My theory on why they may not announce a release date for CD

[the_estranged1]

As stupid as you all may think this sounds look at it like this. Let's say they do give us a release date, it'll be front page news everywhere but what happens if the album flops, Axl will be known the world over as the guy who took 13 yrs and $13+ million to deliver an album that sucks. But if they were not to announce a release date & as Merk said, "you may just walk into a store and find it" the backlash and media coverage on Axl will be no where near the amount if they were to announce a date. At this point its better to release an album quietly and have it flop then announce it to the world and have it bomb. If the album is as good as we all hope then once it gets released quietly and sales are good, the label can push some promotion into it to further the sales instead promoting a flop 1st & wasting anymore money on an album thats costs millions already. In short it makes sense to release quietly and see what happens and build from there, then announce it, make a promotional juggernaut & have it backfire on them. Keep in mind the people on these forums (i am 1 of them) are pretty much the only ones who believe it will be a huge monumental album, but to the average music consumer, its just another band

Edited November 3, 2006 by the_estranged1

[Dave10]

I agree that what you said could work.

And to the average music consumer they aren't just another band for one reason: they have the name Guns N' Roses. This is why I believe Axl kept the name because albums would sell a lot more with the name. Even if somebody isn't a big GN'R fan, they will want to check them out because Axl used to be so good and they would want to see what it's about.

[tampopoarcade]

As stupid as you all may think this sounds look at it like this. Let's say they do give us a release date, it'll be front page news everywhere but what happens if the album flops, Axl will be known the world over as the guy who took 13 yrs and $13+ million to deliver an album that sucks. But if they were not to announce a release date & as Merk said, "you may just walk into a store and find it" the backlash and media coverage on Axl will be no where near the amount if they were to announce a date. At this point its better to release an album quietly and have it flop then announce it to the world and have it bomb. If the album is as good as we all hope then once it gets released quietly and sales are good, the label can push some promotion into it to further the sales instead promoting a flop 1st & wasting anymore money on an album thats costs millions already. In short it makes sense to release quietly and see what happens and build from there, then announce it, make a promotional juggernaut & have it backfire on them. Keep in mind the people on these forums (i am 1 of them) are pretty much the only ones who believe it will be a huge monumental album, but to the average music consumer, its just another band

It's better to not announce a release date. It makes long lost fans of GNR research more about them, and keeps constant interest not knowing when it will appear in stores. This also might swing interest away from current pop music and hip hop. The +13 year CD is long overdue, but waiting for an announced release date is irrelevant because hardcore GNR fans are going to buy the album even if it's released a year from now. GNR needs more promotion after the album is released to keep the media talking about them.

[welcometothespunkle]

As stupid as you all may think this sounds look at it like this. Let's say they do give us a release date, it'll be front page news everywhere but what happens if the album flops, Axl will be known the world over as the guy who took 13 yrs and $13+ million to deliver an album that sucks. But if they were not to announce a release date & as Merk said, "you may just walk into a store and find it" the backlash and media coverage on Axl will be no where near the amount if they were to announce a date. At this point its better to release an album quietly and have it flop then announce it to the world and have it bomb. If the album is as good as we all hope then once it gets released quietly and sales are good, the label can push some promotion into it to further the sales instead promoting a flop 1st & wasting anymore money on an album thats costs millions already. In short it makes sense to release quietly and see what happens and build from there, then announce it, make a promotional juggernaut & have it backfire on them. Keep in mind the people on these forums (i am 1 of them) are pretty much the only ones who believe it will be a huge monumental album, but to the average music consumer, its just another band

Good logic. Quite probable. Test the waters without a splash and tread heavily with promotion if the buzz is positive.........i like it indeed. But as I've always stated this concert tour IS promotion in and of itself and when MSG happens that will be global. The NYtimes is international. The concert review would be read in Iraq!! Now that's promotion!! Also a good review in Rolling Stone and perhaps a closely coincided interview with "The New Band" titled "Ladies and Gentlemen Guns n' Roses...REBORN!!" on the cover with a picture of the new band!! Now that's promotion baby!!!

[KyleMac]

I don't have a problem with a quiet release whatsoever, as long as there is "in-store" promotion. Such as having CD on the front rack at best buy.

Furthermore, i think the leaks were also planned. Maybe Axl didnt do it himself, but i think they allowed the leaks to get out or we would have more of them. They wanted to judge the public's reaction to the leaks and which one they should use as a single and if those songs should appear on the first album. Better has receieved better reviews than the original single (so it was thought) IRS, and now we have Better as the most likely single. I think it has all been planned. Axl is not a stupid man. He is very much about image and wouldnt put out something that the general public thought was a piece of crap. Its all about testing the waters.

