why did the Beatles not give Pete Best money when they became successful?


like they could have agreed to give 5% of their total earnings to Pete Best as he helped make the Beatles the band they are even though he got asked to leave the band early on, he became richer later in life but not after struggling financially during the Beatles heyday. 

8 Answers

  • 2 months ago

    I don’t think people think of the drummer making the Beatles what they were after success, he’ll even with Ringo people turned his name into a verb for the weakest person of a group, plus they were successful after dropping Pete.

  • 2 months ago

    Because they didn't become successful until Best was replaced with Ringo.

  • 2 months ago

    He's gotten money for the recordings he took part in much more than he deserved frankly because of them, he's probably made loads more off his name which is only famous because of them. No tears for Pete Best from me.

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

      Because your premise is false.  He was just a guy they hired to play drums when they got a contract to perform in Hamburg, Germany.  He joined them on 12 Aug. '60, & they opened in Hamburg on 17 Aug.  He never made more than a superficial effort to fit in with the others & eschewed the hair style & dress they adopted.

      Listen to the 1961 album on which they backed Tony Sheridan.  Best's drumming is the weakest part of the recording.  The album was done without Stu Sutcliffe, who formally quit the band 2 weeks later to concentrate on a career as an artist.     When they were unsuccessful in their 1 Jan. 1962 audition for Decca Records, the chief reason given was that "guitar bands were on the way out", but another reason was Best's poor drumming.  One need only listen to that audition to hear what I mean.     When Parlophone's George Martin wanted to replace him for recordings, the other members felt it more important to get the most record sales by having have the best possible recordings, not a weak stage-show drummer who was style over substance.  So they hired Ringo, who was amenable to their wishes &, while not a flashy drummer, was a veritable metronome.  Best was just an employee.  In the same way, the Rolling Stones never gave any benefit to Ian Stewart, the keyboard player who was a member of the original band, when he was unceremoniously dropped from the stage lineup in 1963: He stayed on as just a contracted musician until his 1985 death.    Best didn't suffer financially from the firing.  Beatles manager Brian Epstein got him in as drummer for Lee Curtis & the All-Stars, who soon broke with Curtis to become Pete Best & the All-Stars.  They made a made a record with Decca that wasn't successful.

      He then had a Pete Best Four, later called Pete Best Combo (a quintet) who toured the U.S.He now has a Pete Best Band.  

      Ringo Starr never had more than a share of tour revenues & record sales.

    I see that even here we have some incredibly STUPID readers.  

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Andrew
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    Why don't corporations send checks to all of their former employees? Great question. Real head scratcher that one. 

  • 2 months ago

    Why would they have given him money? Do you think they should have given money to everyone else who'd been a member of The Quarrymen or The Silver Beatles etc? He would have been paid the same as everyone for the work he did in the band (e.g. in Hamburg) but wasn't in the band when they began to achieve real financial success.

    Just about every successful band has ex-members who left before they became financially successful - for example The Police had a guitarist, Genesis had a guitarist and three drummers, The Rolling Stones had a keyboard player who left before the bands achieved success. Should they have been given money? Why? That's not how things work.

  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    The Beatles is not a charity. Once a band member is fired or if he leaves, he is on his own. He will not be paid for concerts that he will not perform in or for albums that he will not take part recording. Pete Best was fired because he was not good enough.

  • This says it all....


    Youtube thumbnail

    They have made wonderful music but that doesn't mean they were wonderful people.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.