He's Making A Huge F***ing Mistake.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 кві 2023
- There's drama in the world of rock once again. Guitarist Mick Mars is suing Motley Crue. Let's have a look at why and who might be in the right. Let me know who you think deserves to win this battle in the comments: Mick Mars or Motley Crue?
Cheers to @RockFeed for the detailed report: • Mick Mars Spills THE D...
Justin Hawkins Rides Again T-Shirt is OUT NOW! thejawsofvictory.com/collecti...
(and it includes free shipping!)
My Patrons get 10% off everything. I also post un-released songs, demos and guitar tutorials on my Patreon. Sign up here to either get the discount code OR just enjoy everything else on there: www.patreon.com/jushawk
Justin Hawkins Rides Again...The Podcast. You can listen on Apple Podcast, Spotify etc: open.spotify.com/show/0hQYjIw...
#mickmars #motleycrue #musicindustry - Розваги
Justin Hawkins Rides Again merch is OUT NOW! thejawsofvictory.com/collections/jhra
(and it includes free shipping!)
Mick was like 30 when he started the band with those guys as teenagers, he deserves everything in the whole world putting up with that
poor old fuk is only worth $70 mil!! must be hard
He didnt start the band
@@rjanolsen3935 He made them into what they are musically.
@@rjanolsen3935 well to be honest he gave them the name, he gave them the backing for the EP and made most of the music so he kind of did. Toss job Norweigan by the sounds of your handle
@@rjanolsen3935 sure, but he was in the band at the beginning of them actually doing anything, is what I meant. “Started out” perhaps I should have said.
When 90% of people think about Motley...they're not thinking about that rad bass line or kick ass drum fill 🤣
The riffs, man, it's the riffs that drove that band.
Me, I also think about the rock and roll circus that is motley crue, which is NOT Mick. but that's me
The riffs that Nikki wrote..
@@np466 😂😂😂😂Nikki Sixx has never wrote a riff in his life... He writes lyrics only!! He can't even tune his Bass by himself... Nikki Sixx is NOT A MUSICIAN HE'S A POSER!!!
np466
Idk, im starting to question what Nikki did or didnt play.
And did or didnt “compose”.
@@np466Nikki wrote lyrics, not guitar riffs. Mick Mars composed guitar riffs. You would have to know how to play 6 string guitar to compose guitar riffs. Nikki can bearly play bass.
Knowing the respective biographies, Mick is like the only Crue member I find halfway decent. The “propping him up” comment from Nikki is a real low blow given his condition too
I remember reading up on them on and Mick was definitely the one member who didn't come of as a monster. Like some of the shit they have done over the years is fairly fucked up.
Nikki is the guy that heard about Vince Neil's near-fatal jetski crash into a reef and, by his own admission, went "well what about the reef?" There's a zero percent chance that he chose the phrase "propping up" to describe Mick by accident
I like it but probably won't be buying it because I am sick of the whole Motley Crue saga, especially since hearing and witnessing Nikki not playing live. And please Gene Simmons, please end KISS, DO NOT KEEP THE BAND GOING WITH ALL NEW MEMBERS. YOU AND PAUL COULD HAVE GONE OUT WITH SOME DIGNITY IF YOU WOULD HAVE JUST ENDED THE KISS LEGACY AFTER THE 96' REUNION TOUR WAS DONE, BUT NO, INSTEAD YOU TARNISHED AND REHASHED IT BY GETTING TWO OTHER GUYS TO REPLACE ACE AND PETER. JUST END IT ALREADY.
@@user-os4wk3fq7y
Who are you to whinge about what Paul and Gene personally decide to do with THEIR OWN band.
And it's only sooks and haters like you that carry on and even go as crazy as using all caps, accusing the band of being tarnished, no good, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Whilst millions of people have still been very happy to continue seeing the guy play since '96.
So you and your negativity and hate don't mean squat.
Just no better than a ranting, raging brat.
@@cartilagehead6326
Oh please.
Mick was the one who jumped on the internet first and savagely threw so much shade at all the other band members. And everything he's been saying to slag the other 3 guys off has been far, FAR worse than anything the other 3 have said so far.
But yet, you lot come along and have a go at Nikki, who actually said NOTHING for a while, until Mick couldn't stop shooting his mouth off and so enough was enough.
Mick's supposedly a big tough guy.
So if he's tough enough to keep shooting his mouth off, delivering many low blows of his own and can he dish out the insults and abuse, then he should be tough enough to take it in return, too.
Without all his little fan boys pathetically denigrating and going after Nikki, as if Nikki's the only one who has said anything bad here, whilst pretending that Mick is some saint who is not being very unreasonable and greedy in his current endeavour to demand more than he truly even deserves.
As I understand it, the band is trying to get Mick to sign away his shares in the Motley Crue corporation, which is not only touring but all six separate companies under the corporate umbrella, and including future publishing rights. Of course it's not reasonable to expect to be paid royalties from touring when you're not on the tour, but his "shares" go way beyond touring royalties alone. That's why he's fighting.
It's complicated - 25% of master recording use should have been retained - publishing/writing royalties. Merchandising is a bit more complex - I would guess a lot of it comes from touring and if you are not touring do you deserve a cut? As for staying available for other things - I can understand wanting the same band in studio as on the road. The other side though is simply 100/3 is better than 100/4 and they were looking for an excuse.
FINALLY, someone understands!
Now that makes sense. Loosing shares in the Motley Crue Corporation is a whole different thing. I agree it is not reasonable to be paid royalties from touring when your not the one touring. As for future recordings, well the weird thing is Mick played very little on the bands last three records, going all the way back to Generation Swine, so I think it would be a bit optimistic to assume your going to record with them in the future.
Im definitely Team Mick on this one. It's not just about touring. Mick said he was retiring from touring only, but was still in the band and was open to one-offs and residency gigs. The band is trying to force him out completely. But really, they should have stuck to the retirement agreement after the farewell tour. The pre-recorded concerts are just pitiful. Should bill themselves as Motley Vanilli.
hahaha true
i went to the girls girls girls tour. vince was out of breath and couldn't remember the words or sing even way back then.
You didn't explain why you're "team Mick on this one".?
that's probably why this is happening. they want to go on and make a mockery of his image. he wants to get paid if they are going to do it.
Motley Crunili??
He’s 1/4 of the band, but I would argue that he’s more than 25% of their sound.
Team Mick.
Absolutely!
Agree!
Why is that?
Yeah but who makes tour money without touring? Collecting royalties Is enough right?
Looking through their writing credits the vast majority of the music seems to be written by Nikki Sixx, is this not accurate?
Mick always cuts the shit and gets to the point. He doesn't romanticize or hyperbolize. I absolutely trust Mick's account of anything over Nikki's. I don't know how this will shake out or what was agreed upon or what was earned, but there's a saying that goes: you don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate.
💯
No way ! Nikki done do Hehwan all the time once. Nikki never done told lie hey!
Mick should be given props for even attempting to perform live with his condition. That alone is the sign of a musician who appreciates his craft. He was truly the most accomplished musician of the band, hands down. He shouldn't have to take a back seat to someone who has had a sudden epiphany about life based on past transgressions, nor someone who wears debauchery as a badge of honor. Mick wasn't a boy scout, but he wasn't fake either. I hope he wins.
I don't know man. Tommy is a pretty good drummer
Mick is very very underrated
100% agree. They extended dates beyond what Mick agreed to, too. But he still honoured the dates in immense pain. Him and Tommy I'd agree also are the real 'musicians'. Nikkis a solid song writer, average bassist. I don't know why he thinks not playing live on tour is fine too. Especially if he's gonna go for Mars. Probably best we don't open the 'Who's struggling/struggled/delivered sub par performances in Motley Crue' door, eh Nikki? *Cough cough Vince cough* 😅👀😅
Of course, Mick should collect “some” percentage of touring royalties because he’s a 25% owner of the business and his major contributions to the “bands brand” for over 40 years have allowed them to ask for the high ticket prices they can now ask for. Their longevity might not have lasted as long as it did if not for Mick. His lawyers and their lawyers will hash it out and it’ll settle somewhere in the middle with something both camps will accept. It’s just too bad it comes to this. Thanks for the music Mick!
Nikki Sixx went from always praising Mick Mars for touring with his health being as it is to demeaning him and saying they ‘prop him up’. Disgusting. Sixx is exactly like Stanley and Simmons-they say what they need to say at the moment, to back-up whatever they are currently promoting-and then do a 180 when it suits them, and say the opposite.
They should all quit and go home and count their money-apparently, it’s what motivates them all now 🙄
Yea it's all a shitshow. Ace Frehly's interview with Eddie Trunk a few weeks ago was wild. Threatened to release a ton of dirt on Gene and Paul.
That’s where the gaslighting comes in “we were propping you up”, as if they themselves weren’t doing the same to themselves with their recordings.
They are narcissist sociopaths.
The whole band should have folded 20 years ago. Now every single one of them look like idiots.
Mick's net worth is $70 million. It's probably not about the money he's probably pissed at Nikki. Nikki is a big bully type of guy I'm sure.
Yeah it's not really about money, he wants to be a pain in their ass.
In 2015 the band signed a contract that included a "Cessation of Touring Agreement", the finer detail was never published but the public was told that no member of the band could tour using the the name Motley Crue after the 2015 world tour. Any member that attempted to tour with the bands name could be sued by the other band members. I paid to see the final tour in 2015 so hope Mick Mars wins
You deserve a refund at the very least.
Oh, well that changes things. I’m sure the judge will review all the contracts and will make the correct legal decision based on the information provided. Nothing any of us say matters at all really.
EXACTLY!!!
Are you sure the4se are 'Clones' ROFL kidding of course as greed always seems to win in this sad world lol!
To my understanding the lawsuit is about the brand that Mick built, as well as remaining a shareholder of a corporation that he co-owns. This hasn't anything to do with touring revenue or even being a member of the band, yet for some reason the band's manager keeps refusing to state things as they really are.
He’s a founding member. His guitar style AND tone defined the sound of the band. He deserves more than 7%. He should be set up for the rest of his life. We wouldn’t even be talking about Motley Crue if Mick wasn’t the guitarist.
Mick Mars is worth $50-100mil, he's set up for life and well beyond for his family. This is all about the principle, which on the face of it, Mars looks to be in the right.
"Set up for the rest of his life," lmao. He was set up for the rest of his life 30 years ago. He's the wealthiest member of Motley Crue because he was the smartest with his money. I don't think he'll be getting foreclosed on his home any time soon.
Exactly! He earned it more than them! Mick is Motley!
Taking care of a older, ill bandmate would have been the right thing to do, but they don't strike me as pillars of moral character...
Uh, nope. most people, when thinking of the Crue, think of Tommy's latest drumkit stunt. and Vince/Nikki posing while playing live. and all the outrageous crap they did and got away with (unlike Mick). I do agree his guitarwork is a huge part of their sound. But any good guitarist can replace him. And again, Motley Crue, like pretty much any other rock band, derives a lot of their current salary on touring and merch sales. Why should Mick get a quarter of that when he's not touring? Justin Hawkins agrees, he said so, and it only makes sense. You retire from future touring, you retire from future tour revenue.
Mick all the way! He's way more than just their band member, he's the most important member of that band hands down.
I imagine Mick was given the push as opposed to leaving of his own accord. Equally have no doubt that Sixx has been using backing tracks for his bass for years now. It just amazes me they don't stick Vince Neil on a backing track. Motley are a joke. They can't even be lazy efficiently.
Well Sixx has always sucked as a bass player. So im not surprised at all about his bass playing was pre recorded lol. If Sixx had never met Mick Mars, I guarantee you he would been successful.
@@BrooklynBounce I get he was never a technically proficient player, but he is well able to play root note rock bass playing through a Motley gig. It's called being lazy and having contempt for your audience.
Itd be too obvious this far into the game if they started having Vince lip sync :-P lol Hes sounded terrible for a LONG time live. Also when ya start using these backing tracks and someone in the band wants to play live... it complicates things big time. Theres no longer any jams outside the box. Any issues Mick had was because the band had no different feel to every night ya know ? Every night as a musician i get a different vibe from the crowd and that goes into the music. Sometimes well speed up a song passage and other times slow it down. How do you get a mind reading backing track system ? You cant and dont. Bands that use these tracks have to stick to a setup and thats the performance they do every night. Some musicians like this or try to regardless perform the same way each night. Im more in the camp of improve, big Grateful Dead fan here. If the crowd is out of control, we play a fast song but slower, the crowd seems tired we play a fast song to kick off the show etc. Ya gotta treat each night differently imho. There are folks who fly, drive hundreds if not thousands of miles for concerts and spend a lot of their hard earned money to do this. Dont give them a pre recorded show. Also i think a lot more bands that do multi night runs at cities should try to play a different set each night. Most bands out there have more than enough material to change it up. Some of the greats have. Or play albums in their entirety. Do something different to help get more people back out to see live music. I think a lot of the lack of concert attendance at times has to do with anyone who wanted to go knows exactly what the band is gonna play. If they have heard it once.... why go see the same show twice ? So repeat customers these days with how busy life in general skip the shows. If the person knew you were gonna play a unknown set of tunes that spanned their whole career or they were gonna play one of your fav albums in its entirety, they would go. But we gotta change shit up and thats why backing tracks need to go, ya gotta be able to turn on a dime. Impossible when you rely on all this crap. But why cant we get back to how live shows were back say in the 70s ? Where bands were raw, they jammed, every night felt different. Thats lacking these days. When i go see a good band, they do stuff to change it up for the better and it brings new life into the songs. Not enough bands are doing this, every night its the SAME exact performance as the night before. To a TEE. Sucks.
@@ctcards2636 Yeah I was obviously exaggerating with the point on Vince, but when your bass player can't just play along on the root note for 90 mins, you have to question why anyone would pay to see these hacks.
@@ctcards2636 yeah we are in agreement on the track situation.
Mick Marrs is an inseparable part of Motley Crue. His incredible riffs are what made Motley Crue rise from obscurity to the top of the metal scene back in the 80s.
Mick is 71- The guys are 63, 62 and 60. Them calling him a victim of “elder abuse” in fighting for his vested interest in the band- is LUDICROUS!! Totally team Mars on this legal matter.
Mick's wife is 35 ...
@@angelescattaneo9751 and I've got an 11 incher 😁
@@angelescattaneo9751 Well, like 38 years old, but close
@@Hrossey It’s 5 1/2 but you tell people it’s about 6. You ain’t fooling nobody, poopdick
It's arguable that Mick doesn't get paid for playing the tour, but he should still get paid for merch sales, and probably ticket sales, because he built the brand. I had a great time seeing them on their last tour, but there was only one guy who stood out to me as a musician and that's Mick Mars. I have zero interest in seeing Motley Crue without him.
uh, no, it wasn't just him who built the brand. It was all 4 who built the brand. unless you are a guitarist, people going to the concert really aren't focusing on Mick, he's not as flamboyant as the other 3. Likely because he's 10 years older (why should he act the fool, he's more mature than that, let them other 3 make spectacles of themselves, more publicity the more money he makes. Till now...
@@marctowersap8018 and without cues from other musicians who are fans things dont get famous. Look at all the bands that have zero skill. Missing that one good part. And people put out the word and they sink. Why was GnR so famous? First they were wild and dangerous. Why did they get away with it? Because Izzy,Slash, Duff and Axl are top notch musicians. Slash changed guitar music industry. Mikk is the same way.
@@BigTyronie While that's your opinion of Mick, I think, while he is a good guitarist, he didn't change music. Slash is considered one of the greats. Mick isn't. Really, it's the music. Songs have to be good. Look at Yngvie. Great musician, people he plays with are also top notch musicians. But the songs aren't there, otherwise, he'd likely be a huge artist. Likely simply because some great bands with great songs don't make it. But he simply doesn't have the songs. As for wild/dangerous, you gotta have the songs. Both Crue and GnR have them. Makes it easier to get away with crap when you're famous, at least back then. I don't really notice any bands with zero skill, because they quickly die before anyone is even aware of them on a non-local level. If you can write great songs and have good musicians play on them, then you have a better chance of becoming well-known. Look at the Sex Pistols. While some say they are known for their antics, really, God Save the Queen, Holiday In the Sun, Pretty Vacant, and Anarchy in the UK are actually great songs. Otherwise, they'd be even more a flash-in-the-pan and no one would listen to their music today (since they did flame out after a single album, but oh what an album!). Now, you may not like them, which is ok, but they truly changed the course of history as well.
The fact that the remaining members of Motley Crue are reacting like this to a lawsuit that is asking for an accounting of the finances definitely raises suspiciouns that they are doing something they don't want being seen.
^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^
Exactly.
Yep
Mick 100%. He's the best part of that damn band.
Mick made the band. His guitar style and sound define Motley Crue.
One hundred percent.
Billboard has uploaded Mars vs Motley Crew and you can read the whole petition - I don’t know these people but reading the details, it’s upsetting. The various and numerable companies are listed, and it goes into origins of when the members were kids in highschool, who came up with the name. Really curious is the mention of parties known only by their aliases - their identities unknown by Mars at the time of filing. Illness and addiction issues are brought into the mix as well, so it’s a case that resonates. In short, Mars is compelling the various Motley Crue companies to disclose their accounts and Mars is entitled to this, as a 25% shareholder.
Nikki cut deep with the “propping him up” bit.
Nikki’s real name is Frank because he’s filled with disgusting crap and is actually a hot dog.
Yeah, literally. When I saw them a few years ago they actually rolled him out on one of those Hannibal Lecter trolley things.
Yeah. Kind of a backhanded "we still love you Mick" don't you think.
Myself being someone who lives with chronic pain. That statement saying we been propping him up for years shows nikki has pure hatred for mick mars.
@@ronsilvia8127 And Nikki has been "propping him up" by miming his bass parts for years...
First.. thank you for what you do. Love your channel. I BELIEVE the main issue of this is Mick owns 25% of the "company" and they gave him the impression he would continue to write and record with the band and just not tour. I'm a recovering musician of 30+ years and to me, this sounds a pretty far-fetched idea, that a band would want to keep recording with the old guy while touring with the "new model" so to speak and not record with said new model. They've wanted to replace Mars since the 80s because he wasn't cool enough, he's finally leaving and they intend to do that? Makes no sense... What doesn't sound far-fetched is that the group may have misled Mick into believing that may be the arrangement as he headed gently into that good night. They most likely didn't handle his exit cleanly and honestly to his face. "Ya dude.. totally get it.. Of course dude... we're family."
I realize I'm totally speculating..But at the end of the day, I bet there he was, standing in the cold outside the backdoor thinking he still had a foot in the band while they were high-fiving about finally getting the old guy out and within 30 seconds calling John 5. I may be totally wrong. Bands are messy I've always described mine as 4 or 5-way marriages.. impossible... And no one is usually a lawyer, (or really a professional for that matter). They were probably vague and agreeable to the poor guy and mucked up the landing of his exit.
Because of what I've heard/read so far I'm leaning team Mick. Not regarding future touring of course.... that's silly, but as far as his share of the band and even maybe compensation for the band leading him to believe he was in fact still going to be involved going forward in some way.
I never really got this argument about Mick not being 'cool enough'. I mean have you seen Vince Neil lately??? ;)
This seems pretty bang on.
I agree. If Mick owns 25% of the company, then the company pays J5 what he’s due for being a hired gun (which is what he’s always been- and a terrific one at that). …and so, yeah, team Mick!
At stake is touring royalties, right now. The multi millions that they are probably making right now? No. If you sling an axe, but, you say that you are tired, and as a business owner, I bring somebody in to sling the axe for you, I should pay you? As you stated, you are a "recovering" musician. You should know better than to Know/read everything that you think that you know/read. Unless you have inside information, you know just as much as us, the public that can read. And I am totally speculating, I have heard/read, you should read blabbermouth some more!
@@blackcrue but if that axe swinger is also a business owner there’s a difference.
Let’s say you and some dude own a burger joint and you 2 are the only workers. Dude falls down and breaks his back and says “I can’t stand all day and make burgers anymore” so dude 3 is hired to make the burgers.
“Some dude” would still own 1/2 the burger joint right? Of course he would. Dude 3 would just be an employee paid to stand all day and make the burgers while “some dude” did the rest of his original job.
Whatever happens, it’s gonna be interesting. Apparently it’s going to a mediator to decide wtf.
I love the variety of topics you cover and every time you upload it’s a good day Justin!
The idea of the remaining members of Crue disputing the details of a contract when they signed some prior to their ‘farewell’ tour stating that they couldn’t legally ever play together again (and then came back for a reunion tour) is, frankly, hilarious.
That contract, was probably just as fake, as their live performances.
Steve Perry makes more money from Journey tours after he retired. It's called being a smart business man.
Mick owns 25 percent of the corporation. They need to buy him out or give him what he owns
I picked up on the Crue's use of pre-recorded tracks long ago. They are OLD MEN.. you don't run clear across a large stage, carrying a bass, and just when you make it to the microphone, belt out a perfect backup vocal. Even a young guy would be out of breath by the time he reached the microphone. Also, I'm 90% sure that Sixx is wearing a wig now.
HAHAHAHA, you are probably right! Everything about him is FAKE!
Thx for the shout out! ❤ Much love!
Mick has been a critical part of the band. Nikki's response was a backhanded statement "We've been propping him up". Mick quit because they were using backing tracks on tour and he couldn't live with that.
damn! your firsthand information is fucking great! Maybe, and I am guessing here, your valued information, (all though read by me as well from, probably, the same publications) is going to make everybody go. hmmmmm? I wonder what that dipshit Mike Gervasi is thinking?! I promise that I will .... oh , never mind . read another comic book and go to sleep
dunno about that he said he said, what's truth and what's not. but they couldn't just let him talk crap about backing tracks. so, Nikki talked crap back. Mick quit not over backing tracks, he quit because his body couldn't tour anymore. He said he didn't quit the band, but you quit touring, you effectively left the band, since most new money coming in is due to ticket sales and merch sales. after all, almost no one buys music anymore.
@@marctowersap8018 He ALWAYS carried that band... Period... They have awesome guitar riffs and mediocre lyrics at best... Basic drums, lame bass and horrible vocals... Mick Mars is 💯% of the reason musicians liked Motley Crue... Girls liked Vince and Nikki and Tommy because of their looks... But all of their looks are history!!! But Mick even tho he's sick can still play circles around the rest of the band!!! That's a Fact!!! I just watched a video of him playing live (not prerecorded 30 yrs ago) and he's still got it... He just can't stand up on stage for 90 minutes or run All over the world anymore... Motley Crue needs to give it up... They've been irrelevant since shortly after Dr. Feelgood was released... Mick carried them for a few more years but got tired of being their crutch!! Bottom line
@Stonehaven228 uh your opinion only. Nikki is motley crue. lots of people love the lyrics, think Tommy is a great drummer, and mick a good guitarist. you have no facts to base your opinion on, 100% of musicians think mick is the reason they like MC? methinks you made that crap up. or cherry picked your sample. but you can believe what you want. you are wrong, but that's ok
I grew up in the Motley Crue 80's time period! I'll tell you one thing! There is no Motley Crue success at all without Mick Mars!! Undoubtedly one of the most underrated guitar players ever!!
And he was paid handsomely for his contribution. And he still receives songwriting royalties and always will.
He’s a rock legend but if he signed that contract, it doesn’t matter if other band members abused their partners or played to pre recorded tracks. I feel like some lawyer has put him up to this.
@@ericMTif he was coerced into signing anything, which is what he seems to be claiming, then that contract isnt necessarily valid. We don’t have all the facts but I’d be interested to hear an actual lawyers position on this.
I was half a foot in team MC for the reasons you stated, (he's not touring with them, new guy should get paid). But, if Micks lawsuit is true, screw those guys. They tried to make him think he was going senile, tried to cut him from everything and now this has gone public because Mars didn't say 'Oh, gee, 5%, 0 for my shares in all the companies, kicking me out of the band fully, then 0% in the future and no rights to fight back. Thanks guys, that's nice of you! Alrighty bye fellas, love ya!'. They really tried to screw him. Now they're trying to save face and make it something it isn't, probably because they didn't think Mars would be inclined to fight them on this. He's a founder member. You'd think they'd have some kind of respect for him!! Doesn't Nikki have a tattoo of his face or something? It's sad we're here. But if I was Mick, man, I'd be furious too.
I was diagnosed with AS a couple years ago. It's absolutely debilitating. Everything hurts and most pain killers do nothing to help. For him to continue playing/touring would be impossible if his medication wasn't working. Certainly there's an agreeable middle ground where Mick can be paid for his contribution to the band as an IP. ~5% is egregious
I've seen retired CEO's who pull in $250K a month, I think Mick has earned everything the others have after all these years whether he wants to enjoy the last 5-10 years of his life or not. When I think of Crue songs, I immediately go to the riffs. Mick is responsible for that.
so you think he deserves more that 5% of a tour he isnt even on? being already worth 70mil
@@krusher74 they offered him a package to get out of paying him for anything band related, not just the tour. at least thats the implication i got from the lawyers statement. If it's just the live shows he isn't playing, 5% is fair. If it's everything wholesale, the band is basically pushing him out like Mick says. He's also got a disability that isn't his fault so i would think 5% and covering all his medical bills from the years on the road would be the right thing to do. I doubt he wanted to stop if he was struggling to even do it this long. We need details!
Most songs are written by nikki sixx.
I wouldn't like Motley at all if it wasn't for Mick's fantastic undeniable guitar riffs! That's the reason I listen and watch videos of the band. Those riffs on the first album were raw, vicious, and made me buy the album immediately! I'm still on team Mick whether he needs it or not!
@@Communism.is.a.cancer Mick brought sketches to life.
If they prerecorded anything it should have been Vince's vocals
Cheers Justin! Geddy Lee of Rush stated early on that everything would be divided into 1/3. That way there was no discrepancy
Regarding the lawsuit, the Crue are trying to reduce ALL of Mick's ownership/rights to the band (Motley Crue), not just touring. This includes his own likeness and merchandising. It's all listed in the lawsuit, which has been made publicly available.
Something similar happened in Alice In Chains where Layne Staley’s family wanted more than just song royalties. I believe they settled out of court. I think there could be a question of “ownership” and some rights to future profits (merch, selling rights to song, future films, etc) and Mick probably wants to continue to be a part of that.
Plus Alice actually play the songs live. Not just larping like Drama Queen Franki Sixx
Same with Soundgarden.
Chris Cornell's widow is a......ummmm....."piece of work" is the most polite way i can say it.
AiC must pay royalties on songs played live
you play the show, the fill out a form noting which tunes were played that have not been "released" for the bands use
@@delphinazizumbo8674 the venue pays the writer/publisher’s PRO- typically ASCAP, BMI or SESAC in USA (PRO affiliate in foreign territories). The PRO then pays the writer/publisher every quarter. This is the quickie version of how “performance royalties” work.)
Mick mars is the only one who is a desent person hes respectful and cares about his fans and he never forgot were he came from cant say the same for the rwst of them
Hey Justin. Love your channel. Think about it, if they play along to to recorded tracks, then chances are high they use his recordings, so he should earn something for that.
Understand why he wouldn't get a chunk of the actual ticket sales but I don't see why he wouldn't get money's from the merch/t-shirt sales. If he has a 25% stake in the name then I can see that.
If they're using his likeness then yes that's valid.
Exactly, after 40+ years he's still in Motley Crue, No-one cares about merch with the touring guitarist on it. Also, why would he get nothing from a T Shirt sold at a gig when presumably het gets 25% from the same shirt sold on the website?
@@JustinHawkinsRidesAgain Even if they don't. The stadium is full and people are buying merchandise because it's Motley Crue. Mick was a quarter of building the brand and ought to get a full share of profits that come from the brand. Are promoters bending over backwards making it clear that Mick won't be there when they are selling the tickets? Highly doubtful. The ticket sales are being built in no small part on Mick's 40 years plus contributing to building the bands rep. Give the man his due.
@@JustinHawkinsRidesAgain they're playing his licks and using the band name he himself came up with, are you kidding?
I’m inclined to agree with you. Shame they’ve resorted to calling one another out in such a demeaning way. Sad, really.
Even after they supposably did their final tour and rode off into the sunset on Rainbows and unicorns. Why bother signing documents you didn't plan on living up too.
I'm on Mick's side. The reason that they are able to tour now in 2023 and bring in all that money is because of the over 40 years of his life that he spent being part of the band. From what I've heard (please correct me if I'm wrong), touring musicians who are not officially a part of the band are only paid per performance, for traveling days and also given pocket money - they don't get a percentage of the income from the tour. And there are lots of insanely talented guitarists that would be more than happy to accept those terms in order to tour with a band as famous as Motley Crue. So a fair arrangement would have the band hire a touring guitarist and either absorb the expense of pittance that he or she is paid, or if they want to be extra shrewd about it, deduct that pittance from Mars' 25% share - THAT would be fair. Only paying 5% to Mars isn't even in the same solar system as fair.
I’m not a lawyer and a bit reluctant to take sides this early in the legal dispute without knowing all the facts/legal documents. However, after reading the Variety articles, I agree with you that it may not go well for old Mick. You made a valid point that it will go whichever way the document (their contract) says it will - unless someone finds a loophole! It does seem unfair that they are trying to oust him from other LLCs when he is rightfully a shareholder. It's unfortunate that he can no longer perform due to his medical condition, however, he can’t expect to get full compensation for the touring revenue when he is not fulfilling the performance requirements of their contract. Anyway he’s 71, well past retirement age, and apparently has an estimated net worth of $70 mil. Wouldn’t you think that’s enough for him to happily enjoy the rest of his remaining years on earth and provide for his family?
I really love your channel, Mr Hawkins. You bring elegance and class to gritty subjects like this. You truly make me want to listen and watch.
Let me just say it, Justin is doing comedy. Not the broad pie-in-the-face comedy, but rather the subtle, which-direction-is-this-guy's-mind-going-to-go, Hugh-Grant-sort-of-British-whimsical comedy. Like being so certain of a fact at the top of the routine, only finally to admit he was not sure at all (in another episode; BTW, Steve Martin did this years ago on "Let's Get Small" in a story about what his guru told him over and over again). I find myself exploding in laughter and am not always sure why.
It's the merchandising and recordings Mick deserves his 25%,you write a song you get proformance royalties when it's played by someone else at this level
You've dialed in that intro. It's perfect
I agree it comes down to what exactly we're talking about with that reduction to 5%. If it's just future touring income then that sounds fair. They're still playing songs he helped create so he should get something, but they'll have to hire someone to replace him, so yeah. But if it was across the board then I understand Mick's attitude.
Who's side are you on?
whoever wins.
I will not pick a side. Yet the only thing i'll say is that Mick Mars is the only reason Motley Crue isn't completely hated.
Aaaaaa!!!
@@Cola.Cube. that is very prudent of you, sir.
I salute you.✊😂
No side.... when business overtakes music there's no side to take. Hey justin... good day to you!
Nikki Sixx’s statement there “how many years we’ve been prepping him up” kind of gave off vibes of him feeling like he should be happy to get anything as he’d be nothing without Nikki vince and Tommy so I don’t like that part
The irony is, Mars is the glue that held MC together. He was the more talented one, it's his riffs people think of when they think of MC. Sixx can't play bass, and Vince is a terrible singer. Tommy is the only solid player. But, Mick is the one to carry that band through the years.
To be fair there's a vid of a 2014 performance where Mick forgets to solo for Looks That Kill and in the latest Variety article they were saying he was messing up quite often unfortunately.
Considering Mick is widely considered to be the talented one in the band that's quite a statement.
@@andrewtschuta2627 he was messing up yeah but who in the band wasn’t messing up? Nikki sixx has never really been the greatest at bass, Tommy lee is admittedly a good drummer but still has a fair amount of flaws and the less said about vince Neil the better
Even worse, he used " propping him up" which is reference to Mick not being mobile as if to infer they had to use strings or supports to keep him from falling down.
Love your videos. Seem like your I could hang out with. Keep it up.
Once again, Justin is making me listen to him talking about people that I couldn’t possibly care less about. I’ve no idea how he does it but I’ll listen right to the end for certain. It’s quite a talent!😋
Agreed. His insight and perspective are really interesting.
I'm not even particularly interested in rock music, I still watch.
This band has earned their place in rock history.
@@sirkayda7205 they earned it 30 years ago, but they also should've retired 15 years ago. They suck now. Tommy and mick are the only ones that can actually play, and mick is severely handicapped.
Motley Crue have been performing parallel to all the other big names in rock for decades. For me, it's impossible to support my favourites without paying some kind of tribute to those in the periphery of my preference.
Justin has really good hair.
If you think 'balding' as having good hair.🤦🏻♂️
@@jimpage7141 I like his hair though
Balding?
Justin’s hair has been carrying Mötley Crüe for YEARS.
@davehoward22 BALD - adjective
Having a scalp wholly or partly lacking hair.
BALDING - another adjective, GOING BALD.
There you go Davey my boy. I hope you've learned and understand the term 'bald' now. You're welcome. You have learned a new word today. Commendable.👏🏽
I've followed this from the end of last year, and I can't help but feel that things are getting glazed over as time passes. Its not just about the revenue generated by touring. The narrative being woven by Motleys lawyer is making it sound like it's purely over the live revenue and that Mars retiring from touring is retiring from the band.
In short its not, its about Motley trying to cut Mars out of revenue of associated businesses. Paperwork Motley has asked him to sign asked him to divest himself of associated businesses that he didn’t even know existed until now, and others he did.
It's a sorry state of affairs quite frankly. But fan support seems to be with Mick Mars and I support that.
Oct 26th 2022 Motley Crue announce that Mick Mars retires from touring, but will continue to be a member of the band.
Oct 27th 2022 Motley Announce John 5 as replacement for Mick Mars (Conflicting statements made in 2 days)
At the time announcements were made via official Motley Crue press releases. No subsequent announcement was made via official Mick Mars press releases.
Dec 2022 John Corabi states that he doesn't believe Motleys narrative regarding the statements and suspects Micks silence points to a potential lawsuit.
"Maybe there's gonna be a lawsuit. I don't know. But I just know how those guys operate, and I would not be surprised if they didn't say, 'Mick, look. You're in pain. We've got John 5. We're gonna bring him in.' Maybe throw him a bone - like every time they tour, throw him some money - but 'we're gonna move forward with this guy.' It wouldn't surprise me."
He also states Mick hasn't been used on new band material since 1995.
April 6th 2023 Mick Mars sues Motley Crue, stating he has been unilaterally removed from the band. He also states that the band has deliberately withheld information about the various Motley Crue businesses that he has a 25% ownership share in.
Mars says the band has demanded he sign a severance agreement that would divest him of those and other future interests, in return for a 5% stake in the group’s 2023 tour, which is going on without him.
Exactly. It's far more than just the tour. Motley as a band is apparently just one facet of Motley as a BRAND. Mick retiring from touring lead the other three to push him out of his 1/4 interest in the whole business.
Thank you for posting this.
It states that Mick hasn’t been used on an album since 1995 , good point since all of the biggest hits were from before 1995 . So pay him the royalties owed and I would bet those out perform anything they have done since . There is no Crue without Mick Mars, just another tribute band and you can’t swing a dead cat around without hitting one these days. Sad that after 40 years it comes to this. But how many times have we been here before?
Emily D Baker is an ex DA prosecutor who does her spin on pop culture law. She's going to be following this case as it develops. I'd follow her take on the law for informed information. Just my .02
@D Prince So yeah, if it was strictly about touring income and nothing else, I'd be siding with the band here. But reading your post, it sounds like this thing goes far deeper than that, and unfortunately, both sides are gonna need to blow a ton of money on legal unless they can come up with some kind of a compromise before this thing gets blown way out of proportion. And if both sides go the full-on legal route, the only winners will be the lawyers, no matter who wins in court. Get it together, guys. Sit down in a room together and sort this out. Otherwise, both sides will suffer, and the fans will too.
This has really become the best place to get music industry news 😁thanks for another awesome review!
Love this content. This and reviews of rock tunes is what I want :)
It's the only thing I regularly watch on UA-cam
I saw Motley Crue live I Halifax and the power blew out the amps on stage...but lo and behold, you could still hear them as they walked around wondering what was going on..true professionals...guess they thought no one would notice in the fog and haze they played in.
Other sources online have reported that a lot more is involved than just the touring revenue. However, whenever I see a story on this subject they end up detailing something slightly different. I've read that Mick was only wanting to give up the touring part. He still wanted to be involved in future recording projects. However, the other members said his playing isn't good enough anymore. I've also heard that the other band members are trying to remove him from band owned businesses. I think they have 7 or 8 businesses like their own touring company, and their offer would remove Mick from all of that as well. There was also some information on the merch revenue that would be cut with the touring money. He would get a lot less of that and nothing from any merch that didn't have him on it or featured his replacement. whatever the case, it is definitely an unfortunate turn for a great career.
Mick is the brand. They couldn’t tour without his precedence.
I'm not sure I agree, I'd say Nikki and Tommy are more recognisable figures to the average non-that-interested person than Mick is. So that means they're more of the brand, doesn't it? Genuine question.
@@victoriadack168
Singers relate to Vince...
Bass players, Nikki...
Drummers know Tommy...
But the GUITAR SLINGER'S USUALLY the FOCAL POINT OF ANY GOOD ROCK BAND.
There ARE some notable exceptions.
The Black Crowes, Lynyrd Skynyrd... etc.
But the CRUE?!?
MICK MARS IS THE MAN!!!
🎶🎸🎶
⚡⚡⚡
The courts and lawyers will decide. However, I think that Mick has a point, especially if the prerecorded tracks that the Crue uses on the tour feature Mick playing the guitar. Using his material should constitute a larger cut, but probably not 25%.
That’s the only way he has a point. If they have hired another guitarist that has to play the part live, then he doesn’t. Getting paid royalties on the song, and an extra 5% just because he’s a founding member, then that’s reasonable.
Tommy, Neil and Nikki wouldn't be anything if it wasn't for Mick.. even their movie shows that...
There’s clips of his live audio with the click track and he’s doing just fine performing from what was shown. Vince is rushing like crazy though.
To his credit Mick Mars is without a doubt the most talented member in the band. I doubt they'd be where they are without him. So I could see how he could feel like he deserves his cut. However I agree with Justin. If its just touring profits the 5% for doing nothing is a good deal. But he should still get his share of profits from any merch, recordings and writing credits.
Mars owns 25% of the band, whether profits come from albums, merch or touring, the band is a corporation and Mars is 25% owner (not limited ownership but ownership).
Yes. Quite sure there are previous examples from the rock world. Don Felder/The Eagles and Steve Perry/Journey come to mind. Not sure what their percentage is. If I were him, I would be concerned about the language of the contract he signed previously. That may make his current case null and void.
i know you've covered a lot of music business stuff, so sorry if you've covered this detail before, but how is ownership divided up among band members in relation to the song itself and in relation to the master recording? for example, if wiki is correct, all four members of the darkness wrote "i believe in a thing called love"--is that because all four essentially contributed equally from a creative standpoint, or because the band had a legal agreement that the songs were to be credited to all four? and if, for instance, justin hawkins had been the only credited writer for that song, what does justin own and what do all the band members own? sorry if those questions aren't laid out very well.
Each band has different agreements. Lennon and McCartney split equally despite how much each did or didn't contribute.
Hi
I worked in biz for 20 plus years with different musicians.
Writing and performing their songs and others as well.
Who ever is on copyright of songs gets royalties.
From their sales or if other musicians play or record them.
Some songs aren’t even written by band members.
Some songs lyrics by someone else, music by band or certain members of band.
So lots of variables.
Touring, Justin is correct in the logical conclusion that if you’re not touring, you’re not entitled to box office receipts.
I’ve Never been a fan of anything these guys have done in music or personal life.
I’m not surprised by these antics actually.
When you become a brand instead of a band, like Kiss, Foreigner, Motley Crue. Where you are just coming out and playing songs from 25-40 years ago, you are just a breathing figure in a wax museum.
Give me real bands like Govt Mule that are still creating new music and definitely play live.
@@TheOneDono musically No.
But when you take into account they only have one original member on stage.
They are basically a tribute band along with Skynyrd and Dead & Co. And I’m a life long Dead Head.
Justin, I want to thank you for your thoughts on this situation from a logical view as a professional who's been in and through the industry
You definitely made me think more about the different aspects.
I've made some comments elsewhere about this situation, as many others without really stopping to look at the overall matter or points of view,etc.
My own personal opinion now is, as far as matketing of the name, the royalties from merchandise, and music he was part of Mick still deserves a 25% cut, or even 15%.
Even with the agreement regarding any member leaving, 5% is a literal slap in the face.
Those royalties include profits from marketing MC products using the brand... Tshirts, posters etc.
I do feel 5% from ticket sales is fair, or maybe even 3 or 4% because it's still selling the brand.
I realize they still need to pay John but the truth is, he will bring even more money/profit with live shows as he has a massive following, so he's going to draw in an even larger crowd and sale of merchandise (no idea what his contract w them is) but there's a chance he worked in the ability to sell his own solo merchandise at venues as well?
So the remaining 3 members will still draw the same wages as always if not more due to John.
So in the end the only one really impact money wise is Mick.
I wish I would be able to get your thoughts on my appraisal of the situation, but also realize it's unlikely, you're a very busy individual.
Anyway again, it was nice to hear your thoughts from a business point of view.
Cheers .
Unilaterally is an adverb that describes something that is done, decided, or affecting only one person, side, party, or faction, without consulting or considering other. It can also relate to a contract or engagement that imposes an obligation on only one party.
I could listen to you doing a commentary on a tin of beans & still laugh.. love your channel.. Justin your the bestest 😂🫶🏻🤘🏻
Great explanation on the meaning of unilaterally 😁 it was perfect accidental Alan Partidge
Dearest Justin - for the first time ever, I watched you on my big TV, rather than my little phone screen. Your skin is just remarkable! Your face, even arms - and you have lovely hands! Another interesting and hilarious video as well.
It always seemed like Mick had the most common sense out of the whole crew.hope everything works out😌❤
Because he is *a lot* older than the rest of the band
He must have felt like he was standing in the middle of a flying circus at times
Hey Justin, talking about music industry stuff...What is your opinion on awards ceremonies? Are they even still relevant these days? I was thinking about Bonnie Raitt beating all those squillion selling megastars to get 'Song of the year' at the Grammys...it feels like a win for old school song writing, but maybe not so much if nobody cares!
I don’t know anything about Motley Crue, but I feel like this is about more than just the tour profits. Definitely comes across like theres some bad blood amongst the band. I think 5-7.5% is a generous offer for a tour that he’s not even playing on but it sounds like there’s a question mark over any of the other members are playing live as well. Will be interesting to see how it all plays out.
He played half the tour, so 5% of his quarter share sounds ridiculous, so when he refused their offer, they did come back with a still unfair 7.5%, but then proceeded to fire him from all of the corporations. I’m curious to see what comes out in discovery!
This video is Great! Like so many others you have unleashed to the world. Did the Michael Star interview happen yet? 🤘🏼🤨🤘🏼
Well my understanding is once the band is incorporated and the members were the sole shareholders (25% each) and that unless there was an agreement that was signed, as claimed by Sixx, then any revenue(touring, merch, etc) generated by the Motley Crue LLC, everyone would be entitled to their 25% share of the profits as claimed by Mick. John5's salary for touring as Mick's replacement(he is a hired player, not a full fledged vested shareholder ie. member of Motley Crue)would just be another expense to the LLC just like a roadie or trucking, etc., so that has no bearing on whether Mick should be compensated as per still being a shareholding memeber of the LLC.
A lot of things were not brought up in the video you watched, Mr. Hawkins. They're not just refusing to pay him royalties for touring (that he isn't doing). They've also removed him from his 1/4 partnership in a ton of Motely Crue related companies (Motley Crue ltd, and stuff like that; it's absolutely mind-blowing how many companies this one band seems to need). Just because Mick is unable to tour anymore, he is also being forced out of his stake in everything band-related, even though touring is only one component of being a band.
It should be noted that, while it makes perfect sense to not pay someone an equal cut of touring money if they don't actually tour and perform like the rest of the group, it's not like that share of the money is going to his replacement. I'll bet you all the money in the world that John 5 is just on payroll, and the other "classic" Motely members are trying to up their shares from 1/4 to 1/3. Obviously, someone shouldn't be paid for work they don't do, but if he is a 1/4 owner of the name/brand/enterprise that is Motley Crue, should he not receive a percent of the profits? If I own 1/4 of a coffee shop, do I only get paid if I show up and make coffee, or do I get paid because I invested early, helped create the brand, and continue to make business decisions? And what exactly are they counting as "touring" profits? Does that include t-shirt merchandise related to that tour? Hopefully, John 5 will get a cut of anything that has his image on it, but if it has the name Motley Crue on it, Mick owns a quarter of that brand. It would make perfect sense to negotiate a smaller cut for stuff like that, since it's related to a tour he isn't actively participating in, but you can't cut him out entirely because he's still an equal owner of the brand name.
They also got a lot nastier with accusing each other of being bad performers. Mick called out Nikki for using backing tracks, and basically implied he was the only person playing live onstage. Nikki countered that he was often missing the beat, getting lost, or playing the wrong song. Mick came back and said he was having trouble with his monitors and often couldn't cleanly hear what was happening. Nikki asserts Mick is losing his mind and his skill. Mick says this is gaslighting, he's just as good as he ever was, and they're making this up to discredit him and increase their cut of the Motely pie. I think we might need to hear from a doctor to get the final word on Mick's mental state, but so far, everything he's said makes sense to me. Of all the guys in the Crue, he's the only one I've had any respect for.
According to him, he told everyone years ago that he was no longer up for touring, so they did that farewell tour, and called it quits. Then they quickly came back after The Dirt movie came out, and Mick told them he could only handle a few gigs here and there. But they just kept going. So he says he can no longer tour and they need someone to replace him on the road, and they oust him from every facet of the band.
I'm 100% Team Mick.
Make that 1/2. Vince Neil has been a "paid employee" of the band for years.
I grew up listening to bands like this and still do, but Motley never gelled with me, I just can’t quite put my finger on why. This is just a sad story all around and if the stories about not playing live are true, I’d personally die of shame if that was me. Great video🤘🏼🤘🏼
I get it- for me that band would be KISS.
@@smandez2023 Hah... Kiss, the only band I have actually walked out on. Never got the appeal.
Same here
2 good albums - rest ok - had to be born about '65 - '75
Hi Justin, are you adding more songs to the 'Check out the Solo on THAT!!!' playlist - im surprised RISE by Extreme isn't in there as you seemed to rate it highly :)
In Nikki's statement the part that got fans heated was him saying, We love you, but we've been spending years "propping" him up, when really it's been Mick that has kept Crue together since the beginning. He was the one that was straight. Crue wanted to replace him back during their early party days, cause Mick didn't get into that scene with them, they wanted someone that would party with them. Mick was and is still always about the music. So really it's been Mick propping the other three up for decades. The guys said their main reason for doing the retirement tour like almost 10 years ago, was cause Mick was losing his mind and he couldn't remember the songs. Then this past stadium tour Nikki said publicly that Mick would forget certain chords, notes and even solo's. Micks response was during those moments his in ears were messed up and not on track. And he did say, it's pretty bad that he's complaining about me not playing the song right, by a guy that never played one note live on his bass this past stadium tour. they were all tracks. Micks playing was 100% live along with a rhythm track and said even some of Tommy's drums were tracks and not live. And let's not forget when Mick retired from this tour.. The agreement was that any music Crue decides to write and record, studio work, Mick would be the guitar player as usual. Nikki announced right before Mick started talking, that Nikki and John 5 have been spending a lot of time in the studio writing and working on new songs for Crue.
Another great video from you Justin about mick mars sueing motley cruel very informative and interesting keep up the great work please bring jenny back soon she is lovely and charming love the last video you did with her
As an Entertainment lawyer(and dealing with a similar issue where a drummer stopped touring but still wants revenue) I would be very very surprised if Mick Mars has any legit case. At this point in their career they would/should all have lawyers and management that would know every scenario. This isn't an agreement signed by 20 year old selling their soul for a record deal. It would have been in all their best interest to have an agreement that covers multiple scenarios and with Mick already dealing with his illness I would guess this would be included. Maybe Mick was hoping for a public sentiment verdict and the other guys would cave to not hurt the brand?
I am curious whether the fact that Mick has a medical disability that prevents him from touring might protect his financial interests if he fails to participate in a tour. It sounds to me like Mick is part of some kind of incorporated entity that profits from the presentation of shows. Does a medical disability that prevents him from being one of the people who puts on the shows put that financial stake in jeopardy? While there might be a signed agreement where they have pledged to have their share drop to 5% if a member chooses not to participate in a tour, I wonder whether the presence of a medical disability might trump that language if it wasn't constructed with clarity.
@@ianstewart1946 it could. Most likely was written into an agreement that he would have to agree to since it is a known condition. Although numerous laws can protect him he still would have to be able to perform and any compensation on the touring side would not be required but merch sold on tour for example he could still receive money.
What consists of tour revenue? It is likely more then just the ticket price. If there is merch with his image on it or music ( that he worked on) that is sold AT the shows or via the tour website/App. Then he shows get his current cut of that. But I would expect that will be very small cut.
They have been trying to force Mick out near day 1 way back around '83
I used to live near Mick in Marina Del Rey and I was always surprised(warranted or not)
by Mick's dedication to Motley, Guitar, Music, and Fans. Later Motley were clients of a studio
I half owned in Sherman Oaks and he was suffering his condition but has admirably stuck in
it's not an easy condition to deal with especially going out on the road and yet up until recently
he has stuck it out. They need to all sit down and find a mutual compromise that serves all in a compassionate
respectful manner.
I’m actually with Motley on this. Getting 7.5% of the touring revenue for sitting at home is a gift.
They forced Mick out.
No Clue MOTLEY well Nikki is a master of bullshitting. The gift of gab and only the oblivious buy it. I'll quote Nikki for you " Motley are the gour of us and when this becomes a job it will be over" Motley has been a job since Dr. Feelgood. When Nikki took the lead role and became boss Nikki. Btw not sure your aware of this but Mick named the band, makes him a founder of the band more so than Tommy or Vince. I hope Mick takes them for everything he can get..... That may be more than 25%
Mick deserves much more.....they suck without Mick Mars.
@@goldenruletv7301 I wouldn't go as far as saying they suck without Mick. 5 is doing a decent job. My point is they are trying to screw Mick and that's wrong. I've been a Motley fan from the first time I heard them in 84. They gradually lost their punch after Shout. Theater was a good record but there was a lot of filler on that record. Girls I think they got lucky with that one and when they did Feelgood they were probably at their best. Now for me the record with Corabi was my favorite since Shout musically. I met all these guys some of them multiple times and I know someone who hung out with them almost everytime they came through. I can tell you their demons hurt them and when Nikki got clean he took ownership of the band and became controlling. Not a bad guy but a master of the gift of gab. He I believe is not truthful about things so his credibility with me is lacking. Tommy is just along for the ride but if he's not happy he would walk no doubt. Imo I think Vince has something in writing because let's face it his instrument is seriously damaged. Out of all of them Mick was the most down to Earth. I met them all on the Motley vs The Earth tour after a press confrence. They were all VERY gracious but out of all of them Vince and Mick were the most down to Earth Mick being the most. Honest wise I'm talking about. Tommy and Nikki were very gracious but they seemed just to be agreeing and going along with the conversation, Tommy didn't say much. Mick and Vince were just amazing. They signed whatever we had. I only had two things and it seemed to surprise Mick as he said "this is it"! Both Vince and Mick once we moved onto Tommy and Mick got on the plane. I had my 4mon. Old son with us and I think it played on Vince and he was still hurting from Skylar. Mick even back then you could tell he was in pain and just wanted to get off his feet. There in lies the point, Mick I'm sure would come out and do shows and I know he plans on doing solo shows but not across the country. JUST PAY HIM!
not if mick doesn't agree to it - he is motley as much as the others are - there are no gifts in business
I think as I read he did not exactly quit the band. He was playing in local shows or shows not too far away in the US, and he was still recording and doing sessions. He just couldn’t do the extended tours. The man’s in his 70’s for gosh-sake. I have what he has, it’s an auto-immune disorder. It’s chronic pain. But I get the feeling this is the devil is in the details kind of dispute. Not as simple as he’s wanting to gain from profits on tours he’s not doing. More like an I.P. thing. They did get tour employees to sign statements that his playing was subpar. There may be a bit of gaslights going on. Who knows. After all, Tommy Lee was caught miming to recorded tracks.
Mick Mars: 'So that's it, after 41 years? So long, good luck?'
Motley Crue: 'I don't recall saying good luck.'
He’s really showing his intention here by basically saying, This is a race to death and the last man standing gets all of the eyeliner, fishnets, and funny hats. I think that man should be me because my band mates have done bad things and I have not. Humble guy. I’m team stop scheduling tour dates if you can’t/won’t actually play live.
Sixx makes it sound like they have been carrying him for years, Mick is the piece that holds the band. He is a legendary shredder. Sixx has never been known as a very good bass player and Vince has never been a top notch vocalist by any means. The band should be thanking Mick for holding them up. Sixx miming his performance on stage is bs if he can't play cut his pay down. The fans deserve a live show. The whole band signed a contract that they would never tour again two tours ago.
Mick is a legendary shredder? LOL! While i like Mick and think he usually has great tone he is not a great guitar player. Motley has very simple (albeit cool) guitar riffs. Put Mick up against about anybody from the 80's and he pales im comparison. CC DeVille is better than Mick!
I had the misfortune of watching this lot live twice already and they're one of the worse shitshows i've had the misfortune to watch life. My last experience was while touring with Def Leppard,who by the way,wiped the floor with this lot,but what was clear for all to see was the persistent use of tape,especially with backing vocals,keyboards,bass and some drums and i must add,some guitar licks/riffs where suspect too. I've got to say i really didn't notice any lip syncing from the mediocre Vince Neill,i suppose some minor shouts but that was more due to backing vocals than anything else but what broke the camel's back was the trigger drumming playing an intro with no Tommy Lee in sight.....even the Crue diehards where left scratching their heads....and the least said about the clapping Nicki Sixx with a thunderous bass line playing at the same time,the better, It bordered on the ridiculous and there where loads of us laughing at this pantomime! It wouldn't be so funny if Crue fans hadn't paid their hard earned cash for this fraud of a band....at least i paid for Leppard....i knew full well what to expect from this fraudsters!!!!!
You're too kind to Vince Neil's "singing." 😂
@@gulfgal98 Totally agreed with you. Calling what he does "singing" is really stretching the mark but i could swear that what came out of his mouth was his own voice. There where definitely tapes of backing tracks and the odd harmonic shout but i do honestly believe that most of Vince Neill's screeching was all his doing. The keyboards, bass, some drum parts and the odd guitar riff where most definitely taped.....without a shadow of a doubt.
@@gulfgal98 I have to be honest, i don't like Motley Crue,i did like the original EP and "shout at the Devil" was a great debut LP with a brilliant production, but the rest, apart from the odd song [i do like Kickstart my heart] and the album they did with John Corabi [which i did find interesting], is an unmitigated pile of shite! But having said that, i always thought there was more to Mick Mars than meets the eye, which was confirmed when i heard via an acquaintance [who shall remain nameless],a smidge of some work from an upcoming solo project......and it was bloody good. Nothing to do with Crue's rock by numbers! Very Bluesy and may i say, with a tinge of modern psychedelia/desert rock......i liked it. I hope it sees the light of day and it puts certain divas in their proper pigeon holes!
The whole share thing I suppose would depend on what's written on a contract. If he's a share holder like an owner of the co apart from being a member he might be entitled to a cut of all profits. Like a share holder of a big factory who doesn't actually work in the factory but just collects the profits.
I would think that he would be entitled to his fair share of the merch sold on tour since he is part owner of the trademark Motley Crue
Team Mick!!
Mick mars named the band. The name Motley Crue was his idea. All the riffs are his if they tour they tour his riffs weather he's playing them or not he owns 25% of that BRAND!!
I've heard your songs on channels like Chris MD through Lickd. Could you talk about how the royalties compare from something like Lickd which is fairly new, to say radio/spotify etc?
Hey, I remember this band from 40 years ago. Man that’s a really long time.
Is he besmirching their characters tho when it's 100% truth?
Ive been saying this since it began. Mick is certainly critical to their success and he deserves 25% on most revenue streams. However, he cant expect 25% of touring profits without touring. They have to pay a highly skilled guitarist to replace him. Maybe 10-15% might be fair. Im sure there must be signed agreements that define all that. No doubt in my mind that without Mick, they dont get where they are. But there must be a reasonable compromise.
It comes down to ownership. Who owns the assets? If he has contributed to building up a company then the only proper thing to do is to buy his shares or share the profits. The value of the shares depends on the future income that the company can generate.
You make a fair point: Where are the cuts being made? We probably won't know unless it goes to trial.
I am really digging your channel bro. Thought your music was awesome, this channel kicks slit. love it !
It's nice to see, and hear the words "music" and "profit" together for any artist these days. No matter how small the percentage.
No one pays me for my hobby and plenty watch.
@@AngusMcIntyre No one pays me either. And plenty don't watch
Lovely insight I’m with you just❤