Sorry I snatched the bait. ;)

(Not sure it would have worked anyway; he's pretty close-mouthed on the subject. But nice try!)

When I shared some of the initial information I was given (way back when all this broke) I was warned off disclosing much more by fellow users on this very forum...

I'm not asking you to disclose anything that you're not comfortable disclosing; but a question occurred to me.

Is your source someone who knows what happened first-hand, for him- or herself? Or is s/he someone who is just close enough to have gotten the information directly from Richie, Jon, or someone in one camp or the other? Like a trickle down, say to a crew member or someone...

I wouldn’t call this person a source as it makes me sound like some sort of investigative journalist!

I can say they’ve met both Jon and Richie but not so many times as to be considered a friend, their information didn’t come from either of them.

Remember however I said in 2013 they’d told me Richie wouldn’t be back. So it proved.

Sorry? :)

Thanks for the info. Not that I doubt your word, or theirs; but I'm still hoping there's a "so far" hiding out there, somewhere after "So it proved..."


"Cuts can heal; scars can fade..."

https://drycounty.com/jovitalk/bon-j...ml#post1246508


Maybe for JBJ good intention would be no more of his "habits" (only because "habits" seems the word of the week...)

Do you honestly think Jon and David would each say (more than once) that Richie's "habits," "drug addiction," and "demons" are the reason if it wasn't? Why do you need for them specially say something like 'Richie partied his ass off drinking booze and doing drugs during the two week break and he was too hammered to get on a plane for the show' for you to believe them?

Something else entirely like suddenly wanting to stay home with his 16 year old kid? Or not wanting to be on another <insert invented number of shows/countries> tour anymore? Or not liking the direction of the band's music and suddenly deciding to quit mid-tour to be a solo artist and jam with fabric on the side? Or just being sick of Jon's shit? Then explain why a just month later he had already started talking to the press about hoping and planning to rejoin the band on tour.


May 2013

"I would love to be in London for the Hyde Park Bon Jovi show on the July 5th… Let's see what happens."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/usshowbi...departure.html


June 2013

"So this tour, we can say, you won't be on it."

"No, that's not true. Not true."



Richie later tweeted:

Hey all, to those who saw that interview from the fashion show it was about my hopes. Nothing's really happening yet...

https://twitter.com/therealsambora/s...025972736?s=21


June 2013

"We rely on each other and I think that's it,' he said. 'It'll all work out in the end."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...-tour-him.html


July 2013

"Things are coming together."

"Is it going to be resolved?"

"Of course it is. It has to."

https://youtube.com/watch?v=VbQun_ZU...ature=youtu.be

From what he said in Chicago, I don't think he ever will. The closest he ever got to anything about being fired was "Jon's making it difficult for me to come back." And recently, when he was asked if there's a backstory, he said, "Yeah, but I'm not going there. I have more class than that."

IMO, he's done explaining; because 1) he seems to truly believe in not airing dirty laundry, 2) he knows it would be "he said/he said" and most fans would take Jon's word, anyway; 3) people believe what they want to believe; and in "Lighthouse", he wrote: "those that judge don't matter, and those that matter don't judge."

Yes, it seems he left on his own; so that puts the onus on him, regardless. That's why I said, from the start, that he must have had a very good reason because, as you say, he knows Jon (and the business) better than we do. If I knew that Jon wouldn't stop the tour or forgive easily, and that a lot of fans would turn on him, you know he knew it. IF he was drunk, stoned, strung out... whatever... that goes out the window; but I haven't seen anything yet to convince me of that. So I'm still going with "a good reason." Even if I never know what it is. :)

I thought it was you. It's a distinctive name, and whether we agreed or not, your posts were always well thought out.

(I hate passwords! Once, I actually used "IHatePasswords". Then forgot what website it was for.):)

I need to jump on this:

So yes, Jon came off bitter during that interview... Why? Who knows. Maybe the lady bringing up his hair and calling it the frizz threw him off or maybe it was something else...

I think him calling Kim out had to do with her and Kanye being Trump supporters... Was it intentionally done or did the moment just present itself? Not sure... He's bitched about this stuff before so maybe the moment to take the shot just presented itself! Or were there other intentions?

As far as Jon calling out Richie, I think he's just ready to come clean about it... He kinda went there on Howard but sure, five years later, it's time...

