You are not logged in. Please register or login.

#721 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 730 weeks ago

Ali
Scabbie wrote:

On a slightly different tangent can't help but notice how far removed from the cd theme the current promo is for the sa tour. Perhaps they are making an effort to 'move on' from chinese democracy. About time in my opinion!

Are you are about that?  The poster I've seen looks like what we saw during the last Euro tour.

Ali

#722 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 730 weeks ago

Ali
tejastech08 wrote:
Ali wrote:
tejastech08 wrote:

Factually speaking, the record company only has one album in their possession after spending that $15 million. Axl might never release the alleged "vault" tracks.

Not the point.  The point was he didn't just record 14 songs, or one album's worth of material.  Axl has confirmed the existence of about 10 other songs and at one point told RS they were working on 32 songs. 

I never said more than one album has been released or will be released.  I said the entire some of money was not spent on just a single album's worth of material.  I don't see how that is disputable in any way.

Ali

If it never gets released, does it really matter how much he recorded? Somehow I doubt the record company will feel like they got their money's worth if Axl recorded 40 tracks and only released 14. Hell, I doubt they would feel like they got their money's worth if he recorded 400 tracks and released all of them. That is an insane amount of cash to spend.

I don't know if the record company could ever feel they got their money's worth and/or what it would take to make them feel that way.  I don't think any of us can really speak to that.

Like I said, it was exorbitant, obviously, but it just wasn't ONLY 14 songs that were written and recorded.  That's all.  So, the entire sum was not for just a single album's worth of material.  Whether or not another album comes out, that is another story.

Ali

#723 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 730 weeks ago

Ali
tejastech08 wrote:
Ali wrote:
tejastech08 wrote:

This is Axl Rose we're talking about. Detailed financial analysis? Remember this is the same guy who spent $15 million making a single album. 16

Yeah, but like buzzsaw said, it wasn't really his money. Also, I think it's obvious it wasn't just 14 songs that were being worked on, too. Not that $15 million isn't exorbitant, but factually speaking, it wasn't jus one album.

But, I'm not saying only the finances should or actually will dictate the decision-making. I just hope it's considered.

Ali

Factually speaking, the record company only has one album in their possession after spending that $15 million. Axl might never release the alleged "vault" tracks.

Not the point.  The point was he didn't just record 14 songs, or one album's worth of material.  Axl has confirmed the existence of about 10 other songs and at one point told RS they were working on 32 songs. 

I never said more than one album has been released or will be released.  I said the entire some of money was not spent on just a single album's worth of material.  I don't see how that is disputable in any way.

Ali

#724 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 730 weeks ago

Ali
tejastech08 wrote:
Ali wrote:

I would hope a detailed financial analysis is being done to help determine from a financial perspective, at least, the best course of action.

Ali

This is Axl Rose we're talking about. Detailed financial analysis? Remember this is the same guy who spent $15 million making a single album. 16

Yeah, but like buzzsaw said, it wasn't really his money. Also, I think it's obvious it wasn't just 14 songs that were being worked on, too. Not that $15 million isn't exorbitant, but factually speaking, it wasn't jus one album.

But, I'm not saying only the finances should or actually will dictate the decision-making. I just hope it's considered.

Ali

#725 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 730 weeks ago

Ali
russtcb wrote:
tejastech08 wrote:

Theaters are the only realistic way to go. Time for Uncle Axl to get his ego in check.

It's not even a matter of "Axl getting his ego in check". I've been screaming for theater shows since the 02 tour was booked. It's a win/win for the band, here's why;

Guns N' Roses comes to your city, they book some theater that seats between 1000-4000 seats, they price tickets reasonably, it becomes THE ticket in town. Period. I don't care what lineup of GN'R they tour with, GNR at a place a little too small creates so much positive buzz it's not even funny.

So they book this tour, radio stations give out tickets to caller X, the tickets are all over Stub Hub, etc, people talk to other people; "DUDE! You got GNR tickets! Man, I would've loved to have been able to get those!" Then you still have that "danger factor" Axl seems to love so much. Will Axl show up? What time will he do it? Will it be a whole show? Will Axl go off on someone or something?

And then best case scenario, the show goes off without a hitch (as many more have than haven't since 02), the people at the show continue the buzz. "Dude, I saw GN'R the other night, they were AWESOME! Axl's still got it!" etc etc.

Then after a couple rounds of those, you've got the cache to pull off an arena tour again if you wish. Or even be invited to more of the super popular US festivals, etc.

I'm telling you, a Guns N' Roses Theater US Tour is and has been THE best option for the band for almost 10 years now. And I really don't think it's got anything to do with Axl's ego. I just think that the people at the wheel of "the GNR machine" so to speak, really don't know enough about how to promote this band properly.

I understand what you're saying, but like Faldor said, you have to look at the numbers, really.  What's the overhead for a theater vs. an arena show, what are the differences in potential ticket sale grosses, are there differences in merch sales, what kind of per show guarantees can the band get, etc.

I would hope a detailed financial analysis is being done to help determine from a financial perspective, at least, the best course of action.

Ali

#726 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 731 weeks ago

Ali
tejastech08 wrote:
Ali wrote:

As a more concise example, a thread was started declaring that Amazon was selling CD at $1.95 and how that related to the law of supply and demand.  This poster later claimed they were just "reporting" this information.  The problem is this was done on a GN'R fan forum, in a particular section where it is well known that there are many, many fans of the new band.  To top it off, comparisons were made to the price of Slash's album. That is the quintessential example of trolling in my book.

I can't agree with your assessment. It's not trolling to point out the obvious. Best Buy was trying to get rid of the stock they still had of the album. Amazon basically price-matched it, which they've been known to do on a lot of other products. I love buying Blu-ray from Amazon, especially if they get in a price war with Best Buy or Wal-Mart.

I'm sorry, but it was trolling.  Perhaps if you knew the poster's history/style you would have a better understanding of the situation.  It was trolling, plain and simple in this case with this particular poster who takes almost every opportunity to deride Chinese Democracy and the new band.  When I asked said poster why they were claiming they were just "reporting" the information (actually told them to be honest about what they were doing) - when the same poster started a thread a few months ago the same as this, merely substituting the name Best Buy for Amazon and got a negative reaction - he personally insulted me instead of addressing the issue at hand.

Bottom line, he started the exact same kind of thread a few months ago when Best Buy started selling the album at $1.99.  Based off that, he knew what kind of reaction he was going to get.  He started a nearly identical thread.  He was choosing to provoke that kind of reaction.  That is trolling, plain and simple.

Ali

#727 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 731 weeks ago

Ali
misterID wrote:

There is trolling. And there is difference of opinion. The two are not the same. And it has nothing to do with negativity. I think Mikka is a troll, without a doubt, when it comes to the main GNR boards. To the point where it gets to personal insults. Yet people will support and defend Mikka and not call him out because they agree with Mikka's "negative opinions." That's trollish behavior. It's not about someone having a negative opinion, I can get along with people who don't think it's GNR, it's when it goes past just being personal opinion and you're deliberately starting an argument (with almost every post about the new line up, Axl, whatever) or deliberately being a dick.

I think that nearly everyone at HTGTH is a troll. And they're all "positive."

I've never deducted karma from Mikka, even when he's called me an idiot and shit like that for the simple reason that I disagreed with him. And even though I've gotten negative karma for telling him to shut up for doing it to others. There's not an even handedness to people with just "negative opinions" about GNR to keep things civil. It is what it is.

Agreed.  There is a distinct difference between a mere difference of opinion and a troll.  I don't consider everyone who has a different view of what is and what is not GN'R a troll.

As an example, when someone consistently pops into threads on the new band, their tours or Chinese Democracy and makes negative comments for the mere sake of making negative comments or provoking a response, that is a troll.  For example, basically every thread BBA has ever started on MyGNR.  As a more concise example, a thread was started declaring that Amazon was selling CD at $1.95 and how that related to the law of supply and demand.  This poster later claimed they were just "reporting" this information.  The problem is this was done on a GN'R fan forum, in a particular section where it is well known that there are many, many fans of the new band.  To top it off, comparisons were made to the price of Slash's album.

That is the quintessential example of trolling in my book.  There are several people that I don't agree with when it comes to GN'R, but if they are respectful and courteous and don't pull that kind of flame-baiting shit, then I don't consider them trolls.

Ali

#728 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 731 weeks ago

Ali
russtcb wrote:

I guess I just don't understand going to a GNR fan site to constantly claim that GNR doesn't exist.

Agreed.

Nor do I understand those that take shots at the new band for no other obvious reason other than to provoke a reaction from the fans of the new era of GN'R.  Granted, that doesn't really happen here as much, but on other boards, christ, it happens a lot.  It's more than incomprehensible - it's utterly pointless.

Ali

#729 Re: Guns N' Roses » Guitarist DJ ASHBA: I Have No Reason To Kiss Axl Rose's Ass » 731 weeks ago

Ali

I don't see why it is so hard to believe that Axl has been tinkering around with some stuff that Ashba is legitimately impressed with.  If you have ever read Lonn Friend's book, he talks about Axl playing him "November Rain" for the first time and his reaction read similar to DJ's.  In fact, having listened to the interview with DJ, he sounds quite genuine in his enthusiasm. 

I also agree that there is no reason to doubt that DJ is sending Axl ideas for songs.  Some of those may strike a chord with Axl and the whole band will be involved in the further writing and development of that song.

Ali

#730 Re: Guns N' Roses » Azoff-Axl Lawsuit Settled: Includes "comprehensive touring agreement" » 732 weeks ago

Ali
buzzsaw wrote:
Ali wrote:
buzzsaw wrote:

I live buisness.  Trust me, if Azoff thought he could make money off a tour, it would have happened in a second.  The only reason a tour didn't happen is because of Axl or because there was no money to be made. 

When's the last time GnR completed a tour in the US?  I don't think Azoff blacklisted GnR in the US; I think Axl did.  He made it where they were unmarketable and nobody wanted to touch them.  THAT is why the touring clause is in there.  It wasn't happening any other way...and it still might not happen.

If it's really about making money, then why now would Axl and Azoff strike a touring agreement?  Is a GN'R tour more profitable now for some reason I don't see?  Nothing has changed to make GN'R more popular.


Ali

You're looking at it from the wrong point of view.  Maybe Axl wanted to tour the US, but couldn't (regardless of the reason), so he puts this language into the agreement.  I don't know...just throwing out a plauseable theory.

"Wrong" point of view?  And, now it's "regardless of the reason"?  O.k. 

Being in a legal battle with the Executive Chairman of Live Nation Entertainment (The merged entity consisting of Live Nation and Ticketmaster) certainly can't help wanting to mount a significant tour in the US.

Ali

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB