The Rolling Stones: did they realise they were regal enough on their own? Photograph: Getty
Asked in 1978 whether the Rolling Stones would continue to tour the world, Prince Rupert Lowenstein beamed: "They'll still be touring in 1991!"
Admirable foresight when you consider that at the time The Stones were already 15 years into their career, Keith Richards was ravaged by heroin addiction and the band were facing critical extinction courtesy of punk-addled hacks high on Sham 69.
Curious then to hear that after 33 years holding the purse strings for the World's Greatest Rock'n'Roll Band™, Lowenstein and the band have parted company, despite takings from their ongoing A Bigger Bang jaunt set to hit £250m.
Has Mick Jagger - whose personal fortune stands at a paltry £90m - finally found a cheaper way of balancing the books than the figure-zapping genius rumoured to be the inspiration for the fast-talking manager Dennis Hope in Almost Famous ("I didn't invent the rainy day - I've just got the best umbrella")? Or, dazzled by all those zeros, did the Stones finally realise they were regal enough on their own?
Whichever, it spells bad news for the rock romantic. As Arctic Monkeys have recently proved, highly successful bands can shed bass players without even their relatives noticing. When bands lose the shady character controlling things behind the scenes, however, the cracks start to show. The Beatles' disintegration begun in earnest with Brian Epstein's death, while the Stones themselves lost a little of their lustre - and their eye for a headline - with the departure of Andrew Loog Oldham in 1967.
A creative accountant may not always be a good thing (ask Sting) but you can't help feel that the departure of Lowenstein - a former investment banker with a cut-glass accent and an eye for a sharp suit - severs another link with their mid-70s pomp, when things backstage could get, in his own words, a little "naughty".
But when you're a pillar of society, why worry about the way things used to be?
