"At Interscope, it felt like we were one of 50 bands, and we didn't sell as much as Eminem, so no one cared about us" - Trent Reznor, 2013

[axlsalinger]

In chinese whispers Axl was ready in 99 and the label wanted to bring in Baker. Then in 2000 Axl was ready to mix and Ezrin said no. I think around that time the blues and madagascar would be enough. It would have sold 4 mil. But the label wanted to sell 20 mil. Especially post Baker.

It seems like people could get paid for telling axl no, pay me ill help.

They seemed to be trying to make gnr relevant when they are a band out of time.

This seems like revisionist history to me. They asked Ezrin what he thought and he said, "you've got 3 songs." I think that may have been before RTB, and by no means does it suggest Axl was "ready" to mix. I just think at that point Axl decided to reverse course on the industrial elements, and Baker ended up turning the whole thing into a circus.

[wasted]

In chinese whispers Axl was ready in 99 and the label wanted to bring in Baker. Then in 2000 Axl was ready to mix and Ezrin said no. I think around that time the blues and madagascar would be enough. It would have sold 4 mil. But the label wanted to sell 20 mil. Especially post Baker.

It seems like people could get paid for telling axl no, pay me ill help.

They seemed to be trying to make gnr relevant when they are a band out of time.

This seems like revisionist history to me. They asked Ezrin what he thought and he said, "you've got 3 songs." I think that may have been before RTB, and by no means does it suggest Axl was "ready" to mix. I just think at that point Axl decided to reverse course on the industrial elements, and Baker ended up turning the whole thing into a circus.

Ezrin's quote was after Baker had some work on it. But Ezrin told the story as Axl said he was ready to mix and he'd told him no it's not ready to mix. This is in 2000. We kind of know they had basically the same album then. Credit to Ezrin he did oversee Shackler's, Scraped, Sorry or something. But he did block CD when Axl thought it was ready. People say it's just one guy, but he's an industry legend and he's telling the label no.

I guess what they are looking for is commercial material. And in 99,2000 it was nu metal so Chi Dem was probably not seen as a big single, The Blues would have been alright in the 90s. I'm not sure if they had Better or ITW at this point. Oh My God, Silkworms, Shackler's seem like they fit late 90s nu metal. but would people accept that as GNR, probably not. Definitely a weird situation!

But at that point they weren't worried it seems. with 3 mil sales world wide they would still make 30 mil. So even without the the Best Buy deal they weren't really going to lose. but this is GNR they have been hoping 10-20 album sales, expecting those numbers with the right song and release.

They were probably perfectly happy to put out Live Era and GH. Both records kind of delayed CD.

[rockerman]

Labels aren't supposed to be entirely concerned with making money. They have a moral responsibility to play a constructive role in the evolution of music. I'd take a GNR or NIN record before any of Interscope's money makers.

Some are geared that way for artistic development but the bottom line is the $$$. Geffen knew the numbers possible and invested heavily in the concept of GNR. Smart return on investment.

Back in the day when GNR were kings- the lable would do anything to cater to thier demands because they knew that GNR was the biggest and best thing on the market. Keep the fellas happy and watch the numbers climb....but that went to hell all to quickly and the sunset strip GNR is NOT the Axl GNR . They dynamic and relationship has changed. Once bitten twice shy as the saying goes...they invested in Axls solo venture and it was a long time in coming and it was at best a mediocre album that the public largely did not buy. Im sure in the negotioations is the insistance by camp GNR that they command and deserve the respect garnered them during AFD AND UYI still. That might have been absolutely true in 2000-2005 but its rolling up on 2014 now. I wouldnt carte blanche give Axl a blank check to finish off CD2 ...that was supposed to be done in the CD sessions 15 million investment fiasco.

How do you market a BAND named Guns and Roses in 2010's with one solitary remaining member who clearly veered off course with (in essence) his SOLO project to a market of music weary youth capable of literly having hundreds of thousands of choices in music? ..mixed with an "artist" who insists that his time and band are still relevant to the modern era and you have a huge impass.

[wasted]

I think you do that, by doing what they did with CD, you focus on Axl's songs. That maybe gave the wrong impression of the material they did. But they resurrected This I Love and basically put together an Axl focused, ballad heavy album. A kind of best of UYI type album.

