Do we as Guns N Roses fans have it that bad?

[jarmo]

Is anybody else surprised by this miracle? The name discussion is back. 



/jarmo
 

[Spirit]

Oh, I never said he could have been as big as the Guns N Roses brand. But with the premise that he marketed himself just as much as Slash has done in the past 20 years, I think he would've wound up with the bigger name of the two of them. The music might have been different, but it would still be Axl writing and performing it, I trust it would have been good.

To be clear, I fully support that Axl went on with the Guns N Roses name, he would be foolish not to do that. This was just a hypothetical situation were Axl would have to go solo after 1996.

Slash has been in many band and released tons of music since he decided not to be in guns any more.   He was on countless late night interview shows and has given countless interviews.   He has released books and video games.   Has been touring straight for the past 20 years

All this has helped established his brand

Now Axl has toured lots in the past 10 years.   He also released one studio album.   

There is no way given his track record you could think he as a solo act would be a successful as slash

No with what we have seen.   

Axl would have totally had to change the way he does things and what he has produced the past little bit

I think people are misunderstanding what I am saying here...


I was always talking about a hypothetical situation were Axl went solo in 1996, just as Slash.

If then Axl had done the same amount of self marketing as Slash actually did, I think he would have had a bigger name than Slash has today.


None of this is based on any actual track record that Axl has doing promotion...



I was just using the above example to illustrate that I think Axl Rose has a big name in music.

[TheBaconman]

Oh, I never said he could have been as big as the Guns N Roses brand. But with the premise that he marketed himself just as much as Slash has done in the past 20 years, I think he would've wound up with the bigger name of the two of them. The music might have been different, but it would still be Axl writing and performing it, I trust it would have been good.

To be clear, I fully support that Axl went on with the Guns N Roses name, he would be foolish not to do that. This was just a hypothetical situation were Axl would have to go solo after 1996.

Slash has been in many band and released tons of music since he decided not to be in guns any more.   He was on countless late night interview shows and has given countless interviews.   He has released books and video games.   Has been touring straight for the past 20 years

All this has helped established his brand

Now Axl has toured lots in the past 10 years.   He also released one studio album.   

There is no way given his track record you could think he as a solo act would be a successful as slash

No with what we have seen.   

Axl would have totally had to change the way he does things and what he has produced the past little bit

I think people are misunderstanding what I am saying here...


I was always talking about a hypothetical situation were Axl went solo in 1996, just as Slash.

If then Axl had done the same amount of self marketing as Slash actually did, I think he would have had a bigger name than Slash has today.


None of this is based on any actual track record that Axl has doing promotion...



I was just using the above example to illustrate that I think Axl Rose has a big name in music.

Sure. 

If Axl went solo

Did everything the exact same as slash.

There is no reason to think we wouldn't of been as successful as slash....

would Axl ever be capable of that?   

[Ginger King]

Is anybody else surprised by this miracle? The name discussion is back. 

/jarmo
 

Please, please, please give us something else to talk about. 

[jarmo]

There's plenty of other topics available....

But it seems like they all turn into the same topics at some point. 

 


/jarmo

[CherryGarcia]

Someone was saying GN'R has been "dead in the states since '94"....I disagree.
In 1993 they were selling out arenas in the U.S. In January 1995, despite being largely inactive for a year and a half, their cover of Sympathy for the Devil, which was tacked on a soundtrack, little promotion and no video, hit #55 on the Billboard Hot 100.

And you think this refutes that point, in the context it was brought up?

Because the rest of that post that started out with that premise, a post that was fairly detailed as I recall, went on to talk about GNR's perception since the relaunch.  In 2001.

Do you honestly think his point was wrong because he didn't take into account they were still relevant a mere one year later?  Or that relevance is defined by a sound from a soundtrack hitting #55 on the charts, which is a whole other argument anyway?  Do you think that's where he was going with that?

Seems like a stretch.  Moreover, it seems like you are being intentionally obtuse about the point he was making.

I think GN'R was a presence in the states until 2006. I honestly think Axl/the camp kept people waiting too long and a majority of the fans in the U.S. lost interest or moved on after 2007 or so. 2002 was a huge blow to the whole idea of a "new Guns N' Roses", though. I remember back then having to basically explain away Axl's bizarre appearance, his voice and then finally the 2002 tour cancellation to people. My sister, who was a HUGE fan in the 80s and 90s, she was like, 'What happened to him?' after seeing the VMAs. And then after Philly, she was telling me how lucky I was that he showed at the MSG gig I was at the day before. She had stopped caring for the most part in the late 90s, but stopped caring completely after 2002. I imagine she wasn't the only old school fan of the same mindset.

I still think new GN'R could sell out arenas in select markets in the US (MSG, for example). But I don't think they're an arena act nationally anymore. Each tour, 2002, 2006 and onward saw declining numbers. IIRC, the last show I was at (Hammerstein 2006) wasn't sold out and that was a ballroom.

[Annie]

Someone was saying GN'R has been "dead in the states since '94"....I disagree.
In 1993 they were selling out arenas in the U.S. In January 1995, despite being largely inactive for a year and a half, their cover of Sympathy for the Devil, which was tacked on a soundtrack, little promotion and no video, hit #55 on the Billboard Hot 100.

And you think this refutes that point, in the context it was brought up?

Because the rest of that post that started out with that premise, a post that was fairly detailed as I recall, went on to talk about GNR's perception since the relaunch.  In 2001.

Do you honestly think his point was wrong because he didn't take into account they were still relevant a mere one year later?  Or that relevance is defined by a sound from a soundtrack hitting #55 on the charts, which is a whole other argument anyway?  Do you think that's where he was going with that?

Seems like a stretch.  Moreover, it seems like you are being intentionally obtuse about the point he was making.

I think GN'R was a presence in the states until 2006. I honestly think Axl/the camp kept people waiting too long and a majority of the fans in the U.S. lost interest or moved on after 2007 or so. 2002 was a huge blow to the whole idea of a "new Guns N' Roses", though. I remember back then having to basically explain away Axl's bizarre appearance, his voice and then finally the 2002 tour cancellation to people. My sister, who was a HUGE fan in the 80s and 90s, she was like, 'What happened to him?' after seeing the VMAs. And then after Philly, she was telling me how lucky I was that he showed at the MSG gig I was at the day before. She had stopped caring for the most part in the late 90s, but stopped caring completely after 2002. I imagine she wasn't the only old school fan of the same mindset.

I still think new GN'R could sell out arenas in select markets in the US (MSG, for example). But I don't think they're an arena act nationally anymore. Each tour, 2002, 2006 and onward saw declining numbers. IIRC, the last show I was at (Hammerstein 2006) wasn't sold out and that was a ballroom.

All the Hammerstein shows were sold out and they were EPIC! So grateful that I got to go and see Izzy on stage. Axl's appearance was not bizarre. What is bizarre is that you need to keep making these same mean spirited comments.

[Jim Bob]

No.   If you are a Guns N' Roses fan, its because you enjoy the music from at least one of the eras and nothing can take that away.

[Ginger King]

I saw this over the weekend and it made me think of this thread.  Bruce Springsteen just announced a 2016 tour.  From his website (http://brucespringsteen.net/) it notes that ?each night of the tour will be mixed for release as high-quality downloads or CDs.?  That?s something that?s unfathomable as a GnR fan?here we are debating which hypothetical concerts we?d like to hear.  The Boss? site also has a new 4 CD/3 DVD box set collection?again, things we only dream about and which (may or may not) exist in The Vault.

Why can?t we have these things?  No clue.  Clearly, it can be done, but for whatever reason, it?s an impossible feat here.

So, do we have it bad?  No, but others have it a lot better.

[Princess Leia]

I saw this over the weekend and it made me think of this thread.  Bruce Springsteen just announced a 2016 tour.  From his website (http://brucespringsteen.net/) it notes that ?each night of the tour will be mixed for release as high-quality downloads or CDs.?  That?s something that?s unfathomable as a GnR fan?here we are debating which hypothetical concerts we?d like to hear.  The Boss? site also has a new 4 CD/3 DVD box set collection?again, things we only dream about and which (may or may not) exist in The Vault.

Why can?t we have these things?  No clue.  Clearly, it can be done, but for whatever reason, it?s an impossible feat here.

So, do we have it bad?  No, but others have it a lot better.

I think I can help you out a little. Not so long ago I read that The Boss signed a new contract with his record company. Besides a big amount of money the deal was about making CDs, DVDs and box set collection. That?s why he is doing it. It is in his contract.

When it comes to GN?R we don?t know anything about the kind of contract Axl has. If there is such a contract to begin with. As for the old band contract with Geffen, all I know is it was for 6 albums. That?s what Duff says in his book.

[jarmo]

The Boss? site also has a new 4 CD/3 DVD box set collection?again, things we only dream about and which (may or may not) exist in The Vault.

Yes, and when was it recorded?
Those Springsteen fans waited a while to get those The River outtakes didn't they? 



/jarmo