Guns N' Roses to return to the road in 2025

[gunsnchalupas]

2 hours ago, Tom2112 said:

Yeah I can't imagine selling the idea of smaller venues to Axl. He likes the big show. Obviously Springsteen did his theatre run where he robbed his fans, so there is that... But I don't see Axl going into storyteller mode, he barely talks to the audience as it is.

Gnr are safe from losing their audience size though. As people pointed out Axls voice has declined for a good few years and they still sell tickets A) people aren't as aware B) some people don't care as much as a more critical listener C) GNR are one of a few big classic rock bands with hits that a gig going demographic still want to see, especially when so many other bands are now aging out. Gnr are aging out too, but they can still operate for another few years of Axls willing to do some similar work to JBJ,who takes lessons every day to get his voice back.

 

He played Vegas with a flying piano, they did their re-debut at the Troubadour, and he allowed Slash back into the band without him having to publicly apologize for things he said in the 1990s.

The theatre tour idea is a small time cash grab. They would do a handful of major markets with it being known ahead of time that it is a one and done thing. They could sell 1000 tickets at $2000 each. People will say that is too much, but they could include a commemorative VIP lanyard and a meet and greet with Steven Adler, and his mother.

I just ran the calculations, and that is 2 million dollars a show. They currently do about 20,000-40,000 people in stadiums, but most tickets are sold for like 20 bucks and their current offering of "meet Axl's gardener with no commemorative lanyard" isn't as exciting for a meet and greet. That's like barely 100k in revenue per show. They have toured the last few years for the love of the music. Love of the music only goes so far. When Axl sees the numbers, he will agree to do an 800 seat venue. 

You also have to factor in both the business-to-business aspect of that kind of tour, and the trickle down effect where it gets the band back in big time mainstream news sites that the general public read everyday like Blabbermouth, so when they kick Steven Adler out of the band and go back to being a NuGNR tribute act, they can maybe get another year out of doing half full stadiums. Ideally from a business POV, they lie and say that the 8 big city dates are it for the AFD 5, but they time the tour just ahead of all the big festivals where the organizers who otherwise were less interested in the NuGNR tribute act are willing to pay one more time if they get Steven Adler in the lineup, and they will get a few guaranteed paydays at the big festivals.

 

Edited July 5 by gunsnchalupas

[DoMw94]

39 minutes ago, vloors said:

Axls voice in 2016/2017 was killer and they had no problem selling out their own shows with the threeunion. Performance from Axl was generally well received from fans and media. Axl in most eyes was back at a top level performing where he had fallen off prior to the reunion.

Was it though? It was better than it is now, but it was nothing like the voice of the band's peak. Songs like Sweet Child o' Mine were far from perfect

[vloors]

11 minutes ago, DoMw94 said:

Was it though? It was better than it is now, but it was nothing like the voice of the band's peak. Songs like Sweet Child o' Mine were far from perfect

Of course but we arent getting 80s or even early 90s back.

Still 2016/17 was a alot better than we have now. And alot better than 2011/2012 

 

Edited July 5 by vloors

[DoMw94]

44 minutes ago, vloors said:

Of course but we arent getting 80s or even early 90s back.

Still 2016/17 was a alot better than we have now. And alot better than 2011/2012 

 

Yes but it still wasn't what casuals and the wider world would deem 'good', generally. The bar wasn't exactly high.

2016-17 was good in terms of modern Axl, but it wasn't good in terms of Axl in general. That's fine, age and wear and tear happen.

And this is my point: a less-than-perfect Axl Rose still sells tickets. It's not make or break, it's not the be all and end all. He doesn't need to be great to fill venues, he just needs to be okay. He's been okay for a while, bad on the odd day, but aside from the odd song, he's never been what many would regard as 'good'.

Personally, I don't care. I like what we have and I appreciate he sings the way he does as a result of coaching to preserve his voice. Plus there's six other people in the band, I'm a fan of the current lineup as a whole. But people here are talking about mainstream success, being relevant etc. Those days are done. Aside from the band's own big fans, people want to see Guns N' Roses to say they've seen Guns N' Roses. Nobody's buying a ticket because they're current or relevant.

 

Edited July 5 by DoMw94

[Rovim]

16 minutes ago, DoMw94 said:

2016-17 was good in terms of modern Axl, but it wasn't good in terms of Axl in general. That's fine, age and wear and tear happen.

can't do AC/DC on that level without still being great. 2016 was a while ago though. nowdays, Axl's age seems to have caught up with him and also how he treated his voice throughout his career.

