Article About Izzy/Guns on the Wall Street Journal

[Modano09]

6 minutes ago, Padme said:

Agree. But the masses care about the hits. Fine, the band plays them. But the ban also should add something for the die hard fans. If they are playing TIL then they also could play Pretty Tied Up. We're getting covers of artists that passed away. Ok, but they could perform the covers just in one show not in every single show.  Are you telling me you rather listen BHS and Wichita Line Man over Perfect Crime, Locomotive or Dead Horse? Do you think the masses are desperate to hear those covers? We still can't even be sure they will play SOYL

They're not playing Coma because it's a mainstream hit.

[kiwiguns]

26 minutes ago, RONIN said:

Most people (the kind Modano is referring to) don't know that. They're going to the show because GnR is an iconic brand and they trust the legacy of the band enough to go without knowing who is in the band. Irony being that said legacy is formed partially by people who are not there on the stage. Given how much they're throwing the AFD imagery in the marketing material, there's a case to be made that the way they're promoting the tour is deceptive. It's not a full reunion but it's still being marketed as one. 

My point was simply that when you buy a product, you expect a certain "integrity" to it. When I buy a BMW, I expect german engineering and high quality craftsmanship. If they're compromising the parts in that car with inferior quality replacements to save money - that's not a "real" BMW anymore even if the BMW logo is on it. That's what this current iteration of GnR is. A hybridized inferior version of the original. Let's call a spade a spade.

Now if Izzy or Steven were unavailable, unwilling, ill, etc I'd give the partners a pass. Heck, you could even convince me that Steven is not a viable option for this tour and I'd buy it. But Izzy ready and willing to be included but they can't work out a deal? Come on...

Has BMW evolved and are they still making products the same way 50 years ago and are the same people making these parts?. and last time i checked BMW was owned by two people and a group of share holders. Thats a company that has evolved with time and is not the same as it was in the past.

Just like BMW, Guns n Rose has evolved and will continue to do so.

As Izzy said thats life. 

Do you still have the same job,.mix with the same friends, live in the same house as you did 10 - 15 years ago and or has your life evolved possibly getting married, having children etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 31, 2018 by kiwiguns

[Padme]

10 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

That's cool, let me know how drawing the line works out

Oh it worked out great during NuGN'R era. I didn't attened not a single show. I didn't like CD nor that line up. Thanks for asking 

2 minutes ago, Modano09 said:

They're not playing Coma because it's a mainstream hit.

One song. Wow!!! 

[RONIN]

22 minutes ago, Modano09 said:

No they didn't, they didn't say he agreed to or backed out of anything. It was implied -

Which is what I said, that they insinuated these things. Not stating but implying something doesn't change the intention behind the words.

Quote

which stating it's not meant to be a 'shot' at Izzy

Which means nothing when they then proceed to take a shot at Izzy after saying that. Something Izzy felt compelled to respond to on twitter with a curt statement. If it wasn't a "shot" why would Izzy say "bullshit" and call them out? 

Quote

- that he tends to change his mind about things. Which is a pretty consistent description of him for the last 30 years.

According to whom? The partners? And they're credible character witnesses? They haven't all gone back and forth about their assessments of each other in the last 30 years? 

Even if Izzy changed his mind, maybe he did not know how much the band was being paid for the Vegas shows and Coachella until later in the negotiation process and adjusted his fee accordingly. It's anyone's guess how it went down.

Quote

He's the one who ran to Twitter to say it was about money.

So what should he have done? Agree with Axl and admit that he's an unreliable person who changed his mind even if that wasn't necessarily the case here? He attempted to set the record straight on his side and if you notice, none of the partners bothered to counter what he said. Not a single one of them including the litigation happy Rose. Why? They haven't bothered to address his statement to the WSJ either. Surely if it was false, Duff would counter quickly?

 Go and read the recent public battles between Billy Corgan and D'arcy - there's a lot of parallels to the GnR situation. 

Quote

Would you rather they be the ones to say Izzy wanted too much money to be there?

As I said before, there's a way to say that in a polished way. Izzy did with his one line statement to the WSJ. "A deal couldn't be worked out." Simple. Rose chose to go a different way by undermining Stradlin's credibility to deflect blame/responsibility in Izzy not being part of the reunion. It is what it is. 

