The Red Head turns 59

[Powderfinger]

Happy Birthday to Axl.

To me the fact the original 5 are all still alive, is something I find hard to believe. 

[Blackstar]

8 hours ago, RussTCB said:

Yes actually, Axl did say in 2002 that there would be at least 3 albums worth of material released within the year and over the course of the next few years. It was on tour and not during the Loder thing at the VMAs. 

7 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

I think what he said was something like "you'll get about 18 tracks, and 10 bonus tracks, then another album, and by that time I should be done with the 3rd record and you'll get it all over again." It was at one of the 2002 shows but I can't remember which one. But he definitely said fans would be getting multiple albums.

There was also the March 6(?) 2007 release date that came and went without any acknowledgement from the band.

Just for the record, Axl didn't say that an album would be released within the year in 2002. Of course what he said generated reasonable expectations that a release wouldn't be too far ahead; however, he didn't give a specific time:

Axl: Now, there's been some concern that if we play 5 or 6 new songs, then there can't be that many more on the album. Au contraire, mon frère! We're just playin' the songs we're not considering putting out as singles or anything. So you'll get 18 songs and about 10 extra tracks. And when that - when the record company feels that has run [its] course, then you'll get it all over again. And by that time, I should be done with the third album! So we'll see if all goes well, boys and girls! And if Uncle Axl proves not to be an asshole - we'll have to see, the jury's still out... [London Arena, London, England, August 26, 2002]

*

Loder: What's gonna happen now? Is Chinese Democracy going to come out? Are we gonna see it soon?

Axl: Umm, you'll see it, I don't know if soon is the word. But it will come out and we will, we'll go back, we'll do some more recording and then we'll start the American leg of the tour... And see how it goes from there. [VMAs, August 29, 2002]

*

Axl: [...] I mean, at the end of the day, it's gonna really depend on - well, for a bit of the nostalgia thing, you have the songs, we're playing a lot of the old material. For new excitement, you have the performance of these particular players. But at the end of the day, it's also really gonna stand on the new songs when we put out a new record, and if that's considered relevant or not, and if that's considered not selling out, you know, just to be relevant. So it'll really all hinge on that, and we feel really confident about the music that we're working on, and I think that when it does manage to find its way into the light, the timing will be perfect, cuz like this MTV thing and the touring right now, that's all working really well. [...]

Meltdown: Now, you said just a couple of minutes ago, "when the new record comes out", I mean, “if”. You're a little skeptical about that?

Axl: No, I'm not skeptical about, like “if”. I'm just saying the “when” thing is when we decide that it's completed. There's a lot of things that - we come up with new ideas that we're working on as we go, and it is a really, really slow process, because it's kind of left more to ourselves in trying to figure it out; where, you know, what I've seen in this industry is that, if a record company… I don't know. There seems to be a lot more support for getting things done with newer bands, and it's got a lot to do with contracts being, you know, they don't have to spend as much money on the band and they're trying to get it out there, and the next thing you know, they've sold a couple of albums and then they don't care about that band anymore and they move on, and that band falls apart. It doesn't seem like there's a lot of support for bands that have been around. That's my experience. So in putting this thing together, in a lot of ways I've had to do way more jobs in it than I'm supposed to — I've had to be manager, A&R man, producer, sole lyric writer and a lot of things; where Guns N’ Roses to me, what I worked really hard at was making it a collaborative effort, and it was a lot of people involved. This is a collaborative effort with the players, but the players aren't exactly sure what it should be to try to win over the world Guns N’ Roses style. So that's kind of my responsibility. Anyway, but it's all working.

Meltdown: Well, there you go. I guess if it works for you, you might as well...

Axl: It took a long time, but now it's working, and I think we'll have the right record. And when we do drop the record - the plan is to drop the record, have a bunch of extra tracks, about a year or so down the road drop another record, and drop a third record. This is a three-stage thing and we'll be touring for a real long time. [WRIF, November 20, 2002] 

*

The only times Axl gave a more specific timeline (and failed to meet it) was in 2006, when he was quoted saying in the beginning of the year that "People will hear music this year" [Rolling Stone, Jan. 16, 2006] (that was at a party, though, not in an interview). And then, in late 2006, when he gave a tentative date for March 2007:

Axl: With that being said, this is not a promise, a lie or a guarantee, but we do wish to announce a tentative release date of March 6. This is the first time we have done this publicly for this album. Others have made up all the other dates for their own reasons. We would like to assure the fans that everything in our power will be done to meet this date. Once it is finalized and official, you will be notified. If we are delayed for unseen reasons, you also will be notified as soon as possible in regard to a new date, and the album will be released as shortly thereafter as is possible. We thank you for your patience. [Open letter, Dec. 14, 2006]

*

He was never specific about the follow-up of CD, either. In 2009 he said "maybe sometime in our lifetimes". Only one time (in 2012 or 2013) he said he believed that it wouldn't take as much time as CD did (oh well). Then in 2014 that he would start seriously looking... etc. - but that was vague. And in 2016 that "soon" was not the word.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Blackstar

[Blackstar]

PS. Happy birthday to Axl!