[vloors]

27 minutes ago, DoMw94 said:

Yes but it still wasn't what casuals and the wider world would deem 'good', generally. The bar wasn't exactly high.

2016-17 was good in terms of modern Axl, but it wasn't good in terms of Axl in general. That's fine, age and wear and tear happen.

And this is my point: a less-than-perfect Axl Rose still sells tickets. It's not make or break, it's not the be all and end all. He doesn't need to be great to fill venues, he just needs to be okay. He's been okay for a while, bad on the odd day, but aside from the odd song, he's never been what many would regard as 'good'.

Personally, I don't care. I like what we have and I appreciate he sings the way he does as a result of coaching to preserve his voice. Plus there's six other people in the band, I'm a fan of the current lineup as a whole. But people here are talking about mainstream success, being relevant etc. Those days are done. Aside from the band's own big fans, people want to see Guns N' Roses to say they've seen Guns N' Roses. Nobody's buying a ticket because they're current or relevant.

 

I think though with Axls vocal issues all it takes is Slash leaving and the bands done and dusted.

I dont think Axl with his vocal issues can carry a new gen of replacements again under the GnR banner.

And theres not going to be people seeing a gnr without slash and a poorly performing Axl for a bucket list tick off

Edited July 5 by vloors

[DoMw94]

17 minutes ago, Rovim said:

can't do AC/DC on that level without still being great. 2016 was a while ago though. nowdays, Axl's age seems to have caught up with him and also how he treated his voice throughout his career.

Right, but that was an entirely different band and an entirely different set of circumstances.

11 minutes ago, vloors said:

I think though with Axls vocal issues all it takes is Slash leaving and the bands done and dusted.

I dont think Axl with his vocal issues can carry a new gen of replacements again under the GnR banner.

And theres not going to be people seeing a gnr without slash and a poorly performing Axl for a bucket list tick off

Agreed entirely.

Axl+Slash is the draw. To many that is Guns N' Roses. Now we've had a taste of it after decades of wondering 'what if', it's that or nothing now.

Edited July 5 by DoMw94

[Rovim]

5 minutes ago, DoMw94 said:

Right, but that was an entirely different band and an entirely different set of circumstances.

yes, but it was still the same Axl singing very challenging material. challenging enough imo to make my previous post still correct. I think he was more motivated and worked hard to be ready for it, but it doesn't change how great he was, at least for me.

[History2010]

55 minutes ago, vloors said:

I think though with Axls vocal issues all it takes is Slash leaving and the bands done and dusted.

I dont think Axl with his vocal issues can carry a new gen of replacements again under the GnR banner.

And theres not going to be people seeing a gnr without slash and a poorly performing Axl for a bucket list tick off

I agree. Axl would retire if Slash left. Slash has been the star of the show since 2016. The whole thing falls apart without him. 

[Cosmo]

9 hours ago, Uncle Bob said:

Most of casuals have no idea who even Duff is. Let alone Izzy and Steven.

It's not about them, it's about "being the original 5". Most people can't name the other two members of Destiny's Child, for example. If Beyonce appeared with "new members", everyone would complain.

[janrichmond]

9 hours ago, gunsnchalupas said:

 

I didn't mean to exclude the more senior members of this forum who have reached 80 or 90, I was just trying to average it out, sir. 

Cheeky git 

BTW I'm female.

 

 

[Tom2112]

5 hours ago, janrichmond said:

Cheeky git 

BTW I'm female.

 

 

Just keeps digging. It's a car crash 

 

14 hours ago, vloors said:

Of course but we arent getting 80s or even early 90s back.

Still 2016/17 was a alot better than we have now. And alot better than 2011/2012 

 

2012 was as good and better than 2016 and far superior to 2017.

I think 2011 was probably equal to some of 2017, and better than 2019-present

[colonizedmind]

18 hours ago, vloors said:

I have to disagree. 

Axls voice in 2016/2017 was killer and they had no problem selling out their own shows with the threeunion. Performance from Axl was generally well received from fans and media. Axl in most eyes was back at a top level performing where he had fallen off prior to the reunion.

Axls voice in 2023 deteriated to a embarrassing level since the days of easy sellouts running off the back of the threeunion. In 2023 was there any concerts they actually sold out and wasnt heavily discounted? The threeunion hype trains over.

Ticket sales will keep dropping if theres deteriation in quality of the concert (lets be honest Axl is now the weak point) lack of new music or the price they are commanding for the show.

