubt it gained them many new fans and just left most watching it confused.
I believe the goal was to help keep the band actively in the eye of the American public as they announced the North American WorldWired stadium dates the day after the Grammys performance with Gaga. The appearance may have been made to give them a little boost for the new venues as they hadn't toured stadiums as a solo headliner before. (Summer Sanitarium was like a mini-festival)

I still think Maiden wants to hop up to some stadium dates in North America for 2026, so I think the tour announcement will be tied into the documentary release.
 
I believe the goal was to help keep the band actively in the eye of the American public as they announced the North American WorldWired stadium dates the day after the Grammys performance with Gaga. The appearance may have been made to give them a little boost for the new venues as they hadn't toured stadiums as a solo headliner before. (Summer Sanitarium was like a mini-festival)

I still think Maiden wants to hop up to some stadium dates in North America for 2026, so I think the tour announcement will be tied into the documentary release.
You're probably right. The documentary, which will be screened in cinemas and distributed on social media, should impact the American market. Kate Bush was inducted into the RnRHoF, thanks to one song on Netflix. I think the Iron Maiden movie might be the key to wider audiences in NA.
 
Another way to look at this is genre popularity.

Straightforward 4:4 time, chorus verse, bridge (maybe) format rock typically enjoys more popularity than prog rock does.

Metallica, while they have NWOBHM roots pioneered by bands like Maiden (who were really only 3 years ahead in debut album release), and display high technical musical competency, were always more rock than prog based.

Comparing Maiden and Metallica would be like comparing Rush to Led Zeppelin or Yes to U2.

Sorta.

The point is the proggier the band, the more devoted its core fan base tends to be but its mass appeal lags more accessible bands.
 
Comparing Maiden and Metallica would be like comparing Rush to Led Zeppelin or Yes to U2.

Sorta.

The point is the proggier the band, the more devoted its core fan base tends to be but its mass appeal lags more accessible bands.
I guess I'm on Team Proggie since Rush, Yes and Maiden are my three favorite bands.
Although to take your example further I also love Zeppelin and U2.
 
Let’s be real—the core issue with Iron Maiden’s ups and downs over the years falls on Rod Smallwood. His mismanagement, especially during the early ‘90s, nearly wrecked the band. Bruce’s departure? That wasn’t a band decision—it was Smallwood failing to manage the situation and causing a massive identity crisis. When Bruce left, Maiden lost their spark, and Smallwood didn’t do enough to smooth the transition. Blaze was never going to fill those shoes, and it showed.

Even after they got back on track, Smallwood’s inability to adapt the band to changing times kept them stuck in a rut. While other bands were evolving, Maiden was playing catch-up, stuck in the same old formula. Smallwood’s short-sighted approach kept them from reaching their full potential. They’re legends, sure, but they could’ve been even bigger with better management.
I agree Rod dropped the ball around the 90's. The last 25yrs he seems so out of date. He was great in the 80's but should have retired in the 90's
 
According to Nicko McBrain, Rod said RnRHoF CEO "Fuck Off, Bollocks" and tell them not to nominate the band anymore. The SiT jacket, which they showed once last year, was brought back to the band from Cleveland's rock museum permanent exhibition. I think they will open something like an Iron Maiden Museum on their own. A few years ago, Steve suggested they think about his house in Essex to be used as the band's museum. Who knows.

 
According to Nicko McBrain, Rod said RnRHoF CEO "Fuck Off, Bollocks" and tell them not to nominate the band anymore. The SiT jacket, which they showed once last year, was brought back to the band from Cleveland's rock museum permanent exhibition. I think they will open something like an Iron Maiden Museum on their own. A few years ago, Steve suggested they think about his house in Essex to be used as the band's museum. Who knows.

Maybe that explains the jacket being used in Newark, it was the Rock Hall jacket.
 
