Do Arena Dates Indicate Tour is More Than Just Cash Grab?

[GoBucky]

3 hours ago, youngswedishvinyl said:

In my opinion the lenght of the shows makes the NITL Tour less of a cashgrab! 

There's for sure cashgrab elements to the tour but I would not call it a full on cashgrab. Had the shows been 90 minutes long I would agree but a band that just wants to make a quick buck does not play for almost 4 hours night after night!

Exactly my point. All concert tours are cash grabs, but the band brought it on stage. Motley did their horseshit final tour and in some cases didn't even play 2 hours and it showed that they didn't want to be there. People can complain about setlists and the lineup, but they gave people their money's worth and played longer than just about any band out there on the road, seemed to have a good time doing it, and that's all we can ask from a band who's core hasn't played together in 2 plus decades! Now if they continue on new tours with the same show and setlist, then they can be called a nostalgic cash grab band along the lines of Kiss, Motley, AC/DC, Aerosmith and others along those lines. 

[AncientEvil80]

3 hours ago, RazorGunner said:

Izzy, unlike the other 3- sold his share when he quit. 

Ok, we all got that. I think at this point, after a FULL implosion of the band and circa 27 years later, it's fucking irrelevant. This is supposed to be RNR, and even more so GNR. Rules and laws shouldn't apply so strictly to the situation. They're all old and surely not getting any younger.. after so much wasted time and efforts, wouldn't it be nice to look past the BS and do the RIGHT thing, for the right reasons? And please, stop saying it's subjective. Of course it is. But you and I and EVERY proper enthusiast of the band knows AFD5 is the only thing that would make sense.

And before all the other fellas tell me for the N'th time that the 3Union is cool, it's great entertainment, it could be worse, you should be content etc etc.. please, it's not my fault if some folks got bad taste LOL 

I'll just skip the latest BS NITL tour and keep hoping, without holding my breath, that they all realize it and do the right thing and get the REAL GNR back together, even if for just 1 gig. 

 

[PatrickS77]

4 hours ago, RazorGunner said:

Izzy, unlike the other 3- sold his share when he quit. 

Geez. The broken record again. It's been boring since quite some time now.

[Hollywood Gunner]

11 hours ago, RazorGunner said:

Izzy, unlike the other 3- sold his share when he quit. 

All that is known is that Izzy and GNR couldn't come to an agreement that everyone was happy with, his now-deleted tweet didn't describe or encompass the entire situation. 

It costs money to tour, why pour all that cash into a tour that were not going to be profitable? People seem to think musicians should be altruistic with their profession, when they themselves wouldn't think of doing their jobs for free. 

i never said i expect anyone to work for free... whether he sold his share or not, he was still one of the main reasons they got so big in the first place, so my personal opinion is that they shoulda gave him an equal cut... now its more than likely that none of us will ever know what really went down, and all we'll ever get are these vague insinuations, but when i hear the word cash grab, i think greed, and when izzy says it was all about the loot, it leads me to beleive that at least one person was being greedy.

did i still go to the shows? yes... did i enjoy the fuck out of them? hell yes... but izzy not being around cuz someone wanted a little bit more cash when theyre already filthy rich, leaves a bitter taste in my mouth... now if axl ever comes out and says it was payback for ditching them mid tour 25 years ago then it might change my take on things... and im not even a huge izzy fan, its just my two cents

[mikeman5150]

What’s to say Izzy wasn’t the one being greedy? It’s crazy for a band of GNR’s stature to “split the loot equally”. A non dependable rhythm guitarist should not be making the same as Axl or Slash. These two have become icons. Just those names alone sell. Outside of the hardcore fan base, who really cares about Izz not being there? 

Also I  totally agree with those who have said 3.5 hour long show with deep cuts = non- cash grab. 

[Hollywood Gunner]

when they play 3.5 hours they dont have much choice but to include some deep cuts, there isnt a band i can think of that has 3.5 hours of just top hits... and a 2 hour show would not justify those ticket prices... especially with the shit bands they had openining

and although i somewhat agree that an undependable rythm guitarist might not "deserve" as much as axl or slash.... does he really deserve any less than duff?

[AncientEvil80]

8 hours ago, mikeman5150 said:

What’s to say Izzy wasn’t the one being greedy? It’s crazy for a band of GNR’s stature to “split the loot equally”. A non dependable rhythm guitarist should not be making the same as Axl or Slash. These two have become icons. Just those names alone sell. Outside of the hardcore fan base, who really cares about Izz not being there? 

Icons. Oh yea, but YET AGAIN, why don't they do their own solo efforts then, even just the 2 of them together: people are gonna love them and tear their hair out to see them/listen to them! What a great idea! But to be fair, they have to call themselves as something else rather than Guns N' Roses. Wanna bet they sell a lot less, the 2 icons alone?? 

Take a vital part out of any organism, that organism will perish. Was Izzy vital? Fuck yeah. Same as Steven. It ain't GNR until all the parts are together.

The myth that Izzy is non dependable is just fucking annoying at this point. I bet that if the band started doing things right, for the right reasons, Izzy would be there 100% and doing it just like all the other guys. And it would make a HUGE difference. And by that I don't mean commercially.

People, pull your business heads out of your asses - this is just rock n roll: you're just trying to justify ugly, stupid situations and decisions that frankly make very little sense, with ways of making $$$, sell tickets and be "popular". As with any artistic endeavor, this ALWAYS ends poorly. 

[TMAC20]

Nothing should be considered a cash grab that the fans have been wanting  23 years- for - we all asked for it and got it-I seen the tour 3 times -every time was bad ass - last show I seen was over 4 hours -that isnt a cash grab that is doing something they missed and loved 

[Hollywood Gunner]

9 hours ago, TMAC20 said:

Nothing should be considered a cash grab that the fans have been wanting  23 years- for - we all asked for it and got it-I seen the tour 3 times -every time was bad ass - last show I seen was over 4 hours -that isnt a cash grab that is doing something they missed and loved 

to be fair tho... whether you enjoyed the show or not, they grabbed your cash 3 times lol

[mikeman5150]

18 hours ago, Hollywood Gunner said:

when they play 3.5 hours they dont have much choice but to include some deep cuts, there isnt a band i can think of that has 3.5 hours of just top hits... and a 2 hour show would not justify those ticket prices... especially with the shit bands they had openining

and although i somewhat agree that an undependable rythm guitarist might not "deserve" as much as axl or slash.... does he really deserve any less than duff?

I guess you’re right, Izzy and duff would seem to be in the same category, I’d say the difference is probably because Izzy quit at the height of their success, while duff stayed. Duff has also been involved with slash and Axl over the years. We don’t know for sure, but many signs point to duff being the man behind getting Axl n slash back on good term. Just in my opinion, that makes him slightly more valuable. 

[mikeman5150]

Have people become so entitled that they think everything should be how they want it? Really, who cares about Izzy? The right reasons? Who decides what reasons are right? I doubt GNR started out thinking, man, it would be great to make music for free, and maybe we can get part time jobs to pay our bills while we go satisfy the masses lol. I don’t get it. I mean the whole merchandise thing, I agree has gotten to be a little over the top. But touring? For over 20 years everybody bitched about them not doing anything, they finally do and people still bitch because it’s expensive? 

I do electrical work for a living. In some counties, the demand is higher, therefore I make more money there. In other places, there’s much more competition so I make a little less. When I first opened my business, I had several workers. There was originally 4 of us. There is 5 of us now, but 3 of my original employees are gone now.  Would what I’m doing be considered a cash grab? I mean, I have what the customer wants, they pay me, the service is still the same. I’m happy. I’ve never entertained the idea of going out and performing my craft for free. Why would I expect a band or anyone else to? 

[RazorGunner]

On 4/9/2018 at 9:28 PM, Hollywood Gunner said:

i never said i expect anyone to work for free... whether he sold his share or not, he was still one of the main reasons they got so big in the first place, so my personal opinion is that they shoulda gave him an equal cut... now its more than likely that none of us will ever know what really went down, and all we'll ever get are these vague insinuations, but when i hear the word cash grab, i think greed, and when izzy says it was all about the loot, it leads me to beleive that at least one person was being greedy.

did i still go to the shows? yes... did i enjoy the fuck out of them? hell yes... but izzy not being around cuz someone wanted a little bit more cash when theyre already filthy rich, leaves a bitter taste in my mouth... now if axl ever comes out and says it was payback for ditching them mid tour 25 years ago then it might change my take on things... and im not even a huge izzy fan, its just my two cents

 

Not the first time Izzy has been concerned with the money though- 

Excerpt from Axl's interview with Spinner w/Del James:

 

"The Izzy bit was fun -- and also fun because we didn't have to rely on him in any way, which is how he prefers things and works better for everyone. That said, you never knew if Izzy would be there or not or if he'd remember the song or decide to leave early. It didn't cause any problems, because we were doing our show regardless and didn't have to depend on anything, but it did open everyone's eyes a bit and blow minds."

