THE 'FRESHEN UP' TOUR 2018
-
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
-
WixRocks wrote:
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
I'd certainly love to see the data or article claiming that his recent tours have lost money
-
Bob Gannon wrote:
WixRocks wrote:
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
I'd certainly love to see the data or article claiming that his recent tours have lost money
-
Fans on the run posted on Facebook that there is a rumor about a show in Israel. Did anybody heard something!? I can't find anything!
-
LadyLeslie wrote:
Paul received an award in Australia last evening. At the end of his video acceptance speech (perhaps from England) he said "See you soon!" Not sure if that means "See all my fans out on tour soon!" or "See you in Australia soon!" but thought it was interesting.
His tour of Australia last year was a success, so I won't be surprised if he announces a few shows over there in late October / early November.
-
puppywhimpers wrote:
Bob Gannon wrote:
WixRocks wrote:
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
I'd certainly love to see the data or article claiming that his recent tours have lost money
No reason for popcorn, not being confrontational. Just a genuine interest in seeing it
-
Yahllil wrote:
Fans on the run posted on Facebook that there is a rumor about a show in Israel. Did anybody heard something!? I can't find anything!
Ringo was in Israel last month, so hopefully Paul will return after a 10-year absence.
-
Yahllil wrote:
Fans on the run posted on Facebook that there is a rumor about a show in Israel. Did anybody heard something!? I can't find anything!
Usually I think that Fans On The Run page is not a confiable source. I have no idea where this rumor comes from.
Last year FOTR said that Australia and New Zealand shows were cancelled. That wrong infomation caused panic for some fans. Not cool.
-
5th-beatle wrote:
Yahllil wrote:
Fans on the run posted on Facebook that there is a rumor about a show in Israel. Did anybody heard something!? I can't find anything!
Ringo was in Israel last month, so hopefully Paul will return after a 10-year absence.
Yes he was. And I attended the show (which was great!). I hope Paul will return to Tel Aviv, but I couldn't find anything related to the rumors Fans On The Run posted unfortunately
-
Renan Takenouchi wrote:
Yahllil wrote:
Fans on the run posted on Facebook that there is a rumor about a show in Israel. Did anybody heard something!? I can't find anything!
Usually I think that Fans On The Run page is not a confiable source. I have no idea where this rumor comes from.
Last year FOTR said that Australia and New Zealand shows were cancelled. That wrong infomation caused panic for some fans. Not cool.
Yes... I hope the rumors are true. It's been 10 years since his last (and first) visit to Israel
-
Renan Takenouchi wrote:
Yahllil wrote:
Fans on the run posted on Facebook that there is a rumor about a show in Israel. Did anybody heard something!? I can't find anything!
Usually I think that Fans On The Run page is not a confiable source. I have no idea where this rumor comes from.
Last year FOTR said that Australia and New Zealand shows were cancelled. That wrong infomation caused panic for some fans. Not cool.
I agree, I do not trust them at all. I also doubt Paul would come back to Australia after one year of visiting, when he previously left a 25 year gap. I would also doubt Israel if they are the only source of the information.
-
Bob Gannon wrote:
WixRocks wrote:
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
I'd certainly love to see the data or article claiming that his recent tours have lost money
I cannot give you that in writing from an outside source.
-
WixRocks wrote:
Bob Gannon wrote:
WixRocks wrote:
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
I'd certainly love to see the data or article claiming that his recent tours have lost money
I cannot give you that in writing from an outside source.
Ok, fair enough. Thought you might be quoting a industry article or magazine article that could be pulled up. Would be interested in seeing it if true. The times I've seen Brian, the venues have been packed and meet and greet lines long so the statement rather surprised me
-
Bob Gannon wrote:
WixRocks wrote:
Bob Gannon wrote:
WixRocks wrote:
I'm amazed at the support for the financial endeavors of billionaires we've never met!
I don't think any response I construct would thoughtfully launch the conversation in any new directions but ultimately I think the difference we have, is that I do not consider money to be the number one reason these guys perform. Maybe part of that is naive on my part because it pains me to think that the initial sole idol I've looked to in my own musical journey, is only in it for the money. Here's another comparison you'll probably scoff at: Brian Wilson. Most of Brian's recent tours have lost money, yet he contains. He was literally carried onstage in Canada a few nights ago after returning from back surgery. Yes, he's in the smaller venues too BUT, is anyone from the 60's rock scene considered as much or more of a songwriter legend than Paul McCartney? I think the two are certainly on even playing fields as far as legendary "status" goes. Now, Brian's voice is long since shot and his piano playing is minimum if een existent some nights yet he actively chooses to LOSE money to perform for his fans.
This isn't ALL about the dough.
I'd certainly love to see the data or article claiming that his recent tours have lost money
I cannot give you that in writing from an outside source.
Ok, fair enough. Thought you might be quoting a industry article or magazine article that could be pulled up. Would be interested in seeing it if true. The times I've seen Brian, the venues have been packed and meet and greet lines long so the statement rather surprised me
I agree, I was shocked when informed as well, perhaps it was an exaggeration on this person's part but they explained the laundry list of needs that Brian Wilson has off stage for his personal health when traveling that add up, in addition to the massive band he carries and the typically small venues he plays.
-
I don't agree with the arguments that Paul's primary motivation to play live is to make money. If it was then he's pretty useless at it.
If I were his manager then I'd suggest, for example, that he did 10 consecutive nights at the O2 arena in London . Get a support act in,who would perform for free just for the opportunity to support Paul on tour. Then for Paul himself,play a one hour set, playing acoustic guitar or a piano. No backing band, no pyrotechnics, no films, just Paul alone on stage playing his hits...unplugged as it were. Keep everything as low key and as cheap as possible to maximise profit.
But Paul doesn't do that. He has a backing band who needs paying, he has all the expense of assembling and dismantling the lighting rig etc for just one show, he has the films, pyrotechnics etc etc, all of which cost money. I'm sure he does make a slight profit from each show but no where near as much as he could do if he was only motovated by making as much money as possible. Naturally, Paul doesn't want to make a loss but as far as I'm concerned he's prime motivation is as its always has been, he simply loves playing live and enjoying the feedback from his audience.
-
Kestrel wrote:
I don't agree with the arguments that Paul's primary motivation to play live is to make money. If it was then he's pretty useless at it.
If I were his manager then I'd suggest, for example, that he did 10 consecutive nights at the O2 arena in London . Get a support act in,who would perform for free just for the opportunity to support Paul on tour. Then for Paul himself,play a one hour set, playing acoustic guitar or a piano. No backing band, no pyrotechnics, no films, just Paul alone on stage playing his hits...unplugged as it were. Keep everything as low key and as cheap as possible to maximise profit.
But Paul doesn't do that. He has a backing band who needs paying, he has all the expense of assembling and dismantling the lighting rig etc for just one show, he has the films, pyrotechnics etc etc, all of which cost money. I'm sure he does make a slight profit from each show but no where near as much as he could do if he was only motovated by making as much money as possible. Naturally, Paul doesn't want to make a loss but as far as I'm concerned he's prime motivation is as its always has been, he simply loves playing live and enjoying the feedback from his audience.
I think it is obvious he loves to perform. Personally, I would much rather see an acoustic show like you mentioned even if it was only for an hour. Of course, it goes without saying I would like to see a few solo songs he has never done live thrown into the shortened setlist but that is just me being picky - lol.
-
Kestrel wrote:
I don't agree with the arguments that Paul's primary motivation to play live is to make money. If it was then he's pretty useless at it.
If I were his manager then I'd suggest, for example, that he did 10 consecutive nights at the O2 arena in London . Get a support act in,who would perform for free just for the opportunity to support Paul on tour. Then for Paul himself,play a one hour set, playing acoustic guitar or a piano. No backing band, no pyrotechnics, no films, just Paul alone on stage playing his hits...unplugged as it were. Keep everything as low key and as cheap as possible to maximise profit.
But Paul doesn't do that. He has a backing band who needs paying, he has all the expense of assembling and dismantling the lighting rig etc for just one show, he has the films, pyrotechnics etc etc, all of which cost money. I'm sure he does make a slight profit from each show but no where near as much as he could do if he was only motovated by making as much money as possible. Naturally, Paul doesn't want to make a loss but as far as I'm concerned he's prime motivation is as its always has been, he simply loves playing live and enjoying the feedback from his audience.
Useless at it???? He is consistently among the top tour grosses despite playing far fewer shows. Sounds pretty successful to me...just saying
-
Bob Gannon wrote:
Kestrel wrote:
I don't agree with the arguments that Paul's primary motivation to play live is to make money. If it was then he's pretty useless at it.
Useless at it???? He is consistently among the top tour grosses despite playing far fewer shows. Sounds pretty successful to me...just saying
There is always room for improvement. What I was saying is that Paul has the opportunity to make a lot more more money from touring than he does but he chooses not to. From a business perspective that is a rather useless attitude.
-
Yankeefan2 wrote:
I think it is obvious he loves to perform. Personally, I would much rather see an acoustic show like you mentioned even if it was only for an hour. Of course, it goes without saying I would like to see a few solo songs he has never done live thrown into the shortened setlist but that is just me being picky - lol.
Given the amount of songs Paul has to choose from,he could at least put together a show that doesn't repeat any songs that he's performed live over the last 10 years for example. The problem though is that the set that is put together is aimed at the audience member who is attending for the first time. And they would be gutted if he didn't do Yesterday or Live And Let Die or whatever. Seeing Paul in concert on a regular basis unfortunately means hearing (and seeing) a lot of repeats.
-
I love the repeats to be honest, it wouldn't be the show I look forward to without them.
The introductions to some of the songs, eg Blackbird get a little repetitive of course, but then I expect more than 50% of the crowd haven't seen Paul live before, and they should hear these little stories