According to Nicko McBrain, Rod said RnRHoF CEO "Fuck Off, Bollocks" and tell them not to nominate the band anymore. The SiT jacket, which they showed once last year, was brought back to the band from Cleveland's rock museum permanent exhibition. I think they will open something like an Iron Maiden Museum on their own. A few years ago, Steve suggested they think about his house in Essex to be used as the band's museum. Who knows.


Which proves that Maiden don't need any of that bs.
 
Which proves that Maiden don't need any of that bs.
It would be a kind of hypocrisy to receive the award from a mainstream institution representing the corporate music industry, which has always ignored Iron Maiden. They probably do something on their own, they are the opposition to commercial, trendy-fueled entertainment.
 
Let’s be real—the core issue with Iron Maiden’s ups and downs over the years falls on Rod Smallwood.
Sorry, but this is mostly nonsense. This theory is based on the premise that success is determined by management alone. Which is of course not the case. Songwriting, stage presence and likeability obviously play an important role, such as musical trends. Management can only work with what the band is delivering. Maiden's downfall in the 90s is mainly result of changing musical climate, releasing poor albums and a decline in production value. At least the latter two are definitely Steve's "fault".
His mismanagement, especially during the early ‘90s, nearly wrecked the band. Bruce’s departure? That wasn’t a band decision—it was Smallwood failing to manage the situation and causing a massive identity crisis.
So? How? Bruce's departure was his own decision. Based on feeling trapped in Maiden's hamster wheel. Sure, part of that wheel stems from Smallwood, but at least in same amounts from Steve. How could Rod have managed the situation? Making Bruce sign a contract to never leave the band?
When Bruce left, Maiden lost their spark, and Smallwood didn’t do enough to smooth the transition. Blaze was never going to fill those shoes, and it showed.
And how could Smallwood have prevented this? Steve wanted Blaze. Could he really have stopped that choice? How could he have made the transition smoother? Would a smoother transition have made Blaze a better frontman? Maybe that final tour with Bruce was a mistake, but other than that, what could Smallwood have done?
Even after they got back on track, Smallwood’s inability to adapt the band to changing times kept them stuck in a rut. While other bands were evolving, Maiden was playing catch-up, stuck in the same old formula.
Again, how is this Smallwoods fault? It is very clear that Maiden never allow anyone from management or record company at the songwriting sessions. Maiden being stuck in their same old formula is Maiden's fault. Not management.
What other bands were evolving? Trends were coming and going, and Maiden did not adapt to them. Probably the best decision they could make. Look at all those bands who followed trends by changing their style abruptly. All of them either crashed immediately or returned to their old style after a while.

Smallwood’s short-sighted approach kept them from reaching their full potential. They’re legends, sure, but they could’ve been even bigger with better management.
Again, this is assuming that management alone is the decisive factor in a bands career. Which is not correct.

The real fuck up Smallwood can be accused of is his handling of Helloween and Noise Records. He massively ruined their career and put the careers of lots of bands at jeopardy with that reckless and greedy move. That's what he can really be blamed for. As for Maiden, I really doubt he caused more bad than good.
 
Last edited:
It would be a kind of hypocrisy to receive the award from a mainstream institution representing the corporate music industry, which has always ignored Iron Maiden. They probably do something on their own, they are the opposition to commercial, trendy-fueled entertainment.
Exactly! The RnRHOF is a pathetic community based on cash flow, bribes and personal preferences of the board. Being induced there is not an honour, it is being part of a self-serving show. If Rod really told them to fuck off, then he has my respect. Just like Axl, who did not give a fuck and did not attend when is band got induced. Thats not bad management, thats balls!
 
It is very clear that Maiden never allow anyone from management or record company at the songwriting sessions. Maiden being stuck in their same old formula is Maiden's fault. Not management.
They actually had A&R people around for Brave New World.


Steve didn't like some of their advice though, so for example the choir vocals on The Wicker Man was cut out from the album version...

It's unclear how much else impact they had on the album. But they are credited in the booklet.


In this article it is mentioned that A&R paired them up with Kevin Shirley:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top