guitarpatch

1 minute ago, sanity_lost said:

Axl is still solely GNR and Duff and Slash are separate entities who have partnered with GNR for the tour?

 

 

Most likely.... Fernando and Team Brazil still handle everything GNR related and its interests. Slash and Duff have their own managers to look after their personal interests, and make sure things are followed and aligned. Actually not too uncommon when dealing with bands of this size of popularity. It's a lot of business for each party that needs someone in charge who can make a call. That way they can all focus on performance and music without those distractions. They are still in the band, however probably under a contract agreement in that scenario. 

Just now, Slash787 said:

Yeah but some people are bringing God knows what in this situation. 

The sad thing about Axl's nutt swingers is that whatever Axl says or does, thats everything for them. 

Just cause Izzy is asking what he deserves, then NO ITS SO WRONG. 

Izzy is asking for what Izzy thinks he deserves. I don't think anyone else here really has the call to say if that's deserved or not. All we know is why that wouldn't be the case with the way the band is structured. 

As far as Axl, you are projecting years of whatever sentiment that has built up around the community, centered on issues we know very little about. It has little to do with Izzy demanding equal loot. 

People are passionate to defend Axl, because it's a Guns N Roses board. Just as people are are quick to defend Izzy. Fact is it's their relationship, and their business dealings. It has nothing to do with the fans. It's why these things should never had been made public. It does no party any good. 

2 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

So when Izzy says something then its complaining? But when Axl releases no music then its his "Perfection" and "Vision" 

How are those situations remotely similar? 

5 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm not interested in any of this shit. It is all business and money and branding and ''Axl's version'' of what Guns is which is in effect the ''partnership'' (none of the others wanted the partnership). When Guns were formed and Appetite was released it was five equals.

The moment Izzy and fan's started complaining about the pay day, the business side of things became relevant discussion. Can't have it both ways there. No need to bury your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist, while at the same time looking for answers and projecting thoughts about how it should be handled. 

Also, demanding that they should run their band like its 1988 isn't exactly anyone's call here. It's up to them to figure it out. 

25 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

All this talk of brands is incredibly cringe. Pardon my French but eh, ahem...wha da fuq?
 

 

Not caring about your brand actually is the brand. Whether done intentionally or not.

It's the creed that you stand for, where all decisions and actions fall from. Does that make people feel better? 

2 minutes ago, double talkin jive mfkr said:

yeah, maybe that was the only way, piss him off so much to make a move and have a yelling match with him - get the anger out of the red head 

I mean history tells us Axl is not one to hold a grudge. Calling him out in public, and theoretically yelling at him seems like a great way to get what you want out of him. 

6 minutes ago, double talkin jive mfkr said:

best case scenario this will somehow result in swift negotiations to get him on board 

Right, because airing stuff in public has always caused Axl to hold swift negotiations. That worked extremely well for Slash and company over the years 

1 minute ago, Slash787 said:

Its like 5 guys started a company and made a TV and that TV was very successful but over the years the company shut down. 

Then after 25 years the company starts to operate selling the same TV again, so the 4th and 5th business partner should get the equal amount of money of the sales of that 25 year old TV which the 5 of them made. 

It's nothing like that.

There was success selling TV's. 1 guy was then voted out and another quit shortly after its success to focus on other endeavors. The TV company then reorganized, where they then operated and attempted to grow the company over the next few years. 

While making a new TV model, 2 more people decided to then quit manufacturing/new TV side of the business, and focus on the models that still sold well from the past. Their focus will now be to maximize exposure for those old TV's

The remaining member decided to take the company to China to manufacture a brand new model under a similar name. However the 3 people maintained its original business and financial  interests with the older models in the states Since they still made money. 

After a long amount of time, after growing/maintaining the brand even more that it's still relevant 25 yrs later, the other guy comes back from China and wants to make reopen business with the other 2. Since they've been working together during this entire time on those old models, it's an easy transition. They are now in talks of making a new TV in the states again.

In the meantime the 2 original members who were voted out and quit, still make $ from the old tvs and all the decisions the other 3 make. Not a bad deal...

Who says they make 1 mil each? That's assuming it's an equal split. That's before managers, agents, etc... Way more complicated than just that round number

7 minutes ago, scooby845 said:

yeah sure i get that... but I still think they would be able to sell the requested amount if Steven and Izzy were in...

Regarding the % thing... the bigger pot would imply having a contract compatible with Izzy steven situation right? Otherwise it would be a breach... or am I not understaing it right/.

Prob not at 5mil per gig. That's not really a realistic figure for a tour. Maybe a one-off situation. Promoter needs to make a certain amount of $ and mitigate risks. They have to take all risk to get sell outs and in the end prob make peanuts in that situation. It's not worth it on that side. 

I'm saying the 3 of them now might not be splitting equally. Having a bigger pot w the other two, doesn't mean they'd all want to do it that way. There might not be as much financial benefit for one of the members to deal with that added situation. 

I think this whole situation was complicated enough. Having to finagle 2 more members w demands in rev splits, merch, etc... could have folded the whole thing.

We should be grateful it got to this point. They made offers to the other 2. That means they wanted them involved. Something that was unimaginable 10 yrs ago. 

In the mean time, we got this awesome hybrid lineup. They just got through a North American stadium tour w no hiccups and mostly positive reviews. They are relevant again on the music scene. 

13 minutes ago, scooby845 said:

I dont get it ... If Axl wanted to keep the nuGnR members so he could benefit more, the same would have happened if he recruited Izzy and Steven...the ticket prices would be higher and more crowd would attend so he would earn the same amount of money plus the fans and Izzy and Steven would be happy... 

It wouldnt be 3mil per show..it would be 5mil....

I just dont get it.....

Theoretically yes, their guarantee per show would increase to fit everyone's demand. However a promoter would have to increase ticket prices even more so, and would have to determine how many of those tickets they could sell to make a profit. Also how many they would have to sell to break even. They could determine that demand couldn't be reached at those prices, and they'd be no show under that scenario. The band would have to come down from their guarantee and people would have to take less $. 

You're also assuming that the 3 make equal $ now. If there's a bigger pot, it could just as well be split according the % that's already agreed upon. 

2 minutes ago, GNR1975 said:

Melonhead87........ Axl is a complete and total cunt, he always was, and always will be. He is a great frontman, and we love him for his contribution to GNR but he can be a total dick at times. Also, just because someone disagrees with you, it does not make them a hooray for tolerance! you dumbass!

So you call someone a cunt and a dumbass, but Axl is the dick?

You don't know these people. Seems pretty harsh to place that kind of judgement. You have no clue as to what happened and why things played out the way it did. No one here on either side can make that call. 

There's a reason why these guys don't do interviews. It serves no purpose but people picking apart statements, to try and boost whatever side of the fence they're on and create negative vibes online. It's why they never publicly come around here. We can't have nice things

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

You are all missing the point.

This partnership is over. It ended,

You are all talking as if the partnership is continuing where it left off in December 1995.
 

The partnership ended when Axl withdrew from it as per the contract they all signed in either 1992 or 1993.

There is actually not much difference between Izzy's position and Slash and Duff's. The latter merely have a power on merchandise and licensing. They all receive publishing royalties.

 

While technically true, that's a lot of power. Merchandise, branding, and also the control of the catalog and its rights. They make decisions on its use and exploitation. It's a big deal and big business for them. Izzy has no say if his song gets used in the new DiCaprio movie and how they should charge for its use. How much of an advance on a merch deal, etc...Thats not a big difference in position? 

Everyone has their publishing rights. Everyone gets paid what they're owed. No one is being short changed and ripped off for its past success on that front. No one is arguing that. 

Just now, Modano09 said:

They fought to maintain some degree of right to the name and control how it was used, took part in Live Era, were as protective as they could be in regards to how the name was used or how old music was used. Basically the Axl, Slash and Duff managed the GNR name/back catalog for the last 20 years. They were still actively involved in the GNR brand, to some degree. 

Not to just some degree, they all had full control of that era of the band. Think about all the legal fees alone they fronted to manage that situation over the years. That alone, should be reason enough. Nobody is taking anything away from Izzy. He wrote great songs and still gets paid to this day for them. If anyone, he's the one who's been collecting checks on the residuals.

What has he done since he left to help grow the brand/band from that era? He didn't have as much leverage in the situation.  He wanted nothing to do with GNR post 1991, and you can argue he wanted nothing to do in working his solo efforts to maintain his own career. Maybe if he had a different philosophy on that matter, he'd have more? If Slash/Duff didn't work their ass off to maintain their careers and slipped into obscurity, do you think they'd have the same leverage as today? Same thing with Axl. Everyone got to the table and looked to see what they could get. Some guys liked what they saw, and another person didn't. Doesn't mean anyone's at fault. It's a business, with millions of dollars on the line. No one is going to force anyone into bad deal. The amount of animosity and resentment that would arise in that scenario could have derail the whole thing forever. 

5 minutes ago, sjlgnr said:

Truth is, stuff like this happens with so many reunions.   First, from an equity perspective, I agree with Izzy that he should get an equal split.  Izzy wrote as much or more of the Appetite, Lies and Illussions material than anyone else.  Izzy also is responsible for helping to craft the band's musical persona.  When you think about what gave the band it's identity, it's very much Izzy:  Punk, Stones & Hanoi Rocks influences.  Also, Izzy is the guy who started it all by leaving Indiana for L.A.  Axl followed Izzy!   There is also the de facto point that Guns n' Roses ended as a band that made new material when Izzy left.

Second, on the other hand, squabbling over money happens with many major bands, especially with reunions.  Zeppelin tried (and succeeded) to cut out Jon Paul Jones from one reunion.  The Eagles made original member Randy Meissner an employee.  Brian Jones was the original leader of the Rolling Stones, but ended up dead in a pool.  When you add to that the fact that Izzy freely walked away from the band, partially because he had to get sober due to an arrest -- albeit partially because of the same Axl power-play business we are seeing now.  Indeed, the reunion tour we just saw is pretty much the Illusions lineup from 92-93 -- minus Tracy & Roberta and the horns :)).   Having abdicated his role with the band, Izzy has given up some of the moral high ground.  

Finally, my vote is of course that I want more Izzy.   Any real fan of GnR knows that Izzy is a major part of the band and the band's history.  There is a strong argument that he is the most important member -- and he's at least top-3.  So it is a major loss not to have Izzy on board.    

The thing is Izzy had all of that. He was an equal partner and was rewarded for all of his songwriting, influences, and being there from the start. He then made the business decision and left. He didn't want the risk/liability that came with the reward. Now the other 3 stuck around, and have maintained the brand for nearly 20 years so that this scenario of a stadium sized reunion show is even possible. Izzy wasn't there making branding, merchandise, synch deals, and running the business side of the GNR catalogue during those times. Think about all the lawyers those guys had on retainer over the years, to help control their interests. Time spent thinking not only but the brand, but about the other parties involved.  By no means is he entitled to now just walk in and demand equal equity on this pay day. This is the other guys payoff for all that work.  I'm sure the other 2 could of sold their rights to Axl if they didn't want the headache. They were just smart enough to stick around. 

13 minutes ago, Italian girl said:

Why wasn't he at the rock n roll hall of fame induction? not enough money to split?

Actually it's quite opposite. The band ends up "donating" to the hall with their table/vip purchases. 

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

Then why, if this is a collaborative project between the 'three', of which Izzy was merely 'invited' (I think that is the general area of your argument?), are they playing 'Patience', 'Double Talkin' Jive', 'Used To Love Her', 'You Could Be Mine', 'Brownstone', 'Don't Cry', 'My Michelle' and Sweet Child'? (in loose descending order reflecting Stradlin's importance to said songs)?

Because they play whatever they want? It's not as if Izzy hasn't been paid for writing those songs. Can Izzy go to a club gig and demand equal split from the guy on stage if he covers Patience? Where the hell is the logic in arguing about song credits? He's been and will continue to be compensated for that work forever. 

He has already and continues to get compensation for what he's brought to the band. This tour is different and separate. Some of you have no clue how the music industry operates. 

I highly doubt the 3 main guys are even being paid equally. You get whatever you can leverage. You are paid for whatever you can bring to the table in 2016, not 1991. I also highly doubt he was offered anything but a similar guest spot like Adler. Is Izzy inferring that he should be paid more than him? Is that fair to Steven? Steven took the offer because it worked for him, and wanted to be there. Izzy felt differently.

Now everyone looks like assholes because he aired the laundry. I wouldn't expect many interviews for the foreseeable future. The fans lose out in this situation...

2 hours ago, Nikki_Sixx said:

I predict exactly zero changes.  It's more or less the exact same setlist since the wilderness years started in '01.  A core skeleton of GNR staples, with CD songs and covers sprinkled throughout.

There's one simple solution: reduce the number of AFD songs, drop the CD songs and pointless covers and replace them with UYI deep cuts, with extra variety from night to night.

It'll never happen...

I'd say it's a bit more change than that. Definitely more stuff being played off the Illusions than those shows. There's only 4 albums + 2 EP's worth of original material. Covers have always been part of GNR's history going back to the club days. They have to play the staples at every show. For my personal tastes, I'd love it if they switched up the order more. Not sure if my setlist would resonate with 50,000 people though. That's for them to figure out. 

You never know what they could pull for the next leg. None of us would have guessed Coma being played at nearly every show this tour. That's a pretty big deep cut, right?

1 hour ago, Slash787 said:

Honestly Axl had no vision for Fortus, he is just a session musician, even after being a session musician, Axl saw nothing in him which would add something to his album, another reason he is in the band cause he is way cheaper than Izzy.

Some delusional people need to stop comparing him with Izzy or Ron Wood and if you call yourselves fan of Fortus then you people are making him look in a negative manner by spamming all over. Even Fortus would not want that. Poor guy is just an employee and doing whatever he is told by his bosses.

You hang out with Axl much? How in the world do you know how he feels about him or what his ultimate plans are for his use? Have you seen his contract or what supposedly was or wasn't offered to Izzy? Did you hang out in the studio and rehearsals? People need to stop assuming they know stuff they have no clue about. 

