New Dj interview at LegendaryRockInterviews.com (Sep 2014)

[GypsySoul]

Then what they'd need is about a solid 5 year run then can cash in on for the rest of their days.

Does ANY of what you just ran down even get off the ground without that 5 year run in the bank?

Could you clarify/restate this because I'm totally lost at what you're trying to say here.

Ben Affleck IS Batman.  The movie studio said so.  There's no one else currently who IS Batman.  If you asked anyone else that used to be in any of the past Batman movies who is the current Batman, they'd tell you Ben Affleck!!!

Yet if no one goes to see the movie, is there going to be a big muckety muck meeting some boardroom where some exasperated department head is going to say "I don't know what the god damn problem was.  The guy WAS Batman.  It says it right here, for christ's sake!!  People are fuckin' idiots, I swear."

Is the studio head going to accept that, I wonder?

Doesn't matter if no one goes sees the movie.  Ben Affleck IS currently Batman.
If you ask George Clooney if he's Batman, he'll tell you he used to be but currently is NOT. Ben Affleck is Batman.
If you ask Slash if he's Guns N' Roses, he'll tell you he used to be but currently is NOT.

[ice cream sand pig]

Jarmo and DX are the best of friends
They've been friends since I don't know when
DX posts on monday when he goes to work
and Jarmo thinks that DX is a big... something that rhymes with work

DX won't accept that this is GNR
Says the business is not on par
with what could have been but what will never be
in between his friendly chats with Emily

Ginger thinks the state of affairs is a joke
mortis murphy began to choke
when he saw the front man fly above the stage
On a piano with road rage

Jaeball Gypsy Soul and Generation X
Draguns, Finns, fools, and rednecks
But it's not just a fan site!
It's a fammmmmmmmiiiiiillllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

I'm working on the theme song for our sitcom. Anyone wanna help me out?

[D-GenerationX]

Then what they'd need is about a solid 5 year run then can cash in on for the rest of their days.

Does ANY of what you just ran down even get off the ground without that 5 year run in the bank?

Could you clarify/restate this because I'm totally lost at what you're trying to say here.

Sure.

The topic is about the business side of this operation the past 15 years.  That's the starting point.

So let's make you the head of GNR, Inc.  And we'd like you to go out and make some money for us.

But, this is no from the ground up operation.  I'm starting you off with :

- one of the most recognizable brands in hard rock history
- one of, if not the biggest rock star of his time
- a catalog of songs people already know and love
- millions of fans all over the world (AKA : a built in audience)

Well, people are going to throw money at that, aren't they?  

- You need millions to record an album?  Sure.  Those guys were huge.
- Offers to headline festivals?  Done deal.  Its Guns N' Roses we are talking about.
- Do I want to send you out on a tour?  Does "fuck" go with "yeah"??

So getting just about every leg up from a resource standpoint is already secured.  And its based on your 5 year run at the top.  Getting all those things to get started was not done through your skill or any sort of savvy deal making.  Those people came to you.

And with all those advantages and such an unlevel playing field tilted in your direction in terms of what most normal bands start off with....and *this* is what you've done with it?  

[D-GenerationX]

Jarmo and DX are the best of friends
They've been friends since I don't know when
DX posts on monday when he goes to work
and Jarmo thinks that DX is a big... something that rhymes with work

DX won't accept that this is GNR
Says the business is not on par
with what could have been but what will never be
in between his friendly chats with Emily

Ginger thinks the state of affairs is a joke
mortis murphy began to choke
when he saw the front man fly above the stage
On a piano with road rage

Jaeball Gypsy Soul and Generation X
Draguns, Finns, fools, and rednecks
But it's not just a fan site!
It's a fammmmmmmmiiiiiillllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

I'm working on the theme song for our sitcom. Anyone wanna help me out?

Hahahahaha.

That's awesome.  Well done.

[mortismurphy]

Then what they'd need is about a solid 5 year run then can cash in on for the rest of their days.

Does ANY of what you just ran down even get off the ground without that 5 year run in the bank?

