Biggest Grossing Tours Of All Time

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
More ignorance from a member of the U2 brigade.

I'm not ignorant, I just don't get your logic.
Muse played theatres in Chile, Argentinia and Brasil 2 years and 4 months before tickets went on sale for U2's South American tour, which sold out quickly. Here's what Muse did in Sao Paulo back then.

Muse
HSBC Brasil
Sao Paulo, Brazil
July 31, 2008
$225,192
3,629 /
4,400
1 /
0
$96.36, $59.26
Evenpro/Water Brother/Mondo Entretenimento

They weren't even popular enough to sell out a theatre in Sao Paulo in 2008. They increased their popularity after The Resistance was relased, no doubt about that. But how could they have possibly increased their demand level in South America so much within 2 years and 4 months, that they were able to contribute significantly to enormous gross figures like $33 million and $20 million? South America is one of U2s strongest markets, in fact, they don't need anyone to open for them there.

Same for Interpol. I can't believe you actually think Interpol has ANY impact on ticket sales in Chicago (or anywhere else). Here's what they grossed in Chicago this year.

Interpol, School of Seven Bells Riviera Theatre
Chicago, Ill.
Feb. 12, 2011
$72,500
2,500 /
2,500
1 /
1
$29
Jam Productions

U2 will probably gross close to $7 million with an average ticket price of $102 (based on how they did in 2009). In Chicago, Interpol on their own is able to gross 1% of what the 360° show will gross in the same market. So even if we assume that all of the people Interpol can draw on their own will visit the U2 concert (which is not going to happen, because Interpol will only play 10 songs and the average ticket price will be $102 and not $29), their contribution to ticket sales in Chicago is absolutely irrelevant.
 
I'm not ignorant, I just don't get your logic.

What logic????
This guy has been proven wrong countless times and yet, he won´t give up. Sure, even a two year old child would realize his lame and ridiculous arguments don´t hold any water.
I for one love to see how Maoil and others repeatedly kick his ass so Moggio/no control, keep it coming! :D:D:D
 
This argument reminds me of two heavyweight sluggers. Neither guy giving an inch, battering each other to a pulp. Anyone else can type what they like it goes un-noticed as they focus on raining blows in on each other
 
It's not that I'm unable to. It's just I know you're going to lie, spin and manipulate WHATEVER stats I throw at you. And you've done so for SIX YEARS. So without surprise and once again, you've low-balled your estimations regarding other artists, and especially in this case, The Stones.

You claimed if the Rolling Stones "had strategically scheduled" A Bigger Bang in Europe, that they would have grossed over $300 million instead of just $216 million.

Now are we to assume you just pulled that figure out of your ass, or did it come from some formula and careful consideration of the known facts?

Live Nation had two legs to work with in Europe on A Bigger Bang, and your claiming that they failed to bring in $100 million in gross for the Stones because of the schedule they set up. Each leg was a year apart, summer 2006, then summer 2007.

You know Moggio, its ok to admit being careless with a statement, but if you really think the Stones could have grossed over $300 million on A Bigger Bang in Euorpe, please lay it out for everyone to see. I want to see how the biggest promoter in the world FAILED to bring in $100 million in gross for one of its top artist.

So lets see your numbers Moggio for gross and attendance in each market if they had followed U2's 360 schedule. I've shown you mine, lets see what you have. Otherwise, man up and admit you grossly overstated what the Stones could do in Europe.

It doesn't matter. The point is that the Australian leg of the PopMart tour was strategically scheduled, when you said it wasn't.

MOGGIO, you are claiming that U2 avoided New Zealand to boost attendance in Australia. So tell us, how many people from New Zealand travelled to Australia for the shows. If what you say is true, you should be able to give us an estimate.

2. Muse are not a theatre act in Chile and Argentina anymore. Currently, they're an ARENA draw.

Well, how can Muse be an arena act in Chile and Argentina when the largest venue they have played there on their own are theaters?

