Slash in new Capital One Bank commercial

[Ratam]

"Sweet way to Bank O'Mine" 

[MaskingApathy]

10 hours ago, Italian girl said:

I can't see where's the problem in slash doing a nice commercial

Same

13 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

Damn people are taking this commercial thing very seriously lol

Ikr? Doesn't make any sense. I think it's cool that Slash is going to be on mainstream television, might introduce some kids to the guitar or GnR/SMKC. It's like when he did an episode of American Idol back in 2010, it was cool to see my favorite guitarist on TV blowing away all these pop wannabes.

[Jakey Styley]

I recently spoke to a relative of someone who works for GNR touring (yeah yeah, you don’t have to believe me). They said that they were told Slash REALLY needs money due to the divorce. I know we all kinda knew that, but kinda interesting to hear it from someone closer.

[Stay.Of.Execution]

52 minutes ago, Jakey Styley said:

I recently spoke to a relative of someone who works for GNR touring (yeah yeah, you don’t have to believe me). They said that they were told Slash REALLY needs money due to the divorce. I know we all kinda knew that, but kinda interesting to hear it from someone closer.

Does that person know when Glasgow will be postponed?

[Tom-Ass]

I wonder what kind of life the people who are genuinley upset about this have...

[Marj]

Nothing wrong about that. 
A divorce is awful most of the time, I hope he ´s ok with his children. You’ve got to do what is necessary for money.

[El Guapo]

Yeah, poor Slash really has no choice, he's desperate for money. WTF?!?!

Edited July 21, 2022 by El Guapo

[Jakey Styley]

1 hour ago, Stay.Of.Execution said:

Does that person know when Glasgow will be postponed?

 Sometimes I run into this person at another friend’s dinner parties. It’s hard to balance the amount of questions I want to ask without being weird and annoying.

[Draguns]

The commercial is funny. What's also funny is how upset some people on this forum are getting. It's his life and work. If he wants to do a  Capital One commercial with his biggest hit so be it. Some people have too much time on their hands. Rather than getting upset on a forum, go out be productive and enjoy life. 

[janrichmond]

3 hours ago, Jakey Styley said:

I recently spoke to a relative of someone who works for GNR touring (yeah yeah, you don’t have to believe me). They said that they were told Slash REALLY needs money due to the divorce. I know we all kinda knew that, but kinda interesting to hear it from someone closer.

100% not true. His divorce settlement was set to his earnings before NITL not after. 

[Jakey Styley]

3 hours ago, janrichmond said:

100% not true. His divorce settlement was set to his earnings before NITL not after. 

I thought I had read that beyond that percentage of his income he has to pay, he still owes a flat ~140k per month in alimony/child support.

[jamillos]

8 minutes ago, Jakey Styley said:

I thought I had read that beyond that percentage of his income he has to pay, he still owes a flat ~140k per month in alimony/child support.

He should pull a Johnny Depp on this. It's bullshit and has nothing to do with justice. 

[Marj]

3 hours ago, Jakey Styley said:

I thought I had read that beyond that percentage of his income he has to pay, he still owes a flat ~140k per month in alimony/child support.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-6132355/amp/Guns-N-Roses-guitarist-Slash-finalizes-split-Perla-Ferrara-three-year-divorce-battle.html
 

It seems true. 😅 

[PatrickS77]

50 minutes ago, Marj said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-6132355/amp/Guns-N-Roses-guitarist-Slash-finalizes-split-Perla-Ferrara-three-year-divorce-battle.html
 

It seems true. 😅 

If true, that's a reason to never get married. And he really must have had one of the worst lawyers ever. But either way, usually alimony is connected to income. If he doesn't make enough to pay, he could petition the court to pay less. But as is, he's making millions since 2016. So I doubt he has trouble paying without whoring himself out for commercials. It's funny though that supposedly a divorce entitles his kids to 0,9 % of Slash's income for 20 years. And that he has to pay the Ex more than twice of what he has to pay for the kids. On top of almost 7 mio. she got out front.

