Jump to content

Official GNR Social Media Update / Discussion


Recommended Posts

Well we don't know if they have because still noone is saying anything. This is just so bizarre. Even today the members left out of this are still saying nothing. If there were no ties to bind them, they would be doing a lot of talking, or you would assume, and still nothing. None of this makes much sense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is weird how Slash and Duff have not fought for the Sorums, Adlers, Stradlins or Clarkes. I have to say I'm somewhat disappointed in them - more so Duff who hitherto seemed to possess integrity.

Maybe they just think that it's not worth it anymore? Or maybe they did, we don't know that...

Edited by GNR-girl
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is weird how Slash and Duff have not fought for the Sorums, Adlers, Stradlins or Clarkes. I have to say I'm somewhat disappointed in them - more so Duff who hitherto seemed to possess integrity.

I dont think They have a right, Cause They are in Guns N' Roses now. N' Axl own the Band... So its Axl decision  if The Others are in or not. Also it will be another fight if They do that to Axl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GNR-girl said:

Maybe they just think that it's not worth it? Or maybe they did, we don't know that...

Well Sorum ''wasn't asked'' so we know that for a fact. We can guess that Clarke was not asked also. We do not know the facts of Stradlin and Adler but if they were ''not asked'' either, it would be a fairly low maneuver, especially considering Stradlin is a founding member.

Just now, SerenityScorp said:

I dont think They have a right, Cause They are in Guns N' Roses now. N' Axl own the Band... So its Axl decision  if The Others are in or not. Also it will be another fight if They do that to Axl.

But why agree to an Axl dictatorship - why sell your friends out - in fact don't answer that (chh ching)? Burying your band loyalties just because of Axl's peculiarities is the very definition of lacking integrity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Well Sorum ''wasn't asked'' so we know that for a fact. We can guess that Clarke was not asked also. We do not know the facts of Stradlin and Adler but if they were ''not asked'' either, it would be a fairly low maneuver, especially considering Stradlin is a founding member.

But why agree to an Axl dictatorship - why sell your friends out - in fact don't answer that (chh ching)? Burying your band loyalties just because of Axl's peculiarities is the very definition of lacking integrity.

Its not dictatorship. Right now, Axl own the contract Band name. So technically He owns the Band. Axl decide everything in Guns N' Roses now. Slash N' Duff basically is like Fortus N' Others now

Edited by SerenityScorp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SerenityScorp said:

Its not dictatorship. Right now, Axl own the contract Band name. So technically He owns the Band. Axl decide everything in Guns N' Roses now. Slash N' Duff basically is like Fortus N' Others now

How do you know all of this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, GNR-girl said:

How do you know all of this?

 

As I said before, Axl own the Band's name contract. He own Guns N' Roses now. So technically He control Guns N' Roses. Slash N' Duff is just like Fortus N' Others.Temporary hired Members just to fill the position. They have no right to decide something. If that contract isnt exist, They still can discuss Sorum N' Others with Axl. Its up to Axl now. Like it or not thats how it is.

Edited by SerenityScorp
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SerenityScorp said:

As I said before, Axl own the Band's name contract. He own Guns N' Roses now. So technically He control Guns N' Roses. Slash N' Duff is just like Fortus N' Others.Temporary hired Members just to fill the position. They have no right to decide something. If that contract isnt exist, They still can discuss Sorum N' Others with Axl. Its up to Axl now. Like it or not thats how it is.

And you think that Slash and Duff are cool with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SerenityScorp said:

As I said before, Axl own the Band's name contract. He own Guns N' Roses now. So technically He control Guns N' Roses. Slash N' Duff is just like Fortus N' Others.Temporary hired Members just to fill the position. They have no right to decide something. If that contract isnt exist, They still can discuss Sorum N' Others with Axl. Its up to Axl now. Like it or not thats how it is.

If that's the case, either Fortus and Frank would be part of the promo or Duff and Slash wouldn't. 

More likely is the old partnership is leading now where Axl, Slash and Duff are legal partners. Axl owning the name doesn't matter.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SerenityScorp said:

As I said before, Axl own the Band's name contract. He own Guns N' Roses now. So technically He control Guns N' Roses. Slash N' Duff is just like Fortus N' Others.Temporary hired Members just to fill the position. They have no right to decide something. If that contract isnt exist, They still can discuss Sorum N' Others with Axl. Its up to Axl now. Like it or not thats how it is.

No, no. We all know Axl owns the name however, Slash and Duff brought with them there own negotiation position, pertaining to their worth. Axl was playing casinos without their presence. Now he is selling tickets for stadia. That is because of what Slash and Duff bring to the table. That is the difference. There would have been a lot of negotiations between respective lawyers before this reunion, yet, to have meekly accepted the role as nugnr hirelings, and not fought for the likes of Stradlin and Sorum, etc. is disappointing. You may also point to the playing of Chinese Democracy stinkers.

I would have slightly expected this from Slash, who is a chancy seeker of money at the best of times and consequentially capable of colossal sell-outs (remember the super bowl glittery hat embarrassment?), but not McKagan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

No, no. We all know Axl owns the name however, Slash and Duff brought with them there own negotiation position, pertaining to their worth. Axl was playing casinos without their presence. Now he is selling tickets for stadia. That is because of what Slash and Duff bring to the table. That is the difference. There would have been a lot of negotiations between respective lawyers before this reunion, yet, to have meekly accepted the role as nugnr hirelings, and not fought for the likes of Stradlin and Sorum, etc. is disappointing. You may also point to the playing of Chinese Democracy stinkers.

I would have slightly expected this from Slash, who is a chancy seeker of money at the best of times and consequentially capable of colossal sell-outs (remember the super bowl glittery hat embarrassment?), but not McKagan.

Super bowl glittery hat embarrasment?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IncitingChaos said:

Maybe they are having fun with this lineup, where as inserting Steven or Izzy would seem like a chore? So far so good right. I don't see any reason to complain

Maybe they just don't want any drama this time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duff knows 4tus and Frank for 6 years now,and he seems very cool with them. Slash likes Richard,he wanted him in his band,and they seem to have pretty good chemistry.Of course Duff and Slash are NOT hired members.I can't imagine Slash compromise with something he doesn't like.He is a rock star, he is a bigger name than Axl nowdays so he has his rules..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to reminds You all about this but I keep wondering, Back at Oct 2005, when visiting Axl House, Why Slash badmouthing Sorum, Scott even Duff tht always with Him, His best friend... Is He really wanted to fix His relationship with Axl tht bad or wht? Even thought I like Him, In My eyes He is a liar N' maybe a backstabber ?

Edited by SerenityScorp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SerenityScorp said:

Sorry to reminds You all about this but I keep wondering, Back at Oct 2005, when visiting Axl House, Why Slash badmouthing Sorum, Scott even Duff tht always with Him, His best friend... Is He really wanted to fix His relationship with Axl or wht? Even thought I like Him, In My eyes He is a liar N' maybe a backstabber ?

Were you there and do you know that is actually what happened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JaxTeller said:

Duff knows 4tus and Frank for 6 years now,and he seems very cool with them. Slash likes Richard,he wanted him in his band,and they seem to have pretty good chemistry.Of course Duff and Slash are NOT hired members.I can't imagine Slash compromise with something he doesn't like.He is a rock star, he is a bigger name than Axl nowdays so he has his rules..

Well I hope They both will stay in Guns. I think Axl seems okay if They doin' solo project too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SerenityScorp said:

Sorry to reminds You all about this but I keep wondering, Back at Oct 2005, when visiting Axl House, Why Slash badmouthing Sorum, Scott even Duff tht always with Him, His best friend... Is He really wanted to fix His relationship with Axl or wht? Even thought I like Him, In My eyes He is a liar N' maybe a backstabber ?

Let's not forget that Slash had a drug-relapse during those times. And perhaps he was tired of Velvet Revolver and Duff just so happened to come in the crossfire as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...