|
|
| Willsonname |
The link:
http://www.billboard.com/billboard/daily/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1782120
Article:
McCartney Notches Year's Highest-Grossing Tour
In an unqualified commercial and critical success, Sir Paul McCartney was the top touring artist in the world for 2002, raking in $126.1 million, according to Billboard Boxscores. Delivering on a Super Bowl promise to tour North America for the first time in nearly a decade, McCartney's spring and fall legs brought in $98.8 million domestically and secured another $27.5 million from dates in Mexico and Japan.
McCartney confirmed today (Dec. 19) that he will return to the road after the new year. "I'm thrilled with the success of this tour and with this accolade from Billboard," he said in a statement. "But I'm also pleased that we had so much fun doing the tour. I'd like to thank the band, our crew and all the crowds who helped to make it fun. We originally set out to play only a few weeks of gigs but it all grew to become something very special to me. So now we're looking at taking this show to new places for new fun in 2003."
The Rolling Stones rolled out three distinct productions for their 2002/2003 Licks tour, one each for stadium, arena, and theater configurations. Michael Cohl, president of tour promoter Grand Entertainment, broke with tradition and opted not to report Stones box office numbers to date.
But, even with the smaller venues on the route, industry sources confirm that the Stones will have taken in some $90 million and played to about 700,000 people by Boxscores' deadline. The tour is projected to pull out $120 million from North America before it turns international early next year.
Conversely, Cher's camp diligently reported results from her Clear Channel Entertainment-produced 2002 tour, and the results have been impressive. The lengthy Farewell Tour is one of the top few treks in the world, with grosses totaling $67.6 million for the year. Cher will extend the tour indefinitely into next year.
Billy Joel and Elton John are again one of the top performers of the year, with 34 arena dates that grossed $66 million. The tour was promoted in each market by CCE, and plans call for more dates in 2003. Meanwhile, more people saw Dave Matthews Band this year than any other act on the planet, with some 1.4 million passing through the gates to the tune of $52.8 million, even with no stadiums on the route.
Under the radar in the face of other more high-profile tours were outings by Neil Diamond ($52.2 million), Aerosmith ($36.3 million), the Eagles ($34.9 million), Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young ($34.9 million), and Jimmy Buffett ($27.7 million). And in a tour often marked by cancellations, postponements, and rescheduling, Creed still managed to get in more than 80 shows, moving into the big leagues of rock touring in the process with $37.3 million and 886,974 attendance, enough for the band to crack the Bilboard Boxscore top-10 for the first time.
Other tours of note included Britney Spears ($43.7 million), 'N Sync ($33 million), the Who ($28.6 million), Barry Manilow ($23.9 million), Bruce Springsteen & the E Street Band ($22.2 million), and Blink-182/Green Day ($20 million). Ozzfest was the lone festival tour among the top-25, grossing $24.5 million.
As the top-grossing country artist, Kenny Chesney earned $22.7 million, followed by Toby Keith ($21.3 million) George Strait ($19.6 million), Alan Jackson ($18.8 million), and Brooks & Dunn ($19.5 million).
Visit Billboard.com's "2002: The Year In Music" section on tomorrow (Dec. 20) for more details on the year in touring.
Nobody can with the "Voodoo Lounge Tour"
McCartney $ 98.8
Stones $ 90
The Stones play theathers and reaches $90 million. Is impresive!!!
|
|
|
| jb |
How is this possible? We played to more peopleat higher prices?
[Edited by jb] |
|
|
| Factory Girl |
The Stones' Licks Tour IS NOT OVER. They're on a X-mas break. Billboard has to wait for the Stones' tour to end, before calculating the tour proceeds. What kind of idiots work for Billboard?
And, when the Stones tour ends, their proceeds will surpass McCartney's proceeds. McCartney is a WIMP-LING. |
|
|
| jb |
This has to based on Macca playing more shows..it just doesn't make sense... |
|
|
| Factory Girl |
The Stones only charged $50 per tic. for club shows. MAcca played no clubs, and charged $200-$250 for arenas. I don't think he played any stadiums. |
|
|
| jb |
Right..but the 8 stadium shows more than made up the difference....we must have played less dates...although I always questioned why Cohl never reported figures. |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
jb wrote:
This has to based on Macca playing more shows..it just doesn't make sense...
McCartney's tour started April 11 and had a running start
of 26 more shows. |
|
|
| F505 |
How much bands earn on tour doesn't mean anything. Says nothing about quality. Totally uninteresting. |
|
|
| TheSavageYoungXyzzy |
This is the total estimate for The Stones so far, not taking into account a lot of factors.
They still have more shows added and a possibility of higher sales on the second leg.
However, based on the deadline, it might just be that the Stones are straddling the time-line for the fiscal years. McCartney's shows were all in 2002, and he sold out close to every one of them. The Stones's shows will straddle 2002-3, I guess.
Good for McCartney. If he was playing like crap or even playing crappy songs well, I'd say screw 'em. But he did a damn good job this tour.
And great for the Stones, too! My guess is when all is said and done with the figures and the financial wrangling and so forth for the 2002 year they'll make about as much as our buddy Sir Lansbury.
-tSYX --- Ain't no use in cryin'... |
|
|
| Boomhauer |
WGAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????????
|
|
|
| Street Fighting Man |
Pretty funny that Cher's "farewell" tour is going on indefinitely! Guess it's tough to walk away. |
|
|
| gimmekeef |
I believe Cohl and Jagger have kept figures secret because they are much higher than Billboard etc figure.The stadiums alone make up the difference with Pauly's little pablum tour.Think the Stones want to keep the focus on the music not the higher ticket prices this time.You do the math it's gotta be more than $90 mil anyway you count it and there may be still more shows added..(PLEASE)!!! |
|
|
| lucasd4 |
quote:
jb wrote:
How is this possible? We played to more peopleat higher prices?
[Edited by jb]
Did you even read the article??? Every show of Paul's tour was in 2002, so it WAS the highest grossest tour of the CURRENT year...HELLO...earth to JB...the Stones tour is NOT OVER yet...what matters is the final numbers for the respective tours....IF you bothered to read the article, you would've seen that they estimate the Stones North American tour to gross nearly 120 million by the time it ends in February...Paul's North American tour grossed around 100 million...so, who will have the highest grossing tour when all it said and done??? Again, Paul's 100 million was grossed in fiscal year 2002...the Stones' numbers will reflect shows in 2002 and 2003...read the damn article, man |
|
CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]