MR

x

What does one have to do with the other. I don't think a pre-requisite to donating something to charity is that you have to come out of retirement. In fact, in the good ol' USA, one can retire anytime they want, especially if they can afford it.

With all due respect, and I'm not trying to be confrontational, but what in the world is people's obsession with Steve Perry having to sing? It's one thing to wish that he would or that you may want to hear him, but it's another to actually judge someone in a negative light for doing what is right for them. Like somehow Steve Perry is less of a man because he has chosen not to sing for the past 20 years. I will NEVER get that. Does Steve Perry judge your life choices?

You paid for those records and in return, he sang on them. You (may or may not have) paid to see him in concert and I assure you, he did his best for you each and every night. Your contractual obligations of what you should judge Steve Perry on have been wholly fulfilled.

Is David Phelps somehow a better man because he is singing at 44 while Steve Perry is kicking back?

These are just men doing what they choose to do. They are no different from each other. Maybe one is a better friend or husband or father than the other. Maybe one is more charitable. Maybe one is this or that - all of which is NOBODY's business.

I know idols are idols and we all want and wish, but I just don't understand the obsession with this one person and singing. I'd love it if he released new music. I'd absolutely LOVE IT. But whoever Steve Perry is as a person, as a human being making choices, would not change one single ounce. Sing, don't sing. Same guy.

Props to David Phelps and the MILLIONS of others who sing at 44 (it's not some miracle). And very cool for those who can step away when it's right for them and enjoy their life making their choices.

Sorry - it just bugs me. And for the record - I think charitable giving is far more valuable, critical, and needed than singing. I am as charitable as I can be with my money and I can't sing worth shit. I'd hate to think I'm a lesser person than David for that.

I just posted this from a performance point of view.

If Steve is into other interests besides recording new Music....Fine. Excellent! GOOD FOR HIM.

Just don't lead people down the path of "Oh, I'm building a new Studio" "I'm thinking about recording new stuff"

EITHER YOU ARE OR YOU ARE NOT
WTF....seriously.

TRAGChick wrote:I just posted this from a performance point of view.

If Steve is into other interests besides recording new Music....Fine. Excellent! GOOD FOR HIM.

Just don't lead people down the path of "Oh, I'm building a new Studio" "I'm thinking about recording new stuff"

EITHER YOU ARE OR YOU ARE NOT
WTF....seriously.

I do get that. I think in that sense, you are probably right. But we have seen photographic proof that a studio has been built, or is at least substantially built. Things take time and when your significant other is battling cancer and passes, you might decide to put some of that stuff on hold for a bit. A couple folks have said they have heard a few new songs and that they sound great, so there are eye witnesses that he's done the things he said he was doing. I'll support that much of the blame for whetting people's appetite is his fault and he's maybe better served not doing that, but I'll also stipulate that my idea of a timeline may or may not be what Steve Perry's idea of a timeline is. I think Steve Perry has probably put exactly as much effort into all of this as he saw fit, from a priority sense. If it was a bigger priority to him, maybe he'd be farther along and if it was less of a priority, he'd not be this far.

All I am saying is - David singing is a good thing. Steve Perry donating over $100,000 to charity is a good thing. But they are different things is all.

Oh - you thought the money for the sit down was for him? If that were the case, I'd probably be the one leading the charge against him. That would be a total douche move. But doing it for charity is a very cool move, in my opinion. I wish everyone with that kind of draw would do such things. If someone has $60,000 to throw away on a sit down with a famous person, that money is far better off in the hands of decent charities anyway. I can only dream of such disposable income. Of course, it's a tax write-off for them, so maybe it was already earmarked for charity anyway - so why not have coffee?