Should Axl really have become Manager/Owner/Boss of Guns -N-Roses?

I think that Axl taking over Guns -N- Roses was a conflict of interest. He was too close to The Band and too emotionally involved to become Manager/Boss/Owner of it. The Owner/Boss of Guns -N-Roses should have been objective, not subjective. Besides, Axl was a mess when he decided to take over Guns-N-Roses. He claimed the Band was a wreck. He was a wreck himself in control of a wreck. Bad combination. Remember at this time, Axl was very mentally unstable. And had a lot of anger management problems . He should have given control of Guns -N-Roses to a stable, professional, and objective Manager, say let David Geffen be the Manager/Boss/Owner of Guns -N-Roses. He should have been focused on singing and performing, what he truly was, and is, as Frontman and Co-founder of GNR, not also Boss/Manager/ Owner. Just because someone is the Co-founder of a band and the Frontman and Main Focus of Band doesn't mean they'd make a great Owner/Manager/Leader.

Why? How do you think that would be better, Karice?

Soulmonster wrote:Why? How do you think that would be better, Karice?

Who is Karice?

the funny fact is that at the exact moment that axl becomes the owner of the band, that's exactly when the band itself stops existing, isn't it? it actually ended earlier than that, but that was the last straw, anything that came after that was a parody, an imitation, an aberration etc

ludurigan wrote:the funny fact is that at the exact moment that axl becomes the owner of the band, that's exactly when the band itself stops existing, isn't it? it actually ended earlier than that, but that was the last straw, anything that came after that was a parody, an imitation, an aberration etc

I wonder if Axl should have employed a Deputy, say his Right Hand Man, his Second In Command, his Co manager. I'd say that would have most likely been Izzy or Slash. I feel he was closer to Izzy and Slash than Duff or Steven.

Again, why would it have been better if Axl had relinquished power? What would have been different today? Axl would have quit the band before giving away control. So there wouldn't have been a GN'R anymore, or it would have been a GN'R with a different vocalist. The alternative where Axl would have accepted continuing as the singer of GN'R without the power, is fantasy. It is not realistic. It wouldn't have happened.

We can always speculate on how great it would have been if Axl had continued without power and someone else had called the shots resulting in a more functional and productive band, but it isn't a scenario that could have happened.

One thing is crystal-clear: in the mid to late 90s it was Axl who wanted to move GN'R into the next century. "Chinese Democracy" was his project; even though he wanted to involve all of the band members in the creative process, it's obvious that HE was the main motivator behind the whole thing. It was Axl who presented the artwork he chose for the album cover to an audience (years before release).

From what I've gathered, the band employed several managers (Merck Mercuriadis is a name which stuck, he was there around 2006/7 and was helping along the touring and last few recordings for the album).

For a short time, Azoff was the manager, at least it seemed to me that it was him who paved the way for the album to finally see the light of day (by way of a Best Buy deal).

Of course with Axl being the only "original" member (at the time) it was pretty clear that he was "boss" - who else should've done it?

Being lead singer, album coordinator and basically "boss", of course it was Axl who "hired and fired" managers (and other "employees").
Someone has to take these decisions, who else should've done it?

Needless to say, Axl was not alone. The persons who are known as "Team Brazil" nowadays, were already around, Beta was his "personal manager" basically.
Del James (his old mate) was there as some sort of "tour manager".

That's not to say that everything was "great". Mistakes were made & some "strange" decisions (to say the least). The communication between band and record company wasn't working well.
I don't believe David Geffen would've been the man to manage the band. He was busy enough looking after his label and his main interest (of course) would've been the album - but not the band and their well-being.

I believe Axl was stubborn about the vision he had for GN'R, but along the road there were obstacles (legal and personal problems perhaps), so the band changed and over time even Axl changed. (Does anyone remember the surprise when he really tried to behave and be on time?)

Welcome to Appetite For Discussion, fellow Guns N'Roses Fan!

Hmm. I'm not sure but I don't think a conflict of interest is a Frontman and Co-founder taking over the Band. I'm pretty sure a conflict of interest would be more like Axl getting paid like 20 Million by a Competing Label to purposely bail on a Guns N'Roses Show and leave his Gun Brothers high and dry and instead perform for Competing Label's Band show such as Poison's Label paying Axl to perform with Poison when he's supposed to be performing with Guns N'Roses That would be a true conflict of interest. Another example of a conflict of interest would be if Axl embezzled money from The Guns N'Roses Fan Club for personal use. Another example of conflict of interest would be if Axl dastardly sold Guns N'Roses Catalogue to say Warner Brothers for personal use without the permission or acknowledgement of David Geffen or his Gun Brothers. Those are true examples of conflict of interest. Him taking over the band wouldn't be a conflict of interest. The closest to a real conflict of interest is him buying the Guns N'Roses name, but he did it openly, honestly and fair and square. He didn't do this in a sneaky clandestine manner. And he BOUGHT the name, not sold it. If he sold it sneakily and clandestinely, that would also be a true conflict of interest.

I wonder if Axl shouldn't have just left Guns -N-Roses and formed a new Music Venture with just three letters called AXL . That's what Guns-N-Roses basically ended up being at least one point anyways. Why not just go all the way with AXL?

Because, as I tried to explain already, at that point in time, Axl (sorta) "owned" the name GN'R and he was bound to deliver an album (contract with Geffen). Leaving "GN'R" behind and trying to release an "AXL" album, would inevitably have lead to problems with the record company and their contract, eh?

Also, it's not like Axl "fired" Slash n' Duff, they left and I had the impression Axl wasn't too pleased about this (at first). In short, he had to keep the GN'R name and try to keep it going...