Could you clarify/restate this because I'm totally lost at what you're trying to say here.

Ben Affleck IS Batman.  The movie studio said so.  There's no one else currently who IS Batman.  If you asked anyone else that used to be in any of the past Batman movies who is the current Batman, they'd tell you Ben Affleck!!!

Yet if no one goes to see the movie, is there going to be a big muckety muck meeting some boardroom where some exasperated department head is going to say "I don't know what the god damn problem was.  The guy WAS Batman.  It says it right here, for christ's sake!!  People are fuckin' idiots, I swear."

Is the studio head going to accept that, I wonder?

Doesn't matter if no one goes sees the movie.  Ben Affleck IS currently Batman.
If you ask George Clooney if he's Batman, he'll tell you he used to be but currently is NOT. Ben Affleck is Batman.
If you ask Slash if he's Guns N' Roses, he'll tell you he used to be but currently is NOT.

I imagine Clooney would like to obliterate every bit of evidence of him having been in Batman and Robin.

[GypsySoul]

So getting just about every leg up from a resource standpoint is already secured.  And its based on your 5 year run at the top.  Getting all those things to get started was not done through your skill or any sort of savvy deal making.  Those people came to you.

And with all those advantages and such an unlevel playing field tilted in your direction in terms of what most normal bands start off with....and *this* is what you've done with it? 

Your argument doesn't make any sense because, in case you didn't know, Axl was kind of an important part of those first 5 years too, right?

The guy who back in the day wrote songs on a pizza box cover and who after a few years made epic theatrical music videos and who after 5 or so years introduced a piano into the band in the evolution of HIS vision of GNR and who after another 15 or so years released CD I and after another 5 years flew a piano over the Vegas residency crowd for a 3D visual effect on a concert dvd and after that said he'd look into maybe releasing new material .... same guy.

I imagine Clooney would like to obliterate every bit of evidence of him having been in Batman and Robin.

My mind went blank on the name of the guy that was the original Batman. he's in that new Birdman movie.  famous/excellent actor ..... but right now I can't think of his name.  As soon as someone says it, I'll remember. 

[JAEBALL]

Michael Keaton

[GypsySoul]

Michael Keaton

That's it.  Thanks!

I think he was a 'successful' Batman, too.  But if DgenX asked Mr. Keaton today if he was Batman, he'd tell him that he used to be but currently he is NOT.  Ben Affleck IS Batman.  Currently Mr. Keaton is Birdman (and supposedly in an Oscar nomination worthy performance).

[jarmo]

Unless your privy to certain information, you don't really know anything. Sorry.
It doesn't change the fact you want to be seen as some kind of armchair authority on GN'R's as a business.

I'm curious.

If I was lauding everything, would I be similarly scolded about not knowing anything and I really shouldn't speculate?

I'd have to be, right?  I can't imagine that's a one way street.

You'd still be uninformed on the subject.

But at least you'd be positive and I'd be pretty shocked!


/jarmo

 

[Ali]

No.  What fan X would be saying is "I don't like this Guns N' Roses" or "I don't accept this as Guns N' Roses".  Fan X cannot determine what is and what is not Guns N' Roses.  Only Axl Rose can.

So, as you see it, Ben Affleck is Batman now, because the movie studio is the only one that can say that.

And anyone that doesn't buy him as Batman, they are incorrect.  He's Batman.  It says so right here...see?

No, I'm not saying that anyone that doesn't like Affleck as Batman is incorrect.  I'm saying they would be incorrect in saying he is not portraying Batman.

Ali

[Ali]

Bumblefoot is surely a first-rate troll, and has been trolling his negativity since he joined the band? Buckethead is a troll for leaving Axl in the lurch and leaving behind a carefully worded letter of 'negativity' via his manager. Robin is a troll also when he criticised Axl's eccentric recording methods.

Totally agree!!!  Those trolling bastards!!! 


joke 

HTGTH is so obsessed with censoring that it lives within its own bubble which does not even logically square with Newgnr themselves!

