Deceptive marketing of Ed Kowalczyk Options

[Lerxst]

OF means present tense. Stop stroking your folds lady...... It's more of the same misrepresentation which IS DONE ON PURPOSE.

COMPLETELY done on purpose for VERY SPECIFIC reasons! Anyone in the know should ask Ed the uncomfortable questions regarding their PURPOSEFUL and misleading practices in the promotion of their shows. No SHAME there! The lemmings follow.. off the cliff they go!

-Jimmy

This post has been edited by Lerxst: Nov 10 2012, 9:39 pm

[Lerxst]

http://www.st94.com/store/Ed-Kowalczyk---I...m_1=EK.3.3.aspx

"Ed Kowalczyk is the voice and songwriting force behind the rock band Live."

Again... pay attention class! Today's lesson we'll be concentrating on the meanings of sentences with respect to tenses, past and present.

The sentence above was written and shows respect to the PRESENT TENSE as shown by the use of the operative word "is".

Now, if you simply replace that word with the word "WAS", you achieve two goals. One is it instantly changes the tense to PAST TENSE, a very clear and opposite distinction. Secondly it would make the sentence FACTUALLY TRUE, whereas the original statement is FALSE and a complete lie... no sorry. correction a complete FUCKING lie.

But to fully understand the importance of this lesson in grammar one should question the true motives behind the use of the words. Yes, and along with that comes the question of honesty and integrity. Well we both know that those things are absent as evident by the simple ignoring of tenses and their importance.

BULLSHIT! The legal system can't proceed fast enough sometimes, but lady justice is always slow when it comes to things. This too shall past.

-Jimmy

This post has been edited by Lerxst: Nov 10 2012, 10:08 pm

[OutToDry]

over the cliff.....

[Pokey]

"Sold Out!" , yep, he sure has!

[Lerxst]

Hi Troll,
Right of course you wouldn't know about how it's worded because you don't understand English comprehension, that much has already been demonstrated. I mean after all I am fairly certain if you wanted to be factual and correct you'd add on to your sentence so conveniently omitted - even though he is NO LONGER IN THE BAND. But everyone knows fully well why there's the urgency and need to be closely tied to a "chapter" of his life that he wanted to move on from. LOL. It's a fucking joke.

-Jimmy
ps. how are you knees? I worry about you Diane. You've been quiet recently... pretty much around the same timeframe that Nick has been quiet. Coincident?

Dear Daniel,
In accordance with your request for me to be more of an adult around here, I thought I'd point out that you miss this particular post. In specific, the ps. was uncalled for no? That's clearly a blatant attempt by me to incite a riot and not very adultlike.. but hey, THEY STARTED IT! THEY DID! THEY DID!

Anyways, yes, I notice you move posts around and move them to appropiate threads like the one where ED IS A CUNNING LIAR with regards to his deceptive marketing practices and misleading blurbs about upcoming shows etc.. but you forgot to move/remove/bit bucket this post. I thought I would bring it to your attention. Or hell, maybe you meant to leave it where it is.

-Jimmy

[dangum]

Anyways, yes, I notice you move posts around and move them to appropiate threads like the one where ED IS A CUNNING LIAR with regards to his deceptive marketing practices and misleading blurbs about upcoming shows etc.. but you forgot to move/remove/bit bucket this post. I thought I would bring it to your attention. Or hell, maybe you meant to leave it where it is.

It was an oversight - when you need to clean a forum first thing in the morning things get missed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I've moved your post.

[Merica]

By condensing this kind of discussion into one thread, the lies that Ed / Ed's marketing team are pushing to exploit the band he's like totally moved on from are perpetuated. If you didn't condense threads, each time there's a gig thread where people rightly discuss the sleazeball marketing, more people would be aware of the situation, come to an understanding about current events and, as a consequence, be more likely to engage with and accept Live as they are today - CCCP.

By condensing/moving stuff, waves of threads about Ed's shows go by with no posts about the disingenuous marketing. People will read them and all will seem well, as though there's nothing wrong with it at all.

The very existence of this thread helps Ed's cause to exploit and damage current Live.

[Lerxst]

By condensing this kind of discussion into one thread, the lies that Ed / Ed's marketing team are pushing to exploit the band he's like totally moved on from are perpetuated.

You are too kind.. I'd equate it to sweeping this eyesore of a topic under the rug. Let's keep it under wraps and keep it confined to a thread that hopefully will slowly disappear. That's too bad because fans deserve to know how EK and team uses deception in marketing to mislead fans, how they purposefully twist words and omit words and ignore the facts of the present day. It's a very deliberate attempt to stay attached and relevant to a chapter of his life that's now in the past, to be as closely related as possible to the band Live (a band he left), the name Live, the logo and images of Live, to use their branding (without consent) for his own promotional purposes. It's not surprising the urgency and importance of their marketing campaign to cash in as much as possible before a Live CD not featuring EK hits the shelves, but until then, let's exploit the situation as much as possible. I believe even Nick admitted a reason for this is so that "people know who he is". Ironic really, considering EK himself said he ready to move on to the next chapter and pursue his new SOLO career.. a career that apparently he wants to be tied as much as possible to the Live moniker.

If you didn't condense threads, each time there's a gig thread where people rightly discuss the sleazeball marketing, more people would be aware of the situation, come to an understanding about current events and, as a consequence, be more likely to engage with and accept Live as they are today - CCCP.

Well that is certainly NOT what The EK wants, and as long as the trolls inhabit this board and the protection of said species continues, I doubt we'd see any change. There's no doubt there is an EK bent to the policies of this board, which is fine, but it's too bad facts are ignored and relegated to a single thread dealing with a big and relevant issue. Much to the delight of EK fans of course and it will continue to help promote the bogus claims of "EK of Live" shows and "Live's very own EK" or whatever else can be used to help sell tickets. You're right though, including this in every single thread of EK's shows would certainly bring an awareness that Live are where they are today and that's CCCP without The EK.

By condensing/moving stuff, waves of threads about Ed's shows go by with no posts about the disingenuous marketing. People will read them and all will seem well, as though there's nothing wrong with it at all.

I agree with you completely, disingenuous is the exact word for it. And frankly they don't really care, but it's a good thing that the courts do care. It's deceptive, it's misleading, and I'm not too surprise coming from a person where the words dishonest, backstabber, betrayal pretty much characterizes that individual.

The very existence of this thread helps Ed's cause to exploit and damage current Live.

Exactly and they understand that fully well, but it's best not to ruffle any feathers and best to just send this off to a Siberian wasteland and hope for it to go away and dissipate into thin air with the passing of time. It's policies like this that help perpetuate more lies and does nothing but to further Ed's cause and damage the current Live. A prime example is this most recent verbage used to promote one of Ed's shows this coming January:

More Deception and Lies

Make no mistake about it, every attempt is made to associate Ed with the band Live, and to VERY CAREFULLY avoid the use of certain words so as not to EXPLICIT state or perhaps infer that Ed is STILL the lead singer of the band and a part of the band, which we all know is false.

The kicker is this venue's promotion of Ed's show actually has the nerve to post:

"Even though the popular and powerful rock band "Live" disbanded, its lead singer and main songwriter Ed Kowalczyk has been hard at work. "

We all know this to be false (including ED and his management), I mean the band Live is FAR from disbanded, having done 2 shows advertised as LIVE with their new singer and have been active in the studio preparing for their new album. Statements like the above are factually false. It would take a certain individual but a simple phone call, email, written letter to correct these wrongs but again, why should such an effort be made when it can further along a SOLO career (still tied to a past chapter that a certain someone wants to move on from) and it can do further damage to the current band Live.

To Ed Kowalczyk, former friend, do the right thing Ed and show some integrity. Fix your marketing practices.

Love,
-Jimmy

[Sonic Tonic]

This is a lot like the Queensryche fiasco.

[Lerxst]

This is a lot like the Queensryche fiasco.

I'd say it's a lot more like Roger Waters v. Pink Floyd. EK should look up the history there for I'm sure David Gilmour was not at all please when Waters tried to use the Floyd name for his own and the courts sided with Gilmour and thought differently. EK should also take some notes from say Chris Cornell or Eddie Vedder, both of whom toured solo and you didn't see their shows being marketed as Eddie Vedder from Pearl Jam, or Pearl Jam's Eddie Vedder. Same with Cornell, when Cornell toured he certainly didn't do it as "Soundgarden's Chris Cornell", or "Chris Cornell, that cool voice from Audioslave".. I mean these guys went out solo and marketed their shows/cd/music as themselves.

The whole Queensryche thing.. well Mr. Tate decided to tour with his old band name. Essentially you have two bands claiming rights to the name Queensryche, and two bands touring under the same name. It's a disaster, but the courts apparently did not allow the injunction against the group for using the name while the lawsuit goes through the legal process. The thing here is Ed does not own rights to the name Live, the guys do! If Ed ever tried to tour as Live, I'm sure the courts would love to speak with him about that.

-Jimmy

[SinfulEyes]

I'd say it's a lot more like Roger Waters v. Pink Floyd. EK should look up the history there for I'm sure David Gilmour was not at all please when Waters tried to use the Floyd name for his own and the courts sided with Gilmour and thought differently. EK should also take some notes from say Chris Cornell or Eddie Vedder, both of whom toured solo and you didn't see their shows being marketed as Eddie Vedder from Pearl Jam, or Pearl Jam's Eddie Vedder. Same with Cornell, when Cornell toured he certainly didn't do it as "Soundgarden's Chris Cornell", or "Chris Cornell, that cool voice from Audioslave".. I mean these guys went out solo and marketed their shows/cd/music as themselves.

The whole Queensryche thing.. well Mr. Tate decided to tour with his old band name. Essentially you have two bands claiming rights to the name Queensryche, and two bands touring under the same name. It's a disaster, but the courts apparently did not allow the injunction against the group for using the name while the lawsuit goes through the legal process. The thing here is Ed does not own rights to the name Live, the guys do! If Ed ever tried to tour as Live, I'm sure the courts would love to speak with him about that.

-Jimmy

I certainly would have a lot more respect for Eddie K. if he followed the marketing paths of Cornell and Vedder. But he's a money grubbing, thieving, sell-out. Can you expect any differently? His contributions from World Vision don't make up for the fact he low ethics and principles.

[Lerxst]

I certainly would have a lot more respect for Eddie K. if he followed the marketing paths of Cornell and Vedder. But he's a money grubbing, thieving, sell-out. Can you expect any differently? His contributions from World Vision don't make up for the fact he low ethics and principles.

I'd love for an interviewer to ask him about that. When those artists toured to promote their solo efforts they did so without trying to hang on to their fame with Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Audioslave.. Actually many artists who strike out on their own do so by promoting THEMSELVES as a name, a new solo chapter in their career.. You don't see that from Sammy Hagar, or Ozzy after he left Sabbath and they continued with Dio. Or take a look at Sting, and yes, I said Sting - not Sting From the Police you guys! FROM THE POLICE!! I don't recall him ever touring as "Sting, you might know me from The Police" or "Hi I'm Sting, you may have heard me sing on albums such as Synchronicity.." They all set out to get away from the confines from a band, to pursue a solo career and that's how they wanted to go forth. EK on the other hand, would like to have his cake and eat it too. I'm a solo artist now but I'm Live's solo artist is how "Live's EK" shows are billed.. Yeah that's wrong.

-Jimmy

[OutToDry]

I'd say it's a lot more like Roger Waters v. Pink Floyd. EK should look up the history there for I'm sure David Gilmour was not at all please when Waters tried to use the Floyd name for his own and the courts sided with Gilmour and thought differently. EK should also take some notes from say Chris Cornell or Eddie Vedder, both of whom toured solo and you didn't see their shows being marketed as Eddie Vedder from Pearl Jam, or Pearl Jam's Eddie Vedder. Same with Cornell, when Cornell toured he certainly didn't do it as "Soundgarden's Chris Cornell", or "Chris Cornell, that cool voice from Audioslave".. I mean these guys went out solo and marketed their shows/cd/music as themselves.

The whole Queensryche thing.. well Mr. Tate decided to tour with his old band name. Essentially you have two bands claiming rights to the name Queensryche, and two bands touring under the same name. It's a disaster, but the courts apparently did not allow the injunction against the group for using the name while the lawsuit goes through the legal process. The thing here is Ed does not own rights to the name Live, the guys do! If Ed ever tried to tour as Live, I'm sure the courts would love to speak with him about that.

-Jimmy

Ed is too smart for them eh? His shit doesn't stink......he trumps all...... FUCK YOU ED!!



Waters/Floyd....yeah WE GOT THAT YEAH!!!

Here are my references to Pink Floyd / Waters. I actually called this in Oct 2009

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...383&#entry52383

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...916&#entry52916


http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...958&#entry52958

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...081&#entry53081

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...267&#entry53267

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...973&#entry53973

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...346&#entry62346

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...733&#entry62733

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...927&#entry62927

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...764&#entry84764


http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...678&#entry85678

http://www.fansoflive.com/forums/index.php...736&#entry93736


I didn't realize it was that many

This post has been edited by OutToDry: Nov 15 2012, 6:39 pm

[OutToDry]

I certainly would have a lot more respect for Eddie K. if he followed the marketing paths of Cornell and Vedder. But he's a money grubbing, thieving, sell-out. Can you expect any differently? His contributions from World Vision don't make up for the fact he low ethics and principles.

It wouldnt surprise me if he's getting a cut of all sign ups at his shows......sorry to say it but that's what I believe!!

[SJN1279]

I'd love for an interviewer to ask him about that. When those artists toured to promote their solo efforts they did so without trying to hang on to their fame with Pearl Jam, Soundgarden, Audioslave.. Actually many artists who strike out on their own do so by promoting THEMSELVES as a name, a new solo chapter in their career.. You don't see that from Sammy Hagar, or Ozzy after he left Sabbath and they continued with Dio. Or take a look at Sting, and yes, I said Sting - not Sting From the Police you guys! FROM THE POLICE!! I don't recall him ever touring as "Sting, you might know me from The Police" or "Hi I'm Sting, you may have heard me sing on albums such as Synchronicity.." They all set out to get away from the confines from a band, to pursue a solo career and that's how they wanted to go forth. EK on the other hand, would like to have his cake and eat it too. I'm a solo artist now but I'm Live's solo artist is how "Live's EK" shows are billed.. Yeah that's wrong.

-Jimmy

All the bands you mentioned, how many started touring without their original lead singer?