You are not logged in. Please register or login.

Abbey_Road
 Rep: 16 

Re: Why can't Axl

Abbey_Road wrote:

pay back Interscope the 13 million he got advanced to make CD and then just release it on his own independent label?

Didn't Bumble say in chat that independent labels are better?

If Interscope is tired of dealing with GNR and Axl and Axl is stubborn and won't budge an inch when it comes to promotion or touring, etc. why won't both parties just cut their relationship and Axl pay back the money Interscope gives him and Interscope ends the contract they have with GNR/Axl

James
 Rep: 664 

Re: Why can't Axl

James wrote:

Because 13 mil is alot for one guy to pay back. Besides, its probably higher than that.  Also, there are more albums due on the contract(I'm assuming).

There's always a chance that Uni could just cut their losses and drop GNR, but unlikely at this point in time. They have other big name artists actually releasing music, so GNR isn't a high priority for them. Also factor in all the shit going down in the industry.

Axl had to tour in 06-07 just to finance the band and album. I doubt he has 13 mil under his pillow to just give to Uni so he can take the album wherever he wants.

A Private Eye
 Rep: 77 

Re: Why can't Axl

Several reasons I guess

Firstly whilst I'm sure Axl has plenty of money I also doubt 13 million is just small change to him that he'd just 'pay back' without a blink.

That's also assuming Axl is so eager to get CD out there that he'd pay 13 million dollars of his own money in order to get it released.

Of course then there's the probability that it's not that simple, I doubt he could just 'pay them back' and get things rolling. There's supposedly so many people involved in this thing that trying to buy his way out now and change labels would likely be more complicated than just ploughing on.

Perhaps an independent label is better for Ron but a Ron album release compared to a GNR release isn't exactly the same thing, it's unlikely that a release on the scale of CD would be something a small independent label could deal with.

Backslash
 Rep: 80 

Re: Why can't Axl

Backslash wrote:

Because $13 million is a lot of money.  I'm sure he doesn't have that kind of money just kicking around to waste on buying his own album from the label.  Not only that, but he has a contractual obligation to release albums under the label.  He's not legally allowed to release anything under the GNR name through another method.  Unless, of course, they're "accidental" leaks.

EDIT: I obviously started this post before James posted. 13

monkeychow
 Rep: 661 

Re: Why can't Axl

monkeychow wrote:

maybe that's the kind of thing that's causing the current delay.

sic.
 Rep: 150 

Re: Why can't Axl

sic. wrote:

I'd imagine Axl would have a hard time wiggling himself out of the deal. He already received a $1 million advance nearly nine years(!) ago on top of the production costs, so severing all possible ties to Universal would likely mean a long and arduous legal settlement. I'm not an expert, but if I were Universal, I'd also take into question how much potential revenue in album sales Axl would be taking out of the house by going independent. Depending how the record deal was made, there may be some back doors for the label for such a situation; remember that GNR was considered a very valuable property back when the deal was made (before AFD) and substantially revised (mid-92). Universal (or simply Geffen as it was at the time) would've been sure to hold on to their goose that laid them golden eggs.

In the current situation, Universal owns the publishing rights for the future album(s), so Axl couldn't get rid of them completely even if he'd succeed in getting the album off their hands. But I'd love it if Axl would go the Radiohead/Saul Williams route and offer the whole thing up for download.


In a hypothetical situation, Axl pays Universal $13 million and they call it even.

Axl has three albums worth of material; divide $13m with three, you'll get roughly $4,3m.

Axl releases all three albums for $5 download; he'll receive all the proceeds directly as the only costs would theoretically be maintaining the web servers.

Ignoring the server costs for a minute, all albums should be downloaded nearly 870,000 times. In other words, their combined sales would have to be little less than the US sales of Contraband (a little shy of three million units).

Re: Why can't Axl

Sky Dog wrote:

http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/art … 1003690156

this article gives you an idea of what artists and labels wrestle over and how standoffs can occur. Axl is most likely fighting over some of the same issues.

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB