Izzy Stradlin comments on reunion

[Lio]

I agree with all the posters saying people are romanticising Izzy's part in GNR. I know he was crucial for songwriting, and I would love it if he would be writing again with GNR. But he wasn't there for the UYI tour either. He's not really needed on stage. Of course it would be great if he was there, but I get that he wouldn't get an equal share.

It's funny how people shit on Axl, Slash and Duff for being greedy. What about Izzy? He would obviously be doing it for the money too. He's not on stage with them because he wasn't happy with what they offered him. If his tweet is correct, they did want him there, but he only wanted to do it if they paid him a shitload of money. It's a bit ironic this is being called a cashgrab tour because Izzy's not there, when the reason he isn't, is because he wanted more money.

Truth is we have no way of knowing who's too greedy, Axl/Slash/Duff, or Izzy. No use in discussing if Izzy earns more than what they'd give him. Because we don't know what was offered, yet people here like to assume he was offered peanuts.

I just think the funny thing is some people obviously have double standards. If Izzy wants top dollar, he totally deserves it, if the others want that too, they're being greedy.

All in all, I just think it's sad that money is the obstacle (regardless of who's to blame, we don't know that anyway, none of us were there at the table to negotiate). Then again, I've probably been romanticising all of GNR too much

[GNRfan2008]

1 minute ago, GibsonLP said:

They should throw that old partnership agreement out the window. Create a new one. Hiding behind lawyers and saying they can't do something because an existing partnership agreement gets in the way is lame old man suit and tie bullshit. This is a rock n roll band who make people happy through the energy and sound they produce together. They're all rich anyway and should be grateful for what each other allowed them all to achieve as a unit. Them + Izzy (and Steven) is where the magic happens and who gives a fuck if they're down a couple of percentage points of pay

 

Lot more than a couple percent if he really was demanding equal money. Slash just had a divorce. Can't blame him if he wants to get as much as he can from this deal. Duff is the reason Slash and Axl are even on speaking terms. Why should he give up anything out of his share? I don't think Axl was happy with how much Izzy demanded from his management for guest appearances through the years. They all have their reasons and different perspectives. I don't blame Izzy for wanting equal share. I don't blame the others for saying no. 

[GibsonLP]

3 minutes ago, GNRfan2008 said:

 

Lot more than a couple percent if he really was demanding equal money. Slash just had a divorce. Can't blame him if he wants to get as much as he can from this deal. Duff is the reason Slash and Axl are even on speaking terms. Why should he give up anything out of his share? I don't think Axl was happy with how much Izzy demanded from his management for guest appearances through the years. They all have their reasons and different perspectives. I don't blame Izzy for wanting equal share. I don't blame the others for saying no. 

I agree they all have their reasons and different perspectives. We don't know the full story either. I still feel pretty confident we're going to see Izzy at some point

[Live Like a Suicide]

The trademarks for 'Guns N' Roses' are owned by Axl, Slash and Duff. All were filed in or after 1992. Izzy left the band in 1991. He therefore rescinded his share of ownership.

I know emotions are running high and people are disappointed. I would have liked to see Izzy treated fairly and be involved too, but the facts are the facts. He is arguably the most important member of the band's history, but he was not involved in the trademarked partnership that is 'Guns N' Roses'. Adding to this the fact that Richard has been in the band for around 15 years and knows the entire catalogue, where Izzy does not, and there isn't much of a reason for Izzy to be paid equally on-tour - especially if he wasn't playing entire shows. Now if he is involved in a new album, then i would expect him to be treated fairly, depending on his involvement.

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by Live Like a Suicide

[GNRfan2008]

7 minutes ago, Live Like a Suicide said:

The trademarks for 'Guns N' Roses' are owned by Axl, Slash and Duff. All were filed in or after 1992. Izzy left the band in 1991. He therefore rescinded his share of ownership.

I know emotions are running high and people are disappointed. I would have liked to see Izzy treated fairly and be involved too, but the facts are the facts. He is arguably the most important member of the band's history, but he was not involved in the trademarked partnership that is 'Guns N' Roses'. Adding to this the fact that Richard has been in the band for around 15 years and knows the entire catalogue, where Izzy does not, and there isn't much of a reason for Izzy to be paid equally on-tour - especially if he wasn't playing entire shows. Now if he is involved in a new album, then i would expect him to be treated fairly, depending on his involvement.

 

 

There isn't really any argument as to who is the most important member. It's Axl. His last name is part of the band name. The others agreed he was extremely important when they refused Alan Niven's demands to fire Axl and replace him. They could have easily done it...and the band probably would have flamed out. They were scared for good reason. Axl was/is a one of a kind talent and they knew it. Furthermore they agreed to hand over the name of the band to Axl.

Slash's guitar riffs and solos are extremely important as well. He too is a one of a kind talent and obviously this tour would be a joke without Slash's involvement. Izzy is a damn good songwriter and was extremely important to the chemistry of the band, but he isn't important enough that his absence leads to poor ticket sales. This was the case in 1992 and it's still the case in 2016. 

[Gibbo]

3 hours ago, highvoltage said:

Do you know which 4 shows by any chance?

That seems like a... somewhat harsh split of the royalties. 50% for Axl is quite a lot indeed.

2 Coachella dates and 2 Vegas dates. Yeah I think its crap not sure if that was just for the first 4 shows!

I was told this back in March

A direct quote from Duff's mouth " Izzy thinks he's gonna get his fucken 25% back, that's never gonna fucken happen"

Edited September 8, 2016 by Gibbo

[Nosaj Thing]

1993 all over again.  Axl, Slash and Duff against Izzy.

I'm loving it.

[GNRfan2008]

3 minutes ago, Gibbo said:

2 Coachella dates and 2 Vegas dates  

I was told this back in March

A direct quote from Duff's mouth " Izzy thinks he's gonna get his fucken 25% back, that's never gonna fucken happen"

 

And there you have it. We have a stalemate. 

[GibsonLP]

10 minutes ago, Gibbo said:

2 Coachella dates and 2 Vegas dates. Yeah I think its crap not sure if that was just for the first 4 shows!

I was told this back in March

A direct quote from Duff's mouth " Izzy thinks he's gonna get his fucken 25% back, that's never gonna fucken happen"

How have we not heard this quote until now???!

[Natty]

Hi, Long time I ve been reading this Forum because GNR is my absolute favourite band since I was 14 years old (I am 39 now). So I really really  love this band and when I was a teenie I was able to see the UYI tour, and I was also lucky to see 2006 New GNR with Izzy as a guest. This Topic and Izzy matters a lot to me, and I would like to share my thoughts:

• I love Izzy because he is a superb Songwriter. He should be involved if GNR wants to release some new Music. He should be paid for his contribution to new and old Music. Live wise and stage wise Izzy is not that important, of course if I had a choice Izzy should be on stage because it should be the Appetite line up. But as live presence I have nothing against Richard, Richard is a great Player.
• If Richard would be out, why do some People think Izzy would be automatically in? Izzy in his tweet is saying ist all about the Money, so even Izzy is only there if he receives enough Money? So more or less he is blackmailing Axl/Slash/Duff ??? Come on that s absout bullshit and not acceptable! No way the big 3 should be blackmailed by Izzy. If they are willing to give him a nice amount of Money he should accept it but he has no right to blackmail them!
• Izzy quit the band and had NO success on the big Screen. So what? Is he in the Position to blackmail and bullshit on the others? NO. Axl Slash and Duff have always been on tour and always kept the Songs alive. Izzy liked to Play the role of the "not for sale" guy but with this tweet he proofed to be there if the Money is right. My opinion on Izzy is not that high any more after his tweet
• Reliability? Izzy???? Izzy wanted to join Velvet Revolver. Before it would have become serious he quit. Do we want GNR tour 2016/2017 to fall apart because Izzy again doesn't feel like being always public, playing in front of big crowds? NO I don 't want to depend on him. So with an unreliable guy like Izzy GNR are only able to offer him guest spots I suppose and Richard shall be there, because Richard is reliable AND a great Player. Izzy shoudl be there in regards of songwriting because he is a Genius.
• People like to bullshit on Axl. Come on guys.. Axl is not responsible for everything, get adult! Axl kept on the whole Thing running, Axl is so hard toward himself that he didn't want to release CD for so Long...Axl put aside his differnces with Slash.. and even if Money is a big Motivation for the tour and the reunion.. so what? Money was also their Motivation back in the mid 80s when they slept in Vicky Hamilton appartment... we all have Money reasons in our live.. so what. Axl is not responsible for Izzy s involvement. Axl has not be blackmailed by Izzy. Izzy is not reliable so why should Axl fire Richard or take the blame? No way. I absolutely love Axl and was Team Axl when the feud Axl/Slash was going on. But I am happy Slash is back, and I am even more happy Duff is back, because Duff is such a cool guy. It makes me enourmously happy that Steven could be involved and I hope he continues to have guest appearances because WE LOVE STEVEN.
• If Izzy want s to be a part of it then he should be it and they will come to a financial Agreement that fits for all of them and for me it would be fine also if he "only" writes new GNR Songs and makes live appearances now and then. But for that he shall not receive equal part as Axl/Slash/Duff. Because they are there, there are reliable (no Show cancelled or very late beginnings in 2016)

I really hope that Izzy s Statement doesnt influence at all the good vibes of Axl/Slash/Duff. If they want to re negotiate with Izzy, super, if they don't come to an Agreement because Izzy is soo hungry for more Money, then let him go.

 

[GibsonLP]

12 minutes ago, Gibbo said:

2 Coachella dates and 2 Vegas dates. Yeah I think its crap not sure if that was just for the first 4 shows!

I was told this back in March

A direct quote from Duff's mouth " Izzy thinks he's gonna get his fucken 25% back, that's never gonna fucken happen"

A split of Axl 25% Slash 25% Duff 20% Izzy 20% Steven 10% seems about right

 

[Gibbo]

Just now, GibsonLP said:

A split of Axl 25% Slash 25% Duff 20% Izzy 20% Steven 10% seems about right

 

For the first 4 shows Duff and Slash are getting payed 25% Axl 50% dont know if that continued 

[Silverburst80]

I liked that he called it loot, he's such a gangster.

[RooSaa]

2 hours ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

I just hope these numbers aren't real.

I mean, forget about Izzy for a second. Fn' Axl pushed everyone away, fucked up GNR's legacy and ruined his own career. Then Slash comes back, makes him relevant again and at the same time accepts to get half of what Axl gets? The poor victim's getting everything his way and all thanks to the evil cancer...

Agree with you - out of likes, otherwise i would have given you one.

I hope those numbers are not true. Why should Axl get 50% and the rest - especially Slash and somehow also Duff - get so much less? Is it because Axl is considering himself the boss? Is he the person who says who will get how much? Or because he owns the band name? I just dont quite understand that, because it is not that Axl is doing more than Slash or Duff, regarding the band, and being onstage, etc ... so there should be a more equaly share than that. Plus people cant deny the fact, that Slash is a huge point that GNR is doing so well again.

But regarding Izzy, what if he would get the amount of money he wanted? What would have happened with Fortus? If Izzy comes back fulltime and Slash is fulltime there too, what should Fortus do? Playing the second rythmn guitar? there isn't need for that. Fortus leaving the band? Something Axl probably would not let have happened.

[Drunk_on_Drugs]

Tbf, I wouldn't give someone as unreliable as Izzy an equal share either, whether he was performing full sets, or just guesting. Think about it, Izzy in the band means advertising for Izzy being in the band. If he ever bailed on a show, not only does it let everyone down, but it wouldn't be offering what they'd be advertising. Someone like Steven they have under their thumbs, the dude would probably play for nothing if it came to it. Call me cynical, but that's the way it works, you don't get equal pay if you don't offer the same, or there's the possibility you'll be a liability.

 

[Lio]

1 minute ago, RooSaa said:

Agree with you - out of likes, otherwise i would have given you one.

I hope those numbers are not true. Why should Axl get 50% and the rest - especially Slash and somehow also Duff - get so much less? Is it because Axl is considering himself the boss? Is he the person who says who will get how much? Or because he owns the band name? I just dont quite understand that, because it is not that Axl is doing more than Slash or Duff, regarding the band, and being onstage, etc ... so there should be a more equaly share than that. Plus people cant deny the fact, that Slash is a huge point that GNR is doing so well again.

But regarding Izzy, what if he would get the amount of money he wanted? What would have happened with Fortus? If Izzy comes back fulltime and Slash is fulltime there too, what should Fortus do? Playing the second rythmn guitar? there isn't need for that. Fortus leaving the band? Something Axl probably would not let have happened.

If those numbers are true, it means Slash and Duff agreed to them, don't you think? Why would you have a problem with that if they clearly don't? Everyone's always praising Duff for being business savvy, and Slash isn't really known to be a naive guy either. But now all of a sudden you think they just fell victim to big mean, greedy Axl?

[Radio flyer]

Every original member of Guns n' Roses is in their 50's. Slash is in the middle of a divorce and desperately trying to sell his house. I'm sure Axl doesn't want to play Vegas residencies anymore and has a Malibu mansion, psychics, therapists and lawyers to pay. Duff is an astute businessman first- a musician second. 

We all would prefer to have Izzy and Steven in the band, but the band makes more money without them and if it doesn't affect ticket sales to 99% of their demographic one way or the other, then their management and business advisers would urge them to go out without them. 

 What I'm saying is...there is no Santa Claus. There is no Easter Bunny. And Axl, Slash and Duff reunited in their 50's to play stadiums for customers paying hundreds (and for some thousands) of dollars to witness it for one reason and one reason alone: To make a LOT of money. 

I have no expectations of new music from this partial reunion. This version of GNR will simply keep playing these songs (90% of which are from at least 25 years ago) until people stop going. 

Ironically, the only members of GNR to put out new music in 2016 are Izzy and Matt with a song bitching about the GNR reunion. 

 

 

 

[Live Like a Suicide]

28 minutes ago, GNRfan2008 said:

 

There isn't really any argument as to who is the most important member. It's Axl. His last name is part of the band name. The others agreed he was extremely important when they refused Alan Niven's demands to fire Axl and replace him. They could have easily done it...and the band probably would have flamed out. They were scared for good reason. Axl was/is a one of a kind talent and they knew it. Furthermore they agreed to hand over the name of the band to Axl.

Slash's guitar riffs and solos are extremely important as well. He too is a one of a kind talent and obviously this tour would be a joke without Slash's involvement. Izzy is a damn good songwriter and was extremely important to the chemistry of the band, but he isn't important enough that his absence leads to poor ticket sales. This was the case in 1992 and it's still the case in 2016. 

Izzy is responsible for a very great amount of song writing, from lyrics to riffs, solos and entire songs. His influence on the band is paramount, which is evident in that it couldn't release anything on-par after his exit in 1991.

In considering this, it is my opinion that Axl and Izzy are equally important in terms of what they brought to the band.

[God of Thunder]

Izzy does not even like to tour; that is one of the principal reasons he quit Guns in the first place....He contributed a lot to the GnR sound, no doubt about that, but he was always a rather underwhelming live player, so not entirely sure why he should be paid the same as Axl.... Guns without Axl can never happen.. Instruments can be recreated more or less, but the voice never. Guns w o Izzy worked quite alright live wise in the past 25 years. Stage presence can also not be replaced that is why it is so important to have Slash and Duff back, even Adler. But Izzy never looked quite comfortable on stage.... 

 

Also I do not see anything contradictory between what Axl said and Izzys pissed of tweet. Axl said more or less that he thought they had found an agreement and the next day apparently Izzy slept over it and said no. Absolutely no need from Izzy for this harsh tone.....

 

[Asia]

30 minutes ago, Gibbo said:

2 Coachella dates and 2 Vegas dates. Yeah I think its crap not sure if that was just for the first 4 shows!

I was told this back in March

A direct quote from Duff's mouth " Izzy thinks he's gonna get his fucken 25% back, that's never gonna fucken happen"

If those numbers are true, then it means Axl is a dick because he does not desereve that much more. But it also means that Slash and Duff were ready to do it for far less than they deserve and Izzy is the asshole; not only he wants God knows how much and shits on everybody when refused but additionally he makes a shitstorm about it.

[RooSaa]

6 minutes ago, Lio said:

If those numbers are true, it means Slash and Duff agreed to them, don't you think? Why would you have a problem with that if they clearly don't? Everyone's always praising Duff for being business savvy, and Slash isn't really known to be a naive guy either. But now all of a sudden you think they just fell victim to big mean, greedy Axl?

I just dont understand why Axl gets so much more than for example Slash and Duff. Is it because he is the owner of the bandname? Or does he work more than the rest? Sorry, but i just dont understand if there is really such a huge difference between Axls payment and Slash/Duffs. Or just because Axl is the boss and Slash/Duff are employees?

[GNRfan2008]

3 minutes ago, Live Like a Suicide said:

Izzy is responsible for a very great amount of song writing, from lyrics to riffs, solos and entire songs. His influence on the band is paramount, which is evident in that it couldn't release anything on-par after his exit in 1991.

In considering this, it is my opinion that Axl and Izzy are equally important in terms of what they brought to the band.

 

I'm looking at the band's legacy in the general public and I'm looking at the actions of the band members over time. Izzy and company had the chance to fire Axl. They chose not to. They even took it a step further and handed over their rights to the name to Axl. His last name is the only one of the band members that is actually part of the band name. From a songwriting standpoint, Izzy's "big guns" aren't anywhere near as popular with the general public as Axl and Slash's big guns. They would be a cult band if Sweet Child didn't blow up the way it did. Slash and Axl did the heavy lifting on that one as well as Jungle, Paradise, and November Rain. 

[Lio]

3 minutes ago, RooSaa said:

I just dont understand why Axl gets so much more than for example Slash and Duff. Is it because he is the owner of the bandname? Or does he work more than the rest? Sorry, but i just dont understand if there is really such a huge difference between Axls payment and Slash/Duffs. Or just because Axl is the boss and Slash/Duff are employees?

I don't know the music business, but Axl's the frontman. It seems logical to me he'd get more. And he kept the name alive (ahum) in one way or another these past decades, plis he owns it. But this is just what I think. It only seems to me that if they agree with that share, it must seem reasonable to them at least, so why should we worry about that? (Also, maybe the situation is different now there's a real tour going on, who knows?)

[RooSaa]

1 minute ago, Lio said:

I don't know the music business, but Axl's the frontman. It seems logical to me he'd get more. And he kept the name alive (ahum) in one way or another these past decades, plis he owns it. But this is just what I think. It only seems to me that if they agree with that share, it must seem reasonable to them at least, so why should we worry about that? (Also, maybe the situation is different now there's a real tour going on, who knows?)

thanks for your answer

you are right, why should we worry about? We dont get anything from the money anyway But still, as a fan, i wonder about such things ...

[DieselDaisy]

Probably tried to buy him off with the same wage as Melissa.