They had Oh My God, Silkworms which doesn't sound so GNR. They even seemed to add Catcher in the Rye on there, it wasn't on the first 13-track album.

They might have another record of this stuff. And as long as there's 3-4 Axl songs on a GNR record then Dj, Fortus whoever can fill it out.

But it's basically Axl songs which will sound like GNR.

[One.In.A.Million]

I like the way Trent has handled labels, and worked out his releases etc. He seems very open about trying something new, even if it means self releasing an album (the slip). Now he's managed to get another label behind him for Hesitation Marks, which he must of also negotiated himself... Gotta admit, Trent don't mess about.

[wasted]

I think part of the big trauma with GNR is they sold so many records. The label must have been kicking itself in the face they couldn't keep them together. And anyone who came in on the new GNR must have been expected to deliver big. The label must have though they had a Aerosmith situation, if they could just bring them back they could sell a ton more records. Obviously the ass has dropped out the industry and it's not really going to happen anymore.

[November_rain]

What Axl and Trent say in those paragraphs in the first post is what a lot of artists have been saying and complaining for years. It has always been about the money but years ago (80´s and early 90´s) they also cared about talent and musical quality. Now it is different, sales have decreased and people don´t buy as many records as they used to years ago and that is a fact. So, now they see the artists as a "product" and they don´t see it in a music wise sense but in a marketing sense. They analyze how they can sell that product, their benefits and it that product will sell or not. IF the product fits their expectations they support it, if it doesn´t, they don´t support it or they don´t support it as much as they do with other projects.

[wasted]

Kind of like how the screen test movies. Maybe thats what leaks are.

[batman007]

Labels aren't supposed to be entirely concerned with making money. They have a moral responsibility to play a constructive role in the evolution of music. I'd take a GNR or NIN record before any of Interscope's money makers.

But that is all they are concerned about. No matter if any of the label people truly believed in the artist. It comes down to the boss breathing down your back. When you have a high paying job at a label your goal is to make the boss happy and make money. Not about morals. I get your point though.

[D-GenerationX]

I wonder if Axl's refusal to promote his own album or do any media had anything to do with the fact the label gave 2 shits about the album?

If the artist can't even be motivated enough to promote his own work, why on earth would the label?

Totally agree.

Axl sure "showed them". Obviously the best way to deal with what you feel is lackluster label support it throw a tantrum and run off and pout for a solid year after your album drops. God forbid you take some initiative and do something on your own. That's just madness.

[Amir]

Don't think it was madness so much as just sheer depression. He'd spent so long on it, and then to see the lacklustre commercial response and the negative reviews on an album he'd spent the best part of his adult life on... He really did believe he'd "show" everybody once the album finally came out. Must have been soul-destroying to see that wasn't the case. Hence staying holed up and gaining a lot of weight by Taipei '09.

[volcano62]

http://www.spin.com/featured/trent-reznor-upward-spiral-nine-inch-nails-spin-cover-september-2013/

In the time between 2007's Year Zero (released on Interscope) and Hesitation Marks(released on Columbia), Trent Reznor hocked a lot of thick loogies in the direction of major labels. Publicly and repeatedly, he chided them for sticking their collective heads in the sand with regards to file-sharing. He thought that the suits were more inclined to sue fans than serve them. So he left.

"At Interscope, it felt like we were one of 50 bands, and we didn't sell as much as Eminem, so no one cared about us," Reznor says, having finished the coffee and moved on to the Diet Coke. "Combine that with unquestionably wrong move after wrong move in terms of the response to new technologies — I just felt like I could figure things out better than they could."

Seems to mirror Axl's experience (though Axl doesn't seem quite so Internet-friendly). I know a lot of people believe that Axl just likes to blame everything on the label, but what Trent says here seems to suggest there was a genuine lack of interest for development of well-established artists (GNR, NIN) who weren't part of the contemporary popular 'sound'.

What's interesting is that Trent ended up working with Jimmy Iovine on the upcoming Beats Music service.

Axl on the label, from the 2009 Billboard interview:

What are your thoughts on how Universal has handled the album?

Unfortunately I have no information for me to believe [that] there was any real involvement or effort from Interscope. I'm not saying there wasn't. But in my opinion, without [interscope Geffen A&M chairman] Jimmy Iovine's involvement, it doesn't matter who anyone talks to or what they say -- virtually nothing will happen from their end.

