Stones vs. Paul
-
oobu24:
^^ wonder if they'll need to cancel any shows like Paul (his people) did to Horsens.
I doubt they will cancel. That would be too embarrassing for the band. This 50th anniversary tour has been very high profile. Horsens was one venue -- not very high profile. I'm not insulting Horsens here, just pointing out that Paul's shows before and after Horsens were generally sold out. Horsens was an anomaly that year -- if indeed ticket sales were the problem and not concerns about Paul's voice in advance of the Olympics (and as it turned out there were reasons to be concerned). The Stones' ticket problems are plaguing the ENTIRE tour. Imagine Paul facing half-empty stadiums for his entire tour. ops: ops: There is a lesson in this for all of these major rock icons. People want to see you perform but push the prices up too high and the fans will walk. I think the Stones got arrogant. They thought that since they hadn't toured in years, people would pay whatever ridiculous price they charged. And I bet Mick Jagger thought, "Well if McCartney charges a top ticket price of $250, and he's only 1 ex-Beatle, there are 3 of us original Stones so we'll charge $630!"
-
kelly campbell:
Yes Paul's prices are the most I will pay for anyone.
I agree,and it's also the only concert I will travel for. Although, everyone has their individual limits.
-
Michelley:
Interesting story in The Obseerver today about the Stones' US concerts. Apparently the Stones' ticket sales in the US have been in the toilet -- due to the excessive prices. Faced with the prospect of half-empty stadiums the Stones have had to slash the ticket prices.
Last week the band said it was dropping the price of thousands of premium seats ? "flexing" in industry parlance ? rather than play to half-empty arenas. The situation was so dire, one insider revealed, that the band's own allotment of tickets was released because of a lack of requests. "Total disaster. Too expensive and no vibe on the shows ? it's a terrible way to go out," a source said. He added that the band could hardly refuse if their reputed $20m fees for the tour were revised. "What's the band gonna do? Say we're not going to play if you touch our gross?"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2013/may/04/rolling-stones-face-pay-cut-ticket-prices-slashed I'm astounded by how much the Stones were charging: $170 for a cheap seat (!!!) and $635 for a top price (not including VIP packages of course; and the Stones offered 1,000 tickets at each venue at $85 and those sold out right away but the vast majority of the seats at each show were at these exorbitant prices). By that standard Paul's prices (from $57.50 for a cheap seat up to $250) look downright reasonable. And it looks like Paul's shows have all been selling really well. Here's another story in the Evening Standard about the Stones' LA show. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/celebritynews/just-too-expensive-rolling-stones-face-playing-to-empty-seats-at-us-concert-8601984.html
To fill Staples Center, promoter AEG has begun lowering prices. More £55 tickets are being made available, the band said on its Rollingstones.com website, with some lucky fans getting cut-price tickets for the most expensive seats. ... ?By the time the show starts, they?ll fill every seat at the arena ... It just won?t be with people who paid $600 a seat.?
So some lucky people got $600 seats for $55 so that the band could fill the stadium. Pretty big embarrassment for the band.
Geez! Who do they think they are -- the friggin' Stones or something??? Oh, wait...
-
haha Audi~
-
audi:
Geez! Who do they think they are -- the friggin' Stones or something??? Oh, wait...
-
So some lucky people got $600 seats for $55 so that the band could fill the stadium. Pretty big embarrassment for the band.
I think somebody is mixing up the $ with £, within the same quote.There are no $55 seats. But there are $85 seats. Also, the $85 'mystery ticket' promo has been going on since the tour was first announced... Before the sales looked miserable. I don't think every currently unsold ticket will become $85. But I do think that all those unsold $600s, will turn into $400s. (and will continue to be discounted even lower to $250 or $150, if they desperately need to.)
-
Despite all the tut-tutting, the fellas still knocked 'em dead last night: http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2013/05/04/rolling-stones-friday-la-tour-launch-review/2131355/ Three weeks from tonight I'll be getting my *own* satisfaction in the Air Canada Centre! I frankly can't wait.
-
wouldn't you be pissed if you paid 400.00 or 600.00 and you have a guy or girl come in and sit next to you all excited because they just bought an 85.00 ticket that day and got just as good seats as you?? I see problems for the stones.
-
That would definitely be an issue with moi.
-
Holly Days:
Despite all the tut-tutting, the fellas still knocked 'em dead last night: http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2013/05/04/rolling-stones-friday-la-tour-launch-review/2131355/ Three weeks from tonight I'll be getting my *own* satisfaction in the Air Canada Centre! I frankly can't wait.
I enjoyed all the Stones concerts I have seen. Back in December in NJ the concert was great, it was the best Stones concert by far for me!
-
Paul's ticket prices aren't much better, really. For Brooklyn, the cheapest was $69, before fees. The $99 tix ($116.75 total!) are about as high up in the arena as you can get, not very good at all. When you have to buy so-called "cheap" tickets because you need more than one ticket, so you can take family or friends to the show, you are still paying a lot of money for crummy seats. It's getting quite discouraging. Paul is the only concert I go to anymore...
-
Thisbe211:
Paul's ticket prices aren't much better, really.
I agree that the "cheap seats" are horrible, and still not really "cheap". But excluding Barclays.... Paul's "high end" price of $250 is still a bargain compared to the Stones' $600. That is a HUGE difference, and Paul's prices ARE much better, really. Paul's also been charging this since 2002.
-
rlj1010:
Thisbe211:
Paul's ticket prices aren't much better, really.
I agree that the "cheap seats" are horrible, and still not really "cheap". But excluding Barclays.... Paul's "high end" price of $250 is still a bargain compared to the Stones' $600. That is a HUGE difference, and Paul's prices ARE much better, really. Paul's also been charging this since 2002.
shhhh...he might hear you & raise his prices. (like they haven't been thinking about that)
-
Oh, I know Paul's prices haven't reached the Stones' level (and let's hope they never do, that he will learn from what happened with the Stones). It's just as I said: if you buy more than one ticket, you're paying hundreds of dollars to basically just be watching a screen. I have to wonder how many people miss out on shows because of prices now.
-
The Stones played a new song Friday night, but for 45 minutes or so I was bored. They were just ok. Has $85 tickets and sat in unsold $600 tickets five rows off center floor. Could have went again last night for free, but went to sleep at 9pm instead (20 minute walk away). Now PAUL on the other hand...
-
LonelyRoad:
The Stones played a new song Friday night, but for 45 minutes or so I was bored. They were just ok. Has $85 tickets and sat in unsold $600 tickets five rows off center floor. Could have went again last night for free, but went to sleep at 9pm instead (20 minute walk away). Now PAUL on the other hand...
You were bored? I was at that show raging! interesting. nice getting on the floor for $85 though!
-
LonelyRoad:
The Stones played a new song Friday night, but for 45 minutes or so I was bored. They were just ok. Has $85 tickets and sat in unsold $600 tickets five rows off center floor. Could have went again last night for free, but went to sleep at 9pm instead (20 minute walk away). Now PAUL on the other hand...
Yeah, I can relate. When Paul played HIGHWAY, SING THE CHANGES, even MY VALENTINE, it is snooze city for me. So I do know what you are talking about.
-
LonelyRoad:
The Stones played a new song Friday night, but for 45 minutes or so I was bored. They were just ok. Has $85 tickets and sat in unsold $600 tickets five rows off center floor. Could have went again last night for free, but went to sleep at 9pm instead (20 minute walk away). Now PAUL on the other hand...
Remarkable: you heard the Stones play "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" - a Sticky Fingers classic and a number on a par with "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" - with Mick Taylor back after 40 years on lead guitar and you were bored?! It's more than fine to just admit you're not into the Stones - saying they were "just OK" is simply factually incorrect and pretty outrageous to be honest. Meanwhile, I don't think we'll see another album-centric tour from Paul - 2005 was probably it. I would sure love to be wrong but I doubt it. And to be honest, for what he's charging, he got to appeal to the broadest audience possible. We ain't that audience!
-
Holly Days:
LonelyRoad:
The Stones played a new song Friday night, but for 45 minutes or so I was bored. They were just ok. Has $85 tickets and sat in unsold $600 tickets five rows off center floor. Could have went again last night for free, but went to sleep at 9pm instead (20 minute walk away). Now PAUL on the other hand...
Remarkable: you heard the Stones play "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" - a Sticky Fingers classic and a number on a par with "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" - with Mick Taylor back after 40 years on lead guitar and you were bored?! It's more than fine to just admit you're not into the Stones - saying they were "just OK" is simply factually incorrect and pretty outrageous to be honest. Meanwhile, I don't think we'll see another album-centric tour from Paul - 2005 was probably it. I would sure love to be wrong but I doubt it. And to be honest, for what he's charging, he got to appeal to the broadest audience possible. We ain't that audience!
Very true on all points.
-
Holly Days:
LonelyRoad:
The Stones played a new song Friday night, but for 45 minutes or so I was bored. They were just ok. Has $85 tickets and sat in unsold $600 tickets five rows off center floor. Could have went again last night for free, but went to sleep at 9pm instead (20 minute walk away). Now PAUL on the other hand...
Remarkable: you heard the Stones play "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" - a Sticky Fingers classic and a number on a par with "I Want You (She's So Heavy)" - with Mick Taylor back after 40 years on lead guitar and you were bored?! It's more than fine to just admit you're not into the Stones - saying they were "just OK" is simply factually incorrect and pretty outrageous to be honest. Meanwhile, I don't think we'll see another album-c entric tour from Paul - 2005 was probably it. I would sure love to be wrong but I doubt it. And to be honest, for what he's charging, he got to appeal to the broadest audience possible. We ain't that audience!
Sounds like you are trying to rewrite history in addition to living in the past. I am a Stones fan. Saw them in 2005, 2006 and 2013. Predicted Paul would be way up here and he was BETTER than I predicted. Predicted the Stones would rock in a lesserway and the were worse. My friend thought the same thing, as did one huge Stones fan who had been to a bunch of shows this year. Crowd was awesome, Stone boring through the middle. I have no reason to make anything up. Sat on a 15hour bus for Paul. Could have walked 20 minutes to the United Center last night and saw the Stones again for free, and passed.