Uli wrote:Because, as I tried to explain already, at that point in time, Axl (sorta) "owned" the name GN'R and he was bound to deliver an album (contract with Geffen). Leaving "GN'R" behind and trying to release an "AXL" album, would inevitably have lead to problems with the record company and their contract, eh?

Also, it's not like Axl "fired" Slash n' Duff, they left and I had the impression Axl wasn't too pleased about this (at first). In short, he had to keep the GN'R name and try to keep it going...

I was insinuating that Axl just go Solo and release at least one Album under the name AXL . For example, release an album called,"Bitter Sweets," and have it released under three letters. AXL. Don't even put the Rose part on the Album. Axl isn't a one name Celebrity where he is mostly known by one name like Prince, Madonna, Brandy, Monica. He is often known by Axl Rose. An Album that is released by AXL(And no Rose) would get a lot of tongues wagging. People would know exactly who it is without him outright saying his full name. It would generate a lot of interest..

Well, that is just "wishful thinking". I would imagine IF Axl wanted to do a "solo album" (under whichever name he chooses) we would already hold it in our hands?

As I said, in my humble opinion, Axl was under a lot of pressure to continue with GN'R and the record company wanted to put out another GN'R album (or several).
So what he did do? Exactly: he became a bit of a recluse and "disappeared" for a while.

Allegedly the 2002 tour came about because of some pressure (to make money) and it ended in a bit of a disaster.
Word has it that the record company stopped putting money into the making of the album around 2004. (No wonder, seeing how much money was spent re-recording drum parts...)

Touring in 2006/7 went a lot better and some more recordings were done.
Seeing the "chaos" regarding the album and its making (read the credits about who did what on which song and how many producers were on board - great fun!) I can't see Axl finding the time to record and promote a solo album...

After the album release in 2008, GN'R toured relentlessly around the globe until 2014. People like Dj Ashba said that Axl had lots of (new) music in him, but not much was released (so far).
With the old members Slash n' Duff returning to the band, not much happened in regards to new songs (what we got so far is older stuff, just previously unreleased and "worked on" by the current band line-up).
Still, my impression is that Axl is currently focussed on GN'R and not much else.

Maybe one day Axl will release a solo album. I seem to remember he said in an interview that if he did, it might be more "instrumental" music instead of his voice! Could be interesting!

But, in general, Axl seems "reluctant" when it comes to releasing new stuff. (Just look at how much music came out since 1994.)

Hmm. Maybe he could have surprised us and released a Solo Album under the name AXEL (not AXL) and do some kind of warped version of his distinctive voice and get People talking. People would be like,"Is this Axl Rose? He sounds weird. "And other People could be like,"No, Axl wouldn't warp his voice like this. And besides, his name is spelled Axl, not Axel. He'd never as release an album with his name spelled as Axel! It's someone parodying Axl." There would be a lot of talk about the Axel album, People wondering if Axl is being parodied by someone else or is it him himself. Then Axl could come clean and admit that he's the one who warped his voice and released the Axel(with an E) Album. People would love this! Lol

Guns N'Roses Fan wrote:I wonder if Axl shouldn't have just left Guns -N-Roses and formed a new Music Venture with just three letters called AXL . That's what Guns-N-Roses basically ended up being  at least one point anyways. Why not just go all the way with AXL?

I believe he felt obligated to continue with GN'R because he didn't feel the band had come to its natural conclusion yet. He more or less said as much in interviews. Of course he could have started a side project, whether that was a solo thing or another band, but that would be detrimental to him focusing on GN'R and GN'R was his main priority.

Guns N'Roses Fan wrote:Hmm. Maybe he could have surprised us and released a Solo Album under the name AXEL (not AXL)

No, please, NO! There are enough idiots out there already who wrote Axel instead of Axl.

Uli wrote:

Guns N'Roses Fan wrote:Hmm. Maybe he could have surprised us and released a Solo Album under the name AXEL (not AXL)

No, please, NO! There are enough idiots out there already who wrote Axel instead of Axl.

It would be a nice "wink," to the Fans if he released at least one Album under the name AXEL since he knows a lot of People write it his name as Axel anyways. It would be a playful gesture for him to do for us.

Uli wrote:

Guns N'Roses Fan wrote:Hmm. Maybe he could have surprised us and released a Solo Album under the name AXEL (not AXL)

No, please, NO! There are enough idiots out there already who wrote Axel instead of Axl.

Sacre bleu! I also thought his name was spelled Axel, like Axel Foley from Beverly Hills Cop movies, when I first heard it. MOST people would automatically assume his name was spelled Axel especially when they hear it. Axl should have just named himself Axel in the first place(He chose his name because he liked Axle on skateboards or something like that. Him naming himself Axel or even Axle like a skateboard has, would have been the best thing to have done.

Karice wrote:
Axl should have just named himself Axel in the first place

No, he shouldn't have. Axl is different from most other Axels and most other people too, thus a unique name is THE thing for him!

Also, changing it to Axel right now would mean "giving in" to those morons who can't spell it, I can't see Axl doing that!

Uli wrote:

Karice wrote:
Axl should have just named himself Axel in the first place

No, he shouldn't have. Axl is different from most other Axels and most other people too, thus a unique name is THE thing for him!

Also, changing it to Axel right now would mean "giving in" to those morons who can't spell it, I can't see Axl doing that!

You are right. There is only one Rockstar who is named Axl, and his last name is Rose!

Users been banned? Has someone been talking to herself here?

Uli wrote:Users been banned? Has someone been talking to herself here?

I had reasons to make that assumption.

Thanks for info; I had the same impression (not at first, but judging from the last few posts of "both" profiles).