The "New Album" Thread. Thanks to the long ass thread, I’m going home!

[SoulMonster]

6 hours ago, allwaystired said:

If they're partners in the business then that obviously does put them above Fortus.....but there's no way they're equal partners. 

It's the Axl show all the way -as it has been since the 90s really. I don't see it as a 'band' structure at all, in the way that other bands are. 

You think other bands typically have an entirely flat structure with no band member wielding more power than the others? Oh, how naive. Now, go and read about the Rolling Stones. 

Axl has been dominating GN'R since the 80s, either because he had the will to force others to do as he wanted through threats and craziness, or because they recognized him as a leader with a vision for the band, or because they signed a partnership agreement biased towards him. So both legally and in practical terms, Axl has had more power in GN'R. The 1992 partnership agreement between Slash, Axl and Duff gave Axl a larger share of profits, provided Axl with better control over ownership of the name, and identified Slash and Axl as more important than Duff when it came to band decisions.

Slash has stated that no new agreements have been signed as he rejoined GN'R. I don't think we should interpret this as him being laissez faire in regards to the legal aspects of returning to the band, I am sure he has had his legal team look over the existing agreements to make sure his interests are protected, and that at least some verbal agreement, or understanding, exists between Axl and him. I would also think this means the 1992 agreement still regulates the band. This means that no one can force Axl to release music but Axl can't force Slash and Duff to do things, either. They have to all agree. Which is how it should be, of course.  

Edited March 27 by SoulMonster

[SoulMonster]

6 hours ago, ChrisW said:

'I don't have to do what you want and you need my permission to do what you want.'  That's not how partnership works.

A partnership can be 100% biased toward one partner or completely unbiased. It solely comes down to what the partners agree to.

Maybe you were thinking about an "equal partnership" in which each partner has equal rights? GN'R hasn't really been an equal partnership at least since 1987 when they signed an agreement were profits were biased towards Axl - because the rest of the band accepted that he deserved more. This was continued into the 1992 partnership agreement where Axl also got more rights to the name of the band (which, in a sense makes sense since he is the founder of the band) and where Slash and Axl were given more power (over Duff) in regards to band decisions. 

Edited March 27 by SoulMonster

[SoulMonster]

42 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

Did he really say that? Later, I think on the chats here, Axl said Slash was the reason he couldn’t do a classic hard rock record because he left and there isn’t anybody else filling these shoes, something like this.

Boy, have I got news for you.

Thanks to @Blackstar we have details about Axl's counter lawsuit from 2006 where he really lashed out as Slash:

Quote

Contrary to his own false accusations, it was Hudson who refused to cooperate in replacing band members that he himself maneuvered out of Guns N’ Roses because of his own insecurities, egotism and jealousies regarding his songwriting abilities and musicianship. It was also Hudson who destroyed the band’s fan club and engineered the employment by Guns N’ Roses of Matt Sorum, thereby facilitating Hudson’s desire to change the approach/rhythm and direction of Guns N’ Roses by seeking to dictate the entire musical direction of what would become the follow up to the classic “Appetite For Destruction” album and sound. But Hudson then publicly placed responsibility for such decisions on Rose. Hudson also falsely, and publicly, claimed that Rose was responsible for the dissolution of the “Illusions”-era line Up, and falsely attributed the break-up to, among other things, musical differences - thereby purposefully and deceptively misleading the public as to Rose’s personal musical vision for the then line-up and future Guns N’ Roses recordings. There is abundant recorded evidence which includes Hudson’s performances in Rose’s possession disproving all of Hudson’s purposefully false, manipulative and calculated claims. Indeed, it was Hudson who attempted to manipulate public perceptions to aggrandize his own position by changing the musical course of the band away from the style expressed in the hugely successful album “Appetite For Destruction” instead to songs which Hudson created, regardless of their artistic quality or commercial appeal. In addition, on information and belief, Hudson personally sabotaged three attempts to make a traditional rock album as a follow up to the “Use Your Illusions” albums and engaged in consistent substance abuse that was extremely detrimental to the band.

