Hey, I'm all about respectful disagreement, but frankly I'm not in either Waters' or Gilmour's "camp." I just think that everything that Waters contributed in terms of lyrics and songwriting was equalled by what Gilmour gave in his own songwriting and his musicianship. In terms of exploitation, I don't think Gilmour did anything that Waters wouldn't have done if he was still on speaking terms with the rest of the band. Are you calling Shine On, Pulse, etc. exploitation attempts? You think if Waters was still part of the band he would have objected to releasing a double live album and a box set? How is any of it different than Waters' "In The Flesh"? I think that Gilmour, Mason, and Wright did what they had to do with the band, and released some damn good material despite losing such a key songwriter. They're both egomaniacs, but I guess I chose the egomaniac who carried the rest of Pink Floyd with him.

Gilmour talent-starved? Wow.. That's one I haven't heard from any fans, even the ones who are on Waters' side of the "rift" so to speak. I can totally understand your opinion of AMLOR and The Division Bell... And I agree Gilmour's best work was with Waters in the band. Nobody really denies Waters was the inspiration behind the band's best work. But Gilmour was a perfect complement to Waters' ideas, and I think none of the great albums would have been nearly as good without Gilmour's balance. Ever see any of the documentaries of the recording sessions from DSOTM or The Wall? Before I watched them I might have also believed Waters was the true "brains" but I consider Pink Floyd a "two headed monster" with the equally talented but very different Waters and Gilmour calling the shots (with occasional flashes of brilliance from Nick and Rick.

Hey, to each his own. But please don't think I'm siding with Gilmour because I like AMLOR and The Division Bell, and don't care for The Final Cut. I just want them to bury the hatchet and the band to reunite and tour again. Not gonna happen, but we can dream.