[SoulMonster]

9 hours ago, RussTCB said:

There's so much to unpack here that really shows the mindset of people who defend GN'R no matter what. 

I don't "defend GN'R no matter what". I am specifically saying that if you trust someone who has consistently shown themselves to be untrustworthy, then "for most part, that's [your] own fault". That's hardly a ringing endorsement of GN'R and their ability to follow-up on their plans and ideas, is it? 

[SoulMonster]

9 hours ago, RussTCB said:

Let's start here: again, you're finding a long winded way of saying "it's the fans fault for believing what Axl and GN'R said". It doesn't matter how many coats of paint you put on it, that's the base of what you're saying. Just because you choose to settle for that, doesn't mean anyone else should. 

I said, "for most part, that's their own fault". Do you see the implicit criticism against those who consistently give us hopes that fail to be realized? There is a caveat there, I can hardly blame newcomers for believing Richard when he implies a new record will come out soon. They don't know better. They haven't been round the block for as many times as us. But all-timers who was here for the whole CD debacle, or even greybeards like me who tore my hair out waiting for UYIs, we should know better.

[SoulMonster]

9 hours ago, RussTCB said:

Second....the bit where you suggest that I must be an unhappy person because I don't praise GN'R on here. I'm honestly hoping that was some sort of joke, but assuming it's not

Huh? Here's what I wrote:

"Come on Russ, you know this, you have been a fan for too long to go through this period of revelation now. Get through this transition period from being a positive guy to one that is positive and have realistic expectations. I think we all miss that more sunny version of yourself."

I am clearly talking about your persona here on mygnrforum. I have no idea how you are in real life and it would disrespectful of me to insinuate that your disappointment over GN'R somehow effects your general wellbeing. I don't believe that. But as you have pointed out yourself, you have had a bit of a bummer with GN'R lately and that shows. Here.

[SoulMonster]

10 hours ago, RussTCB said:

Lastly, art is a matter of taste so to each their own but I guess I'm just glad that for me there are tons of other artists who've released far more material that's as good or absolutely eclipses anything GN'R have ever released. 

I think I started this by pointing out that GN'R is one of my favorite bands, so you are not exactly alone in this. But I think most people who spend time in this part of the forum, are huge GN'R fans. I think that is a fair assumption.

[RussTCB]

3 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Huh? Here's what I wrote:

"Come on Russ, you know this, you have been a fan for too long to go through this period of revelation now. Get through this transition period from being a positive guy to one that is positive and have realistic expectations. I think we all miss that more sunny version of yourself."

I am clearly talking about your persona here on mygnrforum. I have no idea how you are in real life and it would disrespectful of me to insinuate that your disappointment over GN'R somehow effects your general wellbeing. I don't believe that. But as you have pointed out yourself, you have had a bit of a bummer with GN'R lately and that shows. Here.

I don't have a "persona on here", my posts on here are very much just me. It's not necessarily me that's "a bit of a bummer", it's actually GN'R that's a bit of a bummer lol

[BangoSkank]

15 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

And how do you whittle 40000 pages? that alone would need a team😄 

I'm not convinced it's a good idea for a guy like Axl to write an autobiography... he is so sensitive and he hates when he's misinterpreted. I think he's probably say a few things that would get the 'I hate Axl crew' out and I don't think he needs to give them any ammo.

On a positive there was a few positive Axl stories yesterday, the tide has shifted for him and his perception

The relentless "I Hate Axl" crew is one reason I want him to write it. Whenever I've heard Axl's side of things I generally have thought "Huh, that makes sense" or "Well, that's not as bad as people made it out to be." Case in point: people claiming he wouldn't go on stage until the band signed the legal name of Guns N' Roses over to him. People believed that for years. The legitimate press wrote about it. Then late one night on a forum (maybe this one) Axl said, "that's impossible because legally speaking that's a contract under duress and would not hold up." That simple sentence brought a lot of clarity on the issue for me. Just want more of that. Plus he's a fascinating guy and just want to read his perspective on things outside of the band too. 

[Ratam]

11 hours ago, Blackstar said:

PS. Happy birthday to Axl!

Nice sarcasm...

[Euchre]

2 hours ago, BangoSkank said:

 Then late one night on a forum (maybe this one) Axl said, "that's impossible because legally speaking that's a contract under duress and would not hold up." That simple sentence brought a lot of clarity on the issue for me.

From personal experience that statement is only half true - well at least in Oz so may be different in the US.

When i was young and naïve I was forced to sign a contract in a similar kind of situation - certainly a difficult position in that I was told I needed to sign it or affected my job.

Fast forward about 2 years and when it came to the crunch and I was briefing the lawyer, I was told failure to act for two years basically meant I had tacitly accepted the contract - so I could fight it on the duress point but my chances weren’t good.

Basically the advice amounted to if you sign something under duress you need to fight it right away.

As mentioned US is different legal system to Oz but there are a lot of similarities and case law can be used from each juristiction in the other - but if US is like Oz and you wait 3-4 years to challenge a contract based on duress, which I’d guess was the timeline in the GNR case, based on what I’ve been told, your chances aren’t good.

[eddiedingle]

Get your lazy ass in the studio

[BangoSkank]

2 hours ago, Euchre said:

From personal experience that statement is only half true - well at least in Oz so may be different in the US.

When i was young and naïve I was forced to sign a contract in a similar kind of situation - certainly a difficult position in that I was told I needed to sign it or affected my job.

Fast forward about 2 years and when it came to the crunch and I was briefing the lawyer, I was told failure to act for two years basically meant I had tacitly accepted the contract - so I could fight it on the duress point but my chances weren’t good.

Basically the advice amounted to if you sign something under duress you need to fight it right away.

As mentioned US is different legal system to Oz but there are a lot of similarities and case law can be used from each juristiction in the other - but if US is like Oz and you wait 3-4 years to challenge a contract based on duress, which I’d guess was the timeline in the GNR case, based on what I’ve been told, your chances aren’t good.

Sure, and that may be true for GNR too. But as it relates to the band I don't think Slash & Duff ever challenged that contract formally, did they?

Either way, the moral of the story is that that situation is probably a lot more complicated and grown up than "Axl's oh so bad he would not go on stage unless he got them to sign the name." And there are probably a lot more situations in GNR history like that where his input would be pretty revelatory, which is just one reason I want him to write his autobiography. Probably a lot of light he could shine on the early NuGNR years too.

As an aside: that really sucks your employer (or whoever) made you do that.

[Euchre]

4 hours ago, BangoSkank said:

Sure, and that may be true for GNR too. But as it relates to the band I don't think Slash & Duff ever challenged that contract formally, did they?

Yes that is why I say the statement is only half true. If they had of formally challenged it the next day they probably would have got it overturned. If they waited 3 years of whatever they waited it wouldn’t have got overturned for duress.

So for Axl to say the story is BS as it would have got overturned on grounds of duress - I don’t think holds up / proves anything. (There were some aspects Adler signed away that he couldn’t get back eg rights to the name, supposedly as his lawyer didn’t file on this claim and by the time they realised the oversite it was too late - and he obviously won in the end on an unenforceable contract).

For the record I’m sceptical about the GNR name story for one reason and one reason only - I’m sure I read an interview with Niven once where he said something like the name issue came up as part of the Geffen renegotiation and he designed it all so while Axl had the name, the others had enough control of the music and imagery (eg logo) that Axl couldn’t really make money off it without their support.

I suppose both could be true (ie Niven designed it but ultimately it was all executed under Goldstein) - I’m not sure if the time differences make this plausible.

 

On the other theory it seems to me that Goldstein is such a liar/ass kisser that I can certainly believe it and believe everyone ex Goldstein is telling the truth.

ie Goldstein tells Axl, Duff and Slash are due to sign the contract, mentions nothing about his method to make this happen.

Goes to Slash and Duff and says Axl won’t go on stage without it signed to ensure they do it quickly without getting their own advice. (Which given it was their manager presenting the contract chances are they wouldn’t have anyway). Plausible explanation given, Axl was already late for show. 

Tells them the contract is benign and only kicks in if someone dies. Goldstein seems to have form in this regard seemingly having told Adler the contract he signed said something different to what it actually did.

To add to it all Slash & Duff are probably already drunk and not thinking straight. You would think they would be entitled to trust something their manager was doing regardless.

Goldstein tells Axl he gets the signatures and that Slash and Duff were ok with it all.

When Duff realises what happens and he confronts Goldstein he gets told it’s too late now.

Both Slash and Duff don’t want to rock the boat in the middle of a large tour and figure if in the future things go wrong and they leave, Axl can’t really do anything with the name. So it’s not that much of an issues.

Years later things go pear shaped and they realise how bad it was. By then too late to push the duress issue, so they speak out. To best of Axls knowledge this is all BS as he’s never heard any of this before. Probably asks Goldstein who he trusts and Goldstein tells him the duress point to try and prove he never did what was claimed and remain in good stead.

 

I think the above is a simple, plausible narrative that fits with all that has been said (well aside from whatever Goldstein says)

BTW I agree that a book from Axl would be some good insight I do think overall Axl is pretty open and honest when he does speak - just delusional and lacking self awareness at times !! Slash definitely lies at times. Duff is a weird one from what i can see not always entirely truthful at times but more so out of being diplomatic and trying to help rather than being manipulative - what some would call little white lies.

[The Holographic Universe]

On 2/7/2021 at 6:52 PM, Powderfinger said:

Happy Birthday to Axl.

To me the fact the original 5 are all still alive, is something I find hard to believe. 

It’s unreal. Stroke, bursted pancrease, Slash’s multiple ODs and heart issue.