Our involvement with Interscope has been more than frustrating for [the band].

Here's how things worked until they were no longer involved-that is, until recently. Jimmy [iovine] and whoever would come down to the studio. Things would be good for a month. Then, according to whoever was involved at the time from their side, someone above Jimmy would start putting pressure regarding us on him, Jimmy would start pressuring others at his label [and they] would begin doing the same with us. We get that it's just how business -- and perhaps especially this business -- tends to work, but after a month of this the whole thing would get ugly and extensively interfere with getting anything productive done, and near the middle of the third month we'd arrange for Jimmy to come down again. They'd go away happy and the entire process would repeat itself over and over and over.

We feel that, unfortunately, we've never been really anything all that much more other than a throw it at the wall, see if it sticks, no real ground work, something to take advantage of, last quarter, cook the books, write-off, fuck this headache, hoping to get lucky scam.

How DARE a company only want to invest in a something that is going to make money. Evil!!!!!!!!!!!!

You don't get at all.

[wasted]

Reality is label makes a kot more money from cd sales. 10$ per cd. Whereas the band share a couple bucks between them.

[The Black]

Reality is label makes a kot more money from cd sales. 10$ per cd. Whereas the band share a couple bucks between them.

Have a nice read http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm

[wasted]

Reality is label makes a kot more money from cd sales. 10$ per cd. Whereas the band share a couple bucks between them.

Have a nice read http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm

its almost a futile enterprise. They must waste a lot of money because i find out about records from the internet and never listen to the radio.

[Amir]

It's like movies where the studios really on a few big hits to cover the costs of the 90% of films which don't even break-even.

I'm surprised whenever studies come out that show loads of people still listen to the radio. Haven't listened to the radio since my mum drove me to school more than a decade ago.

[The Black]

Reality is label makes a kot more money from cd sales. 10$ per cd. Whereas the band share a couple bucks between them.

Have a nice read http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm

its almost a futile enterprise. They must waste a lot of money because i find out about records from the internet and never listen to the radio.

Because you don't listen to the radio doesn't mean 99 other people don't.

These days there are a select number of people that give a shit about Guns N' Roses and billions of people waiting to here Gangnam Style (well not anymore, but you catch my drift).

Why waste money on something that isn't going to sell, just because of artistic integrity?

Let's say you open an ice cream store, and you love blueberry, but alsmost all of your customers want chocolate, are you going to waste all your money in producing something that's not going to, or barely sell? No, it's a business.

[dalsh327]

I think part of the big trauma with GNR is they sold so many records. The label must have been kicking itself in the face they couldn't keep them together. And anyone who came in on the new GNR must have been expected to deliver big. The label must have though they had a Aerosmith situation, if they could just bring them back they could sell a ton more records. Obviously the ass has dropped out the industry and it's not really going to happen anymore.

Not all labels are that way though. There was a lot of discontent with Universal and Warner in particular. Universal was basically taken over by a liquor company, and Warner had been a part of the AOL & TIme family.

Mid 90s - Geffen floundered - Cobain died, GNR were done recording for them, Aerosmith bailed. It was a trifecta disaster for them, and Henley sued Geffen towards the end. That's prob. why David Geffen wiped his hands clean and sold it off when he did, going on to greener pastures with Katzenberg and Spielberg making Shrek movies. The Interscope takeover was more about Iovine wanting the back catalog at that point.

So the bottom line is this: GNR's label was in the business of back catalog releases when they were trying to work on new music. The Greatest Hits created more discontent than we're probably aware of. If Axl, Slash, and Duff hadn't sued the record company, things probably would have gone smoother in getting ChiDem out. Maybe that was their way of "punishing" Axl.

The question "happened to Geffen Records" is prob. best answered by Vicky Hamilton and Tom Zutaut.

It's like movies where the studios really on a few big hits to cover the costs of the 90% of films which don't even break-even.

I'm surprised whenever studies come out that show loads of people still listen to the radio. Haven't listened to the radio since my mum drove me to school more than a decade ago.

Radio's pretty much dead but they get the money from streaming services like Spotify & Pandora, satellite radio, the music they pipe in at stores, and You Tube. The automated and syndicated stations do well, but you're better asking our country music forum member who works in radio about all that.

[D-GenerationX]

Don't think it was madness so much as just sheer depression. He'd spent so long on it, and then to see the lacklustre commercial response and the negative reviews on an album he'd spent the best part of his adult life on... He really did believe he'd "show" everybody once the album finally came out. Must have been soul-destroying to see that wasn't the case. Hence staying holed up and gaining a lot of weight by Taipei '09.

He did not give it even the slightest chance to succeed though.

No serious press, no video, no nothing. A few unfocused rambling chats on here and HTGTH. For which very little time was spent on the current band or the new album.

These are not the actions of a man that put his heart and soul into something and busted his ass to see it get the best shot to succeed.

[Amir]

I'm surprised whenever studies come out that show loads of people still listen to the radio. Haven't listened to the radio since my mum drove me to school more than a decade ago.

Radio's pretty much dead but they get the money from streaming services like Spotify & Pandora, satellite radio, the music they pipe in at stores, and You Tube. The automated and syndicated stations do well, but you're better asking our country music forum member who works in radio about all that.

As I understand it, in the US radio stations get to play music for free since they argue its promotion. Pandora pays barely anything, and they're trying to get away with not paying anything much at all by pushing the "Internet Radio" angle (though they've failed to get Congressional approval). In the UK, radio stations do pay per play, but it's even less than Spotify, which is a tiny amount. iTunes and CD sales are the only real money-makers when it comes to recorded music,

He did not give it even the slightest chance to succeed though.

No serious press, no video, no nothing. A few unfocused rambling chats on here and HTGTH. For which very little time was spent on the current band or the new album.

These are not the actions of a man that put his heart and soul into something and busted his ass to see it get the best shot to succeed.

The video thing was addressed when he said the label asked for it like a month before release, though yeah, it's something he should have definitely given more time and thought. My argument is, though, is that he didn't do any press because the physical release was botched and he didn't get the marketing plan he wanted. I agree, he could have reached out a bit more, and come December he did an interview with Billboard and the chats, but it was too late by that point. I personally got drawn into the album because of the MySpace stream, which picked up quite a bit of press, although not necessarily positive.

[wasted]

Reality is label makes a kot more money from cd sales. 10$ per cd. Whereas the band share a couple bucks between them.

Have a nice read http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm

its almost a futile enterprise. They must waste a lot of money because i find out about records from the internet and never listen to the radio.

Because you don't listen to the radio doesn't mean 99 other people don't.

These days there are a select number of people that give a shit about Guns N' Roses and billions of people waiting to here Gangnam Style (well not anymore, but you catch my drift).

Why waste money on something that isn't going to sell, just because of artistic integrity?

Let's say you open an ice cream store, and you love blueberry, but alsmost all of your customers want chocolate, are you going to waste all your money in producing something that's not going to, or barely sell? No, it's a business.

But GNR do sell records. Must be one of top selling rock acts. If UMG dont want them someone else will.

[The Black]

Reality is label makes a kot more money from cd sales. 10$ per cd. Whereas the band share a couple bucks between them.

Have a nice read http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/record-label.htm

its almost a futile enterprise. They must waste a lot of money because i find out about records from the internet and never listen to the radio.

Because you don't listen to the radio doesn't mean 99 other people don't.

These days there are a select number of people that give a shit about Guns N' Roses and billions of people waiting to here Gangnam Style (well not anymore, but you catch my drift).

Why waste money on something that isn't going to sell, just because of artistic integrity?

Let's say you open an ice cream store, and you love blueberry, but alsmost all of your customers want chocolate, are you going to waste all your money in producing something that's not going to, or barely sell? No, it's a business.

But GNR do sell records. Must be one of top selling rock acts. If UMG dont want them someone else will.

The back-catalogue sells pretty well yes, but any new material won't. This band is way past their prime.

[Amir]

Old Guns. Greatest Hits still sells well. Best Buy couldn't even sell a million copies of CD in the US. Yeah, other labels are envious of UMG getting a cut from sales of those old albums. No label, however, wants to deal with Chinese Democracy II (both the album and the situation).

[wasted]

How much more would it have sold if Axl went on tv on the release of CD?

what Axl had to say in the chats about the label etc may not have helped sales.

The cd itself isnt a barrel of laughs anyway so it kind of makes sense. The label must really be hoping for a few drinking anthems.

[Apollo]

http://www.spin.com/featured/trent-reznor-upward-spiral-nine-inch-nails-spin-cover-september-2013/

In the time between 2007's Year Zero (released on Interscope) and Hesitation Marks(released on Columbia), Trent Reznor hocked a lot of thick loogies in the direction of major labels. Publicly and repeatedly, he chided them for sticking their collective heads in the sand with regards to file-sharing. He thought that the suits were more inclined to sue fans than serve them. So he left.

"At Interscope, it felt like we were one of 50 bands, and we didn't sell as much as Eminem, so no one cared about us," Reznor says, having finished the coffee and moved on to the Diet Coke. "Combine that with unquestionably wrong move after wrong move in terms of the response to new technologies — I just felt like I could figure things out better than they could."

Seems to mirror Axl's experience (though Axl doesn't seem quite so Internet-friendly). I know a lot of people believe that Axl just likes to blame everything on the label, but what Trent says here seems to suggest there was a genuine lack of interest for development of well-established artists (GNR, NIN) who weren't part of the contemporary popular 'sound'.

What's interesting is that Trent ended up working with Jimmy Iovine on the upcoming Beats Music service.

Axl on the label, from the 2009 Billboard interview:

What are your thoughts on how Universal has handled the album?

Unfortunately I have no information for me to believe [that] there was any real involvement or effort from Interscope. I'm not saying there wasn't. But in my opinion, without [interscope Geffen A&M chairman] Jimmy Iovine's involvement, it doesn't matter who anyone talks to or what they say -- virtually nothing will happen from their end.

Our involvement with Interscope has been more than frustrating for [the band].

Here's how things worked until they were no longer involved-that is, until recently. Jimmy [iovine] and whoever would come down to the studio. Things would be good for a month. Then, according to whoever was involved at the time from their side, someone above Jimmy would start putting pressure regarding us on him, Jimmy would start pressuring others at his label [and they] would begin doing the same with us. We get that it's just how business -- and perhaps especially this business -- tends to work, but after a month of this the whole thing would get ugly and extensively interfere with getting anything productive done, and near the middle of the third month we'd arrange for Jimmy to come down again. They'd go away happy and the entire process would repeat itself over and over and over.

We feel that, unfortunately, we've never been really anything all that much more other than a throw it at the wall, see if it sticks, no real ground work, something to take advantage of, last quarter, cook the books, write-off, fuck this headache, hoping to get lucky scam.

How DARE a company only want to invest in a something that is going to make money. Evil!!!!!!!!!!!!

You don't get at all.

Well apparently the majority of the posters on here don't "get it at all" either.

I beg you - literally beg you - to explain it to all of us. Seriously, not being sarcastic.

PLEASE explain it to us.

******************

Nov - I disagree and think you are looking at it from a band's fan's perspective. Labels are always about money. If they aren't, they go out of business. In the past it seemed like GnR was part of their family. But that was just because GnR was making them a ton of money. Just like today, Eminim or Justin Bieber is part of the label's "family"......simply because they are making the money. The label is going to invest more time, energy and loyality into a new Justin Bieber or Beonce album than a new GnR or Slash album. Why? Because one group makes more money.

If CD or the next Slash album sold 15 million copies............guess who would be part of the "family" again?

******************

And why are people still complaining that the label gave no support to the album?

They gave him what, 13 years and $14 million dollars to produce an album?

Before CD came out, I saw more advertising for CD than 99% of all other albums. I saw tv commercials, I saw ads in magazines, newspapers. And they were going to do their part in promoting a music video (which Axl failed to deliver).

WHAT more should they have done???? Went door to door trying to sell the album?

**************

Finally, somebody mentioned that if the label had did more, then it would have sold more copies. You are saying that their are GnR fans out there who didn't know the album came out? The most anticipated album of all time, got like 14 million listens on myspace, tons of advertsing......but there were GnR fans who didn't know it was coming out????? Seriously?

They might not have bought it opening day, but anybody who wants to buy CD, ended up buying it eventually - which all counts on the sale totals. So you can blame the label all day long, but at the end of the day, anybody who want it - bought it.

******************

Bottom line........the star of the album chose to NOT promote it. That is more damaging than anything the label ever did. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.