Edited May 31, 2018 by RONIN

[Modano09]

2 minutes ago, Padme said:

Oh it worked out great during NuGN'R era. I didn't attened not a single show. I didn't like CD nor that line up. Thanks for asking 

One song. Wow!!! 

Double Talkin' Jive

[RONIN]

3 minutes ago, kiwiguns said:

Has BMW evolved and are they still making products the same way 50 years ago and are the same people making these parts?. and last time i checked BMW was owned by two people and a group of share holders. Thats a company that has evolved with time and is not the same as it was in the past.

Just like BMW, Guns n Rose has evolved and will continue to do so.

As Izzy said thats life. 

Do you still have the same job,.mix with the same friends, live in the same house as you did 10 - 15 years ago and or has your life evolved possibly getting married, having children etc.

It's possible to evolve and maintain product/brand integrity. 

I don't think GnR has - but that's just my opinion and clearly you see it differently which is completely valid.

[Modano09]

3 minutes ago, RONIN said:

 

According to whom? The partners? And they're credible character witnesses? They haven't all gone back and forth about their assessments of each other in the last 30 years? 

 

This very story we're commenting on, for one. He's consistently described as some sort of free spirit who likes to come and go and do his own thing at his leisure. And nobody even says it in a negative way, that's just how he is. 

And what if it is because he demanded too much money? Is that their fault? Are they supposed to explain that publicly? 

[WhazUp]

46 minutes ago, RONIN said:

My point was simply that when you buy a product, you expect a certain "integrity" to it. When I buy a BMW, I expect german engineering and high quality craftsmanship. If they're compromising the parts in that car with inferior quality replacements to save money - that's not a "real" BMW anymore even if the BMW logo is on it. That's what this current iteration of GnR is. A hybridized inferior version of the original. Let's call a spade a spade.

But when you buy a BMW, you are not getting the same literal nuts and bolts that they provided back when they first started.  Sometimes manufactures and the people who sell the parts, change over time and different deals must be arranged with different suppliers for whatever reason.  And just like GNR, we are not privy to those kinds of things like changing suppliers, or why some dude who left the band over 20 years ago isn't there now.  But personally to me I still find the brand and the quality of GNR to be high, at least when it came to the product I got when I paid money for it, which was in the form of two concerts

All in all really the only issue I take is with things like saying calling to spade a spade means we HAVE to agree that "hybridized inferior" version is the only way to see it.  Calling something "as it is" but by something that can only defined by the individual

Not that different opinions are bad, but rather I just wanted to make make that point regarding that

 

I do respect your opinion though and of course I do find it perfectly valid!

Edited May 31, 2018 by WhazUp

[Padme]

5 minutes ago, Modano09 said:

Double Talkin' Jive

Two, again, Wow!!! There is no excuse for the amount of covers and CD songs they have been playing. 

[Tori72]

The D+N section of MyGnr: When rock’n roll, music and art is being discussed as brand business, corporate mangement and compared to BMW. 

[Modano09]

Just now, Padme said:

Two, again, Wow!!! There is no excuse for the amount of covers and CD songs they have been playing. 

Aside from the band apparently wanting to play them.  

 

[RONIN]

Just now, Modano09 said:

This very story we're commenting on, for one. He's consistently described as some sort of free spirit who likes to come and go and do his own thing at his leisure. And nobody even says it in a negative way, that's just how he is. 

So if Izzy is a free spirit who comes and goes as he pleases, does this mean that he cannot honor commitments or his word? The way Axl spoke about Izzy seemed to imply the latter. A signed contract is very hard to wriggle out of - especially when you're facing legal and financial repercussions. Which means Izzy would be held liable if he backed out of anything. 

Quote

And what if it is because he demanded too much money?

It seems that's most likely the case. The question is if Izzy was unreasonable or if the partners lowballed him. Given the track record of Axl and co, the latter seems far more likely.

Quote

Is that their fault?

Depends. If they made a fair offer? No. If they low-balled him and then he declined, then yeah, it's their fault he's not up there on stage with them. Either way, given the enormous profits being raked in, their position is a tenuous one at best if you're going with the theory that Izzy outpriced himself.

Quote

Are they supposed to explain that publicly? 

Saying they couldn't work out a deal with Izzy is that difficult for TB and Duff?

