Merck writes a letter to the NY Times

[jarmo]

I'm not saying Axl should promise anything. I'm saying that Axl could have improved his image by telling his side of the story and showing he has nothing to hide by answering questions. Axl and Merck shouldn't be complaining when they refused to participate.

But does it make sense for him to talk about an album that, right now, doesn't have a release date?

He's done it in the past and some people have always gotten pissed off at him for getting the hopes up.

He'll probably talk about the album once it's ready for release and then get called a liar.




/jarmo

[yagami1gnr]

Naupis and Booker, why dont' you just say "If you want to hear real RnR listen VR."

 

Because I dont assume everybody is as simple you appear to be, if thats how youve interpreted my posts (and I dont think it is; youre just once again trying to be clever - and missing the mark).

If by simple you mean somebody that hasn't has grudges to a guy that owe you something or in your opinion destroy Our favorite band or live on the past; Yes, I'm simple. Since Mr. Mercuriadis is trying to save Axl's face in your opinion, well what can I say. Did you finish to read the rest of my post. Well, I don't think so. You see in this forum I had found some interesting people like Davegnrfk("Axl is God") and You("If you believe Axl, you are stupid, besides you got no points whatsoever.") Since many people post their opinion, and they don't match yours; you can't come here and say "you don't have a point" or "your post just come from your silly imagination" or "you're trying to be clever and missing the mark." What mark?
Sorry, but as you know Mr. Mercuriadis knows of what is going on with the album, and the two engineers, etc.;not me not you.
The reporter must have some points of the past; but not of CD.
And like I say last time Mr. Mercuriadis has said year 2005; so if GNR doesn't deliver  not only GNR is going to lose credibility but also Mr. Mercuriadis, and I bet he doesn't want to lose that. Am I missing the mark? Do I have no points whatsoever? Is my silly imagination making write this? Am I wrong? Should I call you Mr. Right?
Peace out.   

[Ali]

If you really want to call Leeds' article a story on the making of the album, it is a fundamentally flawed and incomplete one at that.  None of the people he quoted have been involved since 2001 in the making of the album, as Merck pointed out.  Therefore, those people, like Tom Zutuat, have no idea how much the album has changed since the time that they were around the GN'R camp.

Ali

]

How is it flawed? Leeds was upront that these people had worked on the album in the past. He never claimed that this stuff is currently going on. Sure, it would have been nice if he had information as to what is going on today, but he couldn't do that without Axl and Merck's permission to speak to people under contract. They weren't going to give that permission unless this story painted the picture that they wanted everyone to see. Why should he cave into their demands? That is not what journalism is about.

I think it's flawed because he had absolutely no contact with anyone directly involved in the making of the album.  No one from the band, no producer and no engineer.  It's incomplete, because the people he quoted ceased to be involved as of 2001.  The album may have changed dramatically since then.

As far as getting Axl and Merck's permission to talk to people under contract, that was never going to happen or else there would have been no point in having the confidentiality agreements in the first place.  Second, he did talk to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they had signed confidentiality agreements.  They broke those agreements by talking to Leeds.

I guess we have different interpretations of Merck's motives for asking who Leeds had been talking to.  Some people might see it as Merck's way of trying to get editorial control over the content of the article.  I see it as Merck protecting Axl's interests by trying to gauge whether or not the article was going to be another piece where people were taking pot-shots at Axl.  If it was another of those type of articles, I think Merck's refusal to comment was out of a desire to not lend credibility to an article that was slamming his client.

I didn't say that Leeds should have caved into their demands.  I merely said that he passed up an opportunity to have an exclusive preview of the album to run his story instead.  He made a choice, and one of the consequences of that choice is that he came away with an incomplete and flawed article on the "process" of making the album that Chinese Democracy is today.

Ali

[RICHEY]

Axl was not going to be a part of this article because the truth paints him as a Syd Barrett like lunatic.What was he going to say that the writer wasn't? "I'am still working on the record" said a perplexed Rose when I spoke to him last week.Axl should have dropped the bomb on this guy, giving him the release date and some crazy ass quote to go along with it.

[nesquick]

Axl should have dropped the bomb on this guy, giving him the release date and some crazy ass quote to go along with it.

Axl can't give a release-date to anyone right now because the record isn't totally finished yet. I think he will when it's done.

[ppbebe]

No one nose about the rest of the story. We'll see soon.

i'm on your side ppbebe. I want this project to succeed.
Anyway, i'm very happy with Merck's response provided his 2005 resolution is accurate and honored.

Hehe, I know. And I know you and Saul are bosom buddies, yes?  We, all the virus-frees want to back the band. I prefer band acts than solo. That wasn't mean to be an attack. I like constructive discussion. Brainstorming deepens our thoughts. 

Anyway, I don't figure Axl as a dictator Kim Jon Ill (Sp?) but a struggling idealist. It may also be the impression people get from the article combined with Merck's comment. I hope each reader of NY times reads them this way and looks forward to hearing the continuation of this story.

[Saul]

Hehe, I know. And I know you and Saul are bosom buddies, yes? 

Any opinions me and KV share or disagree about really has no relevance on this thread whatsoever. Like many people here I fully support axl and the new band 110% and awaken every day in hope of concrete news concerning the album and a release date. I've waited for a new GNR disc since TSI? came out. I've followed GNR online since the day I myself got online. So please , dont miscontrue some of my statements as "hating" gnr/axl ....  Theres tons of things concerning this new band  I just dont agree with , maybe even dont like but thats not to say I'm not still in their corner and wanting them to succeed.

[Eva GnRAxlRosette]

"Mr. Rose is reportedly working on the album even now in a San Fernando Valley studio. "The 'Chinese Democracy' album is very close to being completed," Merck Mercuriadis, the chief executive officer of Sanctuary Group, which manages Mr. Rose, wrote in a recent statement."

That about covers the recent activity. ?The author sums it up there, and doesnt pretend to know much more. ?

But in the beginning he says..
It's a story that applies to the creation of almost every major album. But in the case of "Chinese Democracy," it has a stark ending:

It is no coincidence that many of our own board members came away from this article with grim feelings.

The writer's conclusion is stated in the beginning when he uses the words "it has a stark ending"
In mentioning that fans still wait he says nothing to indicate that they have reason to.
His mentioning that Axl is reportedly working on the album even now and citing a recent statement from Merck that the album is very close to being completed does not negate his overall theme/angle that all his 'sources' support -  thst it was/has been a disasterous unproductive 'process'.... leading to his intially stated conclusion of a 'stark ending'.

"Stark ending" as in blunt, harsh, and - grim absolute ending.   (yes, I love dictionary.com  )

The article does not include any statements that have been made from people that freely gave their name when praising what they have personally heard of the album nor of any positive accounts of those who have expressed admiration or any respect for any of the 'process'.

why has he not included any of the statements freely made by the likes of Tommy Stinson on numerous occasions to the press regarding his experience and feelings about working with Axl and the other band members on the album?  And if he went back as far as 6 or 9 years with some of these sources, why not include the praise that Brian May gave to what he had heard.  Why not include about Marco Beltrami's or Paul Buckmasters involvement?  Why not include (as yg pointed out) that Axl has taken over as producer? 

my belief is that these would not have 'fit' in with his angle.  His 'take' on the process and status of CD is not positive.
The mention of Axl's ambition to do a trilogy is at best scoffed at in the context of the disasterous process outlined.

Just as he only obligatorily threw in 'mangement said (Axl) couldn't be reached for comment'  - which was a lie, anyway....
He also only obligatorily included  'axl is reportedly still working on the album' ... his management said its very close to completion.
THERE IS NOTHING in his article to give the reader any reason to believe it to be true... though there IS much to support his initially stated CONCLUSION - that the story has a 'stark ending'.

As Merck stated - the writer had his own agenda.  they ALREADY had this story PLANNED just the way it went to press.

His contacting Merck was just so he could include the line "axl could not be reached for comment"
When Merck presented an offer and terms to actually be involved in the piece - I believe it was not something they expected or considered.  In any event IT WAS IGNORED...  The writer should have just said right there and then during the Thursday phonecall that there was no way no how he would consider it.   Yet he jerked Merck around saying he would consider it and call back to discuss it... and made no mention of his impending deadline.  I think he was only biding time to get as close as he could to his deadline without Axl's involvement or being advised.   His calling back after business hours leaving a message that 'its going to press tomorrow at noon was an empty gesture.  Even then, in an effort to best represent and serve his client's interest, Merck subjected himself to further interaction with Leed's... and his editor.  At that point it seems they let on that they had no intention of naming thier sources.  Even then Merck, after fianlly having got the answer to his question/offer posed days earlier, still made them an offer that he would consult with Axl on the situaiton.  Even at this point when he was advised they weren't divulging their sources - Why would he have asked them this? and why did they refuse?