If Axl turns up in 2025 and sounds like garbage the negative press to the general public, word of mouth, along with their ticket pricing isnt going to end well.

If 2025 is going to be successful he needs his A game back vocally or his going to be the next vince neil and ridiculed. Whether thats vocal work, rearranging the songs or cutting songs he can no longer perform.

If not he will be forced back to doing arenas or a vegas residency like in 2011/2012 to sell shows. If he likes it or not thats reality to alot of aged rockers who can no longer sing.

I get what you're saying...but if go back and check 2020/21/22....I'd say '23 had some much better moments and certainly energy than those years...

[allwaystired]

Would anyone here not mind Slash leaving at this stage? 

I'm not sure I would. We'd probably get more music from Slash and it would force Axl to do something new.....or retire. The latter being the preferable option of course! 

It would probably be more interesting to me at this stage to see what the scenario would look like if Slash left than more touring of the same stuff. 

Not that I think Slash will leave of course..no need to have that discussion! 

[SoulMonster]

3 hours ago, allwaystired said:

Would anyone here not mind Slash leaving at this stage? 

I'm not sure I would. We'd probably get more music from Slash and it would force Axl to do something new.....or retire. The latter being the preferable option of course! 

It would probably be more interesting to me at this stage to see what the scenario would look like if Slash left than more touring of the same stuff. 

Not that I think Slash will leave of course..no need to have that discussion! 

Why would you want Axl to retire? How does it bother you to the extent that you want it to stop, that he keeps touring? If you don't enjoy the shows, don't go. It doesn't hurt you in any way. And then other people, who enjoy the shows, can continue to get that enjoyment. It puzzles me. It's like Taylor Swift. I get zero enjoyment of her tours or music but I don't want her to stop because obviously others do. It doesn't hurt me that she does what she does. So why would you want Axl to retire?

As for Slash leaving. I think I would actually prefer that because I want the rest of the Chinese Democracy era to come out with the original musicians, and I consider the likelihood of this lineup to create anything new to be close to zero. If they do come out with something new, then I would prefer that. 

[gunsnchalupas]

Interest in NuGNR from promoters and fans already cratered before the "regrouping". 

Axl opened a pandora's box when he brought Slash back. There is no way he can tour as Guns N' Roses without Slash. They are both stuck together, because the amount of money and public interest in both sides together dwarfs the amount of interest in them apart.

If you want to hear the NuGNR stuff, your best hope is that GNR remains as popular as possible to the point that someone convinces them it is worth it to dump the archive. If they sell their publishing rights like other bands have done, whoever holds those rights is going to want to capitalize on them as much as possible. The CD sessions have very little wide appeal, but most releases by older bands aren't aimed at wide appeal. They release live albums or rarities albums because the same five figures worth of people buy them on vinyl or CD, and the cost of releasing an album digitally is minimal. Look at someone like Neil Young as an example of this. Not every release these days is meant to be a massive box set, or an album that needs to move 500k album equivalent units to be profitable or successful. Interest in GNR is non-existent in the mainstream, so they are never going back to the days of even 2008 when Best Buy guaranteed 1.3 million units for Chinese Democracy, let alone the 90s when people cared and lined up for UYI. Those are different times. 

It would be nice if they realized that you guys are all mentally ill for following Chinese Democracy for 20 years, and that instead of convincing you guys not to identify as fans of NuGNR, the only way to treat you is with care that affirms your position that Axl could have buried Appetite....so they dump all the 357 versions of TWAT on a streaming service (Church choir mono up 1.0 dB, Snare Doubled Down 2.0 dB, Axl's left shoe untied right shoe tied, etc). It would be a smart move because the average person isn't going to listen to the songs, but it would shine a light on the scope of the Chinese Democracy sessions to help market against he idea that Axl was a lazy TWAT. It would also be a way to monetize the sessions, because a box set is unlikely to sell at amounts needed to justify the cost, but with streaming they might have four figures worth of hardcore fans who will listen to each version of the same song hundreds of times to try and decipher whether Dizzy actually had a flute solo buried in the bridge of Scraped. It's also positive marketing and fan service for a band who is often accused of being out of touch with their hardcore fanbase.

 

[Tom2112]

51 minutes ago, gunsnchalupas said:

Interest in NuGNR from promoters and fans already cratered before the "regrouping". 

Axl opened a pandora's box when he brought Slash back. There is no way he can tour as Guns N' Roses without Slash. They are both stuck together, because the amount of money and public interest in both sides together dwarfs the amount of interest in them apart.

If you want to hear the NuGNR stuff, your best hope is that GNR remains as popular as possible to the point that someone convinces them it is worth it to dump the archive. If they sell their publishing rights like other bands have done, whoever holds those rights is going to want to capitalize on them as much as possible. The CD sessions have very little wide appeal, but most releases by older bands aren't aimed at wide appeal. They release live albums or rarities albums because the same five figures worth of people buy them on vinyl or CD, and the cost of releasing an album digitally is minimal. Look at someone like Neil Young as an example of this. Not every release these days is meant to be a massive box set, or an album that needs to move 500k album equivalent units to be profitable or successful. Interest in GNR is non-existent in the mainstream, so they are never going back to the days of even 2008 when Best Buy guaranteed 1.3 million units for Chinese Democracy, let alone the 90s when people cared and lined up for UYI. Those are different times. 

It would be nice if they realized that you guys are all mentally ill for following Chinese Democracy for 20 years, and that instead of convincing you guys not to identify as fans of NuGNR, the only way to treat you is with care that affirms your position that Axl could have buried Appetite....so they dump all the 357 versions of TWAT on a streaming service (Church choir mono up 1.0 dB, Snare Doubled Down 2.0 dB, Axl's left shoe untied right shoe tied, etc). It would be a smart move because the average person isn't going to listen to the songs, but it would shine a light on the scope of the Chinese Democracy sessions to help market against he idea that Axl was a lazy TWAT. It would also be a way to monetize the sessions, because a box set is unlikely to sell at amounts needed to justify the cost, but with streaming they might have four figures worth of hardcore fans who will listen to each version of the same song hundreds of times to try and decipher whether Dizzy actually had a flute solo buried in the bridge of Scraped. It's also positive marketing and fan service for a band who is often accused of being out of touch with their hardcore fanbase.

 

In America GNR might have cratered. But they played Europe/UK/SA and they were still playing to pretty full to sold out arena sized crowds.

Axl on his own is not going to play stadiums, but he can lure 15000 people to see him, and that's proven. Now that he comes on time, which was the stick everyone used to beat him with there's no reason he couldn't get those crowds again.... voice aside (he could go up and do 1.5hrs, just focus on what sounds good).

But the point I agree is that they are not splitting up again to go solo, or tour as GNR without Slash/Duff. The core will remain until the band stops. I also agree that a archival dump is very unlikely.

[allwaystired]

4 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Why would you want Axl to retire? How does it bother you to the extent that you want it to stop, that he keeps touring? If you don't enjoy the shows, don't go. It doesn't hurt you in any way. And then other people, who enjoy the shows, can continue to get that enjoyment. It puzzles me. It's like Taylor Swift. I get zero enjoyment of her tours or music but I don't want her to stop because obviously others do. It doesn't hurt me that she does what she does. So why would you want Axl to retire?

As for Slash leaving. I think I would actually prefer that because I want the rest of the Chinese Democracy era to come out with the original musicians, and I consider the likelihood of this lineup to create anything new to be close to zero. If they do come out with something new, then I would prefer that. 

Yeah, that's not what I said, clearly, but I'm really not going to have the usual pedantic debate about it, so feel free to misinterpret it, or interpret it as you wish. 

I know you like a LONG drawn out exchange about these things, with pretty much everyone, but I genuinely can't be arsed. Thanks for the interest though! 

Edited July 6 by allwaystired

[DTV88]

The worst musical decision axl made post breaking up one of the biggest bands in the world was not going solo. He could have done anything he wanted in terms of musical direction and he would have been given a lot more latitude and freedom from both the label and fans. 

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, allwaystired said:

Yeah, that's not what I said, clearly, but I'm really not going to have the usual pedantic debate about it, so feel free to misinterpret it, or interpret it as you wish. 

I know you like a LONG drawn out exchange about these things, with pretty much everyone, but I genuinely can't be arsed. Thanks for the interest though! 

You literally said it would be better if Axl retired than continued. 

[Gordon Comstock]

9 hours ago, allwaystired said:

Would anyone here not mind Slash leaving at this stage? 

I'm not sure I would. We'd probably get more music from Slash and it would force Axl to do something new.....or retire. The latter being the preferable option of course! 

It would probably be more interesting to me at this stage to see what the scenario would look like if Slash left than more touring of the same stuff. 

Not that I think Slash will leave of course..no need to have that discussion! 

 

Slash wouldn't have to leave for Axl to do something different... the whole band has their side projects, there's no reason Axl couldn't do a 'solo tour' or residency and then do GNR for another few months a year. Honestly I'd travel to see Axl do a show where he sits at the piano playing covers and jams with a small backing band, telling stories and jokes throughout the show. Just like with the Serpent festival, it would be a lot more fun and interesting than another GNR tour, but of course they'll still go back to that money machine.

[vloors]

2 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

 

Slash wouldn't have to leave for Axl to do something different... the whole band has their side projects, there's no reason Axl couldn't do a 'solo tour' or residency and then do GNR for another few months a year. Honestly I'd travel to see Axl do a show where he sits at the piano playing covers and jams with a small backing band, telling stories and jokes throughout the show. Just like with the Serpent festival, it would be a lot more fun and interesting than another GNR tour, but of course they'll still go back to that money machine.

Axls voice would be even more exposed in a show like that now so wouldnt happen.

Would have been cool years ago though.

I remember Prince did a microphone a a piano tour. But he still had the vocal chops.

Youre right though theres no reason Axl couldnt record, tour or do anything solo but it looks like all he does is play with his cats in his mansion when not touring with gnr.

Edited July 6 by vloors

[allwaystired]

2 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

 

Slash wouldn't have to leave for Axl to do something different... the whole band has their side projects, there's no reason Axl couldn't do a 'solo tour' or residency and then do GNR for another few months a year. Honestly I'd travel to see Axl do a show where he sits at the piano playing covers and jams with a small backing band, telling stories and jokes throughout the show. Just like with the Serpent festival, it would be a lot more fun and interesting than another GNR tour, but of course they'll still go back to that money machine.

Nope, he wouldn't.....but I absolutely don't think he'd do it without the push that would needed by the apple-cart being upset a bit.

I'd love to see him do something like that for sure, but I can't imagine it would ever happen unless it had to. 

[gunsnchalupas]

3 hours ago, DTV88 said:

The worst musical decision axl made post breaking up one of the biggest bands in the world was not going solo. He could have done anything he wanted in terms of musical direction and he would have been given a lot more latitude and freedom from both the label and fans. 

He would not have gotten the support from the label. 

Look at the early costs of the CD sessions and how he was able to pay a band of reasonably high-profile musicians to jam and write random pieces that he later could pull parts from. 

Not to mention if the album came out in the late 90s or early 2000s, the level of promotion granted to something tied to the GNR name would dwarf an Axl solo album. Even if you go to when the album was released and the sessions were bailed out by Best Buy and other business-to-business transactions like Dr.Pepper, odds are those aren't available with Axl as a solo artist. Also factor in money raised touring and how the GNR name itself was a big enough draw to keep them in hockey arenas, vs Axl solo who likely ends up doing smaller buildings.

Both come with their pros and cons because he clearly had a difficult time releasing the album due to some GNR related factors in his control and some out of his control that he may not have had to deal with as a solo artist, but I can't imagine going solo would have lent him more musical freedom given the resources that seemed to be available to him because of the value of the GNR name to record companies. 

[Draguns]

5 minutes ago, gunsnchalupas said:

He would not have gotten the support from the label. 

Look at the early costs of the CD sessions and how he was able to pay a band of reasonably high-profile musicians to jam and write random pieces that he later could pull parts from. 

Not to mention if the album came out in the late 90s or early 2000s, the level of promotion granted to something tied to the GNR name would dwarf an Axl solo album. Even if you go to when the album was released and the sessions were bailed out by Best Buy and other business-to-business transactions like Dr.Pepper, odds are those aren't available with Axl as a solo artist. Also factor in money raised touring and how the GNR name itself was a big enough draw to keep them in hockey arenas, vs Axl solo who likely ends up doing smaller buildings.

Both come with their pros and cons because he clearly had a difficult time releasing the album due to some GNR related factors in his control and some out of his control that he may not have had to deal with as a solo artist, but I can't imagine going solo would have lent him more musical freedom given the resources that seemed to be available to him because of the value of the GNR name to record companies. 

When you are as big as GNR was and is, you expect certain things from that band. At some point, the band becomes a brand. Fans and studio executives expected a certain type of music and people in GNR. They didn't expect a guy wearing a KFC bucket nor another guy looking like an alien.  

There were/are definitely certain expectations of GNR. One of which is Axl and Slash being a part of the band. Without either one fans lose interest. Axl should have gone solo. He would have a better reception of the type of music he wanted to do. In the end, the GNR name didn't help him much since he was playing in bowling alleys and CD wind up more like a classic rock album than industrial.