[WhazUp]

Just now, Tori72 said:

The D+N section of MyGnr: When rock’n roll, music and art is being discussed as brand business, corporate mangement and compared to BMW. 

Although like it or not, as much as people like the image of rock n' roll, we cannot lie and say that they call it the "music industry" for nothing

[Tori72]

Just now, WhazUp said:

Although like it or not, as much as people like the image of rock n' roll, we cannot lie and say that they call it the "music industry" for nothing

The  music industry is the industry, not the band. A band should have musical and artistic integrity and motivation. And that also is what „should“ drive and motivate it’s fans. I don’t care about the business aspects and I don’t have to. The fact that in GnR world fans care about the business aspect and try and make excuses on that level is very telling.

 

[Padme]

Just now, Modano09 said:

Aside from the band apparently wanting to play them.  

 

Sure, the problem is the shows are not for free. They can play those songs in the shower if the love them so much. After all the masses (as someone put it) didn't bother to buy CD.  And The Seeker is not a priority for anyone either.

[Modano09]

2 minutes ago, RONIN said:

So if Izzy is a free spirit who comes and goes as he pleases, does this mean that he cannot honor commitments or his word? The way Axl spoke about Izzy seemed to imply the latter. A signed contract is very hard to wriggle out of - especially when you're facing legal and financial repercussions. Which means Izzy would be held liable if he backed out of anything. 

 

No, it means he doesn't make commitments in the first place. This while debate gets turned into defending Izzy against the accusation he'd bail in the middle of tour, which nobody's actually accused him of. 

[WhazUp]

5 minutes ago, Tori72 said:

The  music industry is the industry, not the band. A band should have musical and artistic integrity and motivation. And that also is what „should“ drive and motivate it’s fans. I don’t care about the business aspects and I don’t have to. The fact that in GnR world fans care about the business aspect and try and make excuses on that level is very telling.

 

You don't have to, but the band does.  The music industry is the vehicle the band HAS to go through in order to be as big as GNR.  A band's integrity and motivation are all internal affairs, we cannot comment on what drives these individuals unless we are their close friends or are psychic.  

And what is it very telling of?  To me all I can say is, to turn a blind eye to the fact that bands are businesses is avoiding the reality of life.  We aren't talking about the creation of songs in this topic, we aren't talking about Duff getting the inspiration for a song while sitting on the toilet reading Reader's Digest, we are talking about things such as touring, brand, marketing, and making analogies to other businesses.  

Edited May 31, 2018 by WhazUp

[Modano09]

2 minutes ago, Padme said:

Sure, the problem is the shows are not for free. They can play those songs in the shower if the love them so much. After all the masses (as someone put it) didn't bother to buy CD.  And The Seeker is not a priority for anyone either.

Well hopefully they add some deep cuts on the next leg so you can get mad at them for not adding the right deep cuts.

[RONIN]

7 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

All in all really the only issue I take is with things like saying calling to spade a spade means we HAVE to agree that "hybridized inferior" version is the only way to see it.  Calling something "as it is" but by something that can only defined by the individual

Not that different opinions are bad, but rather I just wanted to make make that point regarding that

I don't think it's the only way to see it, I think it's simply inherently apparent to most. The question is whether you're fine with it and still see value (which you do) or if you don't. 

If you're saying that calling the current iteration of GnR as a "hybridized inferior" version compared to AFD 5 is not inherently apparent because opinions vary, then I'd simply say that popular sentiment would say otherwise. If I say a spade is a spade by saying that this version of Guns is inferior to AFD 5 - I'm basing my opinion on a generally held belief.

[Tori72]

Just now, WhazUp said:

You don't have to, but the band does.  The music industry is the vehicle the band HAS to go through in order to be as big as GNR.  A band's integrity and motivation are all internal affairs, we cannot comment on what drives these individuals unless we are their close friends or are psychic.  

And what is it very telling of?  To me all I can say is, to turn a blind eye to the fact that bands are businesses is avoiding the reality of life.  

Everybody can do what they want. If you’re interested in the business side of things that’s fine. I’m more interested in music and artistic developments and decisions. The band doesn’t give us any of that. On the contrary, there are a lot of unfulfilled wishes and desires on the fans part and a lot of disappointment. That’s why people try to justify things that went down with business decisions and something that feels valid and respectable, sensible to them. A band has a business side but when / if it is still alive it also has a musical and artistic side to it. The fact that the business talk among fans is so high and often says a lot about the band being a musical and artist integrity.

