MR

For anyone who knows more than myself. I have a degree in Criminal Justice, so I know quite a bit about the legal process, but not necessarily as much about the Journey proceedings. My question is this. IF Augeri has been terminated, and Jeff has been hired full time, I don't understand why Journey cannot announce that even if Augeri's salary, etc. are still in negotiation. That will not change the end result, if that is what the band has chosen. Anyone have any further insight on this? Makes me curious if that is all that is going on. Perhaps Jeff's contract is not completed either perhaps? Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving. Mark

Uh oh.

Rockin'Deano wrote:Uh oh.

Fill us in big guy!!

jrnysc wrote:For anyone who knows more than myself. I have a degree in Criminal Justice, so I know quite a bit about the legal process, but not necessarily as much about the Journey proceedings. My question is this. IF Augeri has been terminated, and Jeff has been hired full time, I don't understand why Journey cannot announce that even if Augeri's salary, etc. are still in negotiation. That will not change the end result, if that is what the band has chosen. Anyone have any further insight on this? Makes me curious if that is all that is going on. Perhaps Jeff's contract is not completed either perhaps? Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving. Mark

Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation (according to many sources). Therefore, in order for someone else to be made a member or even for him to be removed, Augeri's ownership shares would have to be bought out. An accountant or actuary would figure out the worth of those shares most likely by extrapolating from past income how much the band could make in the future for a reasonable amount of time. Augeri's lawyers would ask for A, the corp. would offer Z, then they'd keep countering thru the alphabet till they met a number agreeable to both. It might not go that long, but that's one idea of how long these things can take. There may be some stipulation in the contract that until Augeri is bought out & everything is settled, the band cannot announce his departure. Or the lawyers may just have asked them to keep it mum as any announcements about the band's future may change the value of his shares. Does that help?

Back to cooking.

Rockin'Deano wrote:Uh oh.

???????????

JourneyRox wrote:

jrnysc wrote:For anyone who knows more than myself. I have a degree in Criminal Justice, so I know quite a bit about the legal process, but not necessarily as much about the Journey proceedings. My question is this. IF Augeri has been terminated, and Jeff has been hired full time, I don't understand why Journey cannot announce that even if Augeri's salary, etc. are still in negotiation. That will not change the end result, if that is what the band has chosen. Anyone have any further insight on this? Makes me curious if that is all that is going on. Perhaps Jeff's contract is not completed either perhaps? Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving. Mark

Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation (according to many sources). Therefore, in order for someone else to be made a member or even for him to be removed, Augeri's ownership shares would have to be bought out. An accountant or actuary would figure out the worth of those shares most likely by extrapolating from past income how much the band could make in the future for a reasonable amount of time. Augeri's lawyers would ask for A, the corp. would offer Z, then they'd keep countering thru the alphabet till they met a number agreeable to both. It might not go that long, but that's one idea of how long these things can take. There may be some stipulation in the contract that until Augeri is bought out & everything is settled, the band cannot announce his departure. Or the lawyers may just have asked them to keep it mum as any announcements about the band's future may change the value of his shares. Does that help?

Back to cooking.

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!!

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!! Smile

Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand. I know enough about the music business and that was just assinine. Should have been put on contract, then dismissing him would have been easy.

AR wrote:

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!! Smile

Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand. I know enough about the music business and that was just assinine. Should have been put on contract, then dismissing him would have been easy.

Absolutely. Could have just said see ya!!

AR wrote:

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!! Smile

Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand. I know enough about the music business and that was just assinine. Should have been put on contract, then dismissing him would have been easy.

No shit.

donnaplease wrote:

AR wrote:

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!! Smile

Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand. I know enough about the music business and that was just assinine. Should have been put on contract, then dismissing him would have been easy.

No shit.

If I'm not mistaken, he was a "hired gun" for some time. Then, when it "seemed" like he was a good fit he became a fully vested member. That is, a one-sixth partner (Perry being a full partner also). Hell, most of the people who blast him, myself excluded, liked him alot at one time. I NEVER liked him (as a singer). As a person, he seems to be a pretty good dude.

AR wrote:Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand.

Because Neal honestly thought at the time that he had found the right singer for "the last incarnation of the band",as he said.
Maybe he wanted to make sure that he will never lose Augeri,so he "pinned" him down with a full member status.

Who knew what was going to happen?I mean who knew that Augeri will have to be sent home this way?

I bet all the guys have individual contracts,full member contracts,as well as a colective contract under the name Journey.
I bet that contract doesn't say "in case of lyp-synching..."
But I'm sure it says "in case one of the members of the band is sidelined for unforseen reasons..." .

The rest is in figures.

I have one other question as well. With Augeri being fully a member of the corporation, could he fight being released if he feels fit to sing?

saint John wrote:

donnaplease wrote:

AR wrote:

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!! Smile

Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand. I know enough about the music business and that was just assinine. Should have been put on contract, then dismissing him would have been easy.

No shit.

If I'm not mistaken, he was a "hired gun" for some time. Then, when it "seemed" like he was a good fit he became a fully vested member. That is, a one-sixth partner (Perry being a full partner also). Hell, most of the people who blast him, myself excluded, liked him alot at one time. I NEVER liked him (as a singer). As a person, he seems to be a pretty good dude.

Could be, I do not know the specifics.

For the record, I thought he was a good fit at first. Noticed the cracks starting a bit around "Under the Radar".

But when I first heard him I thought no one could possibly replace Perry. After the first show (which I enjoyed thoroughly) I was like "Cool, maybe not the same, but fucking close enough!"

jrnysc wrote:I have one other question as well. With Augeri being fully a member of the corporation, could he fight being released if he feels fit to sing?

I don't think he feels fit to sing,but he sure can fight.

saint John wrote:

donnaplease wrote:

AR wrote:

Yes, very much. That makes sense. I wasn't aware (probably missed it somewhere) that Augeri was a full member of the band's corporation. That could certainly get tedious and time consuming. Thanks a bunch, and enjoy that meal!!! Smile

Why he wasn't made a salaried member (hired gun) I will never understand. I know enough about the music business and that was just assinine. Should have been put on contract, then dismissing him would have been easy.

No shit.

If I'm not mistaken, he was a "hired gun" for some time. Then, when it "seemed" like he was a good fit he became a fully vested member. That is, a one-sixth partner (Perry being a full partner also). Hell, most of the people who blast him, myself excluded, liked him alot at one time. I NEVER liked him (as a singer). As a person, he seems to be a pretty good dude.

Is Perry REALLY still a full partner????? If so, wouldn't he have some say in the way things are run???

jrnysc wrote:I have one other question as well. With Augeri being fully a member of the corporation, could he fight being released if he feels fit to sing?

Describe "fit to sing? That's the Problem.

donnaplease wrote:

Is Perry REALLY still a full partner????? If so, wouldn't he have some say in the way things are run???

Never thought about that. Wonder what the deal is.

Rockin'Deano wrote:

jrnysc wrote:I have one other question as well. With Augeri being fully a member of the corporation, could he fight being released if he feels fit to sing?

Describe "fit to sing? That's the Problem.

Does SA believe he IS fit to sing??

Perry gets paid whenever Journey takes the stage....with or without him.

saint John wrote:Perry gets paid whenever Journey takes the stage....with or without him.

Had heard that part, but wondering if he (thru his lawyor no doubt) has a "voice" in CURRENT band business, especially something of this magnitude??

perryfaithful wrote:

saint John wrote:Perry gets paid whenever Journey takes the stage....with or without him.

Had heard that part, but wondering if he (thru his lawyor no doubt) has a "voice" in CURRENT band business, especially something of this magnitude??

Yeah...what she said...

donnaplease wrote:

perryfaithful wrote:

saint John wrote:Perry gets paid whenever Journey takes the stage....with or without him.

Had heard that part, but wondering if he (thru his lawyor no doubt) has a "voice" in CURRENT band business, especially something of this magnitude??

Yeah...what she said...

That, I can't answer. My GUESS would be no, though.

donnaplease wrote:

perryfaithful wrote:

saint John wrote:Perry gets paid whenever Journey takes the stage....with or without him.

Had heard that part, but wondering if he (thru his lawyor no doubt) has a "voice" in CURRENT band business, especially something of this magnitude??

Yeah...what she said...

I'm pretty sure that Perry doesn't have any say in who the lead singer of Journey is. That simply wouldn't make any sense, from anyone's perspective. Honestly, I don't even think Perry wants anything to do with Journey. He's thrilled to still be getting paid (quite well) off of "Journey", but as far as Perry is concerned, the guys out there touring under the name are not Journey, and he's never made any secret about that. I'm sure if Perry had any say at all, the name "Journey" would have ceased to exist, upon his exit from the band.


John from Boston

Rockin'Deano wrote:

jrnysc wrote:I have one other question as well. With Augeri being fully a member of the corporation, could he fight being released if he feels fit to sing?

Describe "fit to sing? That's the Problem.

I simply mean in the event he had been cleared by doctor's, etc. and told Neal and management I'm ready to go, even though the band may not feel it's possible or even want to do it, could he fight being released from the band? Could he hold the band up for a potentially long period of time fighting it if he chose to do so?

Enigma869 wrote:

donnaplease wrote:

perryfaithful wrote:

saint John wrote:Perry gets paid whenever Journey takes the stage....with or without him.

Had heard that part, but wondering if he (thru his lawyor no doubt) has a "voice" in CURRENT band business, especially something of this magnitude??

Yeah...what she said...

I'm pretty sure that Perry doesn't have any say in who the lead singer of Journey is. That simply wouldn't make any sense, from anyone's perspective. Honestly, I don't even think Perry wants anything to do with Journey. He's thrilled to still be getting paid (quite well) off of "Journey", but as far as Perry is concerned, the guys out there touring under the name are not Journey, and he's never made any secret about that. I'm sure if Perry had any say at all, the name "Journey" would have ceased to exist, upon his exit from the band.





John from Boston

It pretty much has. Maybe the latest lineup will be different.

I thought Steve said in one of the Q&As that he was no longer connected to Journey in any way. Of course he still owns part of the catalog, but I would think all he would be making off the tours are his royalties from the catalog.

Since Jeff has a lot of popularity in Europe, isn't it likely that Jeff will be singing next spring? So, that means Augeri must just be fighting for money. Surely,Neal wouldn't schedule a tour that could get cancelled because Augeri says he is ready to sing. What a soap opera Journey has been since Perry left.