12 hours ago, WhazUp said:

Damn people are taking this commercial thing very seriously lol

I'm not. I was talking about the divorce settlement excuse.

[WhazUp]

1 hour ago, PatrickS77 said:

 

I'm not. I was talking about the divorce settlement excuse.

I just am not quite seeing the issue here with spitballing the concept that a famous dude could potentially use their fame for some easy money doing a commercial, in part due to that, amongst other things.  I just thought the harsh nature of the reply didn't quite match what is only just mental spitballing of a trite issue for us fans, y'know? lol

Edited July 22, 2022 by WhazUp

[jamillos]

10 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

I just am not quite seeing the issue here with spitballing the concept that a wealthy famous dude could potentially use their fame for some easy money doing a commercial, in part due to that.  I just thought the harshness of the reply didn't quite match what is only just mental spitballing of a trite issue for us fans, y'know? lol

I mean, what else is there to talk about anyway...

[PatrickS77]

4 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

I just am not seeing the issue here with the concept that a wealthy famous dude could potentially use their fame for some easy money doing a commercial real quick, in part due to that.  I just thought the harshness of the reply didn't quite match what is only just mental spitballing of a trite issue for us fans, y'know? lol

What harshness? It's just disheartening that people who are seemingly swimming in money, mostly paid by us by charging us 160 to 350 $ and more for damn concert tickets seemingly still can't get enough and have to whore themselves out to sell some more lame shit to their fans and make more. And divorce alimony is no proper excuse. People with no morals/equally money hungry people or people who wish they could do so themselves see no issue with that. Others see how pathetic these celebrities are, who whore themselves out, because the millions they already have seemingly are not enough and they think they need more. And all based on the idea that the stupid fan, the person who made them a celebrity millionaire in the first place, is stupid enough to buy any shit that is peddled by their favourite prominent figure. 

[WhazUp]

11 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

What harshness? It's just disheartening that people who are seemingly swimming in money, mostly paid by us by charging us 160 to 350 $ and more for damn concert tickets seemingly still can't get enough and have to whore themselves out to sell some more lame shit to their fans and make more. And divorce alimony is no proper excuse. People with no morals/equally money hungry people or people who wish they could do so themselves see no issue with that. Others see how pathetic these celebrities are, who whore themselves out, because the millions they already have seemingly are not enough and they think they need more. And all based on the idea that the stupid fan, the person who made them a celebrity millionaire in the first place, is stupid enough to buy any shit that is peddled by their favourite prominent figure. 

I guess it doesn't matter to me really, all due respect.  Like, if Slash wants to make easy money being Slash, good for him, y'know?  This commercial cameo thing just doesn't bother me

 

This thread reminds me of the Tool song "Hooker With A Penis" on a seperate note.  Cool jam

Edited July 22, 2022 by WhazUp

[PatrickS77]

12 minutes ago, WhazUp said:

I guess it doesn't matter to me really, all due respect.  Like, if Slash wants to make easy money being Slash, good for him, y'know?  This commercial cameo thing just doesn't bother me

 

This thread reminds me of the Tool song "Hooker With A Penis" on a seperate note.  Cool jam

Obviously Slash can and will do whatever he wants. It's not about Slash per se. It's about the wealthy celebrity in general. The concept of giving rich people money in hope that "poor" people will buy shit because rich people suggest that those poor people need said shit. And that they (and apparently other poor people and with poor I mean, non-rich people) see nothing wrong with it.

[jekylhyde]

9 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

It's about the wealthy celebrity in general. The concept of giving rich people money in hope that "poor" people will buy shit because rich people suggest that those poor people need said shit. And that they (and apparently other poor people and with poor I mean, non-rich people) see nothing wrong with it.