Exactly which part of these 1222 dead-horse conversation replies is the censorship part?? 

Well I did not mean in the literal sense - although I have had one post removed - but in the expectation, the expectation to follow a band in a specific way. Obviously I am referring to the attacks which surface whenever the merest whiff of controversy rears its head - the words 'troll'' and 'negativity' will lead you in the right direction. I find this expectation, of what a fan is supposed to be, completely absurd.

Listen, it is just a stupid rock band. Lighten up people. Every band has off days. Every band makes decisions which seem odd or stupid - and back fire. Many bands have members fans might not be keen on - 'Lars's drumming' is a category you will frequently see on Metallica boards for instance. Yet with every other band, fans seem able to discuss these matters without having their fandom or integrity brought into question - and do it with a sense of humour. Axl is not going to assassinate you for thinking CD is stinks to high heaven or DJ cannot play his ukulele well. GN'R are, at the end of the day, just a silly rock band. We are not discussing theology or a cure for cancer here.

I don't think your seeing things clearly.  Someone comes on this board, who's never been....they are seeing both negative and positive.  Just because someone counters a complaint doesn't mean they aren't accepting negativity.  Maybe it just means they see things differently than you.  They're people who see a lot of positive on here and they're people who don't.  And they are all posting and expressing their opinions.  I would argue that these other sites you speak of, are very similar and have counter posts with different opinions that sometimes turn into attacks.  It's just what happens...

I think you need to read the posts that are being said on here. Certain posts have provoked a reaction from one particular poster which borders on the irrational. They have had their personal integrity question, and have been asked to leave.

Not irrational at all, unlike you I like and support this band, I have been a fan for close to 20 years and have attended countless shows. I don't have the entitlement  mindset, and I understand how the recording industry works, I respect how artists create and I dont feel "owed".

Nobody in authority has asked me to leave, and I take what disgruntled little kids, trolls, and haters say with a grain of salt and consider the source and the mentality of such people.

Fuck what the idiots say about my integrity, I dont fucking care about those kind of people.

I'm simply a long time fan and supporter of this band, I have seen all incarnations, and yes, this is GNR whether you like it or not, that part is non-negotiable.

I may be a bit sadistic, I do enjoy watching Jarmo own the arguments and discount all the ridiculous hater and troll supposed points and petty gripes and endless complaints.

The only reason I got my passport renewed this year was to attend upcoming shows if a european tour happens.

Long live GNR, the soundtrack to my life.

Not even worth the reply.

Well their were actually two versions from LA Guns at the same time. Why not the same with GN'R?

Why not?

Axl has sole, indisputable claim to ownership of the GN'R name.

It's that simple.




Ali

Ali, it isn't that simple considering what went on in the band. I disagree. It is subjective.

Whether or not Axl has sole, indisputable claim to ownership of the GN'R name?

No, that is pretty clearly not subjective at all.

Ali

Yes, legally GNR is under Axl. However, to call it GNR is subjective. There was an analogy about sports teams and roster, which I agree with. There is another analogy in business as well. Bank of America bought Merrill Lynch during the financial crisis. Legally there is still a Merrill Lynch brand, BUT culturally they took on Bank of America. The same people who worked at Merrill Lynch when it was an indecent company no longer works there. To those people it's not Merrill Lynch anymore.

PS: Had to respond to this. Wow! a lot of reading. Haven't been on here since Tuesday due to work.

No, the band name is not subjective. Only Axl gets to determine what is and what isn't GN'R. What is subjective is whether or not you like GN'R as it is today.

Ali

De jure you are correct. De facto, incorrect. If fan X sees Chinese Democracy in a store and says to himself, ''that is not gnr'', he is perfectly entitled to that viewpoint.

No.  What fan X would be saying is "I don't like this Guns N' Roses" or "I don't accept this as Guns N' Roses".  Fan X cannot determine what is and what is not Guns N' Roses.  Only Axl Rose can.

Ali

The difference between ''this is not'' and ''I don't accept this as'' Guns N' Roses is mere semantics.

I disagree completely.  It's a key difference between what is open to subjective interpretation and a matter of opinion and what isn't.  Whether or not the current lineup is Guns N' Roses or not is not a matter of opinion.  Whether or not you like or even "accept" the current lineup is.  As I've said several times already, if who Guns N' Roses is and is not was a matter of opinion, then the Deluxe Appetite for Democracy I received last week would've said "Guns N' Roses (depending on whether or not you think this is Guns N' Roses)".  It just said "Guns N' Roses".

Ali

[Ali]

The difference between ''this is not'' and ''I don't accept this as'' Guns N' Roses is mere semantics.

Yep.

Makes sense on paper, but little practical application trying to sell it in the real world.

The only people that accept that rationale are the people with a vested interest to believe it.

The second we can get somebody that doesn't still follow the band to sign on, I'll be convinced.

It doesn't matter if someone who doesn't follow the band agrees whether or not this is Guns N' Roses.  No matter how many people like that you align, that will not tip the scale and make the next release come out under another name other than Guns N' Roses unless Axl agrees to that course. 

There is no need to sell it in the real world.  It's the truth irrespective of whether or not anyone buys it.  So is the statement that Ben Affleck is the actor currently portraying Batman on the big screen. 

Ali

[JAEBALL]

This is the stupidest fucking argument ...

Yes Axl rose calls it guns n roses end of story .. He's legally entitled to

Should he ? Everybody's entitled to their opinion

He thinks it's fine.. I stopped caring ... I like his songs either way

[mortismurphy]

Bumblefoot is surely a first-rate troll, and has been trolling his negativity since he joined the band? Buckethead is a troll for leaving Axl in the lurch and leaving behind a carefully worded letter of 'negativity' via his manager. Robin is a troll also when he criticised Axl's eccentric recording methods.

Totally agree!!!  Those trolling bastards!!! 


joke 

HTGTH is so obsessed with censoring that it lives within its own bubble which does not even logically square with Newgnr themselves!

Exactly which part of these 1222 dead-horse conversation replies is the censorship part?? 

Well I did not mean in the literal sense - although I have had one post removed - but in the expectation, the expectation to follow a band in a specific way. Obviously I am referring to the attacks which surface whenever the merest whiff of controversy rears its head - the words 'troll'' and 'negativity' will lead you in the right direction. I find this expectation, of what a fan is supposed to be, completely absurd.

Listen, it is just a stupid rock band. Lighten up people. Every band has off days. Every band makes decisions which seem odd or stupid - and back fire. Many bands have members fans might not be keen on - 'Lars's drumming' is a category you will frequently see on Metallica boards for instance. Yet with every other band, fans seem able to discuss these matters without having their fandom or integrity brought into question - and do it with a sense of humour. Axl is not going to assassinate you for thinking CD is stinks to high heaven or DJ cannot play his ukulele well. GN'R are, at the end of the day, just a silly rock band. We are not discussing theology or a cure for cancer here.

I don't think your seeing things clearly.  Someone comes on this board, who's never been....they are seeing both negative and positive.  Just because someone counters a complaint doesn't mean they aren't accepting negativity.  Maybe it just means they see things differently than you.  They're people who see a lot of positive on here and they're people who don't.  And they are all posting and expressing their opinions.  I would argue that these other sites you speak of, are very similar and have counter posts with different opinions that sometimes turn into attacks.  It's just what happens...

I think you need to read the posts that are being said on here. Certain posts have provoked a reaction from one particular poster which borders on the irrational. They have had their personal integrity question, and have been asked to leave.

Not irrational at all, unlike you I like and support this band, I have been a fan for close to 20 years and have attended countless shows. I don't have the entitlement  mindset, and I understand how the recording industry works, I respect how artists create and I dont feel "owed".

Nobody in authority has asked me to leave, and I take what disgruntled little kids, trolls, and haters say with a grain of salt and consider the source and the mentality of such people.

Fuck what the idiots say about my integrity, I dont fucking care about those kind of people.

I'm simply a long time fan and supporter of this band, I have seen all incarnations, and yes, this is GNR whether you like it or not, that part is non-negotiable.

