The Holographic Universe Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) If the current assumption that Izzy isn't in the band because he would essentially be a hired hand and not a member, is true, does anyone here think it's unfair that he was offered such role. Edited September 2, 2016 by The Holographic Universe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitarpatch Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Izzy is not in the band because Richard Fortus is the rhythm guitar player. Now was Izzy offered a guest spot, and could not come to terms for his appearance fee? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintari Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Yes, because Izzy has proven that, when combined with Slash, Duff and Axl, he can pin legendarily great songs. Fortus is a great player, but not so much a writer and that matters way more to me than playing well live. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 If Izzy were back we'd be on a whole nother level of magic (which is hard to believe). Fortus is doinng fine filling in however. I don't mind him as much as in his showboat look at me Nu Guns days. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsh327 Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Izzy is the Mike Nesmith of Guns N Roses. He'll show up at some point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknroll41 Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 I would like it if he were, but in what role exactly im not sure. I like Fortus, and therefore would like it if there was some way for Izzy, Slash, and Fortus to all be in the band at the same time. Idk how to make that work tho. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitha_whiskey Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 If it could boil down to a Facebook relationship status, safe to say it would be "it's complicated"... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megaguns1982 Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Id tend to agree with what Marc Canter said about the whole fact that izzy quit back in 1991, the partnership is Axl, Slash, and Duff. therefore anyone else, including Steven and izzy would simply be hired hands. Due to this they couldn't come to terms with izzy as his payday would have been a fraction of what the others stand to pocket. but to be honest, I'd say nobody outside the GNR camp knows why he isn't there, he could be unwell for all we know, or he simply just doesn't want to do it. my money is on izzy wanting to see how professionally they handle the start of the tour (being on time etc) and he'll come on board later. he sure deserves to be on the tour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Good, Fuck'n, Night. Posted September 2, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted September 2, 2016 Fortus is doing a good job covering the songs but that is all he is, a hired guitar player. Length of service is totally irrelevant. If they are really looking to the future Izzy should be offered partnership back into the band. Axl must now understand he was never bigger than Guns, the more it moves towards what it was the bigger it gets & Axl finally gets what he was delusionally striving for but moving further & further away from all these years. There is a great post here somewhere talking about the old partnership held by the three until Axl quit & took took the name & started the new band under the GnR name that he took control of. Would they have resurrected the old partnership or would Axl have amended the current (NuGnR) set up to include the other two as full partners? I would guess the use of original logo shows its the former, in which case Fortus is as new a member as Melissa to the current incarnation of GnR. The more Axl lets go the more he will find what he was always looking for. Izzy is as much the spirit of Guns as the others, regardless of what NuGuns fan boys & revisionist fools will have you believe. Izzy deserves the opportunity to come back now that the bullshit that drove him away looks to be in the past. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good, Fuck'n, Night. Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) 39 minutes ago, rocknroll41 said: I would like it if he were, but in what role exactly im not sure. I like Fortus, and therefore would like it if there was some way for Izzy, Slash, and Fortus to all be in the band at the same time. Idk how to make that work tho. There is no way for that to work unless Izzy guested like Steve. Of the Two it is more realistic that Izzy could resume full time duties. 4 minutes ago, Good, Fuck'n, Night. said: Edited September 2, 2016 by Good, Fuck'n, Night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Archtop Posted September 2, 2016 Popular Post Share Posted September 2, 2016 Speculating that things are as you suggest, I waver on both sides. As a fan I am hugely disappointed that Izzy is not joining the band and if the reason is because he would like equal status as Axl, Duff and Slash and not as a hired muscian then my immediate reaction is give him what he wants. I want the real reunion, he wrote half the songs, it will lead to new music and so on... I don't even need to give reasons, Izzy belongs. To offer him anything less is an insult, or is it? Is this just an emotional response on my behalf. It's easy to forget the this is a business, Axl, Slash and Duff own the brand and Izzy sold those shares. It can be reasoned that the others have acted to keep that brand going, no matter how they went about it, other than being the founding member and contributing to if not writing the main songs, (yeah, I know not really convincing myself here either) Izzy has not as far as I know had any business dealings or decisions since 2007. I speculate that Izzy's issue is probably less about a four way cut and probably more that he wants back in on the business decisions and as it stands he has no rights in how things are conducted. In business terms there is no real reason to cut him back in and I can't argue that this is unfair. However this does not relegate him down to just another member, Izzy will never be a hired hand, because he represents so much more than that. It would be deeply unfair IMO if he were to be treated on the same terms as the hired hands, I hope this would not happen, but if Fortus and Frank are being contracted as perminant band members it might be Izzy is getting a comparatively low deal? I hope they hash things out, what I do feels is unfair is, why are we not being given some reasons to Izzys absence. It's cast a bit of a shadow over the tour for me, I can't hep wondering if Izzy being slighted or not. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good, Fuck'n, Night. Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 It needs to start somewhere & guest spots would be a good start. I understand its a business decision & izzy chose to sell out his shares. These guys especially Axl are all financially set. There are not a lot of years left for this to play out, its one chance to cement the legacy & go out the right way. If some new music was to come out Izzy could contribute so much. A point of agreement must be able to be made somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Cantona Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 He should be in, but he's not, so that sucks. Fortus is a good replacement, though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxlsFavoriteRose Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) he will be. we are already gathering a group to descend upon the avocado ranch with our no avocado signs at the ready! signs with an avocado in a red circle with a red slash thru them! the avocadoes from Mexico have already glutted the market, his California avocadoes are obsolete!! Edited September 2, 2016 by AxlsFavoriteRose 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxlsFavoriteRose Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 1 hour ago, dalsh327 said: Izzy is the Mike Nesmith of Guns N Roses. He'll show up at some point. so who has to die from GN'R before Izzy comes back?? cos Mike Nesmith is/has only come back since Davy Jones died?? he came back before, a few times, but mostly since Davy passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AxlsFavoriteRose Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 1 hour ago, Original said: If Izzy were back we'd be on a whole nother level of magic (which is hard to believe). Fortus is doinng fine filling in however. I don't mind him as much as in his showboat look at me Nu Guns days. "magic"...that's the word that keeps coming back and back and back! if the AFD5 reconcile what other magic will happen??? world peace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane M. Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 21 minutes ago, Fitha_whiskey said: If it could boil down to a Facebook relationship status, safe to say it would be "it's complicated"... This so much. 2-3 months ago I would have said yes it's unfair, especially if he was supposed to be just a hired hand. Right now it's alright, we have GNR doing great, based just on nostalgia but better than ever and Izzy is ok too. Unlike Steven you've never seen or heard Izzy bitching about not being in the band so... Regardless, you can't change history and his contribution to the band will always be there whether he's in the current lineup or not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIST Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Izzy got bored of twitter already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 (edited) The fact that the term current band has been used is very telling. Do you want Guns n Roses, as someone who has heard Appetite and Lies would understand the term, the foundation upon which this mythological shit that we all feed upon comes from? Well if you want that then you want Izzy Stradlin. And Adler too for that matter. It is what it is and it did what it did, if you want to blag yourself into believing that any of those ingredients was or is incidental then be my guest but you are only fooling yourself. The fact that just Duff and Slash, the supposedly inferior musicians to all the other guys Axl has since had in, have changed the complexion and power and vibrancy of this music as this tour has clearly evidenced should tell you something. If it doesn't well then there's nothing i can do for you I'm afraid. Edited September 3, 2016 by Len Cnut 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archtop Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 (edited) I can't find the link but I was reading recently some legal papers showing that the partnership between Duff, Slash and Axl relate to the use of the logo. It was registered in 1993 and some of the transcripts show Slash signing off on the bullet artwork being used in new artwork for the 2007 tour. If Axl owned the name and could do what he wanted in terms of the band, Slash and Duff have both performed GnR songs over the years. It doesn't seem that the partnership had a bearing on what they were allowed perform within their own bands. I assume it would enable them to sign off on the use of the songs by other artists and how the song are represented in other media. I would be interested to know what restrictions are on Izzy by not being a partner, other than financial. Can he freely perform GnR songs if he wanted too, does he have rights in how the songs are used or did this all go? Sorry if I digress from the original question I'm trying to work out how he would gain by not being a touring member of the band, as that seems to have suited him up until now. Edited September 3, 2016 by Archtop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 If it's money (which it prob is) Izzy will still bring in 10x's more per show than Fortus I'm sure. But I see his side- the 5 guys should all have equal (the real 5). Anyone else gets a contract. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good, Fuck'n, Night. Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 32 minutes ago, Archtop said: I can't find the link but I was reading recently some legal papers showing that the partnership between Duff, Slash and Axl relate to the use of the logo. It was registered in 1993 and some of the transcripts show Slash signing off on the bullet artwork being used in new artwork for the 2007 tour. If Axl owned the name and could do what he wanted in terms of the band, Slash and Duff have both performed GnR songs over the years. It doesn't seem that the partnership had a bearing on what they were allowed perform within their own bands. I assume it would enable them to sign off on the use of the songs by other artists and how the song are represented in other media. I would be interested to know what restrictions are on Izzy by not being a partner, other than financial. Can he freely perform GnR songs if he wanted too, does he have rights in how the songs are used or did this all go? Sorry if I digress from the original question I'm trying to work out how he would gain by not being a touring member of the band, as that seems to have suited him up until now. Axl controlled rights to the name only, The three were always three way controlling partners in the original (real) GnR regardless of who was in the band. Axls NuGuns was a separate business / band. Axl quit the original partnership & took the rights to the name with him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitha_whiskey Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 Izzy wants to be underground punk. Axl Duff Slash wanna be the Stones. Atlas Shrugged vs Walkin... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Original Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 17 minutes ago, Fitha_whiskey said: Izzy wants to be underground punk. Axl Duff Slash wanna be the Stones. Atlas Shrugged vs Walkin... I like The Stones over punk! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
default_ Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 (edited) As much as I love Izzy, I want to see what Axl, Duff and Slash can do without him. If we get a terrible new album (assuming we'll get one) then we'll all know that yes, we need Izzy in the band 'cause looking at these guys discographies after Guns N' Roses... Theres nothing really exciting about it. Some might say Izzy solo stuff is boring but it has the thing this band needs the most: Rock N' Roll. Not heavy metal, not nu metal, not industrial or Elton John. Rock N' Fuckin' Roll. Izzy's ideas combined with elements from Slash, Duff and Axl equals Guns N' Fuckin Roses. Edited September 3, 2016 by default_ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts