Jump to content

Flake

Members
  • Posts

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Flake

  1. 14 minutes ago, ZODIAC said:

    Has he commented about that recently? Again?

    "It's January 10th, as far as I know, nothing has changed regarding 2020.

    Not sure why some seem disheartened after seeing a social media update not meaning what they thought it meant.

    Instead of focusing on that, remember that, as of now,  the upcoming tours aren't labeled as Not In This Lifetime. That surely must mean something?"

     

     

  2. 2 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

    Two stadium runs? Did I miss a second leg of the stadium tour where they played the same cities again? 

    Yes two stadium runs but with different cities. That's very obvious. Just like they did in Europe. 

    I don't get the need to belittle the band all the time.

    • Like 1
  3. 10 minutes ago, downzy said:

    This is a very salient point.

    Izzy might have wanted his "fair share" for the initial few shows.  And perhaps Axl, Duff, and Slash might have been open to the that possibility (just a guess on my part).  

    But then the concern for Axl, Slash, and Duff was whether Izzy would be up for the amount of touring that they might have had in mind should those shows go well.  

    If the assumption was that Izzy wasn't going to be on board for a multi-year, global tour, then the calculation might have been that they weren't going to cut him for a few big money shows if they were going to have to replace him with Fortus not too long afterward.  

    Plus there's the optics of it all.  If Izzy had played with them at the Troubadour, the first couple of Vegas shows, Coachella, it would have given the fans the impression that the big four members were back on a permanent basis.  

    It would have created a marketing issue should they proceed with a tour that Izzy wasn't willing to fully commit to.  

    Forgetting the concerns about money, even from a logistical perspective I can see why Izzy wasn't part of the greater picture.  Again, that's all working on the assumption that Izzy wasn't interested in being apart of a multi-year, multi-continent tour.  Considering Izzy would pop up here and there with GNR and Slash and Duff, it's understandable why the key players decided on the path they ultimately took.  

    I think that's a good and objective analysis 

  4. 2 minutes ago, jacdaniel said:

    I’m sure money was a big issue for Izzy. But I just don’t see him touring full time going into year 5 anyways. 
     

    But we don’t know the full story either. Original negotiations may have been for Coachella gig only. 

    Some people think they know the whole story and are quick to blame the ones they don't like anyway

    • Like 3
    • Haha 1
  5. 2 hours ago, RussTCB said:

    OK, so being able to sell out 50k seaters, then having to downgrade to 20k or less seaters because the market won't support the bigger shows is NOT a downgrade. Got it. 

    Dude, when they tour in the winter, they're not gonna play stadiums, since its pretty cold then. So they go to arenas. Every band does that.

  6. 45 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

    They'd be making a big thing about it, surely? New artwork, new website design, new fonts, new name for the tour, etc etc. 

    It would make no business sense whatsoever to not really really stress something was changing, surely? 

    I don't think they would. Why would they? Gnr always likes to keep things in the dark. 

×
×
  • Create New...