Peter: Thanks for this link. It is a great interview, even if it offers no substantial additional information. It certainly captured my interest once again and got me thinking the Pete Best sacking.
I had the pleasure of attending Pete Best's show in the fall of 2000 and you can see my review here
I admire your restraint in not making comment on the reasons for his departure. I hope you will not mind a couple of observations.
To begin, this interview reminded me of the relatively more polished speaking style of Pete compared to any of the other Beatles. These were the days when, to some, drummers were to be seen in the back row and not heard. I consider that Pete's gentler and more polished manner of expression rubbed John, Paul and George the wrong way.
In addition, Pete certainly seems less reactive that John, Paul or George. A difference in personality that is likely to have won over a number of fans.
Further, this interview is a reminder that the story has not changed over the years. There has been no straight forward in depth explanation of why Pete was sacked. The more we find out, the less likely it seems to have had anything to do with the manager or the producer.
Tracks played during this interview reveal that Pete was probably not as good as Ringo as a drummer but at the end of the day Ringo wasn't used in the early recordings either.
While I may be missing the point, it seems to me that Pete's manner and popularity was more of a threat to the others' insecurities of youth and that it was a group decision to let him go based on personality moreso than drumming talent.
In North America, the first Beatles' drummer to most of us was Ringo and so we were written out of the history. As is so often the case, history is written by the winners. I would love to see the living Beatles step up to the plate and discuss Pete's sacking in an open way. It would obviously mean so very much to Pete and I suspect harmless to the Paul or Ringo at this point.