You lot know more than I do about these things. When you lack the inside information, maybe you should start with what you do know. I understand that there was a working relationship with PC before the split with Ed but it may help to consider these two events - the split with Ed and the signing with PC - as two separate events. Sometimes, just developing a succession of questions helps to clarify matters a bit in one's mind.
In suggesting the following questions, I do not intend to suggest any particualr scenario or sequence of events. If it appears so, I apologise in advance. I am simply suggesting a more analytical style for consideration of this matter.
> Would the signing with PC have happened if Mark had not split from Ed?
> If the answer is "No", was it an amicable split?
> If not, what prompted the split with Ed?
> If there were differences between Mark and Ed, what were those differences?
> If those differences started over managerial, music and/or related matters, what were those matters?
> And did they escalate to become more personal? This is not uncommon but, is that what happened in this case?
> If it did, it can be very difficult to reconcile those differences without one party or the other losing face. If so, is time a healing force following the break in such a long-standing and close relationship?
> Is that what has happened here?
Let's move on to the question of PC.
> Why was PC brought into the managerial fold on behalf of MK in the first place?
> How did that come about?
> What was PC's role in (or with) Damage Management?
> What was the division of responsibility between PC and Ed in terms of managerial responsibility for MK?
> If PC were brought in by MK, did he have a plan in mind?
> Or did MK simply wish to shake up his own management structure in some way but without any clear idea of what the outcome would be?
> Has there been any indication whatsoever that PC, having been brought in, acted to achieve sole responsibility for MK managerially?
> If so, what were those indications?
> If not, did Mark simply turn to him, as if to a port in a storm, when the split with Ed occurred?
> Does MK have exactly the same legal relationship with PC that he had with Ed?
> If not, what are the differences?
> And does PC have the same personal relationship with MK as Ed did?
> If not, what are the differences?
These questions then lead on to the different managerial approaches of PC and Ed. I guess it depends on your definition of professional but there is one different factor here. Mark is in a very different place in his career from where he was over 30 years ago. DS/MK and Ed, in a career sense, grew up together. MK and PC did not. PC came into the managerial fold after the initial success had peaked, perhaps at a time when MK was less sure about his musical future. Another difference is that MK was Damage Management. I'm not saying that Damage didn't have other interests (you'll know more about this) but MK was, as they say, the main man (just as DS had been its main group). With PC, MK simply joined an existing management set-up. As they used to say in the early days of pop and rock music, he joined PC's stable of performers. This is, in my opinion, a very different managerial situation. It is therefore not surprising that we perceive a different management approach.
Having said that, some of the changes that we, as true fans in your case and as a concert-attender in mine, have experienced since the switch to PCM have not been to our liking. As said, the ticketing arrangements have been less than helpful. Since fans want to be fairly close to the stage, not knowing where your seats are on a pre-sale makes it impossible to know whether to apply through the normal channels. If you do, you can select the better seats for yourself but are then left with the problem of off-loading the ones you don't need. There have been some other annoying decisions by PCM, as well. In broad terms, PCM is far less fan-friendly than Damage. Whether that's down to PC or MK, I don't know.
What i can say is that, having met and spoken to both PC and Ed briefly at concerts (neither knows who I am from Adam), Ed was the more personable. I think this is reflected in the way the respective management organisations work and operate.