Also, it appears Muse is just a theater act in Brazil as well. Check out the following Boxscore:

Muse
HSBC Brasil
Sao Paulo, Brazil
July 31, 2008
$225,192
3,629 /
4,400
1 /
0
$96.36, $59.26
Evenpro/Water Brother/Mondo Entretenimento

LOL, HSBC is an arena, but the capacity was set very low! Yet, they still couldn't sellout. Their contribution to U2's tour in South America, is tiny, if anything at all. Were talking under 1%!
 
I'm not ignorant, I just don't get your logic.
Muse played theatres in Chile, Argentinia and Brasil 2 years and 4 months before tickets went on sale for U2's South American tour, which sold out quickly. Here's what Muse did in Sao Paulo back then.

Muse
HSBC Brasil
Sao Paulo, Brazil
July 31, 2008
$225,192
3,629 /
4,400
1 /
0
$96.36, $59.26
Evenpro/Water Brother/Mondo Entretenimento

They weren't even popular enough to sell out a theatre in Sao Paulo in 2008. They increased their popularity after The Resistance was relased, no doubt about that. But how could they have possibly increased their demand level in South America so much within 2 years and 4 months, that they were able to contribute significantly to enormous gross figures like $33 million and $20 million? South America is one of U2s strongest markets, in fact, they don't need anyone to open for them there.

You're using an OUTDATED boxscore. The FACT is Muse's draw HAS increased several times more from what it was in 2007 or even 2008 everywhere on the planet, including South America. I've gone over this THOROUGHLY in this thread. How you can't see that, is beyond me...

Same for Interpol. I can't believe you actually think Interpol has ANY impact on ticket sales in Chicago (or anywhere else). Here's what they grossed in Chicago this year.

Interpol, School of Seven Bells Riviera Theatre
Chicago, Ill.
Feb. 12, 2011
$72,500
2,500 /
2,500
1 /
1
$29
Jam Productions

U2 will probably gross close to $7 million with an average ticket price of $102 (based on how they did in 2009). In Chicago, Interpol on their own is able to gross 1% of what the 360° show will gross in the same market. So even if we assume that all of the people Interpol can draw on their own will visit the U2 concert (which is not going to happen, because Interpol will only play 10 songs and the average ticket price will be $102 and not $29), their contribution to ticket sales in Chicago is absolutely irrelevant.

Again, there was some impact. Regardless, The Stones are still a larger draw in Chicago than U2.
 
What logic????
This guy has been proven wrong countless times and yet, he won´t give up. Sure, even a two year old child would realize his lame and ridiculous arguments don´t hold any water.
I for one love to see how Maoil and others repeatedly kick his ass so Moggio/no control, keep it coming! :D:D:D

You must not be reading this thread? Because that hasn't happened even ONCE. :lol:
 
You claimed if the Rolling Stones "had strategically scheduled" A Bigger Bang in Europe, that they would have grossed over $300 million instead of just $216 million.

Now are we to assume you just pulled that figure out of your ass, or did it come from some formula and careful consideration of the known facts?

Live Nation had two legs to work with in Europe on A Bigger Bang, and your claiming that they failed to bring in $100 million in gross for the Stones because of the schedule they set up. Each leg was a year apart, summer 2006, then summer 2007.

You know Moggio, its ok to admit being careless with a statement, but if you really think the Stones could have grossed over $300 million on A Bigger Bang in Euorpe, please lay it out for everyone to see. I want to see how the biggest promoter in the world FAILED to bring in $100 million in gross for one of its top artist.

So lets see your numbers Moggio for gross and attendance in each market if they had followed U2's 360 schedule. I've shown you mine, lets see what you have. Otherwise, man up and admit you grossly overstated what the Stones could do in Europe.

