The earliest online Yes conversations with Henry Potts – 689

The internet in the late 90s definitely became something of a haven for people like me who wanted to read about their music (given the absence of coverage elsewhere) and happily reminisce a little about the QPR and Wembley 77/78 shows and such like. I didn’t contribute much so didn’t really experience it as a community but the digital fanzine element was absolutely huge and valuable and actually preferable to the endless discourse we have on-line today.

Anyway … I think Mark is right. For bands who put the time in communicating and engaging the base, especially at times when they don’t just want your money, is a massive factor in maintaining an audience let alone building one.

Just look at what Marilllon have achieved over decades. They were down to playing just one night in a sub 2500 cap venue in London on many tours not that long ago and are now doing multiple shows in places twice that size. They could probably manage to sell an O2 Arena headline date if they wanted to play somewhere on that scale. Yes are literally light years away from that level right now.

Most of that regrowth for Marillion is down to the effort in forming a community of fans and understanding the importance of the band being a sincere part of the conversation.

Releasing some decent music along the way does no harm of course but looking at my shelf I think that’s only 10 (?) studio albums of new material in the getting on for 30 years that have passed since EMI dropped them (ironically around the time when mass domestic internet use became a thing). Yes have done 7 or 8 maybe across the same period. So not vastly different. Not in terms of quantity at any rate.

In all that time I have never ever felt like Marillion had their hand in my wallet. Yes meanwhile can’t seem to do anything without it being miserably transactional. They can’t even make the effort to let customers of their own on line store know via e mail that they have dates going on sale.

Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on how you look at it) people do not appear to be biting their hands off for London tickets at these price points but it is a very good example of how some artists take the base for granted.

I am relatively young at 63 for a 70s Yes fan. I can see a lot of people those few years older having a) no idea the band are playing and / or b) when they do find out being put off by the prices being asked to hear them do Fragile (again and again and again).

The stalls and royal circle for both Palladium shows are about 60% sold (as I write) which is ok but I would be very surprised if there is much movement on tickets in the top tier of the venue going for an eye watering £81 (plus fees).

As for a lot of bands of that vintage, post Covid, the instant buy factor isn’t there any more. You have to earn it and they aren’t earning it.

Phoners with podcasts are nice enough but they are just an item on the media round where they tell more or less every interviewer the same thing. It often comes off as a chore. Just as I imagine proofing the accuracy of their own album reissues is deemed a chore.

It is a feeling of a mutually agreed duty of care between artist and audience that is missing. Some are inclined to lean into that in a genuine way and some are inclined to sell you a t shirt. Even the all time merch kings, the Grateful Dead and Kiss*, are better at the comms stuff than Yes and, in the case of Gene and Paul that is really saying something.

Every GD album reissue comes with a whole podcast series. That’s not easy or cheap to do but it certainly keeps the home fires burning in a positive way. When I think of Yes I just have this horrible image in my mind of them doing Spinal Tap’s “Gimme Some Money”.

The band really should be thanking the likes of Mark and Kevin for doing what they do and think more about embracing the community aspect.