You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
Duff may have changed his tune by the time he wrote his book, but shortly after Duff left GN'R, I read an interview with him where he mentioned the "Axl dictatorship" thing. So unless he was misquoted at the time, he definitely said it.
I'll see if I can find the article...
yea cool find
i'm almost certain he never uses the word dictator/ship in his book. he definitely skirts round the issue somewhat & goes gentle on axl. i don't think he describes the dinner he had when he quit in quite the same way in the book. his story has defo changed & softened by the time he wrote the book...
fwiw i'd say he was more otm w/the dictatorship bit.
- metallex78
- Rep: 194
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
I found this part from that interview interesting too, for those who say he doesn't want Loaded to be bigger than an opening slot band (in regards to Loaded recording their debut album)
We’re gonna choose the best label and go on tour throughout the world. We want to be a big band.
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
saw this at the Velvet Rope yesterday...it's from an industry insider/band manager who is very knowledgeable of the Gnr situation...my two cents, Axl and Duff's stories match up. The only thing that doesn't is Axl saying he would cancel the show/tour if they didn't sign over the name. Personally, I don't think Axl did that. I think Doug Goldstein did that on his own....anyhow, good stuff.
"Thanks for posting that.
I'd add, because of the way the kooky editor slanted the video with his own interpretations and suggested conclusions, it is far from exact.
A better scrutiny of what was presented shows that NONE of the material presented contradicts Axl's version.
Let's start with the timing issue.
* The Niven reports do not specifically address the timing of the name rights transfer. His contention that it was the "first thing Axl did" "after I was fired" is hollow and vague, and leaves a load of unanswered questions.
Slash doesn't address timing with any concrete insight - quite vaguely leaving it at, in the "the 90s" and "give me the name or we're not going to finish the tour".
That leaves Axl and Duff, both who did address timing issues with relation to more specific events.
And what does Duff say? He says it was at a point with 5 Europe shows left.
Which would be consistent with Axl saying it was (a) in Europe and (b) during a time when lawyers were on tour because of Adler depositions.
And how does that stack up?
The European tour was after Adler filed suit, and while not knowing the discovery schedule, you can almost be sure there was some activity that the lawyers needed to meet with the band to discuss, and catching them on a tour schedule, while far from ideal, beats trying to catch them once they return home and scatter to the four winds.
Especially these druggies.
The timing of Niven's termination
Just because Niven was fired, it does not negate that Axl was already persuaded he needed to act to secure rights to the band name. Anyone (other than the person who created the video here) can easily see that Axl was getting his ducks in a row as he sensed a possible mutiny against him. Recall his concerns that he'd be the one who was fired before he had the band name rights secured. So the timing of first getting rid of Niven, then asking the 4 others to declare Axl had the right to control use of the name, makes a lot of sense. Had Niven still been the manager, he might have helped the other members resist Axl's efforts here.
The duress issue
It is often a sign of bullshit talking when someone says, "I signed an agreement, which I REGRETTED RIGHT AWAY, under duress of avoiding a riot", then never does anything to address his feeling of victimization except put it in his biography or book.
Either Duff did not feel confident that he could prove duress, or he felt a successful duress claim would not advantage him, so he let it go.
Either way, his version when coupled with his own actions, amounts to the equivalent of bullshit."
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
It'll never happen, but imagine if Izzy showed up at the same show as Duff and the 3 played "You Could Be Mine" without Axl turning up at Hall Of Fame.
I'd love to see all the everyone except Slash is a sellout posts.
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
Found it!
http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/arti … ticleid=26
"but this band was becoming a dictatorship, everything had to get done in Axl’s way or it wouldn’t get done at all. It wasn’t like that when we started out. At one point, we were offered a huge sum of money to play a concert in Germany. I thought : « I never played for money and I’m not gonna start now! ». I’ve got a house, I’m secure financially. Post-Neurotic was the worst moment of my career in Guns. I went out for dinner with Axl and I told him : « Enough is enough. This band is a dictatorship and I don’t see myself playing in those conditions. Find someone else"
Amazing how his tone have changed since that.
I read Duffs book and he's like "my good friend Axl, I sort of miss him, but damn him for those late starts - but was I any better? Err..not sure".
Thats all he says about Axl summed up in one sentence.
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
I tend to agree with Smoking Guns that this is all about money. There's no denying that both parties will benefit from this financially. I do beleive Axl and Duff are fairly cool with each other but like Aussie says it's kinda of a cock tease. I've been saying for years the new band needs to stand on it's own merrit and establish themselves. Having a major component for the original Guns N' Roses does not in any way establish themselves . All it does it make fans wonder how great it would be to see original Guns back together.
Also I don't believe this shows a whole lot of maturity on Axl's part. Duff's yes to a point only that he allows himself to be the opener for Axl when he used to headline with Axl. But as far as Axl goes he's only doing it because the scenario is Duff opens for Him. No way in fucking hell would Axl ever allow himsef to open for any of the original members and he'd never have allowed himself to open for VR.
Granted he can't because he's got the name and the back catelogue but still reverse these roles and Axl doesn't allow this to happen and no "growth" or "maturity" is shown on Axl's part.
Not sure about the "cash grab" aspect. I mean, are these two shows sellouts, or even selling better than the other shows? I wouldn't suspect so, but I haven't been following too closely.
Also, if Axl's career took a different path, he MAY have opened for a former bandmate. We'll never know since it didn't turn out that way, but there's no way in hell he was going to open with Guns N' Roses for Velvet Revolver. That I will agree. If he went on to be in the Axl Rose Band, though and "Loaded" became a household band, then I think he easily could've opened for them in that scenario. Again, that's not how it played out though so it's impossible to say. Although I do find it hard to believe that the Axl Rose Band would open for Guns N' Roses fronted by Myles Kennedy. I don't think I see that happening either.
- Mikkamakka
- Rep: 217
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
You know, other people feel the same: they just can't believe that someone in the caliber of Duff McKagan would open for a Guns N' Roses with DJ Ashba, Richard Fortus, Frank Ferrer or anyone who is not an original member.
Re: It's Official: DUFF'S LOADED To Open For GUNS N' ROSES
y'know a lot of people feel different & can believe someone like Duff would open 4 GnR
i HONESTLY do not SEE what the beef is
yea it's a little SAD but it's the way things are so what is the prob these 'other people' have?
