A recent YouTube upload titled Ace Frehley: The Untold Legacy has stirred new debate among KISS fans after it alleged that Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley’s lawyers orchestrated a deal that cost guitarist Ace Frehley $15 million during the 1996 reunion tour. The video painted a dramatic picture: Frehley, pen in hand, unknowingly signing away millions backstage at Madison Square Garden before taking the stage in front of 18,000 fans. The narrative suggested that Simmons and Stanley’s legal team pulled off a “masterfully crafted contract trap” that left the Space Ace underpaid for one of rock’s most lucrative tours.
The claim quickly spread through KISS fan circles, generating both outrage and skepticism. Many longtime fans questioned whether Frehley—known for his fiery personality and previous battles over royalties—could have fallen victim to such a lopsided agreement. The post’s comment section became a forum for speculation, with one fan asking if anyone could confirm the video’s version of events.
While some were ready to believe the story, others urged caution. They pointed out that KISS’s complex business structure and history of lineup changes often lead to misunderstandings about how money was distributed. Amid the growing chatter, one familiar name decided to step in and address the controversy directly.
Eddie Trunk Calls Out the Falsehood
Eddie Trunk, a respected rock radio host and longtime KISS historian, weighed in on X (formerly Twitter) after being tagged in posts about the video. Trunk, who has been a close friend of Ace Frehley and has covered KISS for decades, didn’t mince words. “As we know, people can literally make up anything online and post it,” he wrote. “And sadly a TON do.”
Trunk said the video immediately lost credibility within the first two minutes when it incorrectly stated that KISS “fired” Ace. He clarified that Frehley left the band, and that alone made the video unreliable. “So right there I’m out as far as legitimacy,” Trunk added, effectively dismissing the YouTube documentary as a fabrication built on factual errors.
His response resonated with fans who value Trunk’s reputation for separating rumor from reality in rock history. As a radio personality, author, and frequent KISS commentator, Trunk has interviewed the band members numerous times and written extensively about their business dealings. His stance added a much-needed dose of credibility to a conversation that was quickly spiraling into misinformation.
What Really Happened During the KISS Reunion
To understand the real numbers behind the reunion tour, it’s important to look at how KISS structured the deal with Ace Frehley and Peter Criss. According to KissFAQ.com, both were hired as employees rather than equal partners. At the start of the 1996 Alive/Worldwide Reunion Tour, Frehley reportedly earned around $40,000 per show. Although that figure was far lower than Simmons and Stanley’s share, it reflected a contractual difference—not an alleged theft.
Over time, Frehley’s compensation improved significantly. Reports indicate that he renegotiated his pay to $50,000 per show, and later as high as $90,000, plus a percentage of merchandise sales. Those adjustments show that Frehley had leverage and was not trapped in an inescapable “contract scam” as the viral video claimed. The tour itself grossed over $140 million in its first year, meaning even as a hired performer, Frehley profited substantially.
Furthermore, multiple sources confirm that Frehley willingly accepted the terms at the time, prioritizing the reunion’s exposure and fan demand over contractual equality. The financial gap was real, but it was a product of structure—Gene and Paul owned the KISS brand, while Ace and Peter returned as contracted members. The “$15 million heist” narrative, therefore, collapses under factual scrutiny.
Misinformation and Rock Mythology
Eddie Trunk’s response points to a larger issue that extends beyond KISS—how rock history often gets rewritten online. In an age where YouTube documentaries can blend truth and fiction for clicks, even well-meaning fans struggle to separate fact from fabrication. Trunk’s quick fact-check underscores how easily myths can snowball into accepted lore when left unchallenged.
KISS, in particular, has long been fertile ground for speculation. From lineup drama to business disputes, the band’s half-century legacy includes countless stories—some true, others exaggerated. For Frehley, his complex relationship with Simmons and Stanley continues to inspire both admiration and controversy, making him a frequent target for sensationalized retellings.
Ultimately, this episode serves as a reminder that in the digital era, fans must approach viral claims with caution. As Trunk emphasized, not everything posted online reflects reality—and when it comes to one of rock’s most scrutinized bands, the truth is often less dramatic but far more interesting.