I look at it like this:

If you are Izzy. You co-founded the band and you co-wrote some of the most successful songs that the band has relied on for 30 years. Then the guys you created the band with offer you a gig where they want to redo the songs of the past again, and have you there to add to the legitimacy of doing that. They've been offered and will make millions and millions of dollars each. They'll give you just a few thousand. You tell them no thanks.

If you are Slash, Axl, Duff. You have been offered tens of millions of dollars for a handful of nights work. The money is contingent on you 3 showing up but it doesn't matter to the offer who else comes. If you cut in Izzy you get a little bit more street-cred with the hardest of hardcore fans, but essentially, the end of the war between Axl and Slash will take precedence amongst almost all concert goers and for the media. Having Izzy there as an equal will literally cost you millions of dollars each - for no reason other than impressing hardcores - who you long ago realised will always find something else they don't like. So you will lose millions to have him there and what will you gain? You will once again be working with a person who is notorious for bailing on projects before they are completed. Just like he did with GNR, VR, some of his solo bands, the hall of fame, and basically almost everything he's been known to get involved in. So you're taking on that risk yet costing yourself literally millions of dollars to have that new problem. No thanks.

So it's not in either party's interest to reunite. Other than for Friendship. But let's face it - this band stopped being about that many many years ago when Adler was fired if not even earlier.

Whatever the situation around Izzy's touring... I wonder what it means for any unheard material sitting in the vault that he co-wrote? We know he wrote Down By The Ocean for Axl, we know he worked on a lot of the tracks in the Velvet Revolver vault. Can he veto their use on any putative future album, or does the material belong to Axl (or Slash and Duff?).

You guys make valid points but I can't feel great with this "it's just business" approach.
That's exactly my point - it clearly is just all about business and a cash grab, so I guess we can all acknowledge that.

Just a shame that the principal songwriter, founding member and soul of the band isn't part of it because they wanted to split an absolute fortune 3 ways instead of 4. I always thought Guns represented something different than commerce. From a music/art, legacy and 'band of brother's/shared history sense, it is a shame for me. But perhaps I'm too much of a romantic and should just enjoy this solely for what it is - a massive, last chance saloon cash grab feeding off the 30-40 set who never saw them in their heyday.

I also find the "Izzy is a flake" apologism laughable - look at the output of 'Guns N' Roses' since his departure? He bailed on a bunch of barely functioning drug addicts, alcoholics and a raging megalomaniac out of touch with reality in 91 who was trying and succeeding in minimising his involvement in the band more and more. You can chart a very clear trajectory of pre-GNR Sucking and post with Izzys presence and departure.