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

He’s 1/4 of the band, but I would argue that he’s more than 25% of their sound. Team Mick.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 🙄

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.

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.

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

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 all the way! He's way more than just their band member, he's the most important member of that band hands down.

Mick 100%. He's the best part of that damn band.

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.

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.

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.

Mick made the band. His guitar style and sound define Motley Crue.

Nikki cut deep with the “propping him up” bit.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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'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.

If they prerecorded anything it should have been Vince's vocals

I love the variety of topics you cover and every time you upload it’s a good day Justin!

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 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!!

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?

Thx for the shout out! ❤ Much love!

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.

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

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.

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).

Cheers Justin! Geddy Lee of Rush stated early on that everything would be divided into 1/3. That way there was no discrepancy

Mick is the brand. They couldn’t tour without his precedence.

Justin has really good hair.

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

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

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.

I’m inclined to agree with you. Shame they’ve resorted to calling one another out in such a demeaning way. Sad, really.

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.

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%.

Who's side are you on?

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.

Love your videos. Seem like your I could hang out with. Keep it up.

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 .

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.

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.

Mick Mars: 'So that's it, after 41 years? So long, good luck?' Motley Crue: 'I don't recall saying good luck.'

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.

Tommy, Neil and Nikki wouldn't be anything if it wasn't for Mick.. even their movie shows that...

Love this content. This and reviews of rock tunes is what I want :)

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.

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.

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.

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!😋

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.

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.

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!

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😌❤

I could listen to you doing a commentary on a tin of beans & still laugh.. love your channel.. Justin your the bestest 😂🫶🏻🤘🏻

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.

Real shame to see bands/friendships dissolve like this. Especially when it devolves into personal mudslinging. Great take though, Justin !

You've dialed in that intro. It's perfect

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

Team Mick!!

You make a fair point: Where are the cuts being made? We probably won't know unless it goes to trial.

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.

I’m actually with Motley on this. Getting 7.5% of the touring revenue for sitting at home is a gift.

Great explanation on the meaning of unilaterally 😁 it was perfect accidental Alan Partidge

This video is Great! Like so many others you have unleashed to the world. Did the Michael Star interview happen yet? 🤘🏼🤨🤘🏼

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 :)

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.

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?

Is he besmirching their characters tho when it's 100% truth?

This has really become the best place to get music industry news 😁thanks for another awesome review!

Wow. Since reading The Dirt all those years again, I always saw Mick as the only empathetic character in the Motley Crue saga. So when this blew up I was thinking “Those arseholes are hanging him out to dry now that his medical condition has really come home to roost.” But Justin makes some salient points. This seems to be about touring money. Mick’s songwriting credits are secure. I play in a covers band. We do ok. If I had to retire from that band tomorrow due to a debilitating disease, and they offered me 5% -7% of their future income while trading under the name I helped establish, I’d be be saying “Cheers Mate!”

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.

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🤘🏼🤘🏼

Speaking of targeted advertisement. I get an ad for a flashlight I could use as a lethal weapon to 'protect my family'. 😂 … can probably also be used against former band members? Ah, the DIRT! ❤

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.

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.

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!!!!!

Mick earned more than 5% in my opinion. I never heard him say much but now he is just unloading. Maybe he has to let off some steam by this point. Ankylosing spondylitis sucks. It messed me up too soon and it can make anyone grumpy. It's stressful enough on it's on. Mick needs support not to be stressed out about it.

These days when you retire and especially when you live where I do you need as much as you can get to survive. Mick has done more for that band than anyone. He deserves it.

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!!

Everyone should also take into account that Mick Mars is a whole decade older than both Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, and 7 years older than Nikki Sixx. They may have all signed that agreement but come on man, it was clearly skewed one way. And regardless of agreements, you make sure that your friends are taken care of. Especially when that friend stood by you through your numerous potentially career ending mistakes and you yourself have gone on record talking about how they were like an older brother figure who helped keep the group on track. Now your older brother has arthritis and can barely even move his hands, and is finally at the point in his life where he needs YOUR help. And then you abandon him. They’re only in it for the money, and you won’t change my mind on that one. Watch who you start a band with, snakes are everywhere.

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?

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 think the issue is that they’ve pushed him out and that he feels he can still deliver when the rest of the band isn’t actually playing - and if that’s the case, he’s got a leg to stand on here because they technically aren’t even playing his instruments. If the grounds for the suit is that he alone can’t perform anymore when other band members also aren’t, and he didn’t leave on his own accord md was pushed out - then yeah, he might have a keg to stand on. I don’t think he retired for himself. I think the band retired (aka fired) him. There’s a massive difference. If Mick can prove that he in fact was pushed out and was performing as well if not better than his band mates, he’s got a case. I think this can actually go Mick’s way if he has the proof - he’s not stupid, so I’m pretty sure he has plenty of proof. If he didn’t in fact retire on his own and was fired bearing the above in mind that other band members haven’t even been playing live and performing to their standards, then that 2008 contact probably doesn’t apply - which means Mick could win this case. It seems like most people are siding with Mick - over 90% of RockFeed’s survey. I tend to think we will find out the rest of the story when it goes to court. Mick wouldn’t sue unless he was sure he had a rock solid case. He’s always been the quiet brains behind the band. Justin, might wanna rethink your opinion lol. 😉

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.

There really are 2 people in Motley Crue that made them work as a band. Mick, and Tommy. 40-45 for Mick really seems like a fair number.