Axl's claim that Slash sabotaged three attempts at make a traditional record, is particularly interesting. It could be some truth to it, that Slash didn't want to proceed with an album because it would shift even more power to Axl through an agreement placed in escrow at the time. It is hard to say what actually happened, although Axl typically has a crystal sharp mind and good recollection he can re-interpret events in the light of new grievances and the quote above was from a lawsuit where one typically resorts to exaggerations and overstatements to win the favor for one's legal argument.

For more on this lawsuit: AUGUST 2005-MARCH 2006: SLASH, DUFF AND AXL'S LEGAL BATTLE, PART II

Edited March 27 by SoulMonster

[Free Bird]

35 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Boy, have I got news for you.

Thanks to @Blackstar we have details about Axl's counter lawsuit from 2006 where he really lashed out as Slash:

Axl's claim that Slash sabotaged three attempts at make a traditional record, is particularly interesting. It could be some truth to it, that Slash didn't want to proceed with an album because it would shift even more power to Axl through an agreement placed in escrow at the time. It is hard to say what actually happened, although Axl typically has a crystal sharp mind and good recollection he can re-interpret events in the light of new grievances and the quote above was from a lawsuit where one typically resorts to exaggerations and overstatements to win the favor for one's legal argument.

For more on this lawsuit: AUGUST 2005-MARCH 2006: SLASH, DUFF AND AXL'S LEGAL BATTLE, PART II

Thanks for that 😂😂

All there’s written is the typical Axl blah blah where everything is everybody’s fault but his. 
It doesn’t take away what he has written in the chats, does it?

[SoulMonster]

4 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

Thanks for that 😂😂

All there’s written is the typical Axl blah blah where everything is everybody’s fault but his. 
It doesn’t take away what he has written in the chats, does it?

No, of course not. I think he was being entirely honest in the chat.

If we are to trust Axl, then Slash has lied or at least exaggerated Axl's desire to broaden out the music of GN'R after the 1990 touring when he (Axl) really wanted or agreed to make an album more in the vein of classical rock, but Slash sabotaged this; and when Slash had left GN'R, Axl wouldn't be able to make such a record because he didn't have the players for it any more, so that steered the music more in the direction of what would eventually be Chinese Democracy.

In my opinion, I think Axl was interested in keeping GN'R music fresh and exciting and not stagnating, but eventually agreed or decided to make a more traditional sounding record (either because of pushback from Slash or simply because he thought that the current lineup, with Slash, wouldn't be the right vehicle for that). That Slash then sabotaged this sounds crazy, but as I alluded to above, there is a possibility that Slash realized he would be better off by not helping to realize that record. In either case, Slash's focus was on Snakepit and as he admitted himself, he stopped coming to rehearsals. So the outcome was, regardless of whether this was Slash consciously trying to sabotage GN'R or just not being present and motivated, that things didn't move forward (also of course due to Axl's peculiarities). Then Slash left and Axl was more free to move GN'R in whatever musical direction he wanted, but also still limited by the musicians at hand. And those musicians came in with very different skills and interests, and also changed frequently. Looking at the Village leaks the music really is a schizophrenia of styles and genres, from very traditional sounding songs that could have fit on Appetite or UYI to much more experimental (both electronic but also avant garde guitar from Buckethead). 

[Free Bird]

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

No, of course not. I think he was being entirely honest in the chat.

If we are to trust Axl, then Slash has lied or at least exaggerated Axl's desire to broaden out the music of GN'R after the 1990 touring when he (Axl) really wanted or agreed to make an album more in the vein of classical rock, but Slash sabotaged this; and when Slash had left GN'R, Axl wouldn't be able to make such a record because he didn't have the players for it any more, so that steered the music more in the direction of what would eventually be Chinese Democracy.

In my opinion, I think Axl was interested in keeping GN'R music fresh and exciting and not stagnating, but eventually agreed or decided to make a more traditional sounding record (either because of pushback from Slash or simply because he thought that the current lineup, with Slash, wouldn't be the right vehicle for that). That Slash then sabotaged this sounds crazy, but as I alluded to above, there is a possibility that Slash realized he would be better off by not helping to realize that record. In either case, Slash's focus was on Snakepit and as he admitted himself, he stopped coming to rehearsals. So the outcome was, regardless of whether this was Slash consciously trying to sabotage GN'R or just not being present and motivated, that things didn't move forward (also of course due to Axl's peculiarities). Then Slash left and Axl was more free to move GN'R in whatever musical direction he wanted, but also still limited by the musicians at hand. And those musicians came in with very different skills and interests, and also changed frequently. Looking at the Village leaks the music really is a schizophrenia of styles and genres, from very traditional sounding songs that could have fit on Appetite or UYI to much more experimental (both electronic but also avant garde guitar from Buckethead). 

