If you read John Savage's definative guide to Brit Pop, he makes it clear that Oasis rise only began when they hired a manager. And Michael Jackson's fall began when he fired his.

You don't neccesarily need a manager in the traditional sense, but you do often need someone who understands the legal and financial side of things! If you do, great, if not, think of at least getting advice from someone who actually does. Thats pretty much how David Bowie operates as far as I know, he just hires accountants and lawyers and stuff as needed. Of course his situation doesn't really relate to the everyday reality of a band starting out but It does raise some interesting questions on the actual role of a manager. Depends how you define a manager I suppose. Any chancer can just set themselves up and call themselves a manager. There are really good people out there (see Jules comment on Oasis above) but there are also a lot of sharks. Think of what might have happened if Ray Davies had accepted an offer to manage The Kinks from those esteemed pillars of society known as the Kray twins.

it depends on your level. a manager at the beginning will just book gigs and organise studio time and try and get you played on the radio. you can do that to a point, but after a while you'd have to try to raise it a level, you need a manager.

Within the realm of unsigned acts my view is personally that until you start being a proper band (my defn.: good songs, good live show, an audience consisting of more than family and friends that think this is essential) then its a waste of money/time. so until/unless you have those things, no i dont see the point. most unsigned bands dont and wont have those things. but to prove me wrong there are numerous signed and financially sucessful acts that dont have them either! So in conclusion against my initial point, yeah go for it! sorry, youve brought up an inner conflict.

I think a manager is a necessity. Purely because if there is the slightest differences exist between 2 people, then the actual band member management will suffer. If you have someone external come in and support, promote and, well, manage you, then you'll better for it. Differences can be settled rationally. Worries will be handled by the manager. It means that all you'll have to do is focus on the music. So, manager good. Self management bad.

music? oh yeah, music. of course. d'oh.

Interesting opinions. There are a good few managers in the Irish market now - Im not so sure that any of them are particularly good with the exception of Principal. Its often the case that 'managers' of Irish bands will do all the running around and not necessarily the managing. I like Binokular's post. It would seem to me that some professional involvement from a solicitor is preferable to a manager -who might just amount to a skivy.