"Next Album" rumor / speculation thread *UPDATE AUG 22/2023*

[TheBaconman]

But if they only see money and it is already done, wouldn't that mean they would want to make some cash by releasing it as opposed to give it away for free with the next album (reconsidering my stance, I do admit that it may be a risk putting money into producing special packaging and all that)? I don't understand the possible contention with the label aspect, could you go into that some?

You still have to pay to press it, ship it, promote it.  Those are costs they have to put out on spec, in the hopes a profit is turned.

A standalone remix album is no sure thing. 

Are we really talking about pressing and shipping costs?    What is this amount?  I would say that its so low of a cost, that if they couldn't recoup it, it would be a easy write off for the label.

[TheBaconman]

Regardless I think we will all agree on these points that were made

We would all listen too and most would buy a remix album

Most of the people that bought CD would buy a remix album

The USA is sure lacking in support for GNR and its sad

[D-GenerationX]

Are you actually trying to blame Axl for the lack of success in the usa now?  Who is in there own vacuum now.   This band should of been the usa version of the rolling stones ( a band with multiple band member changes), but yet the "needy" American culture has pasted on them

Do I blame him?  In a way.  

I'd probably phrase it that he never gave this new venture anything close to the best chance at success.  It was going to take a pretty hefty amount of heavy lifting, and he didn't answer that bell.

The original band was the only one that had a shot of being "the next Rolling Stones".  But they broke up.  Hey, shit happens.

But if you are going to try and relaunch the brand, but with a handful of guys that people couldn't pick out of a line-up?  You are going to have to put in some time selling that.  Hey, here is my new band.  This is what they've done.  I'm really excited about it.  You guys should check it out.  

Did any of that happen?  Not really.

And this board, and a few other GNR boards like it, are the only places on the globe where a new line-up somehow doesn't matter.  I know all the talking points about how its still GNR because it says so on the ticket.  I know the bit about how the line-up has changed over the years.  And who can forget "Axl's vision."

Super.  Those arguments play one place and one place only : here.  Out in the real world, a nameless and faceless line-up is a problem.  And maybe people might have gotten onboard if you gave them a reason to.

But Axl never did.

[D-GenerationX]

Regardless I think we will all agree on these points that were made

We would all listen too and most would buy a remix album

Most of the people that bought CD would buy a remix album

The USA is sure lacking in support for GNR and its sad

Yes to the first, iffy on the second, and as for the third : you reap what you sow.  This is what Axl has sewn.

I'd be a bit more receptive to blaming an unwilling public if Axl put it all on his sleeve, busted his ass to sell this new operation as a viable venture, and people didn't give it a chance.

But he didn't.  You have to make people want to be interested. 

The old band sells on its own.  This one needed some help.  They didn't get it.

[ice cream sand pig]

^^ By out in the real world, do you mean on other GNR forums? I think in the real world (non hardcore fan GNR world) if I were to tell someone that I felt this band really is GNR because it still has Axl's vision behind it and that said vision is to me the most important aspect of GNR, I don't think I'd be getting laughed out of the room or anything. You make it sound like Axl didn't try at all but I think he tried where it counted most: the music. I don't know how hard he tried to put out a great record, but for me he more than achieved that and so however hard he tried, it was enough.

[TheBaconman]

Are you actually trying to blame Axl for the lack of success in the usa now?  Who is in there own vacuum now.   This band should of been the usa version of the rolling stones ( a band with multiple band member changes), but yet the "needy" American culture has pasted on them

Do I blame him?  In a way.  

I'd probably phrase it that he never gave this new venture anything close to the best chance at success.  It was going to take a pretty hefty amount of heavy lifting, and he didn't answer that bell.

The original band was the only one that had a shot of being "the next Rolling Stones".  But they broke up.  Hey, shit happens.

But if you are going to try and relaunch the brand, but with a handful of guys that people couldn't pick out of a line-up?  You are going to have to put in some time selling that.  Hey, here is my new band.  This is what they've done.  I'm really excited about it.  You guys should check it out.  

Did any of that happen?  Not really.

And this board, and a few other GNR boards like it, are the only places on the globe where a new line-up somehow doesn't matter.  I know all the talking points about how its still GNR because it says so on the ticket.  I know the bit about how the line-up has changed over the years.  And who can forget "Axl's vision."

Super.  Those arguments play one place and one place only : here.  Out in the real world, a nameless and faceless line-up is a problem.  And maybe people might have gotten onboard if you gave them a reason to.

But Axl never did.

I disagree   I think Axl and the name Guns N Roses should of been enough for the American fans to attach themselves too.   But typical America, they always want something else, instead of what is right in front of them..

We will hate Axl, because Slash looked cool and isn't in the band anymore...   Pretty much sums it up

Even better, we will hate Axl while we listen to Creed....  America..   I am sure if the support for Axl and the band was better, when he first introduced us to the new band, we would be listening to CD version 3 by now.   Thanks..

[TheBaconman]

Regardless I think we will all agree on these points that were made

We would all listen too and most would buy a remix album

Most of the people that bought CD would buy a remix album

The USA is sure lacking in support for GNR and its sad

Yes to the first, iffy on the second, and as for the third : you reap what you sow.  This is what Axl has sewn.

I'd be a bit more receptive to blaming an unwilling public if Axl put it all on his sleeve, busted his ass to sell this new operation as a viable venture, and people didn't give it a chance.

But he didn't.  You have to make people want to be interested. 

The old band sells on its own.  This one needed some help.  They didn't get it.

It needed help from these supposed fans.....    I agree

[D-GenerationX]

Are we really talking about pressing and shipping costs?    What is this amount?

Beats me.  I was just responding to redneckrudy who asked what costs would be involved.  Those would be the costs.

  I would say that its so low of a cost, that if they couldn't recoup it, it would be a easy write off for the label.

Too good an opening not to use this :

Jerry, its a write off for them!

Do you even know what a write off is?

No.  But they do.  And they are the ones...writing it off.

As for your claim, so you are an expert on the music business now?  They should all listen to you?  What label have you ever run?

(I'm obviously only kidding.  Those answers are horseshit)

[D-GenerationX]

It needed help from these supposed fans.....    I agree

Ugh, don't go down the "supposed fans" route.

[ice cream sand pig]

^^ That is an interesting outlook for a change! Here DX thought Axl wasn't trying hard enough when actually it was we Americans that threw a wrench into the scheme.

[TheBaconman]

Are we really talking about pressing and shipping costs?    What is this amount?

Beats me.  I was just responding to redneckrudy who asked what costs would be involved.  Those would be the costs.

  I would say that its so low of a cost, that if they couldn't recoup it, it would be a easy write off for the label.

Too good an opening not to use this :

Jerry, its a write off for them!

Do you even know what a write off is?

No.  But they do.  And they are the ones...writing it off.

As for your claim, so you are an expert on the music business now?  They should all listen to you?  What label have you ever run?

(I'm obviously only kidding.  Those answers are horseshit)

hahahaha, I was thinking of Jerry as I wrote that.   Its gold

[TheBaconman]

^^ That is an interesting outlook for a change! Here DX thought Axl wasn't trying hard enough when actually it was we Americans that threw a wrench into the scheme.

Agreed 100%

[pilferk]

But if they only see money and it is already done, wouldn't that mean they would want to make some cash by releasing it as opposed to give it away for free with the next album (reconsidering my stance, I do admit that it may be a risk putting money into producing special packaging and all that)? I don't understand the possible contention with the label aspect, could you go into that some?

Not really. Because they would also ascribe a particular part of the artist advance (likely already psid), production cost of the disc, marketing (there has to some,even if its just basic pressers and retail awareness stuff), distribution, etc. to the remix album...and want to turn a profit on top of that.

With labels,its about maximizing return on investment...and the question becomes which ultimately leeds to more sales, now and down the line, and which ultimately costs them less.

There is massive economies to be had with packaging it with new material. You piggyback all the costs....plus youd think new material would get more eyeballs. And...they might be able to charge enough "more" for the deluxe that, with the evonomies, the package is actually more profitable per unit. I dont know thats true, to be clear...but its something theyd consider. They have a warehouse of mbas thinking through ths stuff, and thousands pieces of nickel dime shit we are not even thinking of. As much as i hate the way they operate, there is a slick sophistication and efficiency to their (evil incarnate) operations.

Imho, that route is a less risky investment. Thats my opinion, based on what i know....which isnt expert levls of stuff. Its perfectly ok to think different.

The contention level? Having the label have a failed release, potentislly...even if its "just a remix slbum" isnt going to make them happy. And its not going to make them give any more, and maybe less, consideration for marketing, placement in terms of release date, and other considerstions, to gnr. In an already potentially prickly relationship (maybe, allegedly, possibly), it would be just one more thing to argue over, snd its a chit on the labels side of the bargaining table. I diont see that as good for gnr....or anyone, really.

[D-GenerationX]

^^ By out in the real world, do you mean on other GNR forums? I think in the real world (non hardcore fan GNR world) if I were to tell someone that I felt this band really is GNR because it still has Axl's vision behind it and that said vision is to me the most important aspect of GNR, I don't think I'd be getting laughed out of the room or anything.

Oh, I do.  I absolutely do.

A lot of the talking points used around here are laugh lines out there in the general public.

Which...is usually the point we start shitting on the public for not having "the facts".  But again, that only plays here.

You make it sound like Axl didn't try at all but I think he tried where it counted most: the music. I don't know how hard he tried to put out a great record, but for me he more than achieved that and so however hard he tried, it was enough.

But that's an artistic argument, which is obviously subjective.  I'd actually counter with the fact that it made such little impact that your opinion was not shared by most folks, but I don't even think I have to.

I think the more accurate point is that for whatever artistic brilliance may be found within, the business plan to give that work the best chance to be heard was not remotely competent.  

Music at this level is a business.  You have to sell your product.  Trying to sell your product to to a fanbase that has to get used to a totally different band requires a whole other level of work.  Axl really did neither of those things, by any objective standard.

He sold 700,000 units on the band name.  I obviously can't sit here and play Joe Namath and guarantee its a monster hit with more competent promotion.  But I do see what extremely half ass promotion got you.

[D-GenerationX]

The contention level? Having the label have a failed release, potentislly...even if its "just a remix slbum" isnt going to make them happy. And its not going to make them give any more, and maybe less, consideration for marketing, placement in terms of release date, and other considerstions, to gnr. In an already potentially prickly relationship (maybe, allegedly, possibly), it would be just one more thing to argue over, snd its a chit on the labels side of the bargaining table. I diont see that as good for gnr....or anyone, really.

Your whole post is great, but this was the truly salient point.

All you guys that want this standalone remix album, do you want it to the point you'd roll the dice on it adversely affecting a new album of original material that came after?

I would not, bottom line.

[pilferk]

But if they only see money and it is already done, wouldn't that mean they would want to make some cash by releasing it as opposed to give it away for free with the next album (reconsidering my stance, I do admit that it may be a risk putting money into producing special packaging and all that)? I don't understand the possible contention with the label aspect, could you go into that some?

You still have to pay to press it, ship it, promote it.  Those are costs they have to put out on spec, in the hopes a profit is turned.

A standalone remix album is no sure thing. 

Are we really talking about pressing and shipping costs?    What is this amount?  I would say that its so low of a cost, that if they couldn't recoup it, it would be a easy write off for the label.

First off..lits more than youd think, in terms if share of each disc. Its not "low", for sure.

And now your suggesting a label, entities so obsessed with money they are legendary for it ( and thats saying sonething in the entertainment industry), releae ANYTHING where there is even a decent sized chance theyll have to write down costs associated with it.

Yeah, thats not really realistic. It would be great, as fans, if it was, but.....no.

Its gotta have a really good chance of covering the costs the label decides, in their infinite wisdom (note sarcasm), to attribute to it. Or it isnt coming out. And those cost are likely going to be a big number, bigger than youd think completely reasonable, cause thats the way they operate...unless there is a contractual obligation with costs written in, soe ificall, slready.

Labels dont always get it right...but when they dont, its usually the talent who gets screwed. Remember that before you suggest write downs...

[D-GenerationX]

^^ That is an interesting outlook for a change! Here DX thought Axl wasn't trying hard enough when actually it was we Americans that threw a wrench into the scheme.

Hahaha

My stance has long been it was never going to be what it was, but Axl should be doing better than he is, domestically.

On the name and catalog alone, he should be able to be a reliable arena act.  Truth is, there just aren't a lot of arena rock acts to go see anymore.  There is a void there.

Pearl Jam hasn't had a hit in 15 years.  And most of the fans around me at the concerts primarily want to hear the stuff from the first three albums.  But they are still there filling the arena each tour.  Not some "up close and personal" club, either.

[TheBaconman]

But if they only see money and it is already done, wouldn't that mean they would want to make some cash by releasing it as opposed to give it away for free with the next album (reconsidering my stance, I do admit that it may be a risk putting money into producing special packaging and all that)? I don't understand the possible contention with the label aspect, could you go into that some?

You still have to pay to press it, ship it, promote it.  Those are costs they have to put out on spec, in the hopes a profit is turned.

A standalone remix album is no sure thing. 

Are we really talking about pressing and shipping costs?    What is this amount?  I would say that its so low of a cost, that if they couldn't recoup it, it would be a easy write off for the label.

First off..lits more than youd think, in terms if share of each disc. Its not "low", for sure.

And now your suggesting a label, entities so obsessed with money they are legendary for it ( and thats saying sonething in the entertainment industry), releae ANYTHING where there is even a decent sized chance theyll have to write down costs associated with it.

Yeah, thats not really realistic. It would be great, as fans, if it was, but.....no.

Its gotta have a really good chance of covering the costs the label decides, in their infinite wisdom (note sarcasm), to attribute to it. Or it isnt coming out. And those cost are likely going to be a big number, bigger than youd think completely reasonable, cause thats the way they operate...unless there is a contractual obligation with costs written in, soe ificall, slready.

Labels dont always get it right...but when they dont, its usually the talent who gets screwed. Remember that before you suggest write downs...

So now you are saying Axl/GNR will get screwed if a remix album comes out?

If the album doesn't sell you think some how the label will be angry at the band??

I don't think so!  If for what ever reason it doesn't sell, no big deal for the label...   Move on..

You are right I do not think it costs much to press/ship a album...   Its a cheap piece of plastic, that could be shipped on a truck already headed to the store....  The online sites claim that a record label charges 25 perfect return for packaging...   I think that is a gross over charge.  Thing is they also charge this 25 percent for digital downloads, in most cases...  Where there is zero packaging or shipping

[TheBaconman]

^^ That is an interesting outlook for a change! Here DX thought Axl wasn't trying hard enough when actually it was we Americans that threw a wrench into the scheme.

Hahaha

My stance has long been it was never going to be what it was, but Axl should be doing better than he is, domestically.

On the name and catalog alone, he should be able to be a reliable arena act.  Truth is, there just aren't a lot of arena rock acts to go see anymore.  There is a void there.

Pearl Jam hasn't had a hit in 15 years.  And most of the fans around me at the concerts primarily want to hear the stuff from the first three albums.  But they are still there filling the arena each tour.  Not some "up close and personal" club, either.

Pearl Jam became "cool" to go see live in the USA....  They still don't have that great of success over seas and such....   

Sort of like Dave Mathews.  Both he and Pearl Jam are huge in the states, not really world wide.  I also think both suck...

It became cool to hate Axl in the states, when fans should of been loyal

[pilferk]

But if they only see money and it is already done, wouldn't that mean they would want to make some cash by releasing it as opposed to give it away for free with the next album (reconsidering my stance, I do admit that it may be a risk putting money into producing special packaging and all that)? I don't understand the possible contention with the label aspect, could you go into that some?

You still have to pay to press it, ship it, promote it.  Those are costs they have to put out on spec, in the hopes a profit is turned.

A standalone remix album is no sure thing. 

Are we really talking about pressing and shipping costs?    What is this amount?  I would say that its so low of a cost, that if they couldn't recoup it, it would be a easy write off for the label.

First off..lits more than youd think, in terms if share of each disc. Its not "low", for sure.

And now your suggesting a label, entities so obsessed with money they are legendary for it ( and thats saying sonething in the entertainment industry), releae ANYTHING where there is even a decent sized chance theyll have to write down costs associated with it.

Yeah, thats not really realistic. It would be great, as fans, if it was, but.....no.

Its gotta have a really good chance of covering the costs the label decides, in their infinite wisdom (note sarcasm), to attribute to it. Or it isnt coming out. And those cost are likely going to be a big number, bigger than youd think completely reasonable, cause thats the way they operate...unless there is a contractual obligation with costs written in, soe ificall, slready.

Labels dont always get it right...but when they dont, its usually the talent who gets screwed. Remember that before you suggest write downs...

So now you are saying Axl/GNR will get screwed if a remix album comes out?

If the album doesn't sell you think some how the label will be angry at the band??

I don't think so!  If for what ever reason it doesn't sell, no big deal for the label...   Move on..

You are right I do not think it costs much to press/ship a album...   Its a cheap piece of plastic, that could be shipped on a truck already headed to the store....  The online sites claim that a record label charges 25 perfect return for packaging...   I think that is a gross over charge.  Thing is they also charge this 25 percent for digital downloads, in most cases...  Where there is zero packaging or shipping

Labels dont move on. That might be how you want them to operate. It might be how any compassionate entity would operate. They dont. Theres too much history to pull from to look and think the label would say " hey....you know what...fugittaboutit.

And...i wouldnt say theyd be angry. They dont get angry. Id say theyd reassess their prorities and reconsider the return on investment calculations theyve done in relation to gnr., thus effecting their decisionmaking telated to that piece of meat...errr..talent. You're making it an emotional reaction. Its not. It the furthest thing from. Its a cold, calculated, unfeeling, and quite frankly borderline evil and usary calculation.

Again...what you and i think is reasonable doesnt much matter. I agree...the 25% is nuts. But its what they charge, its what they hold the artist and product accountable for And its what theyd write down. Thats all that matters because that write down effects the shareholders, and the shareholders hold the ceos nuts in a vice, and the ceo isnt gonna let sone measly "artist" effect his bonus ( oh, and sharehokder dividend).

By the by...those costs have to be completely covered, usually, BEFORE the artists share is payed out AND, because of that, before whatever portion of the artist advance ascribed to the product starts getting paid back. See how thst works? Ugly, eh?

I know...pulling back the curtain a little sucks. But thats it, in a nutshell.

I also wouldnt say gnr would be screwed, entirely. Just that history says the kabel screws the talent when things go bad. I know it sounds similar, but what i really mean is they might be in a significantly weaker position with the label, potentially. And there might be finacial repercussions down the line.

Edit: and now to bed for me! Be back tomorrow. Dont fill too many more pages!! Hard to catch up tomorrow.