I don’t know. I think they both had their issues with each other and probably interpreted the behaviour of the other completely wrong. They didn’t talk directly and built their minds on middlemen’s fair speaking, press and their own imagination. The success has outgrown them and it’s easy for young guys in their position to bluster over such topics.

[JimiRose]

17 hours ago, DTV88 said:

There isn’t a single song on CD that wasn’t fleshed out lyrically. Absurd, The General and even Perhaps are no way as good lyrically as any of the songs on CD. 

Perhaps was well thought out lyrically for the first verse. the problem is they just repeated it and that seemed lazy. 

 

20 hours ago, allwaystired said:

I honestly don't think he's far off- just better paid. The way he refers to GNR are really telling. 

I agree. He's obviously the most important member of the band and when it comes to touring I don't think GnR survive if slash says he's out. However, when it comes to any actual decisions, such as songwriting, song releasing, band promotion and what the band can and can't say, he is clearly just as important as a stage tech. Axl decides and dictates all of that. Slash knows his importance is to the live show and the band image, and that is where he is making 99.99% of his cash from being in GnR, so he doesn't really care about the other stuff. Axl obviously really does care about the other stuff (well 'care' perhaps isn't the word) so he is in control of that. Hence we get regular touring and irregular releases. Slash has all the power when it comes to £££ for touring. And he has absolutely zero when it comes to new music. 

Even the new songs with slash on, no one has really given a shit. The argument could be that is because it wasn't in support of an album, and it came too late, no marketing campaign and had the wrong lead single etc even half of the people here say they'd prefer the versions with bucket and finck. So Slash knows where he matters and he knows where he doesnt. I imagine Axl probably does too

[allwaystired]

Just now, JimiRose said:

Perhaps was well thought out lyrically for the first verse. the problem is they just repeated it and that seemed lazy. 

 

I agree. He's obviously the most important member of the band and when it comes to touring I don't think GnR survive if slash says he's out. However, when it comes to any actual decisions, such as songwriting, song releasing, band promotion and what the band can and can't say, he is clearly just as important as a stage tech. Axl decides and dictates all of that. Slash knows his importance is to the live show and the band image, and that is where he is making 99.99% of his cash from being in GnR, so he doesn't really care about the other stuff. Axl obviously really does care about the other stuff (well 'care' perhaps isn't the word) so he is in control of that. Hence we get regular touring and irregular releases. Slash has all the power when it comes to £££ for touring. And he has absolutely zero when it comes to new music. 

Even the new songs with slash on, no one has really given a shit. The argument could be that is because it wasn't in support of an album, and it came too late, no marketing campaign and had the wrong lead single etc even half of the people here say they'd prefer the versions with bucket and finck. So Slash knows where he matters and he knows where he doesnt. I imagine Axl probably does too

Without Slash the band would be dead now, no question. Axl knows that, TB knows that, we know that, Slash knows that. 

His position, I'd say, is placed due to that. More money, more prominence that the likes of Fortus, perhaps even a cut of the profits.....but if people think he has much sway in other stuff I'd say they're wrong. His manager will have negotiated him a good deal in this business. 

Doubtless he and Duff are pushing for an album (and if it was up to them we'd have it by now I'm sure) and I still feel those singles were done to appease them, because if Slash packs this up- this show is done. 

[JimiRose]

4 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

Doubtless he and Duff are pushing for an album (and if it was up to them we'd have it by now I'm sure) 

Yep. We'd probably have 3/4 new albums if it was up to everyone bar axl

[allwaystired]

12 minutes ago, JimiRose said:

Yep. We'd probably have 3/4 new albums if it was up to everyone bar axl

Absolutely. At least 2 I'd say. 

What goes on with the guy, we can only speculate on (and do, frequently!) but Slash/Duff don't even seem to have the sway to get a live album released. 

[Rovim]

7 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

Absolutely. At least 2 I'd say. 

What goes on with the guy, we can only speculate on (and do, frequently!) but Slash/Duff don't even seem to have the sway to get a live album released. 

maybe Slash and Duff just let Axl do his thing and they know that even if they did try to convince him to do anything he doesn't want to do/isn't ready then it would only rock the boat. they seem to be there for when he needs them and I think it's possible the three of them discussed some future plans.

[Free Bird]

Great 🤣

ignoring facts and official documents just to cement their opinions 😬

[allwaystired]

27 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

Great 🤣

ignoring facts and official documents just to cement their opinions 😬

In what way are people doing that on here? I'm confused. 

GNR is a business that has three partners, as documented. They're not equal partners. 

Isn't this what people are discussing or am I missing something here? 

[colonizedmind]

By the time this album comes out, one thing is for sure...we will have debated the complete A-Z of the music business inside out 😝

[allwaystired]

13 minutes ago, colonizedmind said:

By the time this album comes out, one thing is for sure...we will have debated the complete A-Z of the music business inside out 😝

I think we did that in the last 1000 page thread. This is just a deluxe reissue, with bonus frustration, bafflement and resignation. 

 

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, allwaystired said:

Without Slash the band would be dead now, no question. Axl knows that, TB knows that, we know that, Slash knows that. 

Guns N' Roses survived Slash quitting in the 90s and would survive Slash leaving now, too. Any albums released would sell less, sure, and tours would be far less profitable, but it worked before and would work again. 

Is Slash likely to leave? Definitely not as long as they keep the succesful tours going. But if they stop touring and start fighting over new music, Slash would likely shift his attention away from GN'R and maybe altogether leave. A possible scenario could be Axl insisting on prioritizing working on and releasing more CD era music with Slash insisting on writing new songs. In such a situation, with the band being deadlocked, Axl might force Slash out to be able to keep releasing his songs. And with no intention to tour, it wouldn't matter that much if Slash was gone. 

[colonizedmind]

35 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

I think we did that in the last 1000 page thread. This is just a deluxe reissue, with bonus frustration, bafflement and resignation. 

 

We are the ultimate double dip, triple dippers....

Fleecing ourselves of sanity 😸

Edited March 27 by colonizedmind

[allwaystired]

40 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Guns N' Roses survived Slash quitting in the 90s and would survive Slash leaving now, too. Any albums released would sell less, sure, and tours would be far less profitable, but it worked before and would work again. 

Is Slash likely to leave? Definitely not as long as they keep the succesful tours going. But if they stop touring and start fighting over new music, Slash would likely shift his attention away from GN'R and maybe altogether leave. A possible scenario could be Axl insisting on prioritizing working on and releasing more CD era music with Slash insisting on writing new songs. In such a situation, with the band being deadlocked, Axl might force Slash out to be able to keep releasing his songs. And with no intention to tour, it wouldn't matter that much if Slash was gone. 

There is zero chance GNR would survive were they to lose Slash now. 

I know you like to play the 'GNR Defence League Representative' character on here, but it's absolutely ludicrous to suggest what worked (and wasn't really working towards the end of Nu-GNR) pre 2016 would work now. 

Without Slash GNR would be finished. Unless they fancied touring tiny theatres to minimal interest. 

Edited March 27 by allwaystired

[Free Bird]

1 hour ago, allwaystired said:

In what way are people doing that on here? I'm confused. 

GNR is a business that has three partners, as documented. They're not equal partners. 

Isn't this what people are discussing or am I missing something here? 

We know they are three partners. Unlike you I don’t pretend to know the details. When reading your posts, I get the impression Duff and Slash are employees like Fortus, just better paid. I don’t believe that for a second.

[Blackstar]

I think that, in the improbable event that Slash left GN'R now or in the near future, it would be the end of GN'R at least in terms of touring. But, since they're all grown men now, the split most likely wouldn't be as ugly as in the mid-90s, so they would probably find a formula to regroup for occasional one-off shows (e.g. at a festival, if they were offered enough money) and, potentially, for vault releases.

So, in terms of releases, there would (potentially) be only archival releases. And that would be the only form the CD era material could be released (as an archival release and not as "new" music by an active band). Because, even in the very unlikely scenario of Axl continuing GN'R as a touring act with a new replacement guitar player for Slash, Axl would "need" to have that guitar player add to the material, and I don't think he would do that at this point.

Edited March 27 by Blackstar

[allwaystired]

10 minutes ago, Free Bird said:

We know they are three partners. Unlike you I don’t pretend to know the details. When reading your posts, I get the impression Duff and Slash are employees like Fortus, just better paid. I don’t believe that for a second.

Huh? I don't know any details. I just go on the things I read here, usually links that @Blackstar posts which have references.

It does feel like Slash and Duff are well paid employees, I agree with you. That's the impression that comes across- that it's very much Axl's band. 

I'm still not really sure about the 'knowing all the details' bit? None of us know much really - hence why we all come on here and speculate and share our viewpoints? 

 

[Blackstar]

3 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

Huh? I don't know any details. I just go on the things I read here, usually links that @Blackstar posts which have references.

It does feel like Slash and Duff are well paid employees, I agree with you. That's the impression that comes across- that it's very much Axl's band. 

I'm still not really sure about the 'knowing all the details' bit? None of us know much really - hence why we all come on here and speculate and share our viewpoints? 

 

There are legal documents affirming that they're partners. Also, for what it's worth (or not), Fernando has also referred to them as partners. So, what we know for certain, is that they're not employees ("well paid" or not), officially and legally.

The details we don't know are the terms and conditions of the current partnership, e.g. whether it's a continuation/amendment of the 1992 partnership or there are different stipulations regarding touring, merchandise, releases, etc.

[allwaystired]

Just now, Blackstar said:

There are legal documents affirming that they're partners. Also, for what it's worth (or not), Fernando has also referred to them as partners. So, what we know for certain, is that they're not employees ("well paid" or not), officially and legally.

The details we don't know are the terms and conditions of the current partnership, e.g. whether it's a continuation/amendment of the 1992 partnership or there are different stipulations regarding touring, merchandise, releases, etc.

I suppose my definition of an 'employee' is always someone who works for someone else.....so if they're not equal partners, they are employees really. That's the way I see it, in any business really. Probably not an accurate way of seeing it though, in the legal sense. 

I'd be amazed if it was a continuation of the 1992 agreement. Surely Slash/Duffs management could get them a better deal than that on their business negotiations? 

[Blackstar]

15 minutes ago, allwaystired said:

I suppose my definition of an 'employee' is always someone who works for someone else.....so if they're not equal partners, they are employees really. That's the way I see it, in any business really. Probably not an accurate way of seeing it though, in the legal sense. 

I'd be amazed if it was a continuation of the 1992 agreement. Surely Slash/Duffs management could get them a better deal than that on their business negotiations? 

Your opinion that they're "employees really" is only based on the fact that Slash and Duff can't force Axl to record and release new music, right?

Well, they couldn't do that under the terms of the 1992 partnership, either. (But I think such things are never a provision in partnership agreements anyway. They are a matter of how the dynamics between partners work in real life).

Edited March 27 by Blackstar

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, allwaystired said:

There is zero chance GNR would survive were they to lose Slash now. 

I know you like to play the 'GNR Defence League Representative' character on here, but it's absolutely ludicrous to suggest what worked (and wasn't really working towards the end of Nu-GNR) pre 2016 would work now. 

Without Slash GNR would be finished. Unless they fancied touring tiny theatres to minimal interest. 

It is hard to understand what you mean by "survive". If you mean "continue to tour with the same amount of people coming to the shows" then of course you are right, GN'R wouldn't be able to do that without Slash. But "survive" is much more broad than that, it simply means that the band doesn't cease to exist. In my opinion, and this is really elementary, GN'R could continue to exist but as a less popular band without Slash. Slash's absence wouldn't make it impossible for Axl to release music, nor for him to tour with much less people coming to the shows (if he still wanted to tour). So you are wrong.

And my perspective on this has of course nothing to do with defending anything but purely with logic and reason. You constantly trying to ridicule my opinions as if they are solely moved by me wanting to "defend" the band is incredibly immature and simplistic and only makes you appear like a simpleton who are not able to understand the finer points of arguments and perspectives.