Axl Rose Slams Irving Azoff In $5 Million Countersuit

[FunkyMonkey]

GUNS N' ROSES' Former Manager Responds To AXL ROSE's Legal Claim - Oct. 14, 2010

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Irving Azoff's Front Line Management, which once represented GUNS N' ROSES, has filed an official answer to a countersuit brought against the company by GN'R singer Axl Rose.

Rose was sued by Front Line Management in March for nearly $2 million dollars in unpaid commissions, according to the Associated Press. The company filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles, claiming that Rose owes the company $1.9 million, or 15 percent of the more than $12 million that Rose has earned from performances in Europe, Canada and South America, based on an oral agreement.

Rose responded by filing a countersuit that claimed Azoff tried to bully Rose into doing a reunion tour with the original GUNS lineup. According to The Pulse of Radio, Rose claimed in his suit that Azoff did everything he could to sabotage the current version of GUNS after Rose said no to the reunion idea last year, alleging that Azoff tried "devising and implementing a secret plan to set up Rose and the band for failure so that Rose would have no choice but to reunite with the original GUNS N' ROSES members."

Rose's suit added, "Upon realizing that he couldn't bully Rose and accomplish his scheme, Azoff resigned and abandoned GUNS N' ROSES on the eve of a major tour, filing suit for commissions he didn't earn and had no right to receive."

Earlier this month Azoff filed an official answer to Rose's charges by asserting 14 affirmative defenses to Rose's claims he breached fiduciary duty, committed constructive fraud and breached a contract. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Azoff states in his response that Rose claims "are barred by statute of limitations; there was a waiver; There was an accord and satisfaction; that Rose consented to Azoff's actions; that Rose failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate the damage; and that any harm that came to Rose was due to the singer's own negligence, fraud or misconduct."

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=147693

[Gracie2006]

My divorce lawyer must read this and get back to me.......  He says a whole lot of nothing to this response by Azoff

[chineseblues]

Any way we can see the actual papers Azoff filed?

[NaturalLight]

GUNS N' ROSES' Former Manager Responds To AXL ROSE's Legal Claim - Oct. 14, 2010

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Irving Azoff's Front Line Management, which once represented GUNS N' ROSES, has filed an official answer to a countersuit brought against the company by GN'R singer Axl Rose.

Rose was sued by Front Line Management in March for nearly $2 million dollars in unpaid commissions, according to the Associated Press. The company filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles, claiming that Rose owes the company $1.9 million, or 15 percent of the more than $12 million that Rose has earned from performances in Europe, Canada and South America, based on an oral agreement.

Rose responded by filing a countersuit that claimed Azoff tried to bully Rose into doing a reunion tour with the original GUNS lineup. According to The Pulse of Radio, Rose claimed in his suit that Azoff did everything he could to sabotage the current version of GUNS after Rose said no to the reunion idea last year, alleging that Azoff tried "devising and implementing a secret plan to set up Rose and the band for failure so that Rose would have no choice but to reunite with the original GUNS N' ROSES members."

Rose's suit added, "Upon realizing that he couldn't bully Rose and accomplish his scheme, Azoff resigned and abandoned GUNS N' ROSES on the eve of a major tour, filing suit for commissions he didn't earn and had no right to receive."

Earlier this month Azoff filed an official answer to Rose's charges by asserting 14 affirmative defenses to Rose's claims he breached fiduciary duty, committed constructive fraud and breached a contract. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Azoff states in his response that Rose claims "are barred by statute of limitations; there was a waiver; There was an accord and satisfaction; that Rose consented to Azoff's actions; that Rose failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate the damage; and that any harm that came to Rose was due to the singer's own negligence, fraud or misconduct."

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=147693

This is all standard and nothing new. No shit, he filed 14 affirmative defenses. If he didn't he'd fucking lose. It's a formality. Once Axl filed, Ass-off had (usually) 30 (sometimes more) days to respond. The same with the court dates mentioned on the prior page - it's all formality. Nothing of interest really happens in this stuff. In fact, motions and counter motions will probably be filed every other week. Give it a few months, maybe a year, before anything of substance happens.

[NaturalLight]

Any way we can see the actual papers Azoff filed?

If someone went to the court house where they were filed - they're public record.  Typically costs 25 cents a page to copy, or if you convince someone to fax them to you - which isn't likely because they're probably busy - then they're usually free.

[chineseblues]

Any way we can see the actual papers Azoff filed?

If someone went to the court house where they were filed - they're public record.  Typically costs 25 cents a page to copy, or if you convince someone to fax them to you - which isn't likely because they're probably busy - then they're usually free.

Usually they are posted online somewhere (I've read Axl's claim and Irvings initial claim someplace but I can't remember where right now).

[FunkyMonkey]

Usually they are posted online somewhere (I've read Axl's claim and Irvings initial claim someplace but I can't remember where right now).

Here's Axl's lawsuit -- and I saw Azoff's somewhere as well.  If I can find it again, I'll post it.

http://images.eonline.com/static/news/pdf/axlrose.pdf

[Layflats]

^^^ thanks for posting that, facinating.

[Fingers]

I was looking forward to the promotion of this record more than anything-magazine interviews, videos, whatever-I can't believe how the ball was dropped on this-great read, though, and the Van Halen tour would have been great-the record deserved more justice.

[Doofey]

It would be one thing if Chinese Democracy was the only album from one of Irv's clients that went unpromoted, but it's not.

Take a look at Christina Aguilera's recent massive flop, Bionic. No promotion whatsoever. If you follow Irv's twitter, you'll see him defending their handling of it right and left, but the whole thing was a waste. They claim she couldn't promote it because she was busy filming Burlesque? How does that even make sense? Why not wait and release it after your are done filming?

And then they basically abandoned it (her first album in 4 years) and canceled her tour due to poor ticket sales. Yet Irv goes on and on about how she will save them next year with her touring and we will soon see her all over because of Burlesque, which will most likely flop too.

Is this man serious? Or is he really trying to get her fired from her label so she will join his?

[D]

in Irv's defense, Albums are all about hit singles. If an album doesn't have a hit.. there really isn't much he can do. Christina had no hits from what i gather

Chinese Democracy was an old school album.. meaning u listen to each track but it really didn't have that lightning in a bottle smash radio friendly single that radio stations play today. *yes that is a good thing* but singles drive album sales these days.

[FunkyMonkey]

Usually they are posted online somewhere (I've read Axl's claim and Irvings initial claim someplace but I can't remember where right now).

Here's Axl's lawsuit -- and I saw Azoff's somewhere as well.  If I can find it again, I'll post it.

http://images.eonline.com/static/news/pdf/axlrose.pdf

I remembered where I saw Azoff's claim posted, here:

http://www.gunsnfnroses.com/index.php?/topic/51-azoffs-complaint/

[Doofey]

in Irv's defense, Albums are all about hit singles. If an album doesn't have a hit.. there really isn't much he can do. Christina had no hits from what i gather

Chinese Democracy was an old school album.. meaning u listen to each track but it really didn't have that lightning in a bottle smash radio friendly single that radio stations play today. *yes that is a good thing* but singles drive album sales these days.

The songs aren't terrible, but the album needed to be promoted. I only knew it came out from reading it about it on a Christina board. In pop, image marketing is key. Especially this day in age when people are all about the next fad.

[Voodoochild]

Of course the album had radio-friendly tracks. Better, SOD and This I Love would do just great as singles.

[Axlative]

in Irv's defense, Albums are all about hit singles. If an album doesn't have a hit.. there really isn't much he can do. Christina had no hits from what i gather

Chinese Democracy was an old school album.. meaning u listen to each track but it really didn't have that lightning in a bottle smash radio friendly single that radio stations play today. *yes that is a good thing* but singles drive album sales these days.

LOL

That's a bunch of bullshit. Do you even hear what is in heavy rotation on radio & MTV? It has very little to do with the music and a lot to do with how much money is poured into the media by the label. That is key promotion today. Not just billboards (the physical ones ) and in-store promotion. Not just artist visibility in media. They pay the radio station to play the track. The music part concerns only the label. If they believe in the music, they'll buy the top chart position. Then the tracks gain momentum and popularity and that is reflected on album & ticket sales and will stay up there on the charts on their own right. Or that (promotion) is what should happen. Obviously that is not always the case...

No single today will ever reach any significant charting without that direct-to-media "promotion", i.e. purchased airplay. Without it there will be no airplay and without airplay... well... we know how it goes. As long as assholes like Azoff are in control it's all fucked!

[Z?phyr]

Personally from a musical stand point there are several hit's on CD, unfortunately hits today become hits when record labels buy-in/buy-out radio stations to play a certain song 2 to 4 times an hour !
It has become a sad industry, sometimes an artist or band gets lucky when a radio dj picks up a song and play it a lot because he/she genuinely likes it...

[faldor]

in Irv's defense, Albums are all about hit singles. If an album doesn't have a hit.. there really isn't much he can do. Christina had no hits from what i gather

Chinese Democracy was an old school album.. meaning u listen to each track but it really didn't have that lightning in a bottle smash radio friendly single that radio stations play today. *yes that is a good thing* but singles drive album sales these days.

Agreed, but hit singles don't just magically appear.  You need some sort of backing from the label AND ideally the band itself.  The lead single was given the needed support from the label, but nothing was heard from the band.  Then "Better" dropped without any fanfare whatsoever.  I do think CD had many potential "hit" singles, but it was never going to happen with the way things were handled.  And again, I'm not blaming the record company alone.  The band's lack of involvement played a huge part as well. 

But try and name a hit single that came about without any promotion whatsoever.

[sworrm]

last kiss by pearl jam ha

[DeN]

the good part of this story is, if Azoff failed to break Guns N'Roses, nobody can.

[One.In.A.Million]

the good part of this story is, if Azoff failed to break Guns N'Roses, nobody can.

It's a shame what happened with Azoff and Gould, because everyone had such high hopes. When it was announced I remember reading the boards, and people were excited as hell, looking at wikepedia to see their management expertise.

I can't comment on Gould as he has just vanished from the situation. But Azoff was a total dissapointment, and a sneaky individual. We don't know what went on during those early days of his time with GN'R, but I only hope he had nothing to do with Robin leaving, who knows.

But as a manager I would say that Merck was much better, at least he booked shows and sorted things out the best he could. With Azoff he wanted paying for shows arranged by GN'R, when he had nothing to do with them. And the only reason why GN'R had to book shows in the first place. Was because he wanted to derail the current GN'R as much as he could in favour of his own agenda, and thus was lacking in his responsibilities.