[Padme]

Just now, Modano09 said:

Well hopefully they add some deep cuts on the next leg so you can get mad at them for not adding the right deep cuts.

 As long as they add something different at different shows. I'm fine. Specially in Europe because they come back to a place they've been just last year. When they go to China, CD makes more sense. And they can play all the covers they love to play

[RONIN]

3 minutes ago, Modano09 said:

No, it means he doesn't make commitments in the first place. This while debate gets turned into defending Izzy against the accusation he'd bail in the middle of tour, which nobody's actually accused him of. 

Okay we're getting somewhere.

If he was going to participate in this tour, he had to make a commitment. If he signs a deal, he's legally obligated to follow through. Izzy's saying that he couldn't work out a deal with the band which implies he would have made a commitment if they had found a way to work out terms. Which they didn't.

So this basically goes back to money. The partners are making a lot of it. For some reason, Gilby turned them down. Steven implied he wasn't getting paid much. And Pitman (as per rumors) complained about the pittance he was being paid. Then we have Izzy who blatantly says it's over money. Seems like it would be reasonable to speculate that the partners are very stingy when it comes to compensation.

[WhazUp]

7 minutes ago, Tori72 said:

Everybody can do what they want. If you’re interested in the business side of things that’s fine. I’m more interested in music and artistic developments and decisions. The band doesn’t give us any of that. On the contrary, there are a lot of unfulfilled wishes and desires on the fans part and a lot of disappointment. That’s why people try to justify things that went down with business decisions and something that feels valid and respectable, sensible to them. A band has a business side but when / if it is still alive it also has a musical and artistic side to it. The fact that the business talk among fans is so high and often says a lot about the band being a musical and artist integrity.

I mean I love the art, that is why all of us are here is because of the great art GNR has given us.  And I would be the first to say that I find GNR imperfect in some ways.  I just never want to ignore that other, very important side of things 

All in all for me the business talk comes just because I am a musician, I make my living doing it, and so to me I find it a topic I can talk about all day.  The business side of things, especially in the year 2018, is very different than ever before in the music industry and just like a BMW, there are a lot of moving parts

Edited May 31, 2018 by WhazUp

[Blackstar]

2 hours ago, RONIN said:

It would appear this quote was then factually inaccurate: "He (Slash) has been 'OFFICIALLY and LEGALLY' outside of the Guns N' Roses Partnership since December 31, 1995." (Axl, 10/30/96)

This is a fuzzy part, because it's not quite clear what the "trial period" was exactly. Slash said in his book that, following the negotiations between the three parties's lawyers, he signed a mid-term contract according to which if he and Axl managed to work things out and make an album in X period of time, the new agreement (whatever its terms were) would be considered effective; if not, it would be considered "null and void". Duff hasn't mentioned anything about all that, whether there was a similar arrangement for him, if he signed anything etc.

---------

Another question that arises is if, supposing that Axl never formed a new partnership, Slash and Duff have been entitled to royalties from CD. Because, as far-fetched as it sounds, they might have been as partners. There was a clause in the 1992 agreement about "solo partners", but I don't know if CD fell into that since it was released under the GnR name.

[DieselDaisy]

That Guns N' Roses lack certain key ''Guns N' Roses'' personnel I am sure poses no barriers to their purchasing of tickets. Crowds seem less discerning now - if I am going to be unkind ''dumber''. The ''having a good time'' is analogous to a sugar rush instigated by an American food product. These are not the people who see music in loftier terms but seem happy to be spoon fed slabs of regurgitated nostalgia at exorbitant prices. In actual fact the carnal presence of certified knowables (e.g. ''Axl and Slash'') is not always required hence the proliferation of hologram/tribute acts! But then what you are seeing is neither music to bring governments down nor an exclusive gateway into that band's current state of creativity. These are thirty year songs! 

Guns N' Roses have the audiences they deserve really.

You see this in films as well with Disney's franchises, the same formula recycled. Sporting events also! You see sporting events flooded these days with dimly aware inebriates. You also see sporting administrators pandering to these inebriates.