Q & A

[royclough]

Quality not brilliant ans whole video is 40 minutes long so just a taster, this is from 1994, I did another with them in 2002

[sowhat]

Oh my God, Billy Adamson speaking!!!
Lol at the banana, John McNally was acting so naturally here, i'm really amazed.
Although it was hard for me to understand what was said. Yes, i know you were all speaking good English, still it was a bit like, "catch a line if you can".

[royclough]

Yes sound quality porr as caught on a home video camera plus John's accent and mine to some degrre and most certainly Billy's not easy to get.

Video itself 40 minutes lone but some good questions and their take on why Mike Pender left.

[JeffZ]

Nice to see them being so at ease, but I couldn't pick out much of what was said. Sheena's point about Billy actually talking is well taken though!

[chriscurtisfan]

Would anybody care to volunteer to transcribe Roy's 40 minute video into text so we can find out their take on why Mike Pender left. As an American, I had a really hard time making out any of the lovely British accents. Or maybe Roy could tell us, approximately, what they said? It WAS good to see them all enjoying themselves, relaxed, and laughing. And now the apparent mystery is solved that Billy Adamson does speak. So I did enjoy viewing it!! Thanks, Roy!! I have always stated that I don't care if the video is less than stellar quality, just let me see it. I'm happy for any Searchers material!

[royclough]

I wasn't going to post anymore of this but some have requested it, well 1/2, but enough for me!, Even though sound poor some may find it interesting, their version of why MP left, I say their version because MP has always given a slightly different version.

[sowhat]

I think it's the sound not accent, having troubles understanding even Frank's speech although he's usually very easy to understand. Um, anyway.
It's amazing to see how people are still so much interested in "why-Mike-Pender-left-the-Searchers" issue. Well, it was an unusual situation of course, a vocalist leaving when the band's long past their prime & been through hard times and managed to get out of darkness, and so forth (including "name stealing" issue, now that's what doesn't happen often), but still, 26 years on and people aren't yet tired of that subject, amazing, amazing, amazing.

[royclough]

well it was 94 and water under the bridge but rarely have fans had the opportunity to hear what was said, though agree really of little interest now.

[chriscurtisfan]

On this side of the pond, we are still wondering Who Killed Kennedy and then who is responsible for the Lindberg Kidnapping. There is a lot about the human condition that I find amazing, but being nosy -- it will never come to an end. And all the bookwriters of the world should be eternally happy for that.

[JeffZ]

The reason for the interest is basically there are still a lot of us who wish Mike was back with them even though we know full well it ain't gonna happen...

[sowhat]

The reason for the interest is basically there are still a lot of us who wish Mike was back with them even though we know full well it ain't gonna happen...

Yes, i understand. Still i think this may not be a good idea. Actually, i think a "reunion", more often than not, is not such a good idea in general. In some cases, it turns out a disaster. In many others, it comes to naught, a flash of light before everything gets dark. Well, a reunion show or two wouldn't have hurt, of course, but reunion as "bringing a member back" is a different thing. Elaborating.
First off, well, suggest a reunion has happened. The fans are what? Excited. And excitement is a thing that often goes in a flash of light, and after it's gone, the fans often start comparing past with present. More often than not, that comparison isn't flattering to present. Time passed. People changed. Lots of things have changed. Fine wine gets better with age, but bands are a different thing. Sometimes age comes accompanied by wisdom, sometimes it just comes alone, adding grey hair, wrinkles, health problems, musical abilities deterioration, extra weight (optional), etc. Very often, fans expect the reunited band to be the same as it was years ago (or better than it was), but more often than not, it's just impossible, especially if "years ago" has a number of 20 or 25 put before these two words. The whole thing may go as far as "dream turning into a nightmare".
Second, let's not forget Spencer has been in the band for 25 years, and if a reunion had happened, what about him? Throw the guy away, after all these years and after all he'd done for the band and together with the band? Doesn't that sound a bit unfair?
So it goes. Or so it seems to me. But i may be wrong, of course.

[JeffZ]

I know Sheena, you are probably right in saying a reunion would not go very well with all the water under the bridge over the past 25 years. Indeed, Spencer has now been in the band just about as long as Mike was. A few reunions have gone well over time, The Everly Brothers made some fine records and put on excellent shows when they got back together, but it's very much the exception to the rule.

When Chris passed away, I had some hope that his funeral might provide a chance for everyone to bury the hatchet. But from what I've read, if anything, the exact opposite took place, and the parties ended up being even further estranged. It's sad, everyone is getting up there now, as the passing of both Tony and Chris illustrates. Obviously the chances anything changing are very slim at this point.

[royclough]

A reunion will never happen now not even for a one off show.
As pointed Spencer James been lead singer now for probably as long if not longer than Mike was, difference being their legacy was built on MP's vocals in the main.

In fact being realistic one has to wonder how long they like a number of 60s acts can keep going, they still are able to draw an audience but John McNally turns 70 at end of month

[sowhat]

70?! 70! And still rocking. Those guys from the sixties (and fifties, too) must have some kind of a perpetuum mobile built in.