Richard has been in GNR for 16 years quote

[passenger57]

This thread is so complicated. It's pretty simple. It's a reunion of Axl and Slash. Hence the title 'Not in This Lifetime'.

Axl already shared the stage with Izzy and Duff.

Izzy and Steven were probably only considered for guest appearances since Fortus and Frank are solid tour guys.

As for the 'original' GnR members...they only played handful of shows before they were fired or quit, so who cares.

Hopefully Izzy and Steven will make appearances on this or a later tour.

And please for the love of god let's hope they release a new album!!!

 

 

[SoulMonster]

11 hours ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

Where in the definition does it say the "same" componets? Maybe it's just me, but I thought you were being sincere when you said that you care about being precise?

re·un·ion

the action of being brought together again as a unified whole.

Are you seriously arguing that a reunion could be to combine new components into something? "Being brought together again" implies it is the same components that has come together again.

Hey, I had to replace the car clutch as the repairs last week. They put in a new one, so I guess the car has been reunited now. Duh.

Edited April 26, 2016 by SoulMonster
type and additions

[SoulMonster]

50 minutes ago, madison said:

Interesting analogy with Manchester. But let's take this analogy one step further:

Queen Elizabeth II, Britain's longest serving monarch, recently celebrated her 90th birthday. We all know who Queen Elizabeth is.   

Now, let's say a random person on the street started calling herself Queen Elizabeth - and even legally changed her name to Queen Elizabeth. Using your analogy, would this random person now be the Queen of England?  

There'd be two Queen Elizabeths, right? One who is actually the queen of England and one who was simply named "Queen Elizabeth". Of course this doesn't happen in the world of GN'R because if another music group decided to name themselves "Guns N' Roses" they'd be legally crucified by Axl who actually owns that name. I believe Duff and Slash back in the 90s challenged Axl's decision to continue with Guns N' Roses but failed at that, and since then they have both acknowledged the band being Guns N' Roses by first playing with it (Duff in 2012 etc) and now by actually rejoining it as touring members.

As for your point in a post a bit earlier. Yes, the band is pormoting this be referring to Slash and Duff and Axl playing again for the first time after 23 years (or however long it is). They'd be mad not to! But they are obviously careful about not naming it a reunion, because that would suggest that other former alumni is back, too. So yeah, one miggt argue that they benefit from the media running with it and calling it a reunion, and maybe they should have released a statement earlier saying it wasn't a reunion, but again, they'd be silly if they didn't promote the fact that Slash and Duff has rejoined the band.

[ksks12]

12 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

There'd be two Queen Elizabeths, right? One who is actually the queen of England and one who was simply named "Queen Elizabeth". Of course this doesn't happen in the world of GN'R because if another music group decided to name themselves "Guns N' Roses" they'd be legally crucified by Axl who actually owns that name. I believe Duff and Slash back in the 90s challenged Axl's decision to continue with Guns N' Roses but failed at that, and since then they have both acknowledged the band being Guns N' Roses by first playing with it (Duff in 2012 etc) and now by actually rejoining it as touring members.

As for your point in a post a bit earlier. Yes, the band is pormoting this be referring to Slash and Duff and Axl playing again for the first time after 23 years (or however long it is). They'd be mad not to! But they are obviously careful about not naming it a reunion, because that would suggest that other former alumni is back, too. So yeah, one miggt argue that they benefit from the media running with it and calling it a reunion, and maybe they should have released a statement earlier saying it wasn't a reunion, but again, they'd be silly if they didn't promote the fact that Slash and Duff has rejoined the band.

As a touring members ? Wow you crack me up. Without Slashs signature Axl could not release Apettite for democracy dvd. Try again.

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, ksks12 said:

As a touring members ? Wow you crack me up. Without Slashs signature Axl could not release Apettite for democracy dvd. Try again.

That's all I know. I hear rumours they are members of a new partnership, too, set up for the duration of the Not In The Lifetime Tour. That is beside the point, though.

[Babooshka]

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

There'd be two Queen Elizabeths, right? One who is actually the queen of England and one who was simply named "Queen Elizabeth".

You can not see that this is exactly what many fans think about the situation? Certainly from a legal stand point, original GNR and nuGNR are two separate bands. 

 

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, Babooshka said:

You can not see that this is exactly what many fans think about the situation? Certainly from a legal stand point, original GNR and nuGNR are two separate bands. 

Why do you think I don't see this? You are confusing two different issues here: whether this is a reunion (what we are actually discussing) and whether today's GN'R is a different legal entity than 1991 GN'R.

[Tom2112]

4 hours ago, madison said:

Interesting analogy with Manchester. But let's take this analogy one step further:

Queen Elizabeth II, Britain's longest serving monarch, recently celebrated her 90th birthday. We all know who Queen Elizabeth is.   

Now, let's say a random person on the street started calling herself Queen Elizabeth - and even legally changed her name to Queen Elizabeth. Using your analogy, would this random person now be the Queen of England?  

 

Doesn't make sense. That person would still just be the same person with a different name, the queen would remain the queen. GNR is a business NOT a person, businesses are owned by people, can be bought and sold OR signed over as the story went. 

It is a reunion of three classic members, that's what is "the first time in 23 years" however nowhere in the promotion does it say "the classic AFD line up for the for the first time in 26yrs" the "regrouping" is a "reunion" of three classic members... that is all!

"what we want is..." I hear this all the time, all we want is to see the original 5 up there. Last year it was, all we want is DJ Ashba gone. This is a never ending cycle and people are never going to be pleased. Even if GnR did get together as the classic 5, people would complain - initial excitement but eventually that turns to "If they don't now make a record they're just tarnishing AFD". 

A REUNION. NOT A CLASSIC GNR REUNION. END OF STORY! Can we move on from this, and just enjoy the shows, and whatever else comes with it?

[The Glow Inc.]

5 hours ago, madison said:

Don't get me wrong - I like Richard and think he's a good musician. And I'd have no problem with him playing some CD songs on this tour -

lol how generous of you. I'm sure he'd be flattered if, you know, he wasn't already playing on all the songs on this tour.

[maxpax]

5 hours ago, madison said:

I find it amusing to watch certain people desperately trying to claim this tour isn't being promoted as a reunion tour.  We have huge billboards and virtually every TV ad screaming out to the great unwashed - "for the first time in 23 years … … bang!"  Heck, even the name of the tour - "Not in this lifetime" - is a play on Axl's own response to a REUNION.   Yet, certain people try to pretend this isn't the case.    

I guess it's tough to admit that our favorite band is milking the "reunion" angle in order to charge huge prices at stadium-sized venues. We all know that Axl's replacement band could never sell out stadiums or charge these kinds of prices.  But a reunion of the classic lineup that created the music that made GNR the biggest band on the planet?  Absolutely. 

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong - I like Richard and think he's a good musician. And I'd have no problem with him playing some CD songs on this tour - but only AFTER all of the original guys are onboard - you know, the ones who actually wrote and CREATED the music that brought GNR to the top of the music world. 

There's absolutely no question this tour is being marketed as a reunion. So, the real question people should be asking is - why?  Is it just a cash grab and the "big three" didn't want to share the cash equally with the Izzy, Steven and Matt? I hope that's not the reason.

 

 

 

And before the great "non-reunion" crusaders come barreling in with claims - "Oh, but that's the promoters and marketers - that's not Axl - he has nothing to do with the way the tour is being promoted' - Please …. Axl is a guy who micromanages everything in his band and life. So, if you think for a second he knows nothing about it or that he didn't sign off on it, then think again. Geesh.

 

As for the name-calling and other juvenile comments that have been hurled at myself and others who favor a full reunion, give it a rest.  … Many of us watched with great sadness the tragic deaths of some huge icons in the music world in the past year - Prince, Scott, Bowie and Lemmy. Who would have thought Prince - of all people - would have died at the age of 57?  We look at this - and we see how lucky we are that all of the original members of GNR are still with us - and all want to be part of this reunion.  Many of us who have been following the band from day one have always dreamed of seeing the original guys back on a stage together - and now that it's so close, we're hoping it becomes a reality - sooner rather than later - because we don't know if they'll all be alive in a year or even six months from now.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Madison, the time of asslicking Axl is over here, i guess. It might be still a problem on jarmos board, but the majority even here on mygnr knows that Axl made a lot mistakes in the past, he is still the CEO of this band and this tour is a reunion tour with a hybrid lineup. We don't know the story with Izzy, but Matt/Steven would join immediately if Axl would let them. Axl is still Axl...and thats why Matt is not in it. I also have nothing against Frank and Fortus, but especially when it comes to Frank. Seriously there is no need for him, when you can get the other two guys. 

[Gun Shy Assassin]

4 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Are you seriously arguing that a reunion could be to combine new components into something? "Being brought together again" implies it is the same components that has come together again.

Hey, I had to replace the car clutch as the repairs last week. They put in a new one, so I guess the car has been reunited now. Duh.

 

Who said anything about new components? Why do you find it necessary to twist words or make up things entirely? When DJ and BBF left, the band was no longer "whole". To make the band whole once again, Axl decided for his own reasons, which were likely mostly financial, to bring back 2 other hall of fame all-stars that the world has been wanting to see perform together for decades.

It's becoming apparent that you are either failing to comprehend the obvious, or perhaps you're just trolling me. You clearly stated that you are a stickler for precision. I provide you with a textbook definition of the word "reunion" and you (not even cleverly) attempt to modify the definition of the word to further support your own obvious biases. The term reunion applies to any two (or more) people that are brought together again after a separation. This is indisputable. Should you continue to disagree, you must not be this stickler for precision that you claimed to be after all. 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2016 by Gun Shy Assassin

[Gun Shy Assassin]

5 hours ago, madison said:

I find it amusing to watch certain people desperately trying to claim this tour isn't being promoted as a reunion tour.  We have huge billboards and virtually every TV ad screaming out to the great unwashed - "for the first time in 23 years … … bang!"  Heck, even the name of the tour - "Not in this lifetime" - is a play on Axl's own response to a REUNION.   Yet, certain people try to pretend this isn't the case.    

I guess it's tough to admit that our favorite band is milking the "reunion" angle in order to charge huge prices at stadium-sized venues. We all know that Axl's replacement band could never sell out stadiums or charge these kinds of prices.  But a reunion of the classic lineup that created the music that made GNR the biggest band on the planet?  Absolutely. 

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong - I like Richard and think he's a good musician. And I'd have no problem with him playing some CD songs on this tour - but only AFTER all of the original guys are onboard - you know, the ones who actually wrote and CREATED the music that brought GNR to the top of the music world. 

There's absolutely no question this tour is being marketed as a reunion. So, the real question people should be asking is - why?  Is it just a cash grab and the "big three" didn't want to share the cash equally with the Izzy, Steven and Matt? I hope that's not the reason.

 

 

 

And before the great "non-reunion" crusaders come barreling in with claims - "Oh, but that's the promoters and marketers - that's not Axl - he has nothing to do with the way the tour is being promoted' - Please …. Axl is a guy who micromanages everything in his band and life. So, if you think for a second he knows nothing about it or that he didn't sign off on it, then think again. Geesh.

 

As for the name-calling and other juvenile comments that have been hurled at myself and others who favor a full reunion, give it a rest.  … Many of us watched with great sadness the tragic deaths of some huge icons in the music world in the past year - Prince, Scott, Bowie and Lemmy. Who would have thought Prince - of all people - would have died at the age of 57?  We look at this - and we see how lucky we are that all of the original members of GNR are still with us - and all want to be part of this reunion.  Many of us who have been following the band from day one have always dreamed of seeing the original guys back on a stage together - and now that it's so close, we're hoping it becomes a reality - sooner rather than later - because we don't know if they'll all be alive in a year or even six months from now.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very well said, madison. I couldn't agree more.

 

 

[Nosaj Thing]

5 hours ago, madison said:

I find it amusing to watch certain people desperately trying to claim this tour isn't being promoted as a reunion tour.  We have huge billboards and virtually every TV ad screaming out to the great unwashed - "for the first time in 23 years … … bang!"  Heck, even the name of the tour - "Not in this lifetime" - is a play on Axl's own response to a REUNION.   Yet, certain people try to pretend this isn't the case.    

I guess it's tough to admit that our favorite band is milking the "reunion" angle in order to charge huge prices at stadium-sized venues. We all know that Axl's replacement band could never sell out stadiums or charge these kinds of prices.  But a reunion of the classic lineup that created the music that made GNR the biggest band on the planet?  Absolutely.

Let alone the fact that their very first show was at The Troubadour and the Gn'R page stated: "back where it all began..."  What exactly began at The Troubadour if this is just a new incarnation of Axl's cover band plus Slash and Duff?  Why are they using the classic logo that defined and represented REAL Guns N' Roses (1987-1993) when it isn't a reunion tour?  Unless you're mentally challenged, I think it's pretty clear how they're selling it.

Unfortunately - and this is my opinion only - I think we will not see Stradlin or Adler because they don't want to pay more when they can pay less.  Axl, Slash and Duff are splitting the big money from the stadium shows, and paying a minimum to additional musicians Frank Ferrer and Richard Fortus.  To be honest, most people around the globe only care about Axl and Slash, and that's good enough to be selling out stadiums -- something Axl couldn't do with his cover band.  Duff is a great addition as the three of them were the face of REAL Guns N' Roses back in the day.  Nobody is going to say "no Adler - no buy!" and even if someone is, that's just like... one in a million.

[SoulMonster]

38 minutes ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

Who said anything about new components? Why do you find it necessary to twist words or make up things entirely? When DJ and BBF left, the band was no longer "whole". To make the band whole once again, Axl decided for his own reasons, which were likely mostly financial, to bring back 2 other hall of fame all-stars that the world has been wanting to see perform together for decades.

Yes, but that is not a band or lineup reunion. Have you seriously not seen the distinction I have been making for the last 3 pages? You are again arguing about this being a reunion between Axl, Slash and Duff, something which is completely trivial and something everybody agrees on.

Here. read this since you obviously didn't read it the first time (and notice the part in bold):

18 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

What about the fact that a reunion in music is usually meant like a lineup coming back together, something which isn't the case here? It is only a reunion in the sense that Axl, Duff and Slash has found back to each other, a reunion on the level of individuals, not lineups. But again, that is not what people typically mean when they talk about a band reunion.

What I think you have been doing is misrably trying to argue for why this is a true reunion despite there being only 3/5 guys reuniting, and when you failed to twist the definition to work (by cherry-picking the first part only), you now resort to arguing that you have been talking a reunion between individuals all the time. Laughable.

Edited April 26, 2016 by SoulMonster

[Gun Shy Assassin]

8 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I have never disagree with the fact that you can use the term reunion for two or three guys coming back together again Have you seriously not understood throughout all these posts that I have been talking about the BAND and not just Axl, Slash and Duff? 

Ok, so now you finally agree that this is, in fact, a "reunion". Finally .. and it only took explaining it to you 15-20 times. That's ok. Everyone learns and comprehends at a different pace.

So, now that everyone is onboard with this being a "reunion" tour, I guess we can continue discussing 'where's Izzy' (and Steven) - and why the two are a necessity for this reunion tour to be huge.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Gun Shy Assassin

[RussTCB]

14 minutes ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

Ok, so now you finally agree that this is, in fact, a "reunion". Finally .. and it only took explaining it to you 15-20 times. That's ok. Everyone learns and comprehends at a different pace.

So, now that everyone is onboard with this being a "reunion" tour, I guess we can continue discussing 'where's Izzy' (and Steven) - and why the two are a necessity for this reunion tour to be huge.

The question wasn't who wants to call it a reunion tour or not, the question was whether or not it's being marketed as "the original 5 guys" to get more money out of an unsuspecting public. The latter being untrue due to TV ads flat out showing Axl, Slash & Duff along with the rest of the current lineup. 

[tsinindy]

26 minutes ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

Ok, so now you finally agree that this is, in fact, a "reunion". Finally .. and it only took explaining it to you 15-20 times. That's ok. Everyone learns and comprehends at a different pace.

So, now that everyone is onboard with this being a "reunion" tour, I guess we can continue discussing 'where's Izzy' (and Steven) - and why the two are a necessity for this reunion tour to be huge.

Great...now tell me how it isn't "huge" already and I think you'll realize it obviously isn't a "necessity" to have them back.

NOTE:. I'd love to have both back, so don't go there.  Just pointing out that them being back doesn't appear to be a necessity for this to be huge as it already is.

[Gun Shy Assassin]

8 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

The question wasn't who wants to call it a reunion tour or not, the question was whether or not it's being marketed as "the original 5 guys" to get more money out of an unsuspecting public. The latter being untrue due to TV ads flat out showing Axl, Slash & Duff along with the rest of the current lineup. 

I thought the question was, "is this being marketed as a reunion". I've never seen any tv ads, and I suspect others may not have as well. Given that they are placing billboards in all major cities with the classic lineup logo, and billing it as "for the first time together in 23 years", couldn't you see how much of the general public might think this is a full reunion of the classic lineup? I'm not talking about obsessives, such as ourselves, who frequent forums and discuss every aspect of the band, I'm talking specifically about the GP. Do you think most of the GP realize that it's been 26 years since Steven's been in the band and not "23 years"? I don't. Only an obsessive knows those type of details.

I can tell you that I have numerous friends and co-workers who thought that this "reunion" consisted of all classic lineup members. That's a fact. IMO, the band has done very little to minimize this expectation. Who knows .. maybe this is one of the reasons why Axl pulled out of Kimmel at the 11th hour. Maybe, after consideration, he thought, "why say something that may hurt ticket sales". It's possible ..

[Gun Shy Assassin]

6 minutes ago, tsinindy said:

Great...now tell me how it isn't "huge" already and I think you'll realize it obviously isn't a "necessity" to have them back.

NOTE:. I'd love to have both back, so don't go there.  Just pointing out that them being back doesn't appear to be a necessity for this to be huge as it already is.

With all due respect, the band has played Vegas, Coachella, and Mexico City. Of course, all that is needed for any of those specific locations is for Slash to be back in the fold. Let's see if they are just as huge while playing markets like Pittsburgh (which i will be present for), Detroit, and wherever they're playing in Ohio. You know, other non-festivals and other non-sin cities.

[SoulMonster]

38 minutes ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

Ok, so now you finally agree that this is, in fact, a "reunion". Finally .. and it only took explaining it to you 15-20 times. That's ok. Everyone learns and comprehends at a different pace.

So, now that everyone is onboard with this being a "reunion" tour, I guess we can continue discussing 'where's Izzy' (and Steven) - and why the two are a necessity for this reunion tour to be huge.

"Finally agree"? Haha. Read this, again:

19 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

What about the fact that a reunion in music is usually meant like a lineup coming back together, something which isn't the case here? It is only a reunion in the sense that Axl, Duff and Slash has found back to each other, a reunion on the level of individuals, not lineups. But again, that is not what people typically mean when they talk about a band reunion.

In case you simply don't understand what I wrote in this post 19 hours ago, I am stating that it IS a reunion between individuals (e.g. Axl, Slash and Duff) but NOT a lineup reunion which is usually meant when people talk about a band reunion, which is why media has started to rather refer to it as a semi-reunion.

And no, this isn't a "reunion tour", and I highly doubt "everyone is onboard" with that phrasing, again for the simple fact that it suggests a reunion of a lineup.

