Actually, Madonna and Barbara Streisand or closer to U2 and the Police in terms of gross rather than attendance. But neither of them is in the same league as U2, The Police, and the Rolling Stones. The only reason Maddona was able to play some stadiums on her recent tour in some markets was because she had not actually played a show in those markets since the 1980s despite having a continuous active career all those years.
Biggest Grossing Tours Of All Time
- Thread starter STING2
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Actually, Madonna and Barbara Streisand or closer to U2 and the Police in terms of gross rather than attendance. But neither of them is in the same league as U2, The Police, and the Rolling Stones. The only reason Maddona was able to play some stadiums on her recent tour in some markets was because she had not actually played a show in those markets since the 1980s despite having a continuous active career all those years.
That's definitely not true.
This summer, Madonna just grossed over $116 million USD from only 17 UK/European shows. That works out to be nearly $7 million per show.
And recently, in 2006-2007, Barbra Streisand grossed nearly $95 million USD from only 27 shows worldwide. In North America, from only 18 shows, she grossed over $76 million and averaged over $4.2 million per show.
U2, The Police & The Rolling Stones can't do that.
Now imagine how high their overall grosses would be if Madonna & Streisand did 100+ show tours like many other artists...
Whatever. The point is, overall, she's a larger draw than U2, The Police & The Rolling Stones are.
vaz02
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
The revenue is only high because demand was greater than supply, they could command high ticket prices solely on that aspect. Dont you know how the industry works ?
Your forgetting that most of Barbara Streisand's concerts did not sellout, or if they did, it was only because the venue was set up for a lower capacity.
With both Barbara Streisand and Madonna, when you reduce the number of shows that are available in the market, you increase the demand for the few that remain. If Madonna or Barbara Streisand attempted to play as many shows as U2, The Police or the Rolling Stones, they would not be able to sell most of them out and would not be able to match the gross seen by those three artist. Its economics 101.
Its not to see that Barbara and Madonna are not popular, they are very popular, but are just not on the same level as U2, Stones, and Police.
You obviously don't.
It doesn't matter. Attendance can be adjusted based on what the ticket prices and venue capacity are set at, in relation to what the gross is. Example:
~ If market A's gross is $1 million and the average ticket price is $100, then 10,000 tickets will be sold
~ If market A's gross is $1 million and the average ticket price is $50, then 20,000 tickets will be sold
~ If market A's gross is $1 million and the average ticket price is $25, then 40,000 tickets will be sold
~ If market A's gross is $1 million and the average ticket price is $12.50, then 80,000 tickets will be sold
Etc., etc., etc.
She grossed more. Therefore, she is the larger draw. It's pretty simple.
Not necessarily.
I don’t know how you could say that based on the fact that a) Madonna outgrossed them in virtually all markets in the UK/Europe and will do the same this fall in North America & South America in the winter. And since b) Barbra only played 27 shows in major markets but she grossed more than U2, The Police & The Stones did in almost all of those markets. So it's incredibly easy and obvious to see that if she played just as many shows as U2, The Police or The Stones, she would end up with an overall higher grossing tour than the aforementioned artist(s).
Promoters schedule tours based on how many shows the artist(s) in question want to play and then they calculate demand based on a few main formulas relating to album sales. They then schedule the tour according to the above in order to make the most $$$ possible. Promoters already know what the gross is going to be before tickets are put on sale in each market. They're not going to risk spending tens of thousands of dollars booking venues, setting up production, etc., if they weren't sure what demand was...
vaz02
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
So you think if supply was greater than demand ticket prices would be just as high ?
Demand was met. That's my point.
vaz02
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
So how can they possibly be a bigger draw if they only played 27 shows ?
genesis199125
The Fly
so moggio, are you saying madonna could possibly hold sold-out stadium shows in Tennessee and Montana like the Rolling Stones have? I highly doubt it.
Barbra played 27 shows on her 2006-2007 tour. This year, Madonna will be playing around double that amount of shows.
I really can't believe you're still on this. The stats clearly show that Madonna & Streisand outgrossed U2, The Police & The Stones in most comparable MAJOR markets. So, do you really think that if Streisand & Madonna played as many shows worldwide as U2, The Police & The Stones have per tour, that they wouldn't outgross them in most other major & secondary markets?
Not necessarily in those particular markets. But what I am saying is that Madonna & Barbra Streisand can outgross U2, The Police & The Stones, overall.
