Iron Maiden's management: What went wrong?

Ascendingthethrone said:
For me, I have never understood their strategy in the first decade of the century. They seemed to make good progress with a tour and then follow it up with either a shorter tour or one with a concept not conducive to bringing more casual fans onboard.
  • GMETID followed by a shorter tour.
  • Ozzfest followed by a short AMOLAD tour with a new album played from start to finish.
  • SBIT followed by a tour of post-2000 material.
Now have loved seeing Maiden on these tours, but for me it is not hard to see why they took a while to build up in the USA again. They never built momentum.
Click to expand...

Regardless of their usual PR of believing in their new stuff, those shorter album/recent material tours were a tacit acceptance from 2003 to 2011 that the audiences in the USA were always going to receive a classics tour much better than one featuring newer songs.
 
Helmuth Von Moltke said:
I was also reminded that Steve may have had back surgery around the DOD era, perhaps also limiting that tour @GhostofCain was it you saying this?
Click to expand...
I've mentioned it a couple times. The information was taken from interviews with Steve during the Dance of Death cycle when I used to obsessively scrapbook such things. The weight of his bass had been determined the cause of spinal compression, and that's when they decided to cut back on the length of touring for that album. As for whether it was surgery or therapy that helped the problem and allowed them to extend the tours again, I never came across an interview where he addresses this.
 
GhostofCain said:
Regardless of their usual PR of believing in their new stuff, those shorter album/recent material tours were a tacit acceptance from 2003 to 2011 that the audiences in the USA were always going to receive a classics tour much better than one featuring newer songs.
Click to expand...
2006 seems to be a turning point for them considering their most extensive USA tour at the time ended up being a setlist focused entirely on new material (TFF 2010, opposed to the more hits oriented 2011 setlist that barely scraped the US). maybe there’s a realization that even if it’s widely known that they’re going to play new material, American audiences will still buy tickets (and complain after).
 
I could have sworn I'd commented here before, but apparently not.

If we're getting into why Maiden aren't as commercially, er, ambitious, as they could be, Steve Harris is very likely the significant decision maker. It's his band, his baby, in his preferred image. Given all that's speculated about him needing to have a major hand in video production, live sound, having an actual recording studio at one time, and wanting the band to be seen to 'keep it real', it's fair to assume he'd also be the person least in favour of either Frosted Eddie Flakes or being crowned the biggest band on the planet.

That said, I'm also of the opinion that Rod Smallwood isn't a hungry business strategist with dollar signs for eyes as some seem to assume. I've met members of Phantom Management before and find it a small and surprisingly low-key organisation, that leans towards cheap and cheerful rather than trying to build a business empire. Whether or not Steve ever wanted to go down that route, I suspect Rod never put pressure on him either. From all I've read of him, Rod's strength is the old school 70s manager thing of being bullish in negotiations and defending the band's cause to the hilt, but he's no entrepreneur or marketing genius.
 
Mosh said:
Iron Maiden’s success is undeniable, but when you compare their popularity to bands like Metallica and Judas Priest, it's clear they've never quite reached the same mainstream level. A big part of that comes down to the band's management, particularly Rod Smallwood, who has been behind Iron Maiden's operations for decades. While Smallwood has certainly helped keep the band’s core identity intact, his decisions have often held them back from achieving the kind of mass appeal that Metallica or Priest managed to capture.

One of the biggest issues is Iron Maiden’s branding. While they’ve got a killer image with Eddie and iconic album covers, they’ve never really pushed themselves into the mainstream in the way Metallica did with their more commercial sound and strategic media presence. Smallwood’s refusal to change the band’s image or embrace more modern trends in the '90s and beyond meant they stayed within a niche, never breaking out beyond metal circles. Metallica, for example, made key changes like working with producer Bob Rock for the Black Album and getting major radio airplay, which broadened their appeal. Judas Priest also made smarter moves by experimenting with their sound and staying relevant to hard rock audiences, while Maiden stuck to their formula.

Smallwood's management also failed to push Iron Maiden into the media spotlight as effectively as Metallica did. While Metallica was all over MTV and late-night talk shows, Iron Maiden stayed more reserved, often keeping their media appearances limited to the hardcore metal scene. This lack of mainstream exposure kept them from reaching new audiences. Even when their songs were radio-friendly, their management didn't make the necessary push for radio play or mass media coverage.

On the touring front, Iron Maiden’s approach was also more conservative. While Metallica and Judas Priest were constantly expanding into new global markets, Maiden stuck to the same formula, reaching their loyal fanbase but missing opportunities to grow in emerging regions. Metallica’s world tours, which included stops in markets like South America and Asia, helped solidify them as a global force. Meanwhile, Smallwood often kept Maiden's touring strategy limited, not always capitalizing on the right moments or new opportunities. It’s a shame, really, because Maiden had all the potential to be the Metallica of the ‘80s and ‘90s, if only their management had taken a more dynamic approach.

I'm curious what everybody else thinks though. Discuss!
Click to expand...
I don’t normally care for forums, because most of what’s said on them are a load of waffle. But I felt it necessary to reopen my account on this forum, because of your claims.
Your claims are absolutely false.