[Smokin' Cigarettes]

Richard is legit.  

If you disagree, you are wrong.  No apologies, no discussion, no arguing, no nothing.  WRONG!

[Padme]

19 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

The question wasn't who wants to call it a reunion tour or not, the question was whether or not it's being marketed as "the original 5 guys" to get more money out of an unsuspecting public. The latter being untrue due to TV ads flat out showing Axl, Slash & Duff along with the rest of the current lineup. 

Sorry I'm in Europe so at this point I'm not having T.V. ads. Are they available in youtube? The only ad I saw was the one in theartes where Star Wars was showing. In that add we could only see Axl, Slash and Duff. As far as I know before Troubadour nothing was marketed as Axl, Slash, Duff and the rest of the current line up as you put it. All we had everywhere was only Axl, Slash and Duff. Even recently with the AFD logo just showing only Axl, Slash and Duff.

[tsinindy]

6 minutes ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

With all due respect, the band has played Vegas, Coachella, and Mexico City. Of course, all that is needed for any of those specific locations is for Slash to be back in the fold. Let's see if they are just as huge while playing markets like Pittsburgh (which i will be present for), Detroit, and wherever they're playing in Ohio. You know, other non-festivals and other non-sin cities.

Sure I understand what you're getting it...but don't discount the fact they added second dates in the bigger markets...and from what I saw last night some of the smaller markets have sold quite a few tickets over the past couple weeks.

But I agree a wait and see approach is proper, but I'm not the one who said Izzy and Steven were necessary for it to be huge either

[RussTCB]

12 minutes ago, Gun Shy Assassin said:

I thought the question was, "is this being marketed as a reunion". I've never seen any tv ads, and I suspect others may not have as well. Given that they are placing billboards in all major cities with the classic lineup logo, and billing it as "for the first time together in 23 years", couldn't you see how much of the general public might think this is a full reunion of the classic lineup? I'm not talking about obsessives, such as ourselves, who frequent forums and discuss every aspect of the band, I'm talking specifically about the GP. Do you think most of the GP realize that it's been 26 years since Steven's been in the band and not "23 years"? I don't. Only an obsessive knows those type of details.

I can tell you that I have numerous friends and co-workers who thought that this "reunion" consisted of all classic lineup members. That's a fact. IMO, the band has done very little to minimize this expectation. Who knows .. maybe this is one of the reasons why Axl pulled out of Kimmel at the 11th hour. Maybe, after consideration, he thought, "why say something that may hurt ticket sales". It's possible ..

I'm not sure what else they could do to let people know who's in the band outside of running TV ads that show each member of the band. 

My thing is this; I'm one of the first people to call Axl & GN'R out when I think they're doing something deceptive or just plain fucking up. I've been very vocal about what a rip-off I think Nightrain is. I've been very critical of pretty much everything that's been done since 2001 for that matter. I just don't think this is one of those times where they need to be called out though. Izzy himself came out and said he woudn't be in Vegas and some people still posted that they were disappointed that he didn't show up. How is that GN'Rs fault? 

Honestly, there's no way for any of us to know if they are or are not saying anything because they think it'll hurt sales. Personally, I like to think that they aren't saying anything because they don't need to. I get the other side of that argument though, so that's why I just kinda bowed out of the thread. Because there's just no way for any of us to know for sure one way or the other.

[RussTCB]

4 minutes ago, Padme said:

Sorry I'm in Europe so at this point I'm not having T.V. ads. Are they available in youtube? The only ad I saw was the one in theartes where Star Wars was showing. In that add we could only see Axl, Slash and Duff. As far as I know before Troubadour nothing was marketed as Axl, Slash, Duff and the rest of the current line up as you put it. All we had everywhere was only Axl, Slash and Duff. Even recently with the AFD logo just showing only Axl, Slash and Duff.

It took me a minute, but I was finally able to find this:
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/A5_t/guns-n-roses-seattle-concert

To me, that makes it very clear that only Axl, Slash & Duff will be there from the original lineup.