Edited November 3, 2006 by KyleMac

[da_pope]

Front Page... BAHAHAHAHAHA

Lucky to get a mention in a music news program. (ala, MTV news)

Also, wold you rather Axl be remebered as the idiot who took 13 years to make a shitty album or the idiot who let the most expensive album of all-tme be released without any promotion?

Edited November 3, 2006 by da_pope

[the_estranged1]

Front Page... BAHAHAHAHAHA

Lucky to get a mention in a music news program. (ala, MTV news)

Also, wold you rather Axl be remebered as the idiot who took 13 years to make a shitty album or the idiot who let the most expensive album of all-tme be released without any promotion?

But what you don't understand is promotion costs alot of money & they're already in 13 mil. Thats why I'm saying test the waters first. And by front page news I meant in music industry publications

[KBear]

I agree - I think this is how it will happen. How else to explain a 2006 release but no promotion yet and we are already into November? Unless of course they don't release it in 2006, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on that one.

Financially it makes a lot of sense. Why waste promotion dollars up front when you know the album is going to get plenty of free attention in the first couple of weeks? I've actually made this point before. Not only that, but promoting something that isn't even available yet for people to buy seems a little counter-intuitive. Making them wait several weeks before it's on store shelves could lead to fading interest.

Then again, it's hard to see them actually doing this because it's not the typical way to promote an album and you just know they desperately want Chi Dem to be a success. So I'm not holding my breath. But combine the uber secrecy lately with the fact that it's already November, and yeah, it's getting to the point where they only way this album hits the streets in 2006 is if it comes outta nowhere.

Edited November 3, 2006 by KBear

[Takeshi]

Kevin federline is getting a lot of free media attention. Let's see how well it works.

[Lukinx]

This makes NO SENSE. Even if they´d release it quietly (which I don´t think will happen) the media would find out the same day (or before) anyway and the coverage would be the same just a little later.

[the_estranged1]

Kevin federline is getting a lot of free media attention. Let's see how well it works.

Yeah not to mention Vince McMahon is helpin him out by letting him appear on Monday night Raw

[Jar_Mo_Ron]

Don't worry about it, the right amount of promotion will be in given.

[wasted]

Merck has hinted at no release date. It's more likely than some lame press release coming out. hi, guys, the album wil be out on Nov such and such, start cuing now. Although it might cause riots at record shops if they run out. Ha. that would be great. HMV ripped to pieces.

[smith13]

it will not flop

[Moop]

Sure, I guess your theory could work somewhat. But the chance that they'd actually do that? About one in a million. Besides, a few pizza-faced employees at the local HMV is all you need for the world to know that CD has arrived in no more than a day.

No offense people, but now you're just making up excuses for the band and them not giving out any release info on the CD. Lets face it, every day that goes by is one less chance that it will be released this year. Just because Axl says it will be released this year doesn't mean that date is set in stone.

Edited November 3, 2006 by Moop

[Ions]

As stupid as you all may think this sounds look at it like this. Let's say they do give us a release date, it'll be front page news everywhere but what happens if the album flops, Axl will be known the world over as the guy who took 13 yrs and $13+ million to deliver an album that sucks. But if they were not to announce a release date & as Merk said, "you may just walk into a store and find it" the backlash and media coverage on Axl will be no where near the amount if they were to announce a date. At this point its better to release an album quietly and have it flop then announce it to the world and have it bomb. If the album is as good as we all hope then once it gets released quietly and sales are good, the label can push some promotion into it to further the sales instead promoting a flop 1st & wasting anymore money on an album thats costs millions already. In short it makes sense to release quietly and see what happens and build from there, then announce it, make a promotional juggernaut & have it backfire on them. Keep in mind the people on these forums (i am 1 of them) are pretty much the only ones who believe it will be a huge monumental album, but to the average music consumer, its just another band

I completely agree. I believe that's definitely part of the reason for the discretion.

Edited November 3, 2006 by Ions

[PS_PoWeR]

Some people are still stuck in a 1992 time warp.

GNR aren't that big anymore.

CD NEEDS promotion. Period.

You don't just release a $13 million album (the most expensive ever) quietly without a peep. That simply does not happen. Forget your 2006 dreams, and start some November 2007 release date rumors.