I'll offer what I believe explains this, but as my post is quite lengthy at this time - I'll allow some others to offer their opinions on what I have posted thus far - including the question I just raised.

 

[dolphin]

If you feel strongly that the NY Times have treated the Guns n'roses camp badly in the writing of this article, please feel free to express yourself to the NY Times

This is my suggestion, not Mercks

Does anyone have the address (letter to the editor) or email of whom we should express our opinions of this article to if we care to write to the NY times?

[ppbebe]

Hehe, I know. And I know you and Saul are bosom buddies, yes? 

Any opinions me and KV share or disagree about really has no relevance on this thread whatsoever. Like many people here I fully support axl and the new band 110% and awaken every day in hope of concrete news concerning the album and a release date. I've waited for a new GNR disc since TSI? came out. I've followed GNR online since the day I myself got online. So please , dont miscontrue some of my statements as "hating" gnr/axl ....  Theres tons of things concerning this new band  I just dont agree with , maybe even dont like but thats not to say I'm not still in their corner and wanting them to succeed.

Sorry?     no relevance on this thread but I don't think I've ever misconstrued your or KV's words as "hating" gnr/axl. I think you misconstrued my post. I really thought you 2 were friends. And I meant,  like KV's friend(you)did,  I just wanted to tell him my opinion.

On topic,

I'm saying that Axl could have improved his image by telling his side of the story and showing he has nothing to hide by answering questions. Axl and Merck shouldn't be complaining when they refused to participate.

Not trying to get in on the heat of this debate, I add a couple of casual ideas off the top of my head.

maybe it wasn't necessary and maybe Axl isn't really complaining?
When CD comes out, the continuation of this story will be told from the band's point of view, hopefully on a quality paper again. the flaws in the prologue will be corrected. Publish and be damned?
Merck stated it's this year. It's promoted on the NY Times. it's nevertheless a good news.

Besides, The article shows just Interscopes view.  it's only natural that Sanctuary complains.
Companies have important matters such as the reputation, credit, shares, shareholders and so on.

[Mysteron]

A small update

The New York Times did respond to Merck. They have asked him to shorten his response to 300 words or less. 

[Jim Bob]

He first went after Finck when Sorum was in the band so that would be somewhere in '96-97, right? 
At that time (and for the most part it remains true today), Robin hadn't/hasn't had much creative input on anything to speak of so it's hard to explain his involvement based on friendship or potential at that point in time. 

I see Finck as much more obvious "reach out" than Navarro.

To think that Finck is not heavily involved with Axl and this whole process is just not accurate. Finck himself ha shad arguments with Axl on material and direction of the material. Finck has left the band and come back. So obiviously there is something there between them. And being that he is one of the lead guitar players Im sure he will have a lot of creative input. Just becuase we havnt heard a peep from him doesnt mean he just sits there and isnt a force. Of course it remains true till this day because we havnt hear the album yet. You can say the same for all the members including Axl on that.

Ill take Tommys word when he says all the members have had their fair share of creative input.

You can think Finck is a reach out all you want but you drop his name on the street and no1 would have a clue. Hes not a superstar in any genre. Axl sees whatver potential in him and has developed a solid friendship with him. Its pretty obivious.

Finck may not be a household name and may not be the most well known guitarist out there.  but I've seen him myself and I can tell you he simply hasn't been given the opportunity to shine yet, you'll see

He is every bit as capable as $lash, plays with every bit as much emotion, the big difference is his style is much more modern and more versitle 

Axl Rose would not work with anything but the best of the best in the business.   Finck gets shit on all the time by $lash cocksucking fanboys for the mere reason that he replaced $lash.  Watch the Boston-3cam DVD, watch MSG DVD, watch Columbus.. Robin Finck is no fucking joke

[Saul]

Sorry?     no relevance on this thread but I don't think I've ever misconstrued your or KV's words as "hating" gnr/axl. I think you misconstrued my post. I really thought you 2 were friends. And I meant,  like KV's friend(you)did,  I just wanted to tell him my opinion.