Live Nation DID NOT "fail" to bring in $100 million in the UK and Europe for The Stones in 2006 and 2007. AGAIN, BEFORE 2009 AND THE 360 TOUR STARTED, STRATEGIC SCHEDULING HAD NEVER BEEN UTILIZED ON THIS SCALE. And like I said, it's not that I'm unable to give you a market by market estimate. It's just I know you're going to lie, spin and manipulate WHATEVER stats I throw at you. And you've done so for SIX YEARS. So without surprise and once again, you've low-balled your estimations regarding other artists, and especially in this case, The Stones.

Also, you haven't even proven ONE of my points in this thread wrong. However, I've easily KILLED just about every one of your points in this laughing stock of a debate. Just GIVE IT UP...and remember one thing:

THE ROLLING STONES ARE STILL THE LARGEST DRAWING ACTIVE BAND IN THE WORLD. And U2 is second place.


MOGGIO, you are claiming that U2 avoided New Zealand to boost attendance in Australia. So tell us, how many people from New Zealand travelled to Australia for the shows. If what you say is true, you should be able to give us an estimate.

Why does it matter how many people traveled to Australia from New Zealand to see them on the PopMart tour? The FACT is people DID. And the point is YOU'RE WRONG when you said they didn't strategically schedule this particular leg.

Well, how can Muse be an arena act in Chile and Argentina when the largest venue they have played there on their own are theaters?

Also, it appears Muse is just a theater act in Brazil as well. Check out the following Boxscore:

Muse
HSBC Brasil
Sao Paulo, Brazil
July 31, 2008
$225,192
3,629 /
4,400
1 /
0
$96.36, $59.26
Evenpro/Water Brother/Mondo Entretenimento

LOL, HSBC is an arena, but the capacity was set very low! Yet, they still couldn't sellout. Their contribution to U2's tour in South America, is tiny, if anything at all. Were talking under 1%!

Once again, you're using an OUTDATED boxscore. The FACT is Muse's draw HAS increased several times more from what it was in 2007 or even 2008 everywhere on the planet, including South America. I've gone over this THOROUGHLY in this thread. How you can't see that, is beyond me...:rolleyes:
 
This argument reminds me of two heavyweight sluggers. Neither guy giving an inch, battering each other to a pulp. Anyone else can type what they like it goes un-noticed as they focus on raining blows in on each other

Actually, there is a perfect example of the Mogi/Maili "heavyweight fight". It comes from Monty Python's Search for the Grail classic.

Moggio is the black knight guarding the bridge and Mailio is Arthur, King of the Brits, asking Moggio to step aside and let him move across. Moggio says "no, I have to kill you", and proceeds to engage Mailio in a sword fight.

Moggio gets his arm cut off, but keeps going. "It's just a flesh wound". Loses another arm, and says "Is that all you got"?

Mailio then cuts of both Moggio's legs, but Moggio just keeps bringing it, absurd as it is. In the movie, it was hilarious and a classic scene. As it has played out on this forum, it's been funny for a while, but it's losing some of it's comedic value. Part of me want Malio just to ride away on his coconut horse, leaving Moggio to die, but without a new album yet, guess this form of entertainment will have to do...

Moggio also fits the part of the French guy who keeps denying Arthur entrance into the castle...you know, the guy screaming "I fart in your general direction" and argues with his French buddy about whether or not a swallow could carry a coconut...or two swallows...or an African swallow. Since about 10 people played all the parts in that movie, it's the perfect parallel.

Moggio is the knight w/o arms and legs, yet still wants to fight...yet he's also the French guy guarding the castle hurling idiotic insults and arguing over inane topics.

Mailio, you get to be Arthur, but I'm afraid I have to apologize for comparing you to anyone in that movie. They are all a bit off...but Moggio is so perfectly suited for the dark knight characther. Thanks to both of you for some funny stuff as we wait for chart information that is not tour related.
 
Live Nation DID NOT "fail" to bring in $100 million in the UK and Europe for The Stones in 2006 and 2007. AGAIN, BEFORE 2009 AND THE 360 TOUR STARTED, STRATEGIC SCHEDULING HAD NEVER BEEN UTILIZED ON THIS SCALE. And like I said, it's not that I'm unable to give you a market by market estimate. It's just I know you're going to lie, spin and manipulate WHATEVER stats I throw at you. And you've done so for SIX YEARS. So without surprise and once again, you've low-balled your estimations regarding other artists, and especially in this case, The Stones.

Also, you haven't even proven ONE of my points in this thread wrong. However, I've easily KILLED just about every one of your points in this laughing stock of a debate. Just GIVE IT UP...and remember one thing:

THE ROLLING STONES ARE STILL THE LARGEST DRAWING ACTIVE BAND IN THE WORLD. And U2 is second place.

:[/COLOR][/FONT]



It appears that the reason you won't provide ANY estimates for the Stones A Bigger Bang Tour strategically scheduled like 360 is because you know that once you get into the details, it will reveal how absurd your wild claim of over $300 million for Europe really is.

Boasting about this and that and claiming this and that is easy. If your figure of over $300 million for Europe was a serious one, you should have done the calculations before hand which you could easily present here.

Why claim the Stones could have done over $300 million in Europe when you can't provide ANY evidence to back the claim up?

If your indeed here to provide knowledge and objectivity in this forum, why are you avoiding providing any evidence at all to back up this Wild claim?


Why does it matter how many people traveled to Australia from New Zealand to see them on the PopMart tour? The FACT is people DID. And the point is YOU'RE WRONG when you said they didn't strategically schedule this particular leg.

It matters because its your CLAIM that not playing New Zealand significantly boosted attendance in Australia on POPMART. Since you claim your here to provide objectivity and facts, where is your estimate?


Once again, you're using an OUTDATED boxscore. The FACT is Muse's draw HAS increased several times more from what it was in 2007 or even 2008 everywhere on the planet, including South America. I've gone over this THOROUGHLY in this thread. How you can't see that, is beyond me

Well, Mr. Objectivity, where is your evidence that Muse's popular increased so much since 2008, that they have become an arena act in Brazil, Argentina, and Chile? Being an arena act on some other continent is irrelevant to whether an artist is an arena act in South America. Why would an arena act in South America, not play any arena's if they could?

I looked at the Brazilian top 10 and the Argentinian top 10 and could not find Muse's Resistence album in either during 2009.
 
Just so someone doesnt get on their high horse and believe Interpol to be a huge influence on U2's sales when they open for them..lol here is todays boxscore for them..


Interpol
Austin Music Hall
Austin Texas
April 21, 2011
Gross-$61,180
Attendance-1,748/3,224
 
robbrecon72 said:
Just so someone doesnt get on their high horse and believe Interpol to be a huge influence on U2's sales when they open for them..lol here is todays boxscore for them..

Interpol
Austin Music Hall
Austin Texas
April 21, 2011
Gross-$61,180
Attendance-1,748/3,224

Just further proof that the argument that 360 openers account for 10% of the tour gross is a joke.
 
Just further proof that the argument that 360 openers account for 10% of the tour gross is a joke.

I just recently saw this argument.

If anyone seriously thinks that a person will pay $100+ for a 30 minute performance for an opening band is crazy.

U2 frequently choose artists that either blend with their general style, would be appreciated by their audience, or are an up and coming band. Some of these artists have had success. But rare would be the person who'd buy a ticket to a U2 concert for the opening band alone.

Second, even if 10% of the tickets were for this reason, why didn't the Stones do the same? What's stopping them?

In other words, logic is lacking all around.

The numbers are the facts. Interpretation is opinion.
 
I really, really hate to actually participate in this "argument", but there were plenty of people who bought tickets to see Jay-Z in NZ/Aus and then left once he finished. :shrug:
 
I really, really hate to actually participate in this "argument", but there were plenty of people who bought tickets to see Jay-Z in NZ/Aus and then left once he finished. :shrug:

Really, how many? How do you know they were Jay-Z fans? How do you know they actually left the stadium?
 