Edited November 3, 2006 by PS_PoWeR

[coma66]

You could be right, I don't remember a lot of promotion for Lies. I think also that UYI release date wasn't announced too long before the album came out. Not to be a neg ninnie but back in 2002 it was going to be released before the end of the year then it was going to be before summer of 2003 and it never happened and this may very well be another one where it'll never happen. Hope that's not the case here but looking at the past it may very well be- I would like very much to be proven wrong.

[Roy79]

Very good point!!!

[Vogstar90_G'N'R]

nice post man, totally agree with you, but i was thinking that this tour that they were doing is actually the actual advertisment for CD.

[6lake sa66ath]

A lot of people have been saying that the same sort of comments about a relase of CD have been made in years past, right back to 2002.

My question is, has their ever been more evidence before this year, that the album is definetly coming out?

Axl's appearance on the MTV awards, the Rolling Stone article etc.

All signs point to this definetly being the year.

[stiffupperlip27]

guns are no way near as big as the 90's but they still have a lot of pulling power, geez they still make newspapers in australia which is a fair feat in itself. democracy could be announced for tuesday and it would still sell hugely. the album will sell itself purely on the fact that it has been 13 years in the waiting.

i have played better to a few of my mates that hate guns and they even admitted it was pretty good. don't worry lads, democracy will rule its roost rock2

[Voxy]

I absolutely agree!

The way they are going about promoting the band is very cautious. The leaks, doing Europe tour first - building up the bands confidence and hype for the fans. Then onto US where the fan base is a bit harder to reach. The way in which this has been done is very timid like. After 2002 seems like Axl had lost confidence in the way US fans might receive him. Maybe?

[shootingstar]

Sure, I guess your theory could work somewhat. But the chance that they'd actually do that? About one in a million. Besides, a few pizza-faced employees at the local HMV is all you need for the world to know that CD has arrived in no more than a day.

No offense people, but now you're just making up excuses for the band and them not giving out any release info on the CD. Lets face it, every day that goes by is one less chance that it will be released this year. Just because Axl says it will be released this year doesn't mean that date is set in stone.

I don´t see the excuses? This is about their business strategy. And excuses for what? That we all are worried that the lack of promotion indicate that the album won´t be out? Of course we all (most of us) are.

But we sometimes need to separate our frustration and let common sense rule this board. It´s hard, I know.

I can see clearly that members here are a bit (very) pissed and frustrated, including me. But everytime someone on this board give us a theory and a proper EXPLANATION up, they "make excuses" and lick Axs ass etc. In that cind of atmosphere there´s no room for opend minds and makes it harder to look clearer on things. Can´t we just be expectant and attentive instaed of frustrated? But it seems like some want to be pissed. "We´ve been waiting for this album 13 years, so of course were frustrated!" If people have waited 13 years for CD I don´t think it´s on GnR´s responebility. Still people choose to use those "13 years" to put in relevance how pissed they are. I have waiting like 5 years on this album and that´s long. But it´s a hell of an different then 13 years. Point is that we all make excuses. Those 13 years is an excuse to be pissed. Why, I don´t know. Why make up reasons to be pissed more then u need to...?? I´m not talking about u now, but thats why people called "axl haters" when it´s clear that they search and make up reasons to hate him that doesn´t exist.

[bax]

You definitely make some valid points, but I still highly doubt we'll see CD this year. It may be true that the label doesn't want to spend millions promoting a flop, but they do have a tremendous investment to recover.

Think of it like a major movie release. It has become common practice for studios to hold movies back from critics when they think the films will get poor reviews, but they still advertise the movies because there are huge amounts of money to recover. I don't think that the average consumer really pays much attention to what critics say anyway. Check out the top selling albums and see just how many have positive reviews-not many.

Obviously, there will be a certain amount of free promotion. MTV will most certainly make a huge deal over the first video and there will most likely be major articles in magazines-I don't think the cover of Rolling Stone is that far-fetched. The GN'R name alone will sell quite a few albums, but I seriously doubt that it will sell enough for the album to break even. The bottom line is that like any other major release, CD must have a single that gets major airplay or it will not sell to anyone outside of the hardcore fans.

We're down to the last 2 months of 2006 and the album has been promised to us since January. Rolling Stone has published several articles on GN'R this year-probably more than in the last 10 years combined. The timing is ideal for the release of a video and single if they want to take advantage of the free promotion from the press. Let's say there is a major article in Rolling Stone-it would have to be written and ready to publish within weeks to be out by the end of the year. If CD is to drop before the end of the year it would have to be manufactured very soon and there is no sign of that. Quite to the contrary-tour dates have been rescheduled because Axl had to put the "finishing touches" on the album. Ron and Frank have been called into the studio to record. The clock is ticking and there seems to be little hope for this year.