U2Soar
War Child
Hi EP And America! Thanks! A friend was over the other night and asked for my favourite U2 song. I said there was too many but I ended playing EP And America 
Make your case for a "stadium" tour.
- Thread starter martha
- 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.
I think its best all round if U2 go full out and tour stadiums again.
By doing say one night in a stadium in respect to three in an arena it gives the fans and the band a better deal. Playing less dates gives the band more time to recover, which judging by Bono's voice on the prior tour is needed. But also the monotony of playing the same old arenas every night is lost, as the surroundings constantly change. Stadia, domes, showgrounds etc.
The spectacle of a stadium gig is far superior to arenas. There is more space and capital from the sales to put on such shows like Popmart and ZooTV. Elevation was quite sparse in comparison to those mega tours.
Also by playing stadia the band can tour South America and Asia Pacific whicih is fair on the fans.
By doing say one night in a stadium in respect to three in an arena it gives the fans and the band a better deal. Playing less dates gives the band more time to recover, which judging by Bono's voice on the prior tour is needed. But also the monotony of playing the same old arenas every night is lost, as the surroundings constantly change. Stadia, domes, showgrounds etc.
The spectacle of a stadium gig is far superior to arenas. There is more space and capital from the sales to put on such shows like Popmart and ZooTV. Elevation was quite sparse in comparison to those mega tours.
Also by playing stadia the band can tour South America and Asia Pacific whicih is fair on the fans.
OP
OP
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Well, lots of participation, lots of wishful thinking, lots of speculation, but really, no hard evidence to back the claims of a stadium tour this time. A few cryptic allusions to evidence, but nothing concrete.
Time will tell.
Time will tell.
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
LOL, denial, is an ugly thing. What are you looking for? Bono announcing it?? Hmm, I guess that would just be verbal speculation by Bono also. So I guess it would take the stage rolling into the