If U2 played 10 concerts they could charge 10 thousand for a ticket and they would all sell out. Its called supply and demand, very simple economics. U2 could outdraw Madonna very easily in every market around the world with the same ticket prices. The Rolling Stones are right now the only band that is able to draw the same kind of numbers as U2.
If ABBA and Led Zeppelin came back they would be on the same level as U2 but Madonna is not on that level. Shes popular but shes not the biggest live draw around.
If ABBA and Led Zeppelin came back they would be on the same level as U2 but Madonna is not on that level. Shes popular but shes not the biggest live draw around.
Not necessarily. It depends on which venue & market you're talking about.
The facts show that to be wrong.
If ABBA toured, they would do very well. But if Led Zeppelin toured again, they would crush U2.
Again, the facts show that to be wrong.
What facts the facts are that the Vertigo Tour grossed 360 million dollars. The Bigger Bang Tour grossed 558 million dollars. Madonna has grossed 195 million on her Confessions Tour. This is not even close in numbers and yes she did play less shows but it is not to be assumed that she would have still been drawing the same type of crowds in other markets, it is likely the demand was met.
I would challenge Madonna to tour the world with exactly the same ticket prices as U2 has and play the same venues and see who would win the battle. I would put my money on the 4 Irish legends.
Extrapolating information and making assumptions isnt good enough until she grosses more then U2 on a tour, she hasnt done the level of business as them. As much as I hate The Rolling Stones I admit they can draw a crowd all around the world and have been the only competition in pure numbers for about the last 20 years.
U2 may be able to do 600-700 million next tour depending on how well the album is recieved and if they play all out stadiums all around the world. Madonna couldnt do that in her dreams.
I would challenge Madonna to tour the world with exactly the same ticket prices as U2 has and play the same venues and see who would win the battle. I would put my money on the 4 Irish legends.
Extrapolating information and making assumptions isnt good enough until she grosses more then U2 on a tour, she hasnt done the level of business as them. As much as I hate The Rolling Stones I admit they can draw a crowd all around the world and have been the only competition in pure numbers for about the last 20 years.
U2 may be able to do 600-700 million next tour depending on how well the album is recieved and if they play all out stadiums all around the world. Madonna couldnt do that in her dreams.
MOGGIO used to go under the username NOCONTROL, the anti-U2 troll. If you look up many of his posts under the username NOCONTROL, you will see what I mean.
Ironically, many of his current statements about Madonna and Streisand contradict many of his prior statements about the Rolling Stones on the UKMIX FORUM website.
Ironically, many of his current statements about Madonna and Streisand contradict many of his prior statements about the Rolling Stones on the UKMIX FORUM website.
Not necessarily. It depends on which venue & market you're talking about.
The facts show that to be wrong.
If ABBA toured, they would do very well. But if Led Zeppelin toured again, they would crush U2.
Again, the facts show that to be wrong.
Do you realize the Rolling Stones gross of $558 million dollars on their last tour is more than Madonna has grossed on ALL HER TOURS combined!?
The industry determines the biggest tours in the world by Total GROSS, NOT average gross per show. Any artist can artificially drive up their total gross per show by playing a limited number of shows as Madonna is doing.
The following are the 8 biggest tours ever in history:
1. Rolling Stones "A Bigger Bang Tour" 2005-2006 $558 million
2. U2 "Vertigo Tour" 2005-2006 $389 million
3. The Police "Tour" 2007-2008 $358 million
4. Rolling Stones "Bridges To Babylon/No Security Tour" 1997-1999 $339 million
5. Rolling Stones "Voodoo Lounge Tour " 1994-1995 $319 million
6. Rolling Stones "Licks Tour" 2002-2003 $300 million
7. Bruce Springsteen "Rising Tour" 2002-2003 $238 million
8. Bon Jovi "Tour 2007-2008" $207 million
Its unlikely Madonna will break the $300 million dollar mark on the new tour. Several of Madonna's shows in Europe had attendance figures well below full capacity, and one show in Spain did not even sellout the listed capacity. This shows the tour in Europe was reaching peak figures despite the limited number of shows.
This summer, Madonna just grossed over $116 million from 17 stadium shows in the UK/Europe. Last night, she just started the North American leg, where she'll be grossing roughly $100 million. In December, she'll be playing 10 South American stadium shows, including 4 nights at River Plate Stadium in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Overall, Madonna's Sticky & Sweet world tour will gross well over $250 million, from only 58 shows.
U2 can't do that.
She has already won the battle in most markets both have played in. Do you want me to post her boxscores? She never tours for more than 4 months. But if she embarked on a 100+ show tour, we both know what the outcome would be...
Considering the amount of shows they play per tour, U2 won't be able to gross that amount until 2013, at the earliest. U2's next tour next year will gross $375 million, since I believe they'll only be playing in North America & the UK/Europe. However, if they tour elsewhere (South America, Australia, New Zealand & Japan), then they'll gross around $475 million.
Do you realize that The Stones play roughly 2-3x as many shows per tour as Madonna does?
Stop spinning the facts.
I never said it didn't.
That's not necessarily true. It depends on several factors. You know that. Stop spinning the facts.
Anyways, Madonna has outgrossed U2 in the vast majority of markets worldwide that both have played. Period.
This summer, Madonna just grossed over $116 million from 17 stadium shows in the UK/Europe. Last night, she just started the North American leg, where she'll be grossing roughly $100 million. In December, she'll be playing 10 South American stadium shows, including 4 nights at River Plate Stadium in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Overall, Madonna's Sticky & Sweet world tour will gross well over $250 million, from only 58 shows.
U2 can't do that.
U2 could easily play a series of 58 shows that would outgross Madonna's current 58 show tour. So could the Stones, and maybe even the Police if you took their top 58 grosses from the re-union tour, or if they had actually limited their tour to just 58 shows.
If that were the case, every show should be soldout to full capacity and in a stadium. Is that the case with this tour? Not at all. The fact is, many of the shows in Europe did not reach full capacity in attendance, and one did not even sellout. That shows she was close to meeting demand in Europe. In North America, despite the small number of shows, she is mainly playing arena's. Yes, she is playing a few stadiums in North America, but primarily in markets she has not played in decades like Vancouver.
She's only playing 58 shows.
Once again, attendance doesn't matter when judging concert demand, as it can be adjusted based on what the ticket prices and venue capacity are set at. GROSS is what is the ultimate judge. You know that. And Madonna GROSSED more than U2 did in most markets both have played in.
Stop spinning the facts.
Do you realize that the number of shows Madonna has played in her entire career far exceeds the number of shows the Rolling Stones played on the A Bigger Bang Tour? Yet, A Bigger Bang Tour has grossed more than all of her tours combined.
If your only counting single shows, that might be the case, but not if your counting the full number of shows U2 played in the European markets in 2005. Again, she only did 17 shows, and many of these shows did not fully sellout. U2 did $155 million from 32 shows that each soldout the day they went on sale. Average attendance on the tour was over 62,000 per night.
How many markets in North America has Madonna outgrossed U2?
If that were the case, she would have one of the top tours, but she does not. Arthur Fogal who promotes both would be the first to say that U2 are the bigger concert draw.
Attendance is a key factor in concert demand because it can indicate whether an artist actually met demand or clearly did not meet demand. When an artist does not sellout a venue or barely sellout a venue just before the show, that shows that demand was basically met. When an artist rapidly sells out a venue on the day of sale, that shows there is plenty of demand that has not been met.
If that was true and more money could be made, then why don't U2, The Stones or The Police do that, since Madonna is clearly the larger grossing act otherwise?
Once again, Madonna GROSSES more than U2 in most markets both have played in. GROSS is what concert demand is judged on. You've said that yourself. Attendance has no place here in terms of judging demand, based on factors I've already gone over now several times. You can't deny that. So stop denying that.
Stop spinning the facts.
Give me a break. In terms of CURRENT demand, concert tours aren't based on that.
Stop spinning the facts.
If Madonna was the larger grossing act, she would be ahead of the Stones and U2 in the top grossing tours. She is not.
If you look at what U2 did on their last tour, and what Madonna just did on her recent tour in Europe, there is no comparison. 32 soldout shows on the day of sale, compared to 17 shows that did not completely sellout. The result, $117 million for Madonna, $155 million for U2. Also the U2 figure would be a little higher now when adjusted for inflation.
Give me a break. In terms of CURRENT demand, concert tours aren't based on that.
Stop spinning the facts.
Well, NOCONTROL, you remember the last time you came in here and did this?
- Status
Similar threads
