ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang Tour 2006

"Why'd you have to leave us like that, you sod!
I could think of a hundred other fuckers who should have gone instead of him!
He wasn't even on my list!"

Keith Richards. Stu's funeral - New York City 1985
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2006 ] [ FORO EN ESPAΡOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIT TORRENT HELP ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Stones' Tour Top Grosser (From cnn.com) Return to archive Page: 1 2 3
27th November 2006 02:48 PM
Factory Girl NASHVILLE, Tennessee (Billboard) -- Though they'll surely live to fight another day, U2's brief stint holding the title of top-grossing tour ever is over. That distinction returns to the Rolling Stones, whose A Bigger Bang tour is now the top-grossing tour in history.

From March 28, 2005, to March 2, 2006, U2's Vertigo tour rang up grosses of more than $333 million. That put U2 ahead of the Stones' $320 million Voodoo Lounge tour of 1994-95, and the band's 10 stadium makeup shows this month will take the total to 121 shows and a gross of about $377 million.

But the Stones' numbers from their global A Bigger Bang tour shatter that mark. Since the fall of 2005, the band has grossed a staggering $437 million and drawn 3.5 million people to 110 shows.

In addition, an estimated crowd of 2 million saw the band perform at Copacabana Beach in Rio de Janeiro back in February.

The tour, like every Stones trek since 1989, is produced by Michael Cohl under the Concert Productions International banner, with Live Nation.

Though no one's commenting officially, talk is that the Stones will stretch the tour into 2007, meaning that a final tally of more than $500 million is easily in range.

Copyright 2006 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Tools: Save | Print | E-mail | Most Popular
27th November 2006 03:07 PM
Saint Sway its gotta be humbling for a egomaniacal band like U2 to be out grossed by a bunch of 60-somethings

can the media now please stop referring to U2 as "the biggest band in the world"
27th November 2006 03:14 PM
Factory Girl
quote:
Saint Sway wrote:
its gotta be humbling for a egomaniacal band like U2 to be out grossed by a bunch of 60-somethings

can the media now please stop referring to U2 as "the biggest band in the world"




"the biggest butt in the world" is more like it.
27th November 2006 03:15 PM
gimmekeef Shattered?...hey I like that!
27th November 2006 03:18 PM
TampabayStone
quote:
Factory Girl wrote:


"the biggest butt in the world" is more like it.





I find it way to small, flat really.


27th November 2006 03:29 PM
nankerphelge At some point in every single Stones show I have ever seen, there comes a point where I just look at them and realize "holy shit - that is the Rolling Stones up there playing"

The guys that put out Satisfaction in 1965 when their combined age was like 12.

The guys that put out Sympathy for the devil when I was getting my kindergarten lunchbox.

The guys that put out (in addition to the above), JJF, Honky Tonk Women, Midight Rambler, Paint It Black, Get Off of My Cloud, Can't Always Git What You Want, Brown Sugar -- all before the band was even 10 years old.

I was listening to Handsome Girls on the way to AC and I realized that Tumbling Dice had only been out for 6 years when that tour was ongoing.

It is still difficult for me to get my tiny head around this band. It is no wonder that they still out-do everyone live!

Let's see what kind of numbers U2 puts up ten to twelve years from now.



27th November 2006 04:10 PM
Bitch Yes I just heard this a few minutes ago on the radio news, and they said there is talk The RS will be playing locally (NY/NJ area) in early 2007. The RS are trying to break the $500 Million mark. What's up with that? I though ABB will resume in May in Europe and Asia. Did I miss something? Or is it just radio talk bullshit?
27th November 2006 04:23 PM
Mel Belli Since no one else has said it, I must: The tour is a bust!
27th November 2006 05:15 PM
Soldatti They only need 10-15 shows to beat the $500 million mark.
27th November 2006 05:40 PM
Saint Sway is there an official record for fewest copies of an album sold by a band that eclipsed $300 million in ticket sales?



[Edited by Saint Sway]
27th November 2006 05:41 PM
Gazza yep...youve just witnessed it
27th November 2006 05:43 PM
Gazza
quote:
Bitch wrote:
Yes I just heard this a few minutes ago on the radio news, and they said there is talk The RS will be playing locally (NY/NJ area) in early 2007. The RS are trying to break the $500 Million mark. What's up with that? I though ABB will resume in May in Europe and Asia. Did I miss something? Or is it just radio talk bullshit?



I think the latter theory is correct

They must be the only people on earth who cant see that the Stones need a sizeable break and that its quite reasonable to assume they'll take one.
27th November 2006 05:47 PM
Gazza
quote:
Saint Sway wrote:
its gotta be humbling for a egomaniacal band like U2 to be out grossed by a bunch of 60-somethings

can the media now please stop referring to U2 as "the biggest band in the world"




see Soldatti's post on page 1 of this thread http://novogate.com/board/968/233191-1.html


They sold over 1 million more tickets than the Stones. I doubt they're worried that much about being outgrossed.

Their tour had a higher demand for tickets. The Stones happen to have older and therefore richer fans, who the band like to charge as much money to see them as they can.

If anything, its the Stones who have the higher ego as the "biggest gross" thing seems more important to them than ANYTHING.

Personally, I find the whole thing fucking pointless and artistically redundant.

[Edited by Gazza]
27th November 2006 08:24 PM
Soldatti
quote:
Gazza wrote:
Personally, I find the whole thing fucking pointless and artistically redundant.


Agreed, and that's one of the reasons for the lack of new fans.
27th November 2006 10:45 PM
fna69
quote:
Soldatti wrote:


Agreed, and that's one of the reasons for the lack of new fans.



I think they have a nice size of young new fans, but they don't give them enough interest to really dig into the material. They charge way to much for any kid in there teens to be able to afford. SO in return they get a crowd that ranges from the die hard fans and corporate suits who know about two songs out of the entire set. They had a good opportunity to be back in the spotlight with ABB. Forty Licks got alot of new fans, but they did JACKSHIT to promote the new album. No SNL,Leno, Letterman nothing. They are the Stones. All they would have to do is ask. I know alot of people on here hate U2, but these guys got it down when it comes to promoting a new album. They racked in over 800k in first week sales...more than ABB, BTB, and VL's first week sales combined. The Stones are kings of the touring world, but also the kings are the "rock groups who are invisible everywhere besides touring".
28th November 2006 01:37 AM
glencar I mentioned something about what a bigtime Stones fan I was to a co-worker who was born sometime after Tattoo You & he admitted he loves the Stones especially "that Devil song". He couldn't think of his other fave song but he knows it's a fast one. I can't believe the Stones still have fans of that age.
28th November 2006 05:02 AM
Gazza
quote:
fna69 wrote:


I think they have a nice size of young new fans, but they don't give them enough interest to really dig into the material. They charge way to much for any kid in there teens to be able to afford. SO in return they get a crowd that ranges from the die hard fans and corporate suits who know about two songs out of the entire set. They had a good opportunity to be back in the spotlight with ABB. Forty Licks got alot of new fans, but they did JACKSHIT to promote the new album. No SNL,Leno, Letterman nothing. They are the Stones. All they would have to do is ask. I know alot of people on here hate U2, but these guys got it down when it comes to promoting a new album. They racked in over 800k in first week sales...more than ABB, BTB, and VL's first week sales combined. The Stones are kings of the touring world, but also the kings are the "rock groups who are invisible everywhere besides touring".



Good post, although in fairness the Stones never promote a new record/tour by appearing on those kind of shows. They DID however do the Superbowl, which has a far bigger audience. The effect on sales was non-existent. The most telling statistic - as Sway hints at - isnt that theyve made shitloads touring, but theyve done so whilst at the same time the album theyre supposed to be touring behind had such mediocre sales (more so in North America for some reason, where 75% of the shows to date on this tour have taken place). This tour was more of a '40 Licks' tour than the last one actually, when you look at the standard setlists from each. Theyve basically looked at how well "40 Licks" sold and have as a result settled for being what they said theyd never be - a nostalgia act. Not a good sign IMO.

Anyone remember Jagger's quote in that 'Newsweek' interview before the start of the tour?

Their last album, the double-CD "Forty Licks," was mostly repackaged material. "There's no harm in doing that occasionally," says Jagger, "but we didn't want to do it again so soon. You become like an oldies band." The Stones' latest, "A Bigger Bang," which comes out in early September, is a welcome throwback to their scrappy beginnings. This time all the songs are new—a raw, "Little Red Rooster"-style blues number, a couple of Richards's endearingly bedraggled ballads and the usual raunchy, swaggering club anthems. Jagger is clearly proud of it. "We put new stuff out because we still can," he says. "We have lots of it—it's not like we're just eking it out. Rock fans tend to be conservative. 'Ah, I much prefer "Brown Sugar".' Yeah, well, but listen to this, c—t."
28th November 2006 09:03 AM
gimmekeef The only people who would have cared if they played Dangerous Beauty or Laugh..or Cat Dragged In etc....would have been us.........Plus it would have required learning how do play them..Why not mail in another warhorse set ...grab the 5 million and run.....
28th November 2006 09:18 AM
Gazza problem is that Mick's statements before the tour started indicated that the BAND cared about it. Then they lost interest. The Stones are the only major act I know of who release new material that gets good reviews and then wont play hardly anything of it because they think the audience theyre targeting have the collective attention span of a gnat and may walk out. They should have more courage in their convictions.

I've no problem with them playing mostly old material, but their scope for doing so for much of the tour was limited to 40 Licks and very little else. For a band who have sold 250 million albums and who have a back catalogue of 330 songs (a third of which has still never been played in concert) thats a serious indictment of their lack of ambition. The 'licks' setlists had much more depth when it came to rediscovering their old material than the current tour, although to their credit theyve reversed that trend somewhat on the most recent leg.

Anyway, how would it have 'required learning' to play songs that theyd been working on in the studio for months before the tour started? I'd have thought that those songs would be more 'fresh' to them than almost anything
[Edited by Gazza]
28th November 2006 10:28 AM
gimmekeef Learning?....well its like the difference between Rambler etc on record versus live.Truly great Stones songs take on something new and magnificent when strutted live.It takes them time to make that happen and with ABB they were too lazy to bother....To me thats the truly sad thing about the missed opportunity that was ABB...There was a lot of new stuff that could have become classic....
[Edited by gimmekeef]
28th November 2006 10:32 AM
Gazza yep..youre right, although you did say previously about 'learning to play' them - which was my point.

Turning them into something special is another thing, but as you insinuate from your post, you dont know if you dont try!
28th November 2006 11:36 AM
Saint Sway
quote:
fna69 wrote:
They had a good opportunity to be back in the spotlight with ABB. Forty Licks got alot of new fans, but they did JACKSHIT to promote the new album. No SNL,Leno, Letterman nothing. They are the Stones. All they would have to do is ask. I know alot of people on here hate U2, but these guys got it down when it comes to promoting a new album.



not true.

Stones did far more promotion for ABB than they have done for any of their previous albums. Ever.

And they certainly did much, much more prime spot promotional work than U2 or ANY other band in the past 2 years.

• They had the huge press conference performance that landed them spots on all the big news and entertainment news shows. Played 3 songs live - SMU, ONNYA & BS.

• They had a huge article in Newsweek.

• Cover story in Rolling Stone

• they got major press in every major magazine

• they took out print ads in major magazines. Full page ads in most cases.

• They did a lengthy interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show. TWICE during the tour.

• They performed on the ABC/ESPN Monday Night Football promo. Played 2 songs RJ & SMU. 'Rough Justice' ran for weeks in commercial spots both networks football promos leading up to the event.

• iTunes ran email blasts offering exclusive pre-orders of ABB and released THREE iTunes exclusive Singles prior to the release - Rough Justice, Streets Of Love & Back of My Hand. Banner ads ran on the iTunes site for weeks with the pre-sale offers.

• They ran a TV commercial exclusively for ABB

• They cross-promoted the album with in-store displays at Starbucks.

• Sirius radio ran ads with free trial membership to anyone that purchased ABB

• They appeared live on the American Music Awards. Performed 2 songs. RFD & IORR.

• They did a Sprint commercial showing them playing 'Rain Fall Down' live

• They played 'Streets Of Love' on a Day Time Soap Opera (forget which one). The network ran both print and TV ads promoting the song in the show.

• They appeared on an interview feature on 60 Minutes

• They played the Super Bowl!!! The largest viewed TV event of the year. 3 songs - SMU, RJ & Satisfaction. Plus they were plugged in all the Super Bowl promotional hype for weeks leading up to the event. And did interviews with the network.

• They hyped the album & tour with a free concert in Rio to a million fans

• They had their Rio concert shown in movie theatres and advertised the event in print ads.

• They took out giant Billboard and newspaper ads in every major market they played.

did U2 do this?? No. Did any other band do all this? No.

what else could they of possibly done? TRL? Dont think so. Letterman/Leno? Never have, never will. Heck U2 didnt either. Most major big bands dont.

personally I cant think of any other way they could of promoted the record more. IMO, they crossed over from protional to whoring themselves out with the Starbucks shit, the tv ads and the Soap Opera.

Fact is that the Stones promoted this album more than any of their other albums. The album didnt sell well because of lack of exposure or promotion by the Stones. It didnt sell well because there wasnt a single bankable song that the public was genuinely interested in. Joe Jock heard their Rough Justice ad nauseum everytime he put on a sporting event. But was never interested in the song enough to go buy the record. Suzy Housewife got hit with Streets of Love and could care less. Wasnt emotionally moving enough for her to buy the record. The album tried to hit all their target demographics but their target demographics said "NO THANKS". They heard what the Stones latest offering was but showed no interest in buying it.

as die-hard fans, we can like the record. But we have to own up to the fact that no one else cares. The Stones did their part to sell it. They just didnt do their part to create something that was worth the casual fan investing in.

"you can lead a horse to water..."



[Edited by Saint Sway]
28th November 2006 11:48 AM
Gazza >The Stones did their part to sell it.

all except for playing much of it live and selling the album at their shows (a combination which would have helped significantly IMO)

Otherwise, you're spot on. (U2 performed a 3-song set on SNL incidentally but obviously that audience is a fraction of the Superbowl's one)


And I presume you deliberately 'forgot' that the soap was 'days of our lives' as, like me, the thought of it still haunts you at night

The ironic thing is that in Europe, the promotional gimmicks were a tiny fraction of what they did to push the album in the US (understandable to some degree as the tour didnt reach here until 10 months after the album came out). Yet the record sold better in Europe (19 shows) than the US (80 shows plus numerous TV appearances and promotions). I just think thats partly down to the fact that their target audience in the US is significantly older (concert audiences here are younger because it costs less to see them - and in places like South America that gap and the difference in their ability to sell records is even more pronounced)
[Edited by Gazza]
28th November 2006 11:59 AM
Saint Sway I agree that they should of played more songs live and definately should of sold it at the shows.

But I just dont think that it would of helped all that much. Many of those casual fans going to the shows had already heard Rough Justice, SOL etc by then and were not interested in buying the record or hearing the songs live.

I always buy the latest record of a band that I'm going to see live at least a week before the show.

unless its an oldies act whose most recent efforts have tended to suck (see: Robert Plant, Aerosmith, ZZ Top...)

I'm sure thats how most casual fans going to a Stones concert in '05 or '06 feel about buying ABB
28th November 2006 12:10 PM
gimmekeef Guys....when you look at what the "public" buys as music these days....its a wonder they bother at all....If they released Exile today...and no one had ever heard it before.....It wouldnt IMHO reach the top 20.....
28th November 2006 12:13 PM
MidnightRambler Sway and Gazza great posts as usual.

The band's timidness to deliver new songs is mindblowing and personally a little insulting to their fans but mostly to themselves as artists. (Are they still 'artists'..or are they just 'performers' now? Yikes.)

Compared to the '78 tour for "Some Girls" where fans practically heard the entire album each show, ABB definitely was treated like a clunker of an album. Funny because every critic and magazine that had the time and space to review the album ALWAYS gave it a positive review and constantly mentioned the album's great intentions which were its "back to the basics" approach and the Jagger/Richards writing engine resurrected.

It's important to note that at the beginning of this tour, we saw a handful of new songs from the new album. "Rough Justice" "Back of My Hand" "Oh No Not You Again""Infamy" were all played on regular basis for the first leg of the tour---usually all those songs each night! That's a pretty good amount of new material.

But they couldn've done more. ESPECIALLY since the material they were working with was very strong. "Look What The Cat Dragged In" "Let Me Down Slow" and "Dangerous Beauty" all could have been added to the set list--easily!

Not selling the album at shows...huge loss. Idiotic on their part. They should know that if there was EVER a time for a fan to buy the CD it would be after they just watched them live! Huge loss.

As an singer/songwriter myself, I can't imagine being as lackluster as they are about their new songs. I can't understand how they find comfort in playing the warhorses EVERY NIGHT and not feel guilty about ignoring the (i'm assuming) hard work they put in for those new songs.
28th November 2006 01:14 PM
glencar I can't understand why they chose not to do any of the songs listed above on the B stage instead of the same old same old. One of the best things about the Beacon show was when they inserted Live With Me into the "warhorses" section of the show.
28th November 2006 01:22 PM
Some Guy Joe Jock and Suzy Housewife did not like ABB?
28th November 2006 01:47 PM
Saint Sway
quote:
glencar wrote:
I can't understand why they chose not to do any of the songs listed above on the B stage instead of the same old same old. One of the best things about the Beacon show was when they inserted Live With Me into the "warhorses" section of the show.



I think on the previous recent tours they had new songs that they could highlight better because they fit in with more as arena type rock songs with dramatic big build ups and chorus. Whereas RJ & ONNYA are more straight ahead rockers like that they typically either put on the B or in the 3 or 4 slot.

they've done this on the previous tours with the straight up rockers like Flip The Switch or YGMR that were typically relegated to the early rock slot. But the songs that were more dramatic like Out of Control and Saint Of Me were pushed back in the warhorse section on No Security/BTB. Love Is Strong got a prime showcase spot after Sympathy on the Voodoo Tour. I Go Wild was also played deep in the set. Just seemed like they showcased those songs a little more prominantly and were able to sandwich them between the warhorses because they were more dramatic arena type songs that fit well in those sections.

not saying that RJ wouldnt fit well between BS & Satisfaction like they did with Live With Me. I think it would. I just think that thats what their thinking was.

the one song that they never played that I thought had the potential to be a crowd favorite like Saint or Control was LIND. Which I think is similiar to those two and had the potential to be a crowd pleaser if done right. Could of fit in nicely before the band intros like they did with OOC on the early parts of BTB
28th November 2006 03:56 PM
mrhipfl
quote:
Saint Sway wrote:

the one song that they never played that I thought had the potential to be a crowd favorite like Saint or Control was LIND. Which I think is similiar to those two and had the potential to be a crowd pleaser if done right. Could of fit in nicely before the band intros like they did with OOC on the early parts of BTB



I can just imagine the crowd at the end clapping their hands going "been traveling far and wide, wondering who's gonna be my guide." That'd be sweet. Of course, they probably couldn't pull it off live. And the crowd wouldn't know the song anyways.

"rough justice" would be a great opener.
Page: 1 2 3
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)