I share this sentiment. The culture of idolizing the rich and famous is so fucked up. It distorts our values, our needs and our art, it isn't good for the environment etc. (But I guess that's a different discussion altogether )

[jamillos]

Gotta say, to me, it’s not about the fact he’s doing a commercial (I had nothing against that Axl’s beer thing, as unexpected as it was), let alone whether some viewers let such things influence them. It’s about what the commercial is for. Add the fact that a particular song was misused for this purpose, add the false justification of some people here stating he needs to do it cause of the alimony, and there you go. 
No, no big deal of course, I won't stop liking him, but it is in bad taste and kind of a let-down, that’s all. Yes they make big money and have been in the business for decades, but imagine being in 1988 – how do you think people would have reacted had he done it back then? I’m sure people here actually do understand what this small beef is about, but times have changed and I guess sometimes it’s better to pretend not to understand, otherwise one would have to question their world view (or their idols?), which may not always be perceived as comfortable by some. 
No, there’s no way in hell he’d do this in 1988, and that’s the point. Yes for Jack Daniel’s or even Marlboro but not for a bank, no. Such thing epitomizes everything (or a lot of it) this band was against, whether openly or by implication. 
Then again, "never waste your time trying to explain something to people who are committed to misunderstanding you."
There, finished. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by jamillos

[WhazUp]

The dream of every guitarist is to make a ton of money, and then make even more money just saying one line and playing a song you are famous for on camera.  Go Slash

Edited July 22, 2022 by WhazUp

[JimiRose]

1 hour ago, jamillos said:

Gotta say, to me, it’s not about the fact he’s doing a commercial (I had nothing against that Axl’s beer thing, as unexpected as it was), let alone whether some viewers let such things influence them. It’s about what the commercial is for. Add the fact that a particular song was misused for this purpose, add the false justification of some people here stating he needs to do it cause of the alimony, and there you go. 
No, no big deal of course, I won't stop liking him, but it is in bad taste and kind of a let-down, that’s all. Yes they make big money and have been in the business for decades, but imagine being in 1988 – how do you think people would have reacted had he done it back then? I’m sure people here actually do understand what this small beef is about, but times have changed and I guess sometimes it’s better to pretend not to understand, otherwise one would have to question their world view (or their idols?), which may not always be perceived as comfortable by some. 
No, there’s no way in hell he’d do this in 1988, and that’s the point. Yes for Jack Daniel’s or even Marlboro but not for a bank, no. Such thing epitomizes everything (or a lot of it) this band was against, whether openly or by implication. 
Then again, "never waste your time trying to explain something to people who are committed to misunderstanding you."
There, finished. 

100% the people pretending not to understand the meaning behind this have also sold out morally and justifying slash may reinforce themselves. People called GnR fake and posers because they made videos like november rain and estranged. You could argue that grunge killed GnR. now IMAGINE them whoring out to a bank in 1988. The band would be dead. Ok, it's not 1988 but slash has 100 mil in the bank. he has millions in constant income , he's not paying his ex millions. even the worst imaginable alimony say 50% of all previous income and 50% of all future (which it no way is) would still leave slash earning millions per month and 50 mil hard cash in the bank. How much do we all earn here? Slash aint struggling. Banks take peoples homes. they loan them money then increae interest rates so they cannot afford to pay it back. people kill themselves and lose their lives whilst banks prop up the few at the top. GnR no matter what you think are anti establishment. that os their whole brand. No they're not outright punk, but rock n roll is that way. Mick jagger is the tightest money hungry capitalist going and even he aint done a bank ad. If you don't get it, then you probably do ad your ignorance is bliss.

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, jamillos said:

No, there’s no way in hell he’d do this in 1988, and that’s the point. Yes for Jack Daniel’s or even Marlboro but not for a bank, no. Such thing epitomizes everything (or a lot of it) this band was against, whether openly or by implication. 

What exactly does it epitomize? 

[invisible_rose]

8 hours ago, Jakey Styley said:

I thought I had read that beyond that percentage of his income he has to pay, he still owes a flat ~140k per month in alimony/child support.

Aren't his kids over 18? In which case, he won't pay anything directly for child support now.

But $6m and $100k per month - to keep her. Fuck. How is divorce still so heavily biased. I got taken to the cleaners by my ex wife, so I can relate. I will never get married again.

Edited July 22, 2022 by invisible_rose