Interesting theory but to be honest I can't really tell.

The most apparent thing to me about Axl's face is how altered it has looked since some form of cosmetic work circa 2001.

Love the guy and his singing, but the alterations have aged pretty strangely and it sets off my uncanny valley.

I look at it like this:

If you are Izzy. You co-founded the band and you co-wrote some of the most successful songs that the band has relied on for 30 years. Then the guys you created the band with offer you a gig where they want to redo the songs of the past again, and have you there to add to the legitimacy of doing that. They've been offered and will make millions and millions of dollars each. They'll give you just a few thousand. You tell them no thanks.

If you are Slash, Axl, Duff. You have been offered tens of millions of dollars for a handful of nights work. The money is contingent on you 3 showing up but it doesn't matter to the offer who else comes. If you cut in Izzy you get a little bit more street-cred with the hardest of hardcore fans, but essentially, the end of the war between Axl and Slash will take precedence amongst almost all concert goers and for the media. Having Izzy there as an equal will literally cost you millions of dollars each - for no reason other than impressing hardcores - who you long ago realised will always find something else they don't like. So you will lose millions to have him there and what will you gain? You will once again be working with a person who is notorious for bailing on projects before they are completed. Just like he did with GNR, VR, some of his solo bands, the hall of fame, and basically almost everything he's been known to get involved in. So you're taking on that risk yet costing yourself literally millions of dollars to have that new problem. No thanks.

So it's not in either party's interest to reunite. Other than for Friendship. But let's face it - this band stopped being about that many many years ago when Adler was fired if not even earlier.

I don't see it as any less honourable than any other profession. Lets face it almost all employment is about doing things for money.

Sure, someone having sex with you out of love is a wonderful thing, but that doesn't mean there's any real harm in someone else doing it for a job.

Just like if my wife bakes me a cake out of love it's a wonderful thing, but that doesn't make bakers who make cakes for people bad people.

Normally I like Phil Rudd but he's way off base with those comments about Axl.

Axl is totally nailing these parts and doing (more than) justice to both Bon and Brian....and I say that as a massive fan of Brian in particular.

But Axl is just smashing this out of the park...so it's insane for someone not to "rate" him....I mean realistically I think Axl is probably the only person who could have pulled this off - very high quality covers with a star power charisma of his own that makes it still seem like an original act and not just a covers tribute.

Rudd is great...but basically he's dead wrong here.

Another interesting point is he clearly doesn't want back in as he also made a potshot at Malcolm - which is untouchable in AC/DC circles to fans and the band themselves I would bet.

I mean supposedly he wants back in Ac/Dc but then he takes a potshot at the singer who is saving the day, thus attempting to undermine credibility of the current shows, then he takes a stab at the founder of the band, a man who is currently in care for dementia, and who is the brother of the current leader of the band?

I don't see that as the way back in

yeah between this election and the GNR reunion and then Axl/Dc I'm not sure if things are real anymore ;