Especially when all I get asked is why the band is only releasing an EP and why they "didn't just record an album" (even though we all know the answer is time).
People just find a 5 song EP to be a waste and see no point in buying it. People want full albums. They don't want an EP that they'll be done with in 17 minutes.
I mentioned this in the OTHER thread, but I'll say it again....
The EP seems like a legal strategy. I'm pretty sure the reasons they rushed it out, and started touring right away were heavily influenced by the lawsuit. Likely to show earning potential (among other things) as "STP" without Scott. This would provide them with ticket and album/EP sales figures for their case.
But how do you have any IDEA of what the legalities are?
It all depends on the original contracts with Atlantic and between themselves.
I have a tough time believing this is about, "Your honor, as you can see, we sold almost 20,000 albums in the first week! Clearly we aren't guilty. Case dismissed!"
It's not about guilty or innocence. It's a lawsuit, so it's mostly based off past events, and the speculation of potential earnings (
which is how many settlements/awards are reached). Reading the court document makes the DeLeos/Eric's intentions pretty clear.
The lawsuit is only partially about the contract dispute, which is where everything else comes into play. By hiring Chester, touring, and releasing new material, they'll have demonstrated that they're serious, and trying to further STP success (
also laying claim to the STP brand for themselves). They'll be able to compare specifics such as sales, charts, production, and touring, to times when they had problems doing these things with Scott (
essentially trying to prove that he was holding them back). In many cases, it's all about who strikes first... which by all accounts, seems to be the DeLeos/Eric (
it's as if they had this all planned ahead of time). If you've ever been involved in a lawsuit or a divorce, you'd see how these legal strategies apply.