Stephen Pearcy's Official Facebook Page and Twitter Page!
March 08, 2011 5:40:51 PM UTC Post #21

I agree, it doesn't make sense that if he really is making 1/3 of every dollar....which would actually be more than an = share...that he should even care about ownership. It leads me to believe that either (a) he really isn't making 1/3 of every dollar or (b) he may be looking for = power so he could @ anytime refuse to perform thus preventing the others from performing under the Ratt name?? Think about it....there's a lot of bad blood here. If Pearcy @ anytime didn't like the direction the band was going he could cut everybody off. That's a powerful trump card & the ultimate revenge play. I believe that Blotzer & DeMartini know that Pearcy would be capable of this & by keeping his ownership rights from him prevent this from ever happening??

Warren wrote a letter on his own behalf not Pearcy's. Warren actually quit the band as well in '92.....after Pearcy did.

As far as 'Infestation' goes.....According to Bobby there was a record deal on the table w/ Road Runner Records in April of '08. But, there was no way they could sign to do the record until the 2nd Operating Agreement of this current reunion was worked out. Who knows what exactly was in that Operating Agreement?? All we know is that Stephen, Warren & Bobby were again @ odds & this lasted all though '08 and early '09. The Agreement wasn't signed until March of '09 thus paving the way for the 'Infestation' deal to finally take place.

I think Juan may have gotten punked out of his rights as well. But, if he would have went ahead w/ his lawsuit he probably could have prevented it?? Problem back then was $$ was pretty tight & it's not cheap to run a lawsuit all the way to the Supreme Court. And even if Juan would have won the lawsuit all he would have accomplished was keeping his own rights to the 'RATT' name...which was worthless @ the time...& preventing his former band mates from eventually touring under the RATT name. Is that really worth risking every dollar to your name?? Not to mention years of your time?? If he wanted compensated for his share he could have asked for a buyout when the band was getting back together & he declined his invitation. He never did. I feel for Juan on this matter but in reality if he never had intentions of getting back in the band maybe in hindsight a buyout would have been his best option??

As far as the advances go....Stephen was responsible for paying his own back. He presumably filed BK instead. I could be wrong but I believe Juan actually made good on his debt?? Don't know what Robbin & Warren did?? And Bobby claims that he himself paid approx. $30k & then filed BK getting him off the hook for the rest of his part??

Again, none of the above is documented fact. It is just information that I have gathered thru various sources.....hearsay, internet, message boards, Bobby's book ect....I guess it's a matter of who or what you believe??

March 08, 2011 6:10:49 PM UTC Post #22

That's a plausible theory but Warren and Blotzer also have 1/3 rights so even if Pearcy got his 1/3 back he couldn't just fire them since they are EQUAL partners. I suppose he could try and fire Carlos but Warren and Blotz could block that since they are equal partners.

The strange thing is why did Warren leave RATT back then?? Is it because he toured with Whitesnake for a while?

With the Opeartion Agreement signed in March '09 you would think they could just go by that. WHY can't they tour and play together according to the terms of that agreement??

At least the good news is RATT always does come back together. I'm sure Pearcy will get sick of being solo again and come back to the promised land of RATT!

His solo show in Iowa was a sellout so that could be anywhere from 200 to 1000 people. As a RATT fan it's good to know people want to see and hear the voice of RATT!

March 08, 2011 6:41:47 PM UTC Post #23

No, he couldn't fire them but the point is they couldn't fire him either. All he would have to do is jack them around & not agree to tour or basically whatever he had to do to sabotage the band if it was in his best interest. They wouldn't be able to grab a new singer like they could now. He would know that they couldn't perform w/o him. he would basically have them in his hip pocket.

As far as SEP's solo show being a!!! I doubt there were 1000 people there. I also doubt everyone was there to "see & hear the voice of RATT." If a concert is held in a casino the casino will usually give many tickets away to their hotel guest. Most of these casino shows are held in small ballrooms w/ multiple opening bands. Some of the local bands attract a loyal following. A sell-out in a casino can be very deceiving. A lot of times "sold out" is actually just a figure of speech & not an actual sell out.
You can expect a Pearcy solo crowd attendance to be closer to 200 than 1000. I've been to many of his solo shows & never have I seen a crowd anywhere near 1000. Just sayin'....

March 08, 2011 7:24:02 PM UTC Post #24

But Pearcy has them in his hip pocket right now! He's basically holding them hostage just like he did have 1/3 ownership.

I'm sure RATT could get a new singer but I really doubt that since that'll be a total makeover of the band. They'll have to change the website and they know all the Infestation fans and old school fans will NOT like it!!

And before we blame Pearcy we should really know EXACTLY what it is he's holding out for. Maybe he is in the right and Warren/Blotzer are depriving him of something he deserves besides 1/3 of the money he's getting.

March 11, 2011 10:14:06 PM UTC Post #25

Upscope = Bobby LMAO!!

March 11, 2011 10:16:12 PM UTC Post #26

=Slivered said:Upscope = Bobby LMAO!!

LOL...really?? I doubt it dude.

March 11, 2011 10:19:18 PM UTC Post #27

=BigRATTfan said:
=Slivered said:Upscope = Bobby LMAO!!

LOL...really?? I doubt it dude.

Yes.. Really! Go back and read all his comments. He's been called out on it before from a couple of other people too. Yeah, it's him ;)

March 11, 2011 10:26:08 PM UTC Post #28

=Slivered said:
=BigRATTfan said:
=Slivered said:Upscope = Bobby LMAO!!

LOL...really?? I doubt it dude.

Yes.. Really! Go back and read all his comments. He's been called out on it before from a couple of other people too. Yeah, it's him ;)

But WHY hide it?? Why not just tell everyone that you are Blotzer? It could attract more fans and interest. It would make for more interesting conversation too!

March 12, 2011 4:32:56 AM UTC Post #29

=Slivered said:
=BigRATTfan said:
=Slivered said:Upscope = Bobby LMAO!!

LOL...really?? I doubt it dude.

Yes.. Really! Go back and read all his comments. He's been called out on it before from a couple of other people too. Yeah, it's him ;)

Lol....Don't be a fool dude....Show me where a couple of other people have called me out?? Proof son, not ass-umptions. Why do you even think this?? Because I happen to side w/ Bobby on this silly argument?? I guess that makes you Stephen Pearcy then??

I've been frequenting Ratt related message boards for 6 yrs now. Plenty of people here know exactly who I am. Have met several people on this very board face to face even. Bobby Blotzer I am not that's 4

Keep jumping to ignorant conclusions us something new to talk about.

March 12, 2011 1:56:26 PM UTC Post #30

Let me over simplify this whole thing so that even the new kids understand! Warren and Bob's ass's are still sore from getting fucked the first time now Pearcy want's control back so he can fuck them again, Steve knows it Bob knows it and Warren knows it.....Greed and Control is what RATT is about.

Upscope is not Bob, his spelling is to good!

Post your comment

You must be logged in to comment

Please sign up for an account or current members login.