The Rolling Stones can kiss my ass!!!

[cmb737]

One more...Portland. I just sold my Salt Lake tickets. I am hoping to see something I haven't yet, to feel something I haven't yet...

They are still my favorite band, and will give them the benefit of the doubt. My wife is trying to get to Oakland, but I am not going.

 

[ramblin rose]

One more...Portland. I just sold my Salt Lake tickets. I am hoping to see something I haven't yet, to feel something I haven't yet...

They are still my favorite band, and will give them the benefit of the doubt. My wife is trying to get to Oakland, but I am not going.

I hope it works out.

 

[neutral]

Reading the setlist comments on the torrent's thread for the Stones Fenway Park show is hilarious, I feel right at home.

 

[U2Man]

Am I the only in the world, besides Chizip and Ouizy, that understands what a critique is in reference to a thread that is in itself a critique?

No

 

[kellyahern]

Reading the setlist comments on the torrent's thread for the Stones Fenway Park show is hilarious, I feel right at home.

link please?

 

[cmb737]

oops..my bad..sorry U2Man!

 

[U2Man]

Reading the setlist comments on the torrent's thread for the Stones Fenway Park show is hilarious, I feel right at home.

Where do you read it, neutral? A link?

 

[U2@NYC]

I bet that fans are complaining about the setlist...

Am I right? Am I right?

Well, at least they do not have a Satisfaction x 2 to complain about...

 

[U2Man]

Well, at least they do not have a Satisfaction x 2 to complain about...

"I got Satisfaction twice tonight!!!!!"

 

[U2@NYC]

"I got Satisfaction twice tonight!!!!!"

I told you to behave...

 

[U2Man]

I told you to behave...

Anyone should be able to agree that Satisfaction twice in one night is much, much better than that Vertigo crap twice in one night!!!

 

[neutral]

It's here. http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=56626


A lot of the comments are a trainwreck.


And I don't have to moderate them

 

[U2@NYC]

Hey... Mick was in jail... he is a roughie, not like this softy Bono dude.

"Rock and Roll singer and songwriter Mick Jagger, was arrested for possession of marijuana in 1972. Jagger was fined and sentenced to serve time however, the terms were overturned."

Check out his mugshot:

 

[govikesU2]

The Stones are obviously still touring because they love to play live right? Then why is it necessary to charge 3-4 hundred dollars face value for a ticket. If U2 did that when they were 60 I wouldn't pay it because they would have become greedy old bastards trying to cash in when they've already made a trillion dollars anyway.

 

[U2Man]

Hey... Mick was in jail... he is a roughie, not like this softy Bono dude.

"Rock and Roll singer and songwriter Mick Jagger, was arrested for possession of marijuana in 1972. Jagger was fined and sentenced to serve time however, the terms were overturned."

Check out his mugshot:

Is there a similar pic of Adam somewhere?

 

[cmb737]

^ Govikes...Please correct me if I am wrong...but U2 routinely leads all comers when it comes to concert revenue.

They all tour for the money of it. You think anyone really can justify being away from home and family for two years because they like to play a song?

 

[U2Man]

The Stones are obviously still touring because they love to play live right? Then why is it necessary to charge 3-4 hundred dollars face value for a ticket.

Because it's fun AND business for them.

If U2 did that when they were 60 I wouldn't pay it because they would have become greedy old bastards trying to cash in when they've already made a trillion dollars anyway.

U2 are cashing in at the moment, even though they have made a trillion dollars already. Guess they are greedy middle-aged bastards????

 

[starvinmarvin]

Yes, it's a little odd that a U2 fan would accuse another band of charging too much money for tickets.

 

[Chizip]

good link to some setlist bitching

http://www.novogate.com/board/968/214742-4.html

 

[U2Man]

Yes, it's a little odd that a U2 fan would accuse another band of charging too much money for tickets.

It's ludicrous if you ask me. U2 would charge just as much as Rolling Stones if they were confident that they could get away with it.

 

[starvinmarvin]

It's ludicrous if you ask me. U2 would charge just as much as Rolling Stones if they were confident that they could get away with it.

Exactly. Ticket prices are all about supply and demand. Stones tickets are more expensive than U2 tickets, but that is because there is a bigger demand for them.

 

[U2@NYC]

good link to some setlist bitching

http://www.novogate.com/board/968/214742-4.html

These comments sound very familiar...

"I wouldn't say it blows per se. I'd say it's too short for the money for charging. If Brian Wilson can play for two-plus hours in his emotionally fragile state, then surely the Stones can muster the stamina - especially at the prices they're charging."

"Horrible, this tour is a bust.....Ok not a bust, but a dissapointing set........"

"Are they a Vegas act now? Fuck the lighting and play the tunes......."

"and not 1 tune, aside from Sat that is pre-69...man, I would never have thought they'd have so thoroughly distanced themselves from the glorious 60's....."

 

[ramblin rose]

I'm not sure about this assumption. I really think you're looking at different demographics. U2 is still trying to attrack younger crowds, the Stones couldn't care less about that.

If U2 charged what the Stones are charging I believe the shows would still sell out, but the majority of the crowd would be in their late 30's, 40's & 50's.

 

[U2@NYC]

BTW, who the hell designed a show with an empty field???

And this was the reason, apparently:

"They were forbidden to use the diamond due to future Red Sox games. All of the field seats and towers and boards were confined to the grass sections. The actual diamond was roped and fenced off for protection. "

Then why didn't they play somewhere else???

 

[Chizip]

It was the same way with the Bruce Springsteen show at Fenway

and in my opinion, i dont think U2 would be able to sell out stadiums at the prices the Stones are charging. there were reports of a few thousand empty seats at various shows on the European Leg already

but, I hope we wont ever have to find out for sure

 

[U2Man]

I'm not sure about this assumption. I really think you're looking at different demographics. U2 is still trying to attrack younger crowds, the Stones couldn't care less about that.

If U2 charged what the Stones are charging I believe the shows would still sell out, but the majority of the crowd would be in their late 30's, 40's & 50's.

You don't think young people are able to pay the ticket prices? Actually, I think many young people are prepared to pay more for a rock show ticket than many, um, more sensible and experienced people.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

BTW, who the hell designed a show with an empty field???

And this was the reason, apparently:

"They were forbidden to use the diamond due to future Red Sox games. All of the field seats and towers and boards were confined to the grass sections. The actual diamond was roped and fenced off for protection. "

Then why didn't they play somewhere else???

most baseball stadiums don't allow people on the infield durring concerts... thus another reason why most baseball stadiums don't have concerts.

the seating chart from springsteen at shea stadium...

again, no seats on the infield... but alas, if you look closely... no seats, but they did have shitters...

that's the most shit on the mets infield since carlos baerga was in town

 

[starvinmarvin]

You don't think young people are able to pay the ticket prices? Actually, I think many young people are prepared to pay more for a rock show ticket than many, um, more sensible and experienced people.

Yes!

I think there are a lot of U2 fans who feel threatened by the continuing success of the Stones. You hear all sorts of excuses "well, the Stones don't seel that many records," "ya, but The Stones charge more money for tickets," "but the Stones are too old," etc......

Don't try to tell me that U2 attracts a young crowd. I'm almost 30, and when I go to a U2 concert I am way younger than the average attendee. U2 concerts attract a lot of middle aged "professional" types, and these people can be incredibly lame. When the show started I rose to my feet and started cheering, at which time I was politely tapped on the shoulder and was asked by a 40 something couple if I could sit down. I just ignored them, and I was tapped a few more times - it was retarded. U2 attracts an older crowd, just take a look around.

 

[U2@NYC]

most baseball stadiums don't allow people on the infield durring concerts... thus another reason why most baseball stadiums don't have concerts.

Then why would you do a concert in a baseball stadium?

Sounds silly, and I am sure that, for the band, to look at an empty field it does not sound that appealing...

 

[ramblin rose]

Yes!

I think there are a lot of U2 fans who feel threatened by the continuing success of the Stones. You hear all sorts of excuses "well, the Stones don't seel that many records," "ya, but The Stones charge more money for tickets," "but the Stones are too old," etc......

Don't try to tell me that U2 attracts a young crowd. I'm almost 30, and when I go to a U2 concert I am way younger than the average attendee. U2 concerts attract a lot of middle aged "professional" types, and these people can be incredibly lame. When the show started I rose to my feet and started cheering, at which time I was politely tapped on the shoulder and was asked by a 40 something couple if I could sit down. I just ignored them, and I was tapped a few more times - it was retarded. U2 attracts an older crowd, just take a look around.

Huh, I guess we experienced different shows. I was mostly surrounded by teenagers and people in their early twenties who got most excited during HTDAAB songs, BD & Elevation.