Metallica is the most successful “metal” band in the world. There’s absolutely no doubt about that.

As for Iron Maiden, they are the most successful heavy metal band that the UK has ever produced. The only British hard rock band more successful than Iron Maiden is Led Zeppelin.

Judas Priest is nowhere near Iron Maiden in terms of international appeal, record sales, ticket sales, merchandise etc etc. Even members of Judas Priest have acknowledged that Maiden are way ahead of them.

Black Sabbath and Ozzy’s solo career have a more commercial appeal than Maiden in the US, but as for the rest of the world, Maiden are way ahead.

Ozzy is massive in the US. But here in the UK, Ozzy’s album sales and live appeal comes nowhere near Maiden.

During the Monsters of Rock era in the 1980s when Ozzy was at his commercial peak, he would’ve never have been able to sell over 100,000 tickets at Castle Donington, never in a million years - but Maiden did.
Judas Priest has never been anywhere near Ozzy on both sides of the Atlantic. They’re definitely nowhere near Maiden.

In Latin America, Iron Maiden are absolutely massive to the point of being on par with Metallica in that region of the world.

And for you to claim that Rod Smallwood has failed as manager of Iron Maiden just smacks of pure ignorance.

To be perfectly blunt, I can’t tell if you’re trolling, or if you’re an imbecile.
 
Hawkeye said:
As for Iron Maiden, they are the most successful heavy metal band that the UK has ever produced. The only British hard rock band more successful than Iron Maiden is Led Zeppelin.
Click to expand...

Def Leppard has two diamond certified albums and constantly tours. They’ve sold more albums than Iron Maiden.

Queen have outsold Leppard and Maiden combined, but I guess we’re not counting that as “hard rock”.

Hawkeye said:
During the Monsters of Rock era in the 1980s when Ozzy was at his commercial peak, he would’ve never have been able to sell over 100,000 tickets at Castle Donington, never in a million years - but Maiden did.
Click to expand...

The headliner alone doesn’t sell 100,000 tickets to Donington, the success and lineup of the entire festival does. At no point could Maiden sell 100,000 tickets by themselves at a venue in the UK. It’s the strength of the entire festival. You’re also conveniently forgetting that Guns N Roses were on the bill at the 1988 show.

Maiden also headlined the 1992 show and attendance wasn’t remarkable, the 1990 one with Whitesnake drew considerably more, for example.

Hawkeye said:
Judas Priest has never been anywhere near Ozzy on both sides of the Atlantic. They’re definitely nowhere near Maiden.
Click to expand...

Judas Priest were just as popular as Iron Maiden for most of the 80s. Screaming For Vengeance is double platinum in the USA, Maiden never had a double platinum album in the USA. “You’ve Got Another Thing Comin’” was all over the radio as well, more than Maiden ever was. No question that they play smaller venues and have largely been mismanaged since Rob returned, but saying they were nowhere near Maiden is incorrect. They were absolutely bigger than Iron Maiden were in the US for a period.
 
Last edited:
BludBrutha said:
Def Leppard has two diamond certified albums and constantly tours. They’ve sold more albums than Iron Maiden.

Queen have outsold Leppard and Maiden combined, but I guess we’re not counting that as “hard rock”.



The headliner alone doesn’t sell 100,000 tickets to Donington, the success and lineup of the entire festival does. At no point could Maiden sell 100,000 tickets by themselves at a venue in the UK. It’s the strength of the entire festival. You’re also conveniently forgetting that Guns N Roses were on the bill at the 1988 show.

Maiden also headlined the 1992 show and attendance wasn’t remarkable, the 1990 one with Whitesnake drew considerably more, for example.



Judas Priest were just as popular as Iron Maiden for most of the 80s. Screaming For Vengeance is double platinum in the USA, Maiden never had a double platinum album in the USA. “You’ve Got Another Thing Comin’” was all over the radio as well, more than Maiden ever was. No question that they play smaller venues and have largely been mismanaged since Rob returned, but saying they were nowhere near Maiden is incorrect. They were absolutely bigger than Iron Maiden were in the US for a period.
Click to expand...
US IS not the only Market in the World. Iron Maiden albums were distributed by a different label on through the years, Priest were always labeled by CBS/ SONY. IM albums cumulated sales with the different labels are more impressive than it seems, and yes - in the terms of worldwide success IM are the biggest UK Metal output, and just behind Led Zeppelin as we think about heavy rock bands (are Queen and Leppard heavy at all??!). Just realize Maiden are still massive, constantly filling stadiums around the world and selling tons of products and merch. And thay constaly touring year by year! Facts are facts!
 
Spaldy said:
Def Leppard and Queen were both objectively heavier than Led Zeppelin (who were blues/folk rock). At least when they wanted to be heavy.
Click to expand...
First albums, pop rock generally. Led Zeppelin were absolute Hard rock/ Heavy blues pioneers. Protagonists of many ideas which Queen and Lepps used in theirs songs.
 
When you revive a 10+ year old account to feed the troll. :D
Hawkeye said:
I don’t normally care for forums, because most of what’s said on them are a load of waffle. But I felt it necessary to reopen my account on this forum, because of your claims.
Your claims are absolutely false.

Metallica is the most successful “metal” band in the world. There’s absolutely no doubt about that.

As for Iron Maiden, they are the most successful heavy metal band that the UK has ever produced. The only British hard rock band more successful than Iron Maiden is Led Zeppelin.

Judas Priest is nowhere near Iron Maiden in terms of international appeal, record sales, ticket sales, merchandise etc etc. Even members of Judas Priest have acknowledged that Maiden are way ahead of them.

Black Sabbath and Ozzy’s solo career have a more commercial appeal than Maiden in the US, but as for the rest of the world, Maiden are way ahead.

Ozzy is massive in the US. But here in the UK, Ozzy’s album sales and live appeal comes nowhere near Maiden.

During the Monsters of Rock era in the 1980s when Ozzy was at his commercial peak, he would’ve never have been able to sell over 100,000 tickets at Castle Donington, never in a million years - but Maiden did.
Judas Priest has never been anywhere near Ozzy on both sides of the Atlantic. They’re definitely nowhere near Maiden.

In Latin America, Iron Maiden are absolutely massive to the point of being on par with Metallica in that region of the world.

And for you to claim that Rod Smallwood has failed as manager of Iron Maiden just smacks of pure ignorance.

To be perfectly blunt, I can’t tell if you’re trolling, or if you’re an imbecile.
Click to expand...

Mosh said:
Alright, since this has become the thread that would not die, I think it's time to come clean. I started this thread as a joke/troll thread to parody what I felt were pretty silly talking points that frequently show up on this forum about Maiden's management failures, despite the fact that they are about to roll out a 50th anniversary stadium tour and have basically only scaled up since the 90s.

When I started this thread, I felt like the opening post was so obviously ridiculous that it wouldn't last more than a page. I thought people would catch on immediately as well and play along.* Maidenfans proves me wrong again. :D Normally I would just let it play out, but seeing Eddie's Uncle freaking out over me not responding to his posts made it feel necessary to come clean - especially since I have strongly criticized a certain other forum member for repeatedly doing the same.

I want to shout out @Azas for being the first to catch on to this thread's real intention. I also used ChatGPT to help write the initial post and given Azas' interest in AI generated content.... well, the phrase "you can't bullshit a bullshitter" comes to mind.

I will say there was some interesting discussion in here though, so I won't move the thread over to madness (at least not right now). While the constant cynicism can be tiring, I think Ghost of Cain probably summed up Maiden's business dealings most succinctly. With the help of Rod Smallwood, they created an image from the beginning as well as relationships with the early Metal press that has allowed them to be a massive touring force, a cult phenomenon, and an underdog story all at the same time. I think it's also worth flagging their ability to personal differences aside in order to allow the band to exist largely in tact for most of its history, something that seems remarkably difficult in the rock business.


I also think this is an interesting topic. If you look at Maiden's status and metal as a whole during this time, the logic makes sense imo. They didn't oversaturate the American market and kept their touring limited while slowly scaling up on each revisit. Ozzfest was smart because it put Maiden in front of younger audiences and in a lot of ways reintroduced the band to that region. The Brave New World tour was undoubtedly a step up for them in America, but it's not like they were back to playing arenas again, they needed time to rebuild that audience.

I think it's also worth considering that at the time it wasn't clear that legacy acts could sustain the amount of touring Maiden has done. I think the most successful precedent in the early 00s was probably the Kiss reunion, which lasted about 4 years before imploding. It started with a massive stadium tour, and by the end it had scaled down to small arenas and amphitheaters. It seems to me like Maiden didn't want to burn out immediately and opted for slowly phasing things in again. With that being said, I also think at the time they were seeing the 2008 tour as their last big swing at a world tour. Where I get puzzled is the period between 2010 and 2015 and the thing I keep coming back to is that the band didn't realize they could sustain giant arena tours beyond a single cycle, which is why by the time we get to 2012 there is the feeling of a sort of slapped together Maiden England tour. They already blew their load with Somewhere Back in Time, but somehow there is still a market for more nostalgia touring and they have to figure out something comparable.


*For a look behind the (iron) curtain, I emphasized Judas Priest as a successful alternative to Maiden again to hopefully provide a clue to the non-seriousness of this topic, as Priest has not been as successful of a touring entity as Maiden in the 21st century and they have been famously objectively mismanaged throughout their history.
Click to expand...
 
Black Bart said:
What about Deep Purple? If I recall well, they were the biggest record-sellers in the US (all genres combined) in 1973.
Click to expand...
I doubt that. Dark Side of the Moon, Goodbye Yellow Brick Road and Houses of the Holy, for a start.

For all their success, Purple never moved a lot of product. They only have a few platinum albums in the USA it’s pretty surprising.

www.riaa.com

Gold & Platinum - RIAA

www.riaa.com www.riaa.com

They were too heavy for the massive mainstream audience and maybe too intellectual for the massive southern rock head banging AC/DC buying audience. They were in the middle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top