Have your preferences and taste. We get it, a small amount of people despise Fortus. Others feel differently. Ron Wood might be a stretch, but he's still a phenomenal player. Whether or not you think his style meshes within GNR comes down to preference. His skills are certainly not up for debate.

He's a pro, that a majority of guitar players would give anything to have a fraction of the amount of success outside of his GNR endeavor. Very well respected  

14 minutes ago, Tom-Ass said:

Onstage Presence.. Nope.. He is the biggest show boat on the stage and most people at the shows don't even give a rats ass about him. Kind of corny. The ultimate poser.

The way he plays his solos.. I really don't.. His Rocket Queen one doesn't fit the song.. The Nightrain one is tacky.

The fact that he plays solos.. I don't.. He has way too many. I could care less about the CD ones but don't care to hear him on KOHD or other Gn'R tunes.  Wish You Were here is ok but other than that just play rhythm

his rhythm parts... He pulls off the rhythm parts pretty well on most songs.. Sometimes he tries to get to cute and adds unnecessary things to the songs which is annoying.. At times he is too loud but that seems to have gotten better. In April it was terrible.

 

To each their own.... But to claim that no one gives a rats ass about him on stage is a bit much. I've never heard anyone complain about his playing during a show. Also I don't think anyone thinks Slash isn't the main attraction on guitar after walking out. 

Id just say that  GNR likes to make sure everyone gets a bit of the limelight in each show. So to expect Fortus to not play a few leads is sort of naive. Also none of those guys play their parts exactly like the record either. So I'm not sure why you'd expect any different for him. 

Sounds like you either want him behind the amps or offstage playing behind a curtain?

7 minutes ago, Modano09 said:

Because pretty much every time someone talks about him they mention that he's content doing his own thing off out of the public eye and just likes to come and go as he feels. 

Who knows? Maybe the band just considers Richard to be the guy? Maybe Izzy was offered $ for a guest slot and wouldn't do it? Maybe Izzy didn't want to dilute his reunion payday on a guest appearance? Maybe he didn't want to learn new material? Maybe he didn't want to tour or there was a conflict? Maybe the other guys just don't want to work with and rely on him for a tour? Maybe this was all planned and he comes back so that they double dip and play stadiums again? Or maybe it's none of that. You could go crazy thinking about the reasons. Maybe there just isn't a reason at all and was never even approached? 

None of us really knows until someone talks. Then that will be their side, and we can then guess what the other's view could be. All I know is that Richard can play and he's incredible on guitar, and I'd gladly pay to listen to them whether he's in the band contributing or not. 

4 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

Its good to know that you are in NYC now, but I assume LA is a better place. 

Everyone has their point of view, I guess thats why he have this forum. Like that we can't vote in any matter regarding anything and many things go un listened, but it doesn't means we should stay quite and not speak about it.

No one knows if this band will even release an album, it could be 6 months or even 6 years. But we do wan't an album, don't we? So if we ask for some new music then its wrong too? cause well after all its up to them to decide. 

Discussion boards are meant for debate and different views. That's all cool. I'd rather have deeper discussion about certain subjects and bring points of opposition to the prevailing view at times. Plus some knowledge from the field. Not being personal. We all have a common interest here. 

New music? Anticipate all you want and be excited. I just personally think it gets silly when fans demand that they should do this or that with a release. There's just so much stuff behind the scenes we don't know about. Way too much to make an honest call on it. 

Maybe we're here to discuss that line at times? Maybe there are things on the opposite view that have been misrepresented? At the end of the day I think we just want what's best for the music. That reason will be different for anyone. I just know we can't control what we don't control. 

4 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

Because its not necessary if you like something then it means you should support it.

Axl, Duff and Slash on one stage is a dream come true, they sound awesome, hopefully I will see them next year, I spent a huge amount of money on the tickets cause I like them.

But on the other hand I like Izzy too and I will express myself that Izzy should be there cause he contributed so much to the band. 

I don't get why some are so negative regarding Izzy. 

You yourself is confused if you are from Syracuse OR Boston, you can't even decide one. 

That sig was from 2003 while in school. I've moved to LA and then to NYC since then, but thanks for your concern. I know exactly where I am. 

i love Izzy and his contributions. I just don't have the gall to insist that he should be there, without being involved in the inner workings of the band. That's for them to decide and hash out. 

I'd love it if he came out for 14 years or if was suddenly involved in a 30 yr AFD tour, or back in the band. That would be awesome. 

I also appreciate Fortus and the other members. I think they're phenomenal musicians and bring interesting playing out of Slash and the sound of the band. I'd love to see what they could accomplish in the future in the studio/live.

You can enjoy both versions, and/or have preferences. I just don't understand the constant thought the band should be whatever a fan wants. No one here has a vote in the matter