i am buying it, its naive to think that an autobiography is any more legitimate/reputable than any unauthorised biography, mainly because theres nothing more biased than ones own account of things. sure, if its not a reputable writer than the information is probably not worth the paper its written on, however as previously mentioned this guy knows his shit, it wouldn't be outrageous to say that this is a more accurate rendition of events than slash's book, or at least, there'll be a little less self-glorification.

one more quick point i feel i have to make, using slash's book as anything other than a skewed perspective on what occurred is ludicrous. slash himself acknowledges that all band members would view the events differently. but thats not the point, the point is that, do you really think by reading an autobiography you're going to read something that the person doesn't want you to know? do you actually believe slash is going to write "well in reality Axl wanted to experiment, and it just wasn't something i felt comfortable about doing so i bailed, the situation had also become difficult and i just couldn't handle it". no of cause he isn't, i am not saying sash is lying, i am saying that you're reading what slash intends for you to read, nothing more , nothing less.

its always been my view that beta, and her family, and all those other pseudo-mystic idiots, have severely hindered Axl as a person and as an artist. it has been her(and her family's) continued displays of incompetence and public 'fuck yous' to the fans, that have hampered the album's release, as well detrimentally affected public perspectives of the band. that, along with the whole psychic/introspective/past-life horseshit that Axl got caught up in in the 90's. fuck them, manipulative parasites.