"He called, asked to come out and negotiated a deal with management that it's probably best that none of us knew about or the fun would've seemed a bit more like being used or taken advantage of spoiling the moment. As it was, we had a great time."

http://www.spinner.com/

 

Slash- From Kerrang! March 1984

"Izzy all of a sudden turned around and stabbed us in the back again, asked for an amazing amount of money to do one show - it's like, 'I can't believe this, go home!'. That's the last time we talked. I don't know what's going on in his head...I have this great photo of Gilby, Izzy and Ronnie Wood together - the flunkies from hell "

[RazorGunner]

21 hours ago, AncientEvil80 said:

Icons. Oh yea, but YET AGAIN, why don't they do their own solo efforts then, even just the 2 of them together: people are gonna love them and tear their hair out to see them/listen to them! What a great idea! But to be fair, they have to call themselves as something else rather than Guns N' Roses. Wanna bet they sell a lot less, the 2 icons alone?? 

Take a vital part out of any organism, that organism will perish. Was Izzy vital? Fuck yeah. Same as Steven. It ain't GNR until all the parts are together.

The myth that Izzy is non dependable is just fucking annoying at this point. I bet that if the band started doing things right, for the right reasons, Izzy would be there 100% and doing it just like all the other guys. And it would make a HUGE difference. And by that I don't mean commercially.

People, pull your business heads out of your asses - this is just rock n roll: you're just trying to justify ugly, stupid situations and decisions that frankly make very little sense, with ways of making $$$, sell tickets and be "popular". As with any artistic endeavor, this ALWAYS ends poorly. 

It's unfortunate that Izzy and GNR were unable to come to an agreement that everybody was happy with, but aside from the hardcore fans, nobody was really upset he wasn't there and the concert sales didn't suffer as proven by the pollstar figures for 2016 and 2017. 

Izzy has no leverage at present, nor does Adler- (which is an entirely different animal. ) 

Could things change? Certainly- and it would be amazing to see him onstage with GNR again so I hope issues can be resolved at some point. 

[PatrickS77]

5 hours ago, mikeman5150 said:

 I’ve never entertained the idea of going out and performing my craft for free. Why would I expect a band or anyone else to? 

I'm not sure that anybody is demanding or expecting them to go out for free. It's just that there was a long period of time when they were glad that people were willing to pay 100 $ for good seats at a GNR show. Those people kept them afloat and in business. To see that those seats are now sold for 300+ $ is the annoying and cash grab part.

Edited April 11, 2018 by PatrickS77

[TMAC20]

15 hours ago, Hollywood Gunner said:

to be fair tho... whether you enjoyed the show or not, they grabbed your cash 3 times lol

I enjoyed it every time , EPIC PERFORMANCES, A lot of bands get my money , going to see Black label Society for the 20th time in August , SMKC will get my money as well along with STEVE VAI, Eric Johnson , GNR WILL AGAIN, OZZY AND ZAKK WILL TO -Money well  spent by EPIC performers -NOW if u wanna say a cash Grab -that would be AXL and his clown wanna  be's band  he called GNR , they didnt get my money and never will 

Edited April 11, 2018 by TMAC20

[mikeman5150]

9 hours ago, PatrickS77 said:

I'm not sure that anybody is demanding or expecting them to go out for free. It's just that there was a long period of time when they were glad that people were willing to pay 100 $ for good seats at a GNR show. Those people kept them afloat and in business. To see that those seats are now sold for 300+ $ is the annoying and cash grab part.

I see what you’re saying, I just think that now Slash is back, its worth more and they should get more money. I’m just hesitant to call it a cash grab, each their own. I was one of those guys who helped keep the machine afloat. During that time, I was spending money simply to see Axl sing the songs. The other guys (some of them) were cool, and good players, but it didn’t matter to me. Same with Slash and Myles Kennedy, for me it’s about seeing Slash. I feel that them being together automatically calls for much higher prices and bigger venues, which was evident throughout the tour. I think that at the end of the day, everybody is looking to get what they can.

[PatrickS77]

4 minutes ago, mikeman5150 said:

I see what you’re saying, I just think that now Slash is back, its worth more and they should get more money. I’m just hesitant to call it a cash grab, each their own. I was one of those guys who helped keep the machine afloat. During that time, I was spending money simply to see Axl sing the songs. The other guys (some of them) were cool, and good players, but it didn’t matter to me. Same with Slash and Myles Kennedy, for me it’s about seeing Slash. I feel that them being together automatically calls for much higher prices and bigger venues, which was evident throughout the tour. I think that at the end of the day, everybody is looking to get what they can.

The same as me. But they could have raised the prices to 150. That would have been a 50 % increase, reflected the fact it's now worth more and not fleeced the (loyal) fans for all they have.