You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
They should have just let him quit during that day when they signed over the rights. Things were already going south in the band and there was already tension all around. Why sign them over to give him more power when they are already pissed at him for some of his actions? Was Izzy around when this happened (I forgot when he quit)? He would have been the one guy in the old band who wouldn't have put up with that stunt. The other 2 guys were too fucking stoned or drunk to think well.
Depends on which side of the story you believe. For years Axl never said anything on the matter, so most people consider Slash's version of it the truth. If you read Axl's version of it, it's pretty different from Slash's. And it almost makes me wonder that Slash did lie about some (or maybe all) of the story over the years. Why else would Axl be so pissed at him?
http://web.gunsnroses.com/news/article. … &fext=.jsp
So let's start here... the whole Axl wouldn't go on stage yada yada... is complete and utter crap.
Never happened, all made up, fallacy and fantasy. Not one single solitary thread of truth to it. Had that been the case I would've have been cremated years ago legally, could've cleaned me out for the name and damages. It's called under duress with extenuating circumstances. In fact the time that was mentioned the attorneys were all in Europe with us dealing with Adler depositions.
Couldn't talk sooner as it could have jeopardized whatever nonsense was going on.
When Guns renegotiated our contract with Geffen I had the bit about the name added in as protection for myself as I had come up with the name and then originally started the band with it. It had more to do with management than the band as our then manager was always tryin' to convince someone they should fire me. As I had stopped speaking with him he sensed his days were numbered and was bending any ear he could along with attempting to sell our renegotiation out for a personal payday from Geffen.
It was added to the contract and everyone signed off on it. It wasn't hidden in fine print etc as you had to initial the section verifying you had acknowledged it.
Now at that time I didn't know or think about brand names or corporate value etc. All I knew is that I came in with the name and from day one everyone had agreed to it being mine should we break up and now it was in writing.
I still didn't grasp any other issues until long after I'd left and formed a new partnership which was only an effort to salvage Guns not steal it.
In my opinion the reality of the shift and the public embarrassment and ridicule by others (which included a lot of not so on the level business types he was associating with at the time) for not contesting the rights to the brand name, were more than Slash could openly face. Also we aren't lawyers or formally business educated so it was just a matter of all of us being naïve and doing what we thought was right at the time. Slash was imo being on the up and up in agreeing I had the rights and I wasn't trying to be some snake in the grass pulling a fast one. The others could've cared less.
But when the reality of the breakup hit and the strategy to have me crawl back was put into play Slash had to save face and get business team and public support. Painting me as the one who held a crowd hostage forcing the others to sign over the name worked out pretty well in that regard. I'm the bad guy and Duff, the fans and most importantly himself were the victims. Oh and they had actually made the sacrifice for the crowd, the people, the fans at the show. But again.... IT NEVER HAPPENED.
Media and others ignorantly, wrongly and falsely harped on about it at mine and the fans expense for years and Slash has hoped to use all that to continually sue and have some sort of legal nonsense going on behind the scenes in an effort to reverse things. He wouldn't have been able to get the support and action on the part of his various team members over the years to do so if the truth were out there especially when the statute of limitations had run out years ago.
If his version of it is even close to the truth, he has good reason to never want anything to do with Slash again. His name has been dragged through the mud for years on this issue. I'd be pissed if I were in his shoes too, assuming his story is even remotely close to the truth.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
I don't know if they're lying, I think it's all perspective.
Axl is probably true that he NEVER directly held a crowd hostage for the rights. But he frequently held shows hostage because he was upset about other stuff didin't he? There's a ton of late starts back in the day and they're mostly associated with things happening to him.
Meanwhile, ask, why did managment want rid of him? When everyone knows he has an austoundingly good rock presence and vocals?
So I'd say, he probably did put the clause in to protect himself from management, not 'steal' the rights. But then managment probably wanted rid of him because of the walking off stage, going on 2 hours late etc. Ask yourself also - what would have happened if the guys had told him to go fuckhimself - Surely there would have been some repercussions for the tour or next album in some regard - even if there's no one incident where axl had his 'contract gun' pointed at their heads backstage.
ThusI think it's perspective. To slash what he says is basicly true. To Axl it's an utter lie. And somehow they're both kind of right.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
ThusI think it's perspective. To slash what he says is basicly true. To Axl it's an utter lie. And somehow they're both kind of right.
I'm sure that is the case. The problem for Axl is that Slash's side of it was told and retold in the media for 10+ years. At some point it becomes propaganda and is ingrained in the public. And from his perspective, I'm sure he feels like he has been dumped on in an unfair way.
At the end of the day, regardless of why it happened...even Slash admits he voluntarily signed over his rights. That is his damn fault for being an idiot. And yet you never see it portrayed that way by the media even though it's the truth. How foolish can you be? You have a 20% stake (or higher after Steven and Izzy left) in a gold mine music brand, and what do you do with it? You hand it over to someone else. Absolutely one of the dumbest things in the history of the music business.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
^ For sure.
But I guess, firstly there's the drugs, and secondly, they seemed on top of the world at the time. I mean AFD is still one of the best albums ever to most rock fans. and look how mental UYI went. And while they'd had their issues, in the end they probably knew they had an awesome chemestry wiyh Axl, and somehow things always worked out killer after the drama.
I don't think when they signed that deal they ever really thought they'd wind up not in GNR, or that the next album would be synth based, or that Axl's mate from someplace would be re-doing Slash's parts.
I see your point - they do assume some responsibility for signing it.
But them what's the alternative? Let the band disolve on the spot? Even if Axl wasn't threatening it, it may well have gone that way if they can't agree.
That deal is what drove izzy from the band. Essentially it drove out Slash and Duff too...just they had more attempts to stick it out first.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
But them what's the alternative? Let the band disolve on the spot?
Yes, you keep your rights in the band and hire a new singer.
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
Just for the record, Izzy was supposedly over Axl's disrespect for the band and the audience with constant lateness and holding the band hostage. Izzy's belly started to fill after St. Louis, and I wanna say it was Mannheim, Germany in 1991 (according to Slash), when Axl walked off stage for no apparent reason and refused to return. Matt Sorum was the only one with balls big enough (yes, and kudos to him) to say "fuck this" and went out and confronted Axl and demanded he return to the stage. Axl & Matt got into a near fist-fight (according to Slash) and were broken up by the band. Axl locked himself in a van and still refused to return to the stage. Security fearing a repeat of St. Louis locked all the gates so Axl could not leave. Once it cemented in Axl's mind that he was not going anywhere anytime soon until he returned to the stage, he returned and finished the show.
Izzy informed them the day after that he was leaving the band once that leg was over.
- monkeychow
- Rep: 661
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
Yeah...same day that Axl put Izzy on a salary according to photographer robert john. I dont doubt the walking off stage was a factor but the real kicker was being removed as a partner. Izzy says so himself in that interview where he says something about how being told your no longer a part of something you helped make sucks.
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
Yeah your right. At the time it seemed to Axl like Izzy just wasn't "in it" at the level he felt he needed to be like himself, and Slash & Duff.
Bottom line is it was a power grab. Axl has his side, and they might've been idiots, but don't you think it's possible that Axl manipulated AND took advantage of their trust in him as a friend?
Axl pulled off a brilliant business move, that to this day is a playbook right from 'ole J.R. But he sacrificed his friends, his bandmates, his integrity, and the real Guns N' Roses to do it. Period. I love the guy, but for that move he'll forever be on 'fuck you' status. Just the way it is.
- tejastech08
- Rep: 194
Re: Slash added Welcome to the Jungle to the setlist!
Yeah your right. At the time it seemed to Axl like Izzy just wasn't "in it" at the level he felt he needed to be like himself, and Slash & Duff.
Bottom line is it was a power grab. Axl has his side, and they might've been idiots, but don't you think it's possible that Axl manipulated AND took advantage of their trust in him as a friend?
Axl pulled off a brilliant business move, that to this day is a playbook right from 'ole J.R. But he sacrificed his friends, his bandmates, his integrity, and the real Guns N' Roses to do it. Period. I love the guy, but for that move he'll forever be on 'fuck you' status. Just the way it is.
Agree with that. I recently decided to change the artist for Chinese Democracy to "Axl Rose" on my iPod. When Slash released his solo album, I figured it's not any different from CD. Nu-GN'R is a hybrid cover band and supporting band for Axl Rose the solo artist. Fuck him for trying to pawn it off as anything else to the public.
