You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
- shotgunblues1978
- Rep: 11
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
shotgunblues1978 wrote:Axlin08 wrote:Precisely Olorin, which creates an even scarier thought. If in Axl's mind, he views the situation with Universal as "cutthroat loan sharks", and "no help", and "no support", when he was given probably the biggest budget and biggest ROPE of ANY artist in history for CD... and Axl still looks at it that way.
The thing that most people don't realize, however, is that out of the infamous $13 million, the old Geffen Records handed out $10 million of that back in 1997. That label got swallowed up by UMG/Interscope in (I believe) 1998, no later than 1999. The people who greenlit CD with the exorbitant budget were long gone by the time the first version of the album was complete
Also, he was not given the biggest budget ever for CD. Mariah Carey signed a 4 album $80 million contract with Virgin. Her first album tanked and they spent $28 million to buy her out. So essentially they paid $48 million for one album that flopped
Michael Jackson's Invincible cost over $30 million in recording costs alone. A lot of big pop artists get $10 million advances (or at least they did back in 1997).
Either way, there's not much indication that Jimmy Iovine and his regime cared much about CD, and you can't really blame them. It wasn't their album, or their problem. They didn't greenlight it or hand out the huge advance, the fired execs of a dead label did. So to them it was never a priority, they were interested in their own projects which is the way record execs always have been and always will be. Which is why they probably just wanted to get the album out and make as much as they could without spending anything
From an accounting standpoint, it was a success. From that perspective, revenues generated were much greater than cost of goods sold and they didn't have to spend any money promoting it domestically.
now somebody is on to something.....however, in the end, so far, it has not been the success it could have been. The overall goals/objectives for this type of release were not met.:( ...I'll let you define your objectives but anyone will be hard pressed to look at the big picture and call it a success. Maybe Axl can try again with another approach, but for now, it failed on a lot of levels.
From a PR standpoint is was not successful. From the executives' business perspective it was a success, they made a profit and posted net income, not net loss, from the release, 10 years after the investment was made, after everyone said that this album would lose money, those guys look smart
I'm sure Axl and Co. are pissed but the record execs figured out a way to make money off the thing which is their job. Axl's job is to make music, theirs is to make money. The Best Buy deal ensured that UMG wouldn't care about promo. They made the same selling 600,000 in the US as they would have if they'd sold 1.5 million, they look like geniuses to the shareholders. Axl may be pissed but to them he's just another employee. They made money off CD and continue to rake in dough off the GNR back catalogue. They don't give a shit what he thinks
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
Axlin, I'm still not buying the idea that the label is interested in a NEW old line up album. Labels make more money off the old albums and greatest hits than a reunion album. Very rare when those reunion albums actually sell anything, even with bands much bigger than GNR. A reunion would be more lucrative for the band with touring, not with a label trying to sell a new "old" album. Not to mention big labels don't really like pushing rock acts that are in their 40's. Which might be a problem Axl is facing right now 
Anyway, I'm still pretty convinced there will be another album released. Don't know under what circumstance, but at the end of the day it would be to both parties advantage to release it. I just don't see any "big" promotion from uni in that albums release, either.
I remember reading the quote about Geffen being upset Axl didn't promote it, but you can't blame him with the way they released it. I think Axl did have a big plan for its release and it got shit on by the label. Which is why he's not pimping it.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
Axlin, I'm still not buying the idea that the label is interested in a NEW old line up album. Labels make more money off the old albums and greatest hits than a reunion album. Very rare when those reunion albums actually sell anything, even with bands much bigger than GNR. A reunion would be more lucrative for the band with touring, not with a label trying to sell a new "old" album. Not to mention big labels don't really like pushing rock acts that are in their 40's. Which might be a problem Axl is facing right now
Anyway, I'm still pretty convinced there will be another album released. Don't know under what circumstance, but at the end of the day it would be to both parties advantage to release it. I just don't see any "big" promotion from uni in that albums release, either.
I remember reading the quote about Geffen being upset Axl didn't promote it, but you can't blame him with the way they released it. I think Axl did have a big plan for its release and it got shit on by the label. And why he's not pimping it.
Eagles had one of the biggest selling albums of the year
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
Which is why I said Very Rare. It didn't hurt they had a good manager, too. 
Also, the Eagles have a huge fanbase, GNR doesn't. They don't have the demographics of that fanbase, either. And the Eagles have been doing several "reunion" tours years before the album... The fact they switched to adult contemporary didn't hurt either. They are a very different animal than GNR.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
They didn't greenlight it or hand out the huge advance, the fired execs of a dead label did.
that's true.
Which is why they probably just wanted to get the album out and make as much as they could without spending anything
that's also true
From an accounting standpoint, it was a success. From that perspective, revenues generated were much greater than cost of goods sold and they didn't have to spend any money promoting it domestically.
this however, isn't true....whilst i agree with you that a dead label handed over the moneys, the new guys took over not only their brand(s) and a list of artists, but their debt as well....there were a few holes to be plugged, and CD was one of those holes...
Sure, the $10m they got from BB can be viewed as pure profit, as they probably wrote the advances off as cost of business of the old company, but bean counters don't work that way...
they will write off the debt so that it doesn't hurt them, but they will keep on referring to it (as a loss) until the end of time, and in public will probably say that CD just managed to pay for itself, whilst in reality it did make them money...
and knowing Axl's history with Geffen, these new guys are not interested in negotiating with some has been rockstar over obscene amounts...
in 2004, they pulled the plug on him....cheers Axl...go fuck yourself...which is clearly evident from his comments about them as well...(waiting for 5 years on a marketing plan from them)...
meaning that he asked for a marketing plan circa 2004....which could have gone something like this:
UNI: Axl...go fuck yourself, we're out of this deal.
AXL: wait wait, i'm almost done, how about you guys send me the marketing plan for the album so we can launch it...?
UNI: sure thing...
and that was the end of that. Iovine paid occasional visits to the studio (i think) purely because he was a fan, but not because he believed into the project...hip hop was on the rise, and returns on investment were much better with guys like 50cent and Eminem...
If you ask me, Axl played his cards too soon with these guys, and now doesn't have an ace up his sleeve anymore...
Bucket was the star (freak) attraction in 02....MTV was willing to help out then as well...(VMA performance)...so its not like he didn't have any options out there with regards to finding collaborators...
and not wanting to be a cock or anything, but the excitement that the Better leak generated in 2006...was so much greater than the CD release last year...
there is a lesson to be learned there, and i don't think anyone got the point.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
I think u guys underestimate GNR
A greatest Hits CD sold 3 million IN the DL era where all of these songs are super easy to torrent.
if they reunited and went on a huge press tour, rollingstone interview, Larry king, huge tour etc and had kick ass music to go with it
Shit, it would BLOW UP
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
According to everyone here 3 million ain't shit
That's a lot of wishful thinking, D.
Your answer is in your post: Greatest Hits. It's not the same as a new album. And it would be a Slash press tour. And new music that might, or might not ever get finished... Or even recorded... Or even agreed upon in practice.
Another big problem is, even if Axl was interested, I don't think he'd give up (among other things) his own taste in music for the old way just to sell a record. And I don't think Slash would drop his way to adjust to Axl's.
Re: Revisiting the Billboard Interview
I think it comes down to the all mighty dollar
Axl said they were offered stuff, so it seems like he was "listening" just said it wasn't enough to go through it
So what IS enough to go through it?
U have to think
Axl is 46 and i would fathom he is rich but not like U2 or Bon Jovi rich
if u read Slash's book and see all the money they lost and wasted, it would lead me to believe that he may not be as rich as u would think
Does he have enough money to live comfortably on for the next 30 years?
if not
A reunion will be more likely to happen.
Axl hasn't indicated in any interview that he is allergic to money.
