I remember watching the band perform Forever in Cleveland last year. Chad, Pat, and Chad basically mocked the song and Ed behind his back on stage. If they three of them had any balls at all, they would have told Ed that they weren't going to play the song before the show. Instead, they cheated the fans at the show by performing half-ass and acted like children in the process.

Ed is no angel, but the three of them don't behave any better.

I guess that's one way of looking at it, another is that Ed cheated the fans by even penning that song in the first place.

Anyways, thanks for not answering any of my questions

Oh pot calling kettle black now. Nick, tune it out man. Ed's lyrics to Chad's music was an abortion. Simply doesn't fit anymore. Hasn't for sometime.....it's sad but true.

Embrace and accept this fate ........it is the only way!!!!

Brem.....Remember our little tiff about being verbally abused, that you'd know with my words?

Well, LR took care of that perfectly.

This post has been edited by OutToDry: May 25 2010, 3:41 pm

Except it was liverocks

oops

Well, like a lot of others, you're straying into a new discussion. I agree about the idea of Ed losing his abilities, and TGF being on the rise (though I don't totally agree that Chad didn't play a role in Ed's current reputation). This is a great point in general, but then you might want to connect that to how TGF was without a doubt being gracious in putting Ed in their newsletter, while Ed has been without a doubt, being improper for not going into more detail about the band. That is the only thing that I wanted to defer, that we can by no means be certain that it was an act of generosity on TGF's part, given what we know.

but why/how do you know for sure....



So long as some folks act presumptuous to a nauseating extent, I might be up for repeating some questions to them.

Well, looks like we're in complete agreement. I hopped into this discussion when I saw posts assuming to a certainty that TGF were being gracious in mentioning Ed in their newsletter, and that Ed was definitely in the wrong by not going into detail about TGF and the bands breakup, or not being more supportive of the TGF project.

Where was all your rage when these folks were being presumptuous?






I would disagree with you there. I think that being speculative, and pointing out that my thoughts are only speculation, is the key to not being presumptuous, and a great way to argue against those who speak in certain faith of things they don't know.


Bottom line is, any point I make is either to take a crack at probabilities, or to diffuse other peoples definite assertions.

You must be an attorney, your writing style indicates this.

I think this is hilarious: (though I don't totally agree that Chad didn't play a role in Ed's current reputation).

Ed's current reputation, mind you, before we heard that there were improprieties committed, 100k bonus et all, .....was selling coffee, selling pendants, taking over writing and band direction, garbage music w/exception of a handful of songs, visible ego on stage, stories of his rudeness to meet & greet people......i am sure the rest of us can fill this in with more.

I can't remember, Bremang were you the tin foil hat wearing fellow from several months back who claimed the break up was a hoax or am I getting you confused with someone else?

Now you're talking about Ed ruining Ed. I think this is a interesting subject that brings about many factors and confusion.

I see many people talk about Ed losing his songwriting ability, singing ability, and losing the drive to keep the concerts fresh and energetic. I read about Ed selling coffee, and phone calls, essentially selling out. I read about Ed being the cause of Live's downfall.

I think that Ed is significantly losing vocal strength, songwriting ability, and energy on stage in recent years.


I wouldn't completely blame Ed for selling the coffee and phone calls. There are so many possible reasons to justify selling coffee and phone calls. The industry has changed, Ed doesn't get a steady income now. The band Live has sold tons of merchandise unrelated to their music, which is part of trying to make a profit. Thats cause the second Live signed to Radioactive, they sold out. Tshirts, they sold alot, and it was to their target audience. Now the target is probably people in their 30's and 40's, homebodies. Ed sells coffee, chocolate, and phone calls. Hes making his target audience happy, because those are the ones he can please. George Foreman sells grills, and Ed is putting his image on a product too - coffee. While it is clearly to make money, it doesn't look like that evil a product. It is organic and fair trade, I wouldn't be surprised if it is good, though I don't drink coffee. As for phone calls, I wouldn't be surprised if some of us spent 200 bucks back in 1997 and would think it was worth every penny.

Every band member has gone on side projects and personal capital ventures. Gracey owns a buisness, probably a multi-million dollar one. Taylor has been trying to flip scripts and other bands for a while. Ed doesn't really have other ventures going on right now. Ed is a songwriter in this life. Why shouldn't he try to supplement his income? We don't know his finances, or whether he would have to find another job. The guy is trying to make a buck. He probably has no decent contract, and being a rock star doesn't last forever, hes clearly slipping. Yet he needs to make money for his family. I wonder what Ed wife says, or if shes worried about Live, so long as the children get food on the table and go to school.


And maybe Ed just got tired of doing the same thing for 20 years, while he sees himself growing old and less appreciated. Some of us consider Ed going downhill ever since TC, or TDTH, or 2006...but we all agree the in the last couple years the band was lacking on stage. They still got attention during this time, and were still appreciated by many. The reputation of Ed Kowalczyk was still in good standing around the world.

It wasn't until Chad's blogs that radio stations, and news outlets, started associating Ed with greed. Chad certainly didn't only clear the air, but used the term greed in Ed's name. There is no doubt that he was also pointing the finger. He could have just let it remain private, or coined it an internal disagreement. Gracey let him have it too.


Back to the main point of this thread....THE NEWSLETTER. Sure, the blog posts were a while ago, but we haven't been intimately updated since, and Chads words vs. Ed's words are put to the test of our faith. Chad has SINCE THEN, expressed dismay about Ed having a stolen version of the mailing list. He made it clear to us that he didn't like the idea of Ed on the mailing list, and this was more recent. But in the end, maybe its all fake, or maybe they cooled off, or maybe they are contractually obliged. I'd take fake and contractual obligation over being cooled off, since Chad was against Ed's stolen version of the list.

This post has been edited by Bremang: May 25 2010, 5:50 pm

Lol, this stuff is confusing and hard for me to articulate. I just go with the flow.

the very first post i made about the hoax, I said it without any provisional disclaimer.

But it all comes down to believing in what Chad Taylor says in his blog.

Of course, Ed said it was all lies the next day.

Its all faith, those who believe one way or the other to a certainty.

So the breakup is a possibility,

but there were discrepancies in Chads blog,

none of us can quantify what their is to gain from a fake beef.

I think what you said before about Chad and the boys and Ed cooling off, in this hypothetical situation, would be the best thing. Surely, people don't always hold grudges, and often say things when they're angry that they take back.

But that doesn't mean its not a hypocrisy to denounce Ed to the world when it comes to music and friendship and the band, and then promote his new album out of respect; a complete 180. Even if it was the best of a mending heart, I didn't mean that Chads hypocrisy would be excluded of your assessment. So you're really getting angry at nothing.

Meanwhile, hypocrisy is trying to try to teach people the nature of relaxing an animosity, while speaking about it in a dramatic fit of rage.

This post has been edited by Bremang: May 25 2010, 6:09 pm