Because they were rocking out harder than I was to Jigga and then they got up and left and didn't come back......?

Did you confirm that they left the stadium or did you just see someone leave their seat and not come back to their seat? How many people did you see do these things? More importantly, how does any of that truely confirm that they would not of bought a ticket if Jay-Z were not on the bill. Could it be that you saw someone who was a fan of both and moved to a different area of the stadium to watch U2? Perhaps there was another reason unrelated to the concert itself that explained their absence form their seats.

Either way, its pure speculation, not hard fact.
 
cobl04 said:
I would get into this argument, but I've got some nosehairs to pluck. :wave:

I think the point Maoil is trying to make is that unless something is known/factual, there is no point talking about it like it is a fact. To make a blanket statement that 10% of people who went to a U2 show on this tour went for the opener is not a fact but an assumption or thought ( not a very good one IMO).
 
Moggio said:
1. I NEVER said there weren't smaller scales of strategic scheduling, genius. :rolleyes:

2. The concert business has NEVER seen a tour HEAVILY strategically scheduled like the 360 tour. You can make all the excuses in the world to try and show the hows and whys this type of scheduling hasn't been done before but the fact is, IT HASN'T. But by all means, if you can show me a world tour schedule before 2009 where virtually ALL markets played are HEAVILY strategically scheduled, THEN DO SO. :applaud:

3. I've given perfectly truthful and logical responses to your garbage above, pages ago. Yet you CONTINUE to ignore those responses and CONTINUE to post the same BS above. Why is that? :lol:

4. I NEVER said that ALL artists are separately bringing in 10% of the gross from the 360 tour (some more than that, some less than that). I meant COLLECTIVELY since it's beyond obvious that each artist is a different draw. :rolleyes:

5. It IS a FACT that The Rolling Stones are still the largest drawing active band in the world, for reasons explicitly discussed in this very thread. But I don't expect someone like yourself to understand that, for more than obvious reasons as well. :lol:

6. Almost ALL of my predictions have been dead on or close to, considering the current conditions. But of course, you're not knowledgeable in this area, yet you still think you can throw your weight around for some reason? :lol:

7. If you've been paying attention, everyone here should know by now, that U2's openers have significantly contributed to the overall gross of the 360 tour. And COLLECTIVELY, that figure is about 10%. :rolleyes:

Your ignorance is astronomical.

1-You have said many times that strategic scheduling was a new business model. I understand that as you get proven wrong you change your story, so it's no surprise that now you are saying there are "scales" of strategic scheduling LOL

2-By all means, if you can show me an an artist that has toured with a 300 ft stage in a 360 configuration in stadiums only, please do so.....

3-You're logic is embarrassing and has been proven incorrect both here and on the UKMIX forum.

4-So then some of U2's openers have brought in 15-20%?? Wow, 10,000 people willing to pay 3x the ticket price to hear 1/2 the songs....yep, that's logical LOL LOL

5-confusing facts with opinions/theories still I see

6-almost all of your predictions have been wrong or changed based on several of your excuses for U2 being as successful as they have been.

After seeing your predictions from the Vertigo tour that Maiol provided, I see that you have never really known anything about the concert business after all. But what do I know, I'm just a "typical U2 fan". Why don't you go back to the UKMIX forum where you were getting torn apart by both U2 and non-U2 fans alike.
 
last time i showed ticket results on here they looked like this..

Singles-122
sold out-103

multiples-57

now they look like this..

singles-129
sold out-105
multiples-48

that's with the additional 9 shows. last year there was 30 multiples left with 3 weeks before the first concert was supposed to start. there are 32 multiples left with the original 16 shows 3 weeks before the first concert in Denver this time around, so sales are really close to $100 million for the original 16.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom