realpoti Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 The music industry isn't headed by one man only. He is CEO of ticketmaster, the largest ticket agency in the country controlling like 95% of the market. He is about as big a fish as there is in the pond right now.Chief executive officer of Ticketmaster. So ?? If there's a lot of money involved, I'm sure there will be a Gn'R tour in the US. Azoff isn't losing money for fulfillment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dario27 Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 The music industry isn't headed by one man only. He is CEO of ticketmaster, the largest ticket agency in the country controlling like 95% of the market. He is about as big a fish as there is in the pond right now.Chief executive officer of Ticketmaster. So ?? If there's a lot of money involved, I'm sure there will be a Gn'R tour in the US. Azoff isn't losing money for fulfillment.he doesn't need GNR US tour to make a lot of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsh327 Posted March 28, 2010 Share Posted March 28, 2010 Shrewd? He got in HUGE trouble when Ticketmaster sent ticket buyers to a third party ticket broker outlet when people were trying to buy Springsteen tickets. First link: Letter written by Congressman to Department of Justice. http://idolator.com/5146150/ticketmaster-dares-to-get-between-a-new-jersey-congressman-and-his-springsteen-ticketsSecond link: Bruce's reply and Azoff's apology underneath. http://idolator.com/5146920/bruce-springsteen-makes-ticketmaster-ceo-grovel-apologize-and-generally-feel-like-crapIn a business that makes billions, this isn't really money he's going to miss, but he still has people to pay. I know he's a big reason why Don Felder parted ways with Eagles, and why Mike Anthony signed away his rights to Van Halen. When they did Rock Band, they show different eras of Van Halen, but Wolfgang Van Halen's shown as the bassist. He gets publishing. But VH did something messed up - they had put up album covers from the past, and on the first Van Halen album, they put Wolfgang in Mike Anthony's place. The fans flipped out... it would like putting DJ Ashba in Slash's place in the photos of AFD, UYI, and Lies...There's no way Azoff would sue unless he knew he could win. He's been one of the shrewdest and most powerful businessmen in music for decades. Not someone that Axl should have fucked over. He can pretty much kiss any U.S. tour goodbye because Azoff pretty much singlehandedly controls the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunsguy Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 It is now on the BBC with story from AP:Guns N' Roses frontman Axl Rose is being sued by his former manager who claims the singer owes him nearly $2m (£1.3m), according to reports.Front Line Management filed papers suing the musician in Los Angeles on Thursday, said the Associated Press.Founder Irving Azoff has claimed he had a verbal agreement with Rose to receive 15% of the star's earnings for overseas performances.Rose and his current management were unavailable to comment.The legal action claims commissions are due on more than $12 million (£8 million) in earnings made by the musician.Mr Azoff has represented musicians including The Eagles and Joe Walsh and is currently the executive chairman of Live Nation Entertainment, which recently merged with Ticketmaster. story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8588653.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iftheworld Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 (edited) It is now on the BBC with story from AP:Guns N' Roses frontman Axl Rose is being sued by his former manager who claims the singer owes him nearly $2m (£1.3m), according to reports.Front Line Management filed papers suing the musician in Los Angeles on Thursday, said the Associated Press.Founder Irving Azoff has claimed he had a verbal agreement with Rose to receive 15% of the star's earnings for overseas performances.Rose and his current management were unavailable to comment.The legal action claims commissions are due on more than $12 million (£8 million) in earnings made by the musician.Mr Azoff has represented musicians including The Eagles and Joe Walsh and is currently the executive chairman of Live Nation Entertainment, which recently merged with Ticketmaster. story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8588653.stmThis isn't looking good. Fortunately, it's only 2m. Thanks gunsguy Edited March 29, 2010 by iftheworld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sweet Tooth Posted March 29, 2010 Share Posted March 29, 2010 /guess that's why Axl took to the road, to pay off some debts..I think he found out himself while overseas, which is maybe why he was down/angry the few past concerts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anahzul Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 Hmm.. let's see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 (edited) From what I've read, the two had a verbal contract (which sounds insane if true; not sure GNR and/or Frontline would enter into a business arraignment without formal contracts). My guess is that Axl probably felt Front Line/Azoff weren't fulfilling their end of the agreement as as result the contract was null and void. Azoff probably felt otherwise, hence the lawsuit to claim what he feels is rightfully his. This will likely be settled in arbitration as both sides will likely settle with some sort of agreement. Either way, this will likely be the last we hear of this matter.Cheers,Andrew Edited March 30, 2010 by downzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercool Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 (edited) poor little axllol @ verbal contract Edited March 30, 2010 by supercool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyDRE Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 in the us, verbal contracts are binding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohmygod Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 in the us, verbal contracts are binding.UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM look at the statute of frauds, if it falls within one of the exceptions it MAY be... But that statement u just made is totally wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iftheworld Posted March 30, 2010 Share Posted March 30, 2010 I'll pay 1.8 million dollars to Axl Rose if he punches Azoff in the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickn Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 I'll pay 1.8 million dollars to Axl Rose if he punches Azoff in the face.he probaly already has settled this . 1.8 aint shit to AXL.Considering the GNR brand has grossed 15mill so far . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 just making it as difficult as possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SunnyDRE Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 in the us, verbal contracts are binding.UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM look at the statute of frauds, if it falls within one of the exceptions it MAY be... But that statement u just made is totally wrong.Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 in the us, verbal contracts are binding.UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM look at the statute of frauds, if it falls within one of the exceptions it MAY be... But that statement u just made is totally wrong.Nope.Yes, actually. It's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. In order for a verbal contract to be enforced, it must be proven that one existed which can come down to he said-he/she said. And, a verbal contract will never, ever be as all-inconclusive or all-encompassing like a written contract. And, there are several oral contracts that are not enforceable under US law, regardless.Ali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karlossacanell Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 (edited) in my country verbal contracts are only valid if there are witnesses and there is not a written contract saying just the opposite, of course Edited March 31, 2010 by karlossacanell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris 55 Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 I'll pay 1.8 million dollars to Axl Rose if he punches Azoff in the face.Azoff got CD released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(t) Posted March 31, 2010 Share Posted March 31, 2010 in the us, verbal contracts are binding.UMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM look at the statute of frauds, if it falls within one of the exceptions it MAY be... But that statement u just made is totally wrong.Nope.Yes, actually. It's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. In order for a verbal contract to be enforced, it must be proven that one existed which can come down to he said-he/she said. And, a verbal contract will never, ever be as all-inconclusive or all-encompassing like a written contract. And, there are several oral contracts that are not enforceable under US law, regardless.Alioral, hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 1, 2010 Share Posted April 1, 2010 to me it comes down whether azoff booked the tour. i have a contract but if i dont go to work i dont get paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts