You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#5521 Re: Guns N' Roses » Chinese Democracy Elimination Round 2 » 908 weeks ago
Wouldn't it be easier to just get rid of both of them?
#5522 Re: Guns N' Roses » Chinese Democracy Chart Positions Thread » 908 weeks ago
I don't think the people that love it are writing it off, it's the other however many millions of people on the planet that are.
#5523 Re: Guns N' Roses » Best Buy exclusive dramatically limited 1st week sales! » 908 weeks ago
The reality is Jimmy, Irving and Axl were not confident in how the album would do in the US so they took the guaranteed sales of 1.3 million. They took the upfront money, and it paid off. They made the right decision from a business standpoint. It's Best Buys problem now. Why speculate further?
They only made the right decision if they knew they weren't going to do a damn thing to promote it.
Thank you, I was hoping someone would finally lead it down this road. They had no intention of ever promoting this album. None. Axl is covering his ass legally by saying they planned this and planned that but it didn't work out. There was never any intention of promoting it, it was rushed strictly for financial reasons before anybody could back out of it. That's why the booklet is fucked up, the LP is fucked up, the mixing is fucked up, etc. The record company really must have had Axl by the balls to force them down this road with what he intended to be his masterpiece. So now he has to talk about the next album...
#5524 Re: Guns N' Roses » Best Buy exclusive dramatically limited 1st week sales! » 908 weeks ago
So...who made the decision to go with Best Buy? I mean, all this sounds like another scapegoat fest by Axl lovers, but lets think about what made them choose Best Buy.
Lets pretend everything you said is correct. So they chose to go with the company that would result in 40% (your made up number, not mine) less sales for their album? Damn, what a brilliant move. I mean, that way when it fails miserably, you have (gasp) another excuse for it. Maybe they didn't do it for the excuse...maybe they did it because of the upfront money. But if you thought it was going to sell 40% (again, your made up number) more, who cares about upfront money, right? You'll get just as much if not more after 2 weeks of sales, plus recognition for being #1 which will bring in more buyers curious to hear what was so good.
So even if you believe your post (I don't but I'll pretend I do for the sake of this discussion), what would lead them to making the decision they made? I mean, surely if YOU know all of this, Axl's management team (one of the best in the business) knows all of this too, right?
#5525 Re: Guns N' Roses » Best Buy exclusive dramatically limited 1st week sales! » 908 weeks ago
It's ok that he chose the money over the art. I really don't have a problem with that unless he's going to complain about how it was received, promoted, etc. It's totally ok that he took the money, but don't try to pretend otherwise when things don't go as well as they could have.
#5526 Re: Guns N' Roses » Best Buy exclusive dramatically limited 1st week sales! » 908 weeks ago
MrWonderful wrote:So, Axl was definitely already aware of the impact that Walmart has on album sales. Which makes the BB decision that much more curious.
The BB offer was a godsend for Axl & Co.. No way was any other place going to give them a deal like BB did. Obviously, if Walmart had made a comparable offer, GNR would've gone that route since it's a bigger retailer. GNR made out like bandits on the BB deal.
Do people on this board really think they would've sold 1.6 million(in the USA) copies at $9 a piece already if it hadn't been a retail exclusive?
He chose the money over the art. Period.
#5527 Re: Guns N' Roses » Best Buy exclusive dramatically limited 1st week sales! » 908 weeks ago
I know in my case i'd rather buy it with debit or Cash cuz using a credit card is not something i prefer to do..especially for like $12
Then you'd go to BB to get it. It's really that simple.
Yes, it would have sold more at WalMart. But Axl chose to go with BB, Axl chose not to promote it, and Axl chose to have the band be what it is. Axl made all these choices. Nobody forced it on him. So no matter what you want to blame for the lack of sales whether it's best buy, the quality of the music, the lack of promotion, the band members, the manager, the record company, etc, it all goes back to Axl making those decisions.
#5528 Re: Guns N' Roses » Best Buy exclusive dramatically limited 1st week sales! » 908 weeks ago
BB isn't the problem. Anyone that claims it is isn't fooling anybody else. Last time I checked, you could still order the album at www.bestbuy.com, so anybody that wanted to buy a copy could do so without ever leaving their house. Did it hurt sales? Sure. Was it the difference in being #1 or #2? No. The interest in the music/band did that. Axl has nobody to blame but himself anyway because he approved whatever decision was made. He took the quick $$ over the art, which is fine. His fans have to accept that.
#5529 Re: Guns N' Roses » Questions for Axl if he visits GN'R Evolution » 908 weeks ago
I'm not singleling you out, but i've watched some people across the 'net, since Axl spoke, that almost feel like they have to defend Slash. To immediately take a stance.
Throughout Axl's statements, I haven't once come across a Slash bash. Just his side of the story. And obviously they are going to disagree, or otherwise the band would've never broke up.
I agree with this. I haven't gone out defending Slash against anything Axl says and I'm one of the biggest Slash supporters out there. I don't think Axl said anything wrong or offensive. He said how he feels. There's no Slash bashing in any of the posts any more than there's Axl bashing in Slash's book.
They obviously still have some respect for each other from a musical standpoint and love and appreciation for the music they were able to create together. Beyond that, there are a lot of negative feelings on both sides about things that may or may not have happened that are keeping the sides apart. That's ok. If Axl doesn't ever want to work with Slash because of what happened or what he perceives happened, who am I to tell him otherwise? Any negative comments that I read about Slash were directed at things more than they were at Slash himself. The people around him that tried to manipulate him, the lawyers, etc. He takes very few direct jabs at Slash other than how he markets himself, which is really none of Axl's business.
Axl seems to believe that Slash uses Axl to promote himself. I don't know that I agree, but that's what he believes. If Axl were fielding questions from the media the way Slash does, he may feel differently since he'd be asked about Slash all the time. It goes with the territory. McCartney probably still fields questions about John. But Axl sees it as using him or the GnR legacy (which Slash helped create) to promote himself. One could argue Axl is doing the same thing, but whatever.
#5530 Re: Guns N' Roses » There really seems to be a buildup now... » 908 weeks ago
I'm really starting to believe that the big guns (if they really exist) were saved for whatever comes next. It's a risky move though. Fans won't give you a second chance unless you bring it, so all the killer songs with killer hooks are going to have to come into play on whatever happens next.
The way CD was released, it was done to get it out of the way. I said that when it came out, I still believe it. The question is still, get it out of the way for what? Reunion? Probably not anytime soon (though you NEVER know in the world of GnR). More realistically, the album Axl really envisioned as his masterpiece.


