Former Guns N’ Roses manager Alan Niven recently addressed the long-standing rumors about the band considering replacing Axl Rose. He shared his account of events in a statement featured on The Hair Metal Guru.
Niven’s comments came in response to a question about whether there was ever a discussion in the early days about removing Axl Rose from the band, even before their breakthrough album “Appetite for Destruction.”
“No. That’s a piece of bullsh*t that has been propagated and utilized by Gold Swine for years, but he’s an inveterate liar. Here’s the actuality,” Niven said.
The former manager then provided context about a specific incident that may have sparked these rumors.
“And this occurred in Phoenix at the airport and Axl had turned up for the second show. There had been a riot. A couple of cars got burned. It was not good. And you’re not an established act who can afford to get away with that kind of sh*t going on,” he explained.
“We need the support of a record company and we need people to go, ‘Yeah, we’ll take them out on tour with us.’”
Niven then cleared the air on his actual role in addressing the situation with the band.
“I sat the band down at breakfast and I told them that if they decided to go on with another singer, I would not drop them,” he continued. “So, the day after the Phoenix debacle at Celebrity Theater, my clear statement to the band was, ‘If you decide to find another singer, I will not drop you.’ I did not say, ‘Get rid of Axl.’ No. That was my place. That was not my place to do that. Sure, it was up to them.”
The statement directly contradicts years of speculation about internal pressure to replace the band’s controversial frontman during their early career.
Niven’s revelations provide crucial context to understanding the complex dynamics within Guns N’ Roses during their formative years. They shed light on the challenging management decisions that shaped the band’s trajectory.
While Alan Niven’s account clears up the long-debated rumor of Axl potentially being replaced in the band’s early days, history took a different turn years later. Instead of Guns N’ Roses moving on without Axl, it was actually Axl Rose who eventually moved on without Guns N’ Roses. By the mid-1990s, tensions inside the band had boiled over. One by one, Slash, Duff McKagan, and Matt Sorum departed, frustrated by delays, disagreements, and Axl’s increasingly dominant control of the group.
By the time Guns N’ Roses hit the stage in the late ’90s and early 2000s, Axl was fronting an entirely new lineup, with none of the classic members at his side. What had once been a ferocious gang of five was now Axl Rose and a rotating cast of replacements. Fans were divided — some remained loyal to Axl’s vision, while others longed for the chemistry of the classic era. This shift marked one of the most dramatic changes in rock history, cementing Axl’s reputation as both the driving force and the most polarizing figure in Guns N’ Roses.
Meanwhile, Slash, Duff, and Matt Sorum weren’t finished rocking. Teaming up with Stone Temple Pilots frontman Scott Weiland, they launched Velvet Revolver in the early 2000s. The band’s debut album, Contraband, stormed the charts in 2004, fueled by hits like “Slither” and “Fall to Pieces.” For fans who missed the hard rock bite of Guns N’ Roses, Velvet Revolver felt like a rebirth, combining the raw energy of GNR’s rhythm section with Weiland’s charismatic snarl.
The split between Axl and his former bandmates created two parallel legacies — one where Axl carried the Guns N’ Roses banner alone, and another where Slash, Duff, and Sorum kept the flame alive in their own way.
