Stones vs. Paul
-
LonelyRoad:
I got a pair of the $85 ticket for May 31 at the United Center in Chicago!
Congrats! I've got pairs of the $85s for both Toronto (May 25) and Philly (June 21).... It *will* be interesting to see where they'll actually be in each venue but for that price, who cares? Saw them back in December (for considerably more $$!!) and had a GREAT time. And with Mick Taylor back for these shows?? I honestly can't wait.
-
I think they (Stones ) have over priced their tickets by a long shot...I just went to tm and pulled up 4 tickets together in section one on the floor 10 rows back and then a pair of tickets for Three hundred in the first row of the balcony..I know they are selling some but I find it hard to believe they will sell out for all their shows. I saw them on the Some Girls tour and they flat out sucked..I like their music but then it was hard to tell which song they were playing, none of the songs sounded like the recordings.
-
Thing is at those prices they clearly don't need to sell out the shows for them to be profitable ... guess the big question is why you wouldn't price tickets even just a little bit lower for a guaranteed sellout vs a high priced, 3/4-full arena with pockets of empty seats... I suppose the $85 deal was one way to address that but it certainly won't compensate for it completely.
-
plus if you are not selling out there is less money for vending and memorbillia etc..which is taking money from their pockets as well, I think they really just screwed this up..just for fun I checked other shows in LA and other places and there are a lot of good seats left..I just pulled up 4 together in section one row 17..still not sold?? huh?
-
So Lonely Road where did you even see the 85.oo tickets?? I would be interested possibly but I do not even see them listed anywhere.
-
I saw on their site where they were sold out.
-
kelly campbell:
plus if you are not selling out there is less money for vending and memorbillia etc..
You should see the prices on some of their merch!!! It seems to work on the same principle - sell fewer at twice the price. (Sorry to say Macca's not too far behind on this front.) They obviously still sell a lot of merch regardless - and have to say the whole "50 years and counting" branding *is* pretty cool... I agree with you - it's not what I would do and it seems completely counterintuitive! - but I'm sure there were loads of meetings between band, accountants and promoters beforehand to make these crazy-seeming numbers "make sense" financially for everyone - well, except the fans, of course! But many (of us) will stump up the $$$ because a) we love the artist(s) and/or b) we know there won't be but so many opportunities left to see and hear them in person.
-
And re the $85 tickets - they were on sale through special links off the official Stones website. But yes, they're all sold out now. If you are interested though, keep your eyes peeled as show dates get closer - for the reasons you mention (i.e., unsold seats), those $85 links may become active again.
-
I may be interested I last saw them 35 years ago I may give it another shot because I loved the set list this time around..Thanks for the info.
-
I imagine any unsold seats will be rereleased the day of as $85 tickets.
-
What is the meaning of "tounge" pit? Do you mean "tongue"? (at first I thought you meant "lounge"!!
-
Nancy R:
What is the meaning of "tounge" pit? Do you mean "tongue"? (at first I thought you meant "lounge"!!
-
kelly campbell:
KingMacca:
oobu24:
THAT is the age old question...Beatles or Stones...ever since they became famous. I, of course, would pick the Beatles (Paul) over the Stones. The President picked the Stones. I even have a book on it. http://www.amazon.com/Beatles-vs-Rolling-Stones-Opinions/dp/B005K5KKE6 excerpts are here: http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/turn_it_up/2010/10/beatles-vs-rolling-stones-sound-opinions-on-the-great-rock-n-roll-rivalry-an-excerpt.html
Obama chose The Stones over Paul? After he had Paul in his living room?
Shows you something about the smarts of the guy..LOL
And, yet, Paul and his entire band endorsed him. Harvard-scholar, Constitutional lawyer/professor. Go figure.
-
audi:
kelly campbell:
KingMacca:
oobu24:
THAT is the age old question...Beatles or Stones...ever since they became famous. I, of course, would pick the Beatles (Paul) over the Stones. The President picked the Stones. I even have a book on it. http://www.amazon.com/Beatles-vs-Rolling-Stones-Opinions/dp/B005K5KKE6 excerpts are here: http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/turn_it_up/2010/10/beatles-vs-rolling-stones-sound-opinions-on-the-great-rock-n-roll-rivalry-an-excerpt.html
Obama chose The Stones over Paul? After he had Paul in his living room?
Shows you something about the smarts of the guy..LOL
And, yet, Paul and his entire band endorsed him. Harvard-scholar, Constitutional lawyer/professor. Go figure.
and what does harvard have to do with beatles or stones?
-
oobu24:
audi:
kelly campbell:
KingMacca:
oobu24:
THAT is the age old question...Beatles or Stones...ever since they became famous. I, of course, would pick the Beatles (Paul) over the Stones. The President picked the Stones. I even have a book on it. http://www.amazon.com/Beatles-vs-Rolling-Stones-Opinions/dp/B005K5KKE6 excerpts are here: http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/turn_it_up/2010/10/beatles-vs-rolling-stones-sound-opinions-on-the-great-rock-n-roll-rivalry-an-excerpt.html
Obama chose The Stones over Paul? After he had Paul in his living room?
Shows you something about the smarts of the guy..LOL
And, yet, Paul and his entire band endorsed him. Harvard-scholar, Constitutional lawyer/professor. Go figure.
and what does harvard have to do with beatles or stones?
If I have to connect the dots for you, then I'm afraid you won't get the point. I can explain things for folks, but I can't understand things for folks, though. Please don't start your shenanigans tonight. I'm in a good mood.
-
LOL Well there is book smart and common sense smart I guess he did not get both..
-
Audi, Are you going to Memphis?
-
-
LOL..Audi you flew it right over the heads..
-
The Beatles are the greatest band of all-time. That statement will get little argument here in this forum or anywhere else for that matter. So the Rolling Stones are behind the Beatles, but how far? The second greatest? Third? Fourth? Fifth? Somewhere likely between two and five would be my guess, trying to be objective about things. So my preference is and always would be to see Sir Paul McCartney over the Rolling Stones. Especially in my early years of seeing McCartney 2002 and 2005. Both years coincidentally I also saw the Rolling Stones. In recent years I have seen McCartney yearly between 2008-12, so it's been five years in a row going on six that I have seen Macca. Seeing McCartney 12 times since 2002 going on to 13 and 14. I have seen the Rolling Stones 10 times but that started in 1994 and stopped in 2005, until seeing the Stones at 12.12.12. coincidentally again with McCartney. So now I've seen the Stones 11 times going on 12. This year I will be seeing both the Rolling Stones in Toronto, ON and Paul McCartney in Manchester, TN and Ottawa, ON. All things being equal if they fell on the same day in my city then I would pick McCartney. But are all things equal? The Rolling Stones are touring the first time in five years, while McCartney has been touring for five straight years. The Rolling Stones are touring with Mick Taylor for the first time in 39 years. Also the Rolling Stones have had Mick Jagger, Keith Richards and Charlie Watts together for 50 plus yeas and Ronnie Wood for 38 years. While McCartney has been touring with the same band for 11 years with no Ringo Starr or even Denny Laine. So I'm happy to be seeing both this year. And I do believe that no one has to make the choice because McCartney playing on the same day and in the same city as the Stones. Unless it's for budgetary reasons of not going to both, the choice does not have to be made. Besides, is it the 1960's where fans were silly enough to argue the Beatles vs. the Rolling Stones? There is enough time in a in a lifetime to enjoy both of these seminal groups. I love the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, just the Beatles more.