Izzy Stradlin comments on reunion

[Słash]

1 minute ago, Radio flyer said:

That's only if he didn't sell his publishing when he quit in 1991....which is the dumbest most short-sighted move a songwriter with hits under their belt can do. 

I don't think Izzy sold his publishing though- that's how he continues to fly under the radar.....he can afford to. 

I guess he sold cause for the Vegas DVD which had GNR songs, Duff and Slash had to sign off, Izzy was not mentioned anywhere. 

Same thing for Roxy DVD which had GNR songs, Axl and Duff had to sign off. 

I read somewhere that he cut a deal that they pay him a % up to 1997 for something. 

But yeah Steven and Izzy get royalties but they have no right to make decision that the song will be used or not in a movie etc etc 

[Słash]

2 minutes ago, sanity_lost said:

Most likely. I don't about the CD stuff for sure. The Old Guns licensing is pretty well known with the lawsuits Duff and Slash filed against Axl and lost. They each have veto power over the licensing and Axl was pretty liberal about using it if I remember right.

For CD stuff im sure only Axl has the licensing rights and even their own stuff which were recorded, like demos, it belongs to Axl's "Guns N' Roses" which only Axl is the owner of. 

Thats why bucket was pissed that he can't use his own songs. Even Robin said he wrote another song which was really cool and he hopes it gets released in the future, so even he can't use whatever that song was. 

[sanity_lost]

6 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

For CD stuff im sure only Axl has the licensing rights and even their own stuff which were recorded, like demos, it belongs to Axl's "Guns N' Roses" which only Axl is the owner of. 

Thats why bucket was pissed that he can't use his own songs. Even Robin said he wrote another song which was really cool and he hopes it gets released in the future, so even he can't use whatever that song was. 

That is my thought as well.

[DieselDaisy]

43 minutes ago, sanity_lost said:

You replied to Bika's comment including "Izzy might not even be asking to get into the partnership... Maybe he's just asking for equal split in the tour revenue (not merch, not deciding where the band's going)"

Maybe I misunderstood him? It sounded liked to me that he was saying Izzy didn't want in the decision making process. Just wanted equal money from the results.

I assume gate receipts is the 'loot' in question, Izzy desiring equality of pay from these proceeds.

[BOSSY78]

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

The partnership was not formed until after Izzy had left. Izzy left in 1991. The partnership was signed 1992 or 1993.

You are partially correct. However in the actual legal contract used in court proceedings it specifically said Izzy left the prior partnership and gave a date for his leaving the partnership. The word partnership was used. A date for original partnership was listed and a second date for new one is listed. 

Axl, Slash andDuffs new percentages were listed.

Izzy was paid money when he left. Izzy even mentions having to wait for the money due to legal channels etc. 

To be honest who knows why Izzy isn't getting what he wants it could be this partnership mentality it could be manythings. We don't know.

 

[Słash]

4 minutes ago, BOSSY78 said:

You are partially correct. However in the actual legal contract used in court proceedings it specifically said Izzy left the prior partnership and gave a date for his leaving the partnership. The word partnership was used. A date for original partnership was listed and a second date for new one is listed. 

Axl, Slash andDuffs new percentages were listed.

Izzy was paid money when he left. Izzy even mentions having to wait for the money due to legal channels etc. 

To be honest who knows why Izzy isn't getting what he wants it could be this partnership mentality it could be manythings. We don't know.

 

What was the deal which Izzy made that he had to be paid for something up to 1997 or something?

[BOSSY78]

25 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I assume gate receipts is the 'loot' in question, Izzy desiring equality of pay from these proceeds.

It could be as far as him not wanting in the partnership but wanting equal pay. Unfortunately percentages are listed as to who gets what. Which means of in fact he wants equal it would be a big ordeal because they have set contractual percentages. Again I'm not sure of agreement today. It may be different. I can only go by what is public knowledge right now

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, BOSSY78 said:

It could be as far as him not wanting in the partnership but wanting equal pay. Unfortunately percentages are listed as to who gets what. Which means of in fact he wants equal it would be a big ordeal because they have set contractual percentages. Again I'm not sure of agreement today. It may be different. I can only go by what is public knowledge right now

I'm not assuming the partnership has anything to do with the tour. Axl left the band and took the name. I see no reason to assume that Axl does not still own the name and we are still operating with the second legal entity.

To be honest - and I've said this before - it wouldn't shock me if Slash and Duff were on salary.

[xBrownstonex]

This thread has become nightmare. Too many people writing shit that has been said too many times by now

[BOSSY78]

4 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

What was the deal which Izzy made that he had to be paid for something up to 1997 or something?

There is a contract the one fans debated without seeing since 1992. 

When Izzy left it's obvious he would have sold his share to the other three. They split that share.

Axl had the most a fee percents below is Slash and Duff right below that.

Someone mentioned Axl owning CD stuff. The rights and contracts list pre recorded stuff. I'm sure it's all broke down for newer things done.

 

[BOSSY78]

11 minutes ago, Slash787 said:

What was the deal which Izzy made that he had to be paid for something up to 1997 or something?

Forgot to mention that the contract says Steven and Izzy's royalties are to be taken out as well.

It is interesting it tells us how pay was before Izzy left and after. It doesn't mention Izzy's pay out amount. But does say his percent was split and tells how.

On this forum is Izzy's interview talking about them having tons of money that he had to wait a bit for. Don't remember exact words but I believe he mentioned legal channels. 

He didn't leave the original partnership without negotiating a buy out.

There's tons of pages I'm still reading it.

[Słash]

Just now, BOSSY78 said:

Forgot to mention that the contract says Steven and Izzy's royalties are to be taken out as well.

It is interesting it tells us how pay was before Izzy left and after. It doesn't mention Izzy's pay out amount. But does say his percent was split and tells how.

On this forum is Izzy's interview talking about them having tons of money that he had to wait a bit for. Don't remember exact words but I believe he mentioned legal channels. 

He didn't leave the original partnership without negotiating a buy out.

There's tons of pages I'm still reading it.

Yeah Izzy said that they owed him money and he had to go through legal ways.

Izzy did say that they were cutting down his royalties etc etc

But what was Izzy asking for till 1997? profit share from the tour and merch? Licensing partner till 1997? 

[BOSSY78]

9 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm not assuming the partnership has anything to do with the tour. Axl left the band and took the name. I see no reason to assume that Axl does not still own the name and we are still operating with the second legal entity.

To be honest - and I've said this before - it wouldn't shock me if Slash and Duff were on salary.

Axl has the name that is in the contract each member had to initial several things including that. It wasn't hidden. 

There still exists a partnership for old guns stuff it was renewed in 2013 for the second ten yearinterval.

Again I don't know pay breakdown but supposedly it's still percentage wise Axl most Slash second Duff next.

I'm thinking it was on a whole. Slash and Duff wouldn't want a pay decrease to accondate either. Again only going from what we have which are the contracts and registry

[bikka]

I think thise might have been licensing revenue... I don't think you can sell writting loyalties? Also, once these are decided for each record (i.e. when they gave Steven some writting credit even though he didn't contribute) they are not managed by the partnership - that's how I understand it.

[DieselDaisy]

This is all pointless discussion as we are not even talking about licensing and recording partnerships but touring and the percentage of gate receipts.

[onurbayrak03]

Why too many posts here :D? I know its a discussion thread but talking THIS much wont change Izzy's mind right ? He's out guys... Lets live with this from now on 

[AlterL]

52 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm not assuming the partnership has anything to do with the tour. Axl left the band and took the name. I see no reason to assume that Axl does not still own the name an d we are still operating with the second legal entity.

To be honest - and I've said this before - it wouldn't shock me if Slash and Duff were on salary.

I honestly don't think they have a salary. That they're employees sure, why not but they're probably and most likely still being paid in some percentage arrangement. In the past it used to be3 6% for Axl 33%Slash and30% Duff those numbers probably changed once They got back together (probably giving more money to Axl) but they're all still making a fortune with this tour.

[BOSSY78]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

This is all pointless discussion as we are not even talking about licensing and recording partnerships but touring and the percentage of gate receipts.

Again think your missing the point. If a contract states the three split it a certain way then yes it matters. 

These mention money percents based off all that. Considering the renewed partnership which is valid I'd say it affects Izzy not getting equal.

[-W.A.R-]

 

[BOSSY78]

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

This is all pointless discussion as we are not even talking about licensing and recording partnerships but touring and the percentage of gate receipts.

There is an entertainment partnership renewed in 2013. I posted link on I believe page 37 or 38 if anyone wants to read all documents listed on it. 

Maybe post some breakdowns tours is listed under the entertainment license I believe.

Axl Slash and duff are listed under it. AgaiI've been going over the who 92 contract and on mobile right now so feel free to follow my links I posted.

[DieselDaisy]

4 minutes ago, BOSSY78 said:

There is an entertainment partnership renewed in 2013. I posted link on I believe page 37 or 38 if anyone wants to read all documents listed on it. 

Maybe post some breakdowns tours is listed under the entertainment license I believe.

Axl Slash and duff are listed under it. AgaiI've been going over the who 92 contract and on mobile right now so feel free to follow my links I posted.

I've never read anything posted. My knowledge of the 1992/3 Partnership is it awarded Axl the name if he withdrew (in affect folding Guns N' Roses as a band). Slash and Duff retained their stock holding and thus control over licenses and merchandising profit. Axl withdrew in December 1995.

Everything 1996 onward is a different operation. 

 

[Słash]

13 minutes ago, -W.A.R- said:

 

 

[StrangerInThisTown]

This thread is just bad now. A mess. Time to stop checking it

Edited September 11, 2016 by StrangerInThisTown

[Słash]

Everyone is looting this thread. 

[DIST]

Baba booey!! Baba booey!!