In the beginning there was a some uncertainty so Jon just left that part out. Don't forget, Richie's been abusing his entire life since the 80s but just had it more under control...

It's five years later, Richie's done some Bon Jovi basing on his own, they both come to terms of moving in different directions and that's it... I'm sure Jon's hearing some of the speculation rumors about Richie leaving because Jon was being too controlling or Jon being a dictator with the musical direction... Jon's probably like, F it!!! I'm coming clean...

Now, was Jon trying to create some buzz to promote his ticket sales in Europe? It's very possible. Or was it just pure coincidental? That's possible too...

Not sure..

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

yeah, it’s not the first time that JBJ speaks publicly about the Kardashians, many years ago he talked about it almost with the same words... he’s always saying this kind of things, like with JLo, Steve Jobs, Madonna, Justin Beiber, etc.

You answered your own question by the end of the post. The interviews are ALL about getting press for the tour. The Kardashians comment has got more exposure than anything else Jon has said over here for the last 5 years. He knew what he was doing, no doubt in my mind...

Yup.

You mention "last 5 years", because it was 5 years ago when Jon made the infamous Justin Bieber remark ("shut up and play") in the middle of the 2013 tour when he needed to sell some tickets and detract the public attention from the Richie drama.

Jon is PR-trained, he thinks through every word he says.

lol, I was reading my local newspaper today... big picture of JBJ check, word Kardashians in black letters check, tour mention check, I guess JonBo did it again
"You have to consider marketing"

btw kleman is right on the Youtube thread, the video has changed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAmL...youtu.be&t=353

The last thing I need is for somebody to tell me what he (or she) assumes happened. ;)

And, unless I missed it, the phrase “drug addiction” hasn’t crossed David's or Jon's lips. Nor has “alcohol” or “substance” or “abuse”. Not in this interview, or any of the promo interviews they did in 2016-17, or in any of Jon’s responses in 2013. I might have more faith in what they’re insinuating if they didn’t seem to be working so hard to imply something without saying it flat out. Or if just once, when Jon is asked point blank to confirm it, his reply wouldn't be non-responsive. If that IS the “personal issue” that led to Richie not showing up, a simple "yes" would settle it.

It might also help if Jon would stop changing it up.

In 2013, up until Vienna, it was “personal reasons” or “personal issues”. Then:

May 16 (https://youtu.be/psnm40AcuC0?t=99 mark 1:39): “… We’ve been through this before. And when he works through his personal issues, then he can talk about what date, if at all, he chooses to come back... the guy who filled in for him last time he had issues was available. ...”

May 19 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrit...-drugs-1899663):
May 20 (http://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/ce...s-8623519.html):
May 22, Richie apparently got tired of Jon’s insinuations because The Daily Mail posted an article in which Richie was quoted as saying (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/usshowbi...alcohol.html):
After that, in the next interview with Jon, posted May 29, lo and behold, Jon said the issue wasn’t alcohol and there was nothing more that needed to be said. (http://www.mariskalrock.com/index.ph...-se-solucione/):

Did you catch that? No, [he isn’t struggling with alcohol again (also translated as he isn’t having drinking issues again)]; that he’s facing some personal issues and that he's talked with us, or [that he talked with us about]; and there’s nothing else to say . EVERYTHING THAT NEEDED TO BE SAID HAS ALREADY BEEN SAID.

So why is it that, 3 years later, when the promotions for THINFS started, Jon thought he needed to elaborate further? And why did it seem like, suddenly, it WAS about alcohol again; when in 2013, he said clearly that it wasn’t? Why did it even MATTER? It was old news when Jon brought it up in 2016, and again in 2017, and now, in 2018. Why mention it? It's not like he clarified anything or gave more information than he did before. He didn't "come clean” in that interview, any more than he did umpteen times in 2016-2017.

Here’s another question: In 2013, Jon said Richie HAD talked with him AND the band (assuming that is the “us” he referred to), such that everybody knew what was going on and there was no need to say anything more. But by 2016, Jon was saying (not once, but on constant f'n repeat) that Richie didn’t call to explain why he wouldn’t be in Calgary, and no one had heard from him since. Even in THIS interview, he said “he didn’t come see us for 5 years.” Technically, you could say that’s not the same thing, but that’s what Jon does. He says things that may be technically true (or not); but he implies more than what he actually says. Just like he’s been doing with the whole “last time Richie had issues–Richie’s demons/issues/habits-Richie went off the rails” shtick that he’s been on for 3 years now. But again, unless I missed it, he hasn’t once said it’s alcohol or drugs or substances. He’s just insinuated it out the wazoo; and left it up to the fans to jump to that conclusion. So, you tell me, was it alcohol and drugs, or not? Did those conversations with Richie never happen or did they just suddenly go “POOF!”?

To answer your question, no, I don’t think that Jon or David would say, even once, much less more than once, that it was substance related if it weren’t. They're smarter than that. But I have to say that I do think they would imply the hell out of it, whether it's true or not. Jon has implied it was, it wasn’t, it was, it wasn’t, and now that it was again. So which “truth of the truth of the truth” is it?

IMO, David’s saying what he’s told to say; because ever since his first promo interview, you could almost see him ticking off Jon’s talking points, verbatim (probably because Jon got wind that people were sick of hearing him say “Being in a rock band is not a life sentence, and he just didn’t show up, and he didn’t want to share his art in this forum any longer, and we have a great guy filling in, thank God he’s still available….”, so he turned that over to David.)

Jon’s ever-changing story, and tap-dancing around calling Richie’s issue by any name that he might have to back up, is one reason I doubt the truth of the statement. The other reason is explained in my comments a few posts back. From 2012 through most of 2014, Richie looked better than he’s looked in years. Before, during, and after Calgary. I don’t deny the possibility that he could have fallen off the wagon in the 3 days before, and as you suggested, been so hammered that he couldn’t get on a plane; but then, by golly, he musta got right back on the wagon and straightened his ass out before anybody except Jon or David knew about it! Because from the first time we saw him after Calgary until the shows in late 2014, where it seemed that he might be under the influence, he looked and sounded healthy. And those shows were almost a year and a half after "he just didn’t show up."

So, nope, I'm still not convinced.

I suppose it could be the things you listed (other than jamming with fabric, which he categorically denied); but I doubt it. My guess would be something that we haven't heard, or maybe even thought of. More along the lines of “the backstory” that he said he’s not gonna talk about; or what he referred to, in Chicago, when he said that people were mad and wanted to know what happened, and then said, “and I ain’t telling.” Or maybe it was whatever he seemed to consider sharing, in the Gen Luxe interview you shared (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAnl...ature=youtu.be @2:07), after the guy asked what the stumbling blocks were, and Richie paused before he said, “I can’t say...”

You could be right; “something else” could be that he was drinking and drugging. Or it could be one big thing, or the culmination of a lot of small things that just mounted up until a straw broke the camel’s back. Maybe Richie realized that going back out on the road might have pushed him back into substance abuse, and he was smart enough to head that off, even if it pissed off a whole bunch of people. It could be any number of things.

Bottom line: We. Don’t. Know.

No one is going to read that Jackie

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

I know that's not often the case, but I completely agree with you [emoji28]

Gesendet von meinem Nexus 5X mit Tapatalk

I think she's trying hard to prove that Richie didn't leave Bon Jovi because of his substance abuse.. but that's like trying to prove that Trump's not the President based on the Popular Vote...

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

Then you heard it here folks, Richie didn't leave because of substance abuse!

I really meant when I said I was the exception... 'cause I read her post


I understand you but I would prefer: We. Don't. Run.

If I ever have insomnia I'll read it.

That's their choice. She asked, I answered. :)

Then your thinking would be wrong. :)

See? That's what you get for not reading. I'm not trying to prove that at all; because it's entirely possible that substance abuse IS the reason he left. I repeat: I don't know why Richie wasn't in Calgary. All I said was there's enough reason on the opposite side of that coin to create doubt in my mind. I'm open to further consideration if anyone has facts that would weigh in on one side or the other.

(FYI, just because something begins with "Jon [or Richie or David] said..." isn't necessarily going to qualify it as a fact, imo. It may, indeed, be a true statement, but I'm not going to hang my hat on it simply because one of them said it.)

Sounds like you didn't read either, smarty-pants; because you're wrong on two counts.

1) Nowhere in that post did I, personally, say that Richie didn't leave because of substance abuse.
2) You actually heard it, first, way back in 2013, from JON.

I just reported what he said.:D

HA! :D

PS: I thought you said you were outta here! I'm glad you reconsidered... ;)

Rdkopper brought me back...

and I'm glad you replied my post 'cause if you did not do it my theory would be: JackieBlue don't reply to my posts... she's being ingnoring me for a few days now, because she is in love with Rdkopper and she is jealous of me.
jajaja!

On the last video posted by Jackie, which I totally forgot about, Richie expected a comeback around September according to himself. 5 years later, there's no Richie Sambora return except the RNRHOF performance. That door has close for good unfortunately. Life goes on, the band goes on, Richie goes on as well. This summer, he spent some family vacation time in Greece for example. The Orianthi door is closed as well, so he might be back on track

Everyone on here is jealous of you because of that...

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

I think it's pretty clear that Richie and Jon are finished for good in terms of 'Bon Jovi'... and I think it's equally clear that his habits were the issue... Not only did Jon say it but it was visually clear as well...

And just for Jackie:
Habits is a soft way of saying Drug & Alcohol Abuse. Just like when people say 'Passing' instead of Dead...

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

David in September 2015:

“You know, drug addiction is a very tough thing,” he says. “All we can do is just wish him all the best.”

https://www.thenational.ae/arts-cult...orres-1.133765

Oh thank goodness... maybe the madness and denial can stop now!!!

Great find btw

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk

Really? When was it visually clear that his "habits" were the reason he didn't show up?

No shit, Sherlock!

Just for Sherlock: a euphemism is a "soft" way of saying something that might be considered too harsh. Just like when people say "clever" instead of "smart-ass"... :p

And that's why I said, "unless I missed it." I'm not going to argue that one. :)

I believe the only comments I heard from David (other than reciting Jon's list) were about his "demons". That may also explain why Jon could so easily shift back and forth between it was/it wasn't "alcohol." I honestly don't remember if anyone ever asked him if it was drugs. Do you?

Thanks for bringing that one to my attention. It goes into the hopper with all the rest. :)

I didn't say it would change my mind; I said it would help. But, of course, you wouldn't know that since you didn't read the post.

I did say, however, that I didn't think they would say it once if it wasn't true; so I may have to reconsider.

And I think I've told you once before that there's no need for you to be concerned about my psychological state. I'm neither mad nor in denial.

I would never ignore you... I probably just had nothing to contribute. And I would never be jealous of you because of RDK. (Seb, on the other hand... you might wanna watch out for him. I think they've had this thing going for a while. Not sure how well he'll deal with the competition...)

He aims, he shoots, and he... misses again. :p

I'm not scared

Oh crap, it happened again. I was implying that Trump did lose the popular vote therefore RDK was wrong. I wasn't commenting on what you were saying whatsoever.

I have no clue if substance abuse played a part in Richie leaving.

However, I find it amusing that people still say there has been no visual evidence Richie has been high and/or drunk in the last six years. There has been plenty of visual evidence and I guess those who don't see it have never been consistently high.

I mean, it is what it is. In terms of being a cause for him leaving, I am unsure. Richie just didn't show up according to Jon, so how would he have known he was off the wagon? I think it's fair to assume Richie did fall off the wagon after Calgary at some point, but how would Jon know it happened during the tour break if there was no contact?

I don't think anyone has ever said that though!? Just that there was no evidence that he didn't show up because he was high...indeed just before that he was on fine form at the shows...

He was in no fit state to play that first show back. Having remained tight-lipped on the subject Jon is now apparently happy to admit as much.

Richie looked completely clean and fresh leading up to his departure but he didn't look particularly happy on stage. He seemed focused and his playing was good.

The Radio 2 promo show where Jon says Richie stayed home and watched the football rather than rehearse was a clear indicator at the time that Richie had lost interest completely.

I think he came off his solo album feeling somewhat more self centered and couldn't stand Jon's shit any longer and just snapped and quit at short notice. Then he probably got wasted because he had no commitments and Jon latched onto that as his excuse for Richie leaving rather than have a discussion about the real reasons which I believe to be Jon's tyrannical control and dumbing down of the bands sound.

Jon may be dictatorial in the way he runs the band and I’m sure it has pissed various members off over the years but that wasn’t the reason for Richie’s departure. He wanted back in right up until the point it was made clear to him that wasn’t an option.

Do you know when that point occurred?

No they don't.

You'll find a lot of posters here who claim they know the truth when in fact they're speculating like the rest of us.

Doesn't sound too far away to me.