I may be a bit sadistic, I do enjoy watching Jarmo own the arguments and discount all the ridiculous hater and troll supposed points and petty gripes and endless complaints.

The only reason I got my passport renewed this year was to attend upcoming shows if a european tour happens.

Long live GNR, the soundtrack to my life.

Not even worth the reply.

Well their were actually two versions from LA Guns at the same time. Why not the same with GN'R?

Why not?

Axl has sole, indisputable claim to ownership of the GN'R name.

It's that simple.




Ali

Ali, it isn't that simple considering what went on in the band. I disagree. It is subjective.

Whether or not Axl has sole, indisputable claim to ownership of the GN'R name?

No, that is pretty clearly not subjective at all.

Ali

Yes, legally GNR is under Axl. However, to call it GNR is subjective. There was an analogy about sports teams and roster, which I agree with. There is another analogy in business as well. Bank of America bought Merrill Lynch during the financial crisis. Legally there is still a Merrill Lynch brand, BUT culturally they took on Bank of America. The same people who worked at Merrill Lynch when it was an indecent company no longer works there. To those people it's not Merrill Lynch anymore.

PS: Had to respond to this. Wow! a lot of reading. Haven't been on here since Tuesday due to work.

No, the band name is not subjective. Only Axl gets to determine what is and what isn't GN'R. What is subjective is whether or not you like GN'R as it is today.

Ali

De jure you are correct. De facto, incorrect. If fan X sees Chinese Democracy in a store and says to himself, ''that is not gnr'', he is perfectly entitled to that viewpoint.

No.  What fan X would be saying is "I don't like this Guns N' Roses" or "I don't accept this as Guns N' Roses".  Fan X cannot determine what is and what is not Guns N' Roses.  Only Axl Rose can.

Ali

The difference between ''this is not'' and ''I don't accept this as'' Guns N' Roses is mere semantics.

I disagree completely.  It's a key difference between what is open to subjective interpretation and a matter of opinion and what isn't.  Whether or not the current lineup is Guns N' Roses or not is not a matter of opinion.  Whether or not you like or even "accept" the current lineup is.  As I've said several times already, if who Guns N' Roses is and is not was a matter of opinion, then the Deluxe Appetite for Democracy I received last week would've said "Guns N' Roses (depending on whether or not you think this is Guns N' Roses)".  It just said "Guns N' Roses".

Ali

Question, would you still believe all of this if Axl retired and legally delegated the band to another singer/leader-figure?

[EmilyGNR]

I absolutely agree with you redneck..  Been reading along time , been HTGTH many times. Pun intended! I find it interesting what thoughts are about the band, and to me its GUNS N ROSES. I've long decided to not be bothered with those who argue otherwise , or claim to be authorities on how things should be or operate in bands. As a fan since the beginning, and been to 25 + GNR shows since 1987, I feel the same connection with the  most recent music as well as the old. Perhaps I'm not as concerned with alot of the discussions nowadays as I have met hung outwith and and had real human conversations with everyone of the members of the band at one point or another in my life. And I get the greatest excitement of actually meeting up with fans I have met thru the yrs via this forum, and others, even ran a site myself some yrs back. Jarmo is an awesome dude..always a pleasure to see again at shows, along with many others. Truth is some of the band didn't even think it was going to go on as it has, and even they are grateful and have all intentions always to do the best and put out the best material(I'm taking about the guys who chose to fill the shoes of others) . But they all are as every bit Guns N Rose and anyone from Izzy to Slash etc. They all made their choices along the way, they live with themselves and are quite content. As a fan so am I. I Just look forward to new music and shows and when it comes, I'm there again, and if its more shows first and I can do shows again here in NYC, or go to Vegas again fuck yes I will. 

Great post -!! I concur completely, am looking forward to attending the next shows as well, wherever they may be.
 