No problem. I think I just misread what you wrote or whatever. No harm done.

p.s. , I dont think I have bosums ... yet. 

[Mysteron]

Sorry?? ?? no relevance on this thread but I don't think I've ever misconstrued your or KV's words as "hating" gnr/axl. I think you misconstrued my post. I really thought you 2 were friends. And I meant,? like KV's friend(you)did,? I just wanted to tell him my opinion.

No problem. I think I just misread what you wrote or whatever. No harm done.

p.s. , I dont think I have bosums ... yet.?

The 'yet' aspect is worrying 

[Buddha_Master]

Dudes dudes...chill. The album will be out soon.

I am sure Axl is already well on his way to laying down some vocals on at least the third track by now. Then, there is just the final mix and the mastering. So, we will have it in no time.

[Saul]

Sorry?     no relevance on this thread but I don't think I've ever misconstrued your or KV's words as "hating" gnr/axl. I think you misconstrued my post. I really thought you 2 were friends. And I meant,  like KV's friend(you)did,  I just wanted to tell him my opinion.

No problem. I think I just misread what you wrote or whatever. No harm done.

p.s. , I dont think I have bosums ... yet. 

The 'yet' aspect is worrying 

Raising money for the surgery is hard work man.     

I also heard a new rumor today , maybe you could confirm or deny this Mysteron ... I've heard from various sources that Axl handed over Democracy during the middle of febuary to the label and the label rejected it. they sent it back to axl with a note saying "needs more cowbell"

any truth to this?

 

[Mysteron]

Sorry?? ?? no relevance on this thread but I don't think I've ever misconstrued your or KV's words as "hating" gnr/axl. I think you misconstrued my post. I really thought you 2 were friends. And I meant,? like KV's friend(you)did,? I just wanted to tell him my opinion.

No problem. I think I just misread what you wrote or whatever. No harm done.

p.s. , I dont think I have bosums ... yet.?

The 'yet' aspect is worrying?

Raising money for the surgery is hard work man.? ? ?

I also heard a new rumor today , maybe you could confirm or deny this Mysteron ... I've heard from various sources that Axl handed over Democracy during the middle of febuary to the label and the label rejected it. they sent it back to axl with a note saying "needs more cowbell"

any truth to this?

 

I don't know for sure 

But if CD is gonna sell more than 10 Mill copies., it's gonna need some cowbell on it

[Bad_Apple]

hey, just a Q:
I got my mom to buy the NY Times (sunday edition...and man it cost $10!  I'm from Canada!) but I would like to know somethin since I haven't seen it yet (I live away from home)....

-how many pgs is this article? 
-is Merck's letter published in the NY times as well (if so and u have it, and don't want it--send it to me ...or any other gnr-related articles---will compensate  )

thanks so much...and my 2 cents on this whole thing:
Its great gnr publicity, and it just goes to show that they sorta still matter to the GENERAL public (like I mean, NY times is huge).

[nesquick]

what is a "cowbell"?

[Saul]

Sorry?     no relevance on this thread but I don't think I've ever misconstrued your or KV's words as "hating" gnr/axl. I think you misconstrued my post. I really thought you 2 were friends. And I meant,  like KV's friend(you)did,  I just wanted to tell him my opinion.

No problem. I think I just misread what you wrote or whatever. No harm done.

p.s. , I dont think I have bosums ... yet. 

The 'yet' aspect is worrying 

Raising money for the surgery is hard work man.     

I also heard a new rumor today , maybe you could confirm or deny this Mysteron ... I've heard from various sources that Axl handed over Democracy during the middle of febuary to the label and the label rejected it. they sent it back to axl with a note saying "needs more cowbell"

any truth to this?

 

I don't know for sure 

But if CD is gonna sell more than 10 Mill copies., it's gonna need some cowbell on it

roflmao! No matter how much cowbell you put on there it wont be enough. An artist can equate every 10 seconds of cowbell = 10 thousand copies sold. 

Nesquick : are you being sarcastic about not knowing what a cowbell is? If you are serious you really need to point your browser to http://www.morecowbell.net/