[EmilyGNR]

Jarmo and DX are the best of friends
They've been friends since I don't know when
DX posts on monday when he goes to work
and Jarmo thinks that DX is a big... something that rhymes with work

DX won't accept that this is GNR
Says the business is not on par
with what could have been but what will never be
in between his friendly chats with Emily

Ginger thinks the state of affairs is a joke
mortis murphy began to choke
when he saw the front man fly above the stage
On a piano with road rage

Jaeball Gypsy Soul and Generation X
Draguns, Finns, fools, and rednecks
But it's not just a fan site!
It's a fammmmmmmmiiiiiillllyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

I'm working on the theme song for our sitcom. Anyone wanna help me out?

This could be fun, I'll see what I can come up with Rudy 

[Ali]

Bumblefoot is surely a first-rate troll, and has been trolling his negativity since he joined the band? Buckethead is a troll for leaving Axl in the lurch and leaving behind a carefully worded letter of 'negativity' via his manager. Robin is a troll also when he criticised Axl's eccentric recording methods.

Totally agree!!!  Those trolling bastards!!! 


joke 

HTGTH is so obsessed with censoring that it lives within its own bubble which does not even logically square with Newgnr themselves!

Exactly which part of these 1222 dead-horse conversation replies is the censorship part?? 

Well I did not mean in the literal sense - although I have had one post removed - but in the expectation, the expectation to follow a band in a specific way. Obviously I am referring to the attacks which surface whenever the merest whiff of controversy rears its head - the words 'troll'' and 'negativity' will lead you in the right direction. I find this expectation, of what a fan is supposed to be, completely absurd.

Listen, it is just a stupid rock band. Lighten up people. Every band has off days. Every band makes decisions which seem odd or stupid - and back fire. Many bands have members fans might not be keen on - 'Lars's drumming' is a category you will frequently see on Metallica boards for instance. Yet with every other band, fans seem able to discuss these matters without having their fandom or integrity brought into question - and do it with a sense of humour. Axl is not going to assassinate you for thinking CD is stinks to high heaven or DJ cannot play his ukulele well. GN'R are, at the end of the day, just a silly rock band. We are not discussing theology or a cure for cancer here.

I don't think your seeing things clearly.  Someone comes on this board, who's never been....they are seeing both negative and positive.  Just because someone counters a complaint doesn't mean they aren't accepting negativity.  Maybe it just means they see things differently than you.  They're people who see a lot of positive on here and they're people who don't.  And they are all posting and expressing their opinions.  I would argue that these other sites you speak of, are very similar and have counter posts with different opinions that sometimes turn into attacks.  It's just what happens...

I think you need to read the posts that are being said on here. Certain posts have provoked a reaction from one particular poster which borders on the irrational. They have had their personal integrity question, and have been asked to leave.

Not irrational at all, unlike you I like and support this band, I have been a fan for close to 20 years and have attended countless shows. I don't have the entitlement  mindset, and I understand how the recording industry works, I respect how artists create and I dont feel "owed".

Nobody in authority has asked me to leave, and I take what disgruntled little kids, trolls, and haters say with a grain of salt and consider the source and the mentality of such people.

Fuck what the idiots say about my integrity, I dont fucking care about those kind of people.

I'm simply a long time fan and supporter of this band, I have seen all incarnations, and yes, this is GNR whether you like it or not, that part is non-negotiable.

I may be a bit sadistic, I do enjoy watching Jarmo own the arguments and discount all the ridiculous hater and troll supposed points and petty gripes and endless complaints.

The only reason I got my passport renewed this year was to attend upcoming shows if a european tour happens.

Long live GNR, the soundtrack to my life.

Not even worth the reply.

Well their were actually two versions from LA Guns at the same time. Why not the same with GN'R?

Why not?

Axl has sole, indisputable claim to ownership of the GN'R name.

It's that simple.




Ali

Ali, it isn't that simple considering what went on in the band. I disagree. It is subjective.

Whether or not Axl has sole, indisputable claim to ownership of the GN'R name?

No, that is pretty clearly not subjective at all.

Ali

Yes, legally GNR is under Axl. However, to call it GNR is subjective. There was an analogy about sports teams and roster, which I agree with. There is another analogy in business as well. Bank of America bought Merrill Lynch during the financial crisis. Legally there is still a Merrill Lynch brand, BUT culturally they took on Bank of America. The same people who worked at Merrill Lynch when it was an indecent company no longer works there. To those people it's not Merrill Lynch anymore.

PS: Had to respond to this. Wow! a lot of reading. Haven't been on here since Tuesday due to work.

No, the band name is not subjective. Only Axl gets to determine what is and what isn't GN'R. What is subjective is whether or not you like GN'R as it is today.

Ali

De jure you are correct. De facto, incorrect. If fan X sees Chinese Democracy in a store and says to himself, ''that is not gnr'', he is perfectly entitled to that viewpoint.

No.  What fan X would be saying is "I don't like this Guns N' Roses" or "I don't accept this as Guns N' Roses".  Fan X cannot determine what is and what is not Guns N' Roses.  Only Axl Rose can.

Ali

The difference between ''this is not'' and ''I don't accept this as'' Guns N' Roses is mere semantics.

I disagree completely.  It's a key difference between what is open to subjective interpretation and a matter of opinion and what isn't.  Whether or not the current lineup is Guns N' Roses or not is not a matter of opinion.  Whether or not you like or even "accept" the current lineup is.  As I've said several times already, if who Guns N' Roses is and is not was a matter of opinion, then the Deluxe Appetite for Democracy I received last week would've said "Guns N' Roses (depending on whether or not you think this is Guns N' Roses)".  It just said "Guns N' Roses".

Ali

Question, would you still believe all of this if Axl retired and legally delegated the band to another singer/leader-figure?

It's not a matter of belief.  It would be Guns N' Roses regardless of what I thought.  What I or anyone else thought would not change the name on the concert tickets or the albums/Blu-rays.  The more pertinent question, IMO, is would you like it?

Ali

[D-GenerationX]

It's not a matter of belief.  It would be Guns N' Roses regardless of what I thought.  What I or anyone else thought would not change the name on the concert tickets or the albums/Blu-rays.  The more pertinent question, IMO, is would you like it?

I absolutely see what you are saying, and I'm not sure any of us are saying anything different.

I think, my question anyway, is that if they don't accept it...than what weight does your stance carry?  I don't think any of us here dispute your legal argument.  I just don't know how far that gets you in a conversation, unless you are talking to someone who is already on your side.

I think to the average person, they aren't as caught up in legality versus eye test.  I'm having trouble picturing someone saying they don't like or recognize this as GNR and digging too much deeper into it.  That's probably the beginning and end of it for them.

If that's what you think, I'm not entirely clear what a PDF of some contract is going to do to move that conversation forward.  Even if you swear up and down you still have a point, does it matter, really?

[jarmo]

Yeah, it's a losing battle arguing with somebody when you have the facts on your side and they still refuse to believe/accept it.



/jarmo

[D-GenerationX]

Yeah, it's a losing battle arguing with somebody when you have the facts on your side and they still refuse to believe/accept it.

But is that PDF going to make them like 'There Was A Time'?  Does a court ruling get them to buy a concert ticket?

Not really.

Legally, Axl has his ducks in a row.  No question about it.  And he was very, very smart to do that too.

With the public though?  Not so much.  There was always going to be a segment that never accepted this, no matter what.  But he didn't exactly bust his ass trying to give this thing the best chance at success he could have.  That part is on him, and to a lesser extent, his management.

He was going to have to work real hard selling this new venture to the public.  In a way, he almost had to work twice as hard as he did to have the band hit it big initially.  That was only selling yourself.  This required not only selling a new version, but getting people to sort of forget the old one and not invite the obvious comparison.  And with him taking the lion's share of that work on, as he was the only link to GNR's past, as well as being their biggest asset.

Sadly, he wasn't interested in that aspect.  And my suspicion is that he hates doing that shit, but there are parts of every job that suck, but you have to do them anyway.  You can refuse, sure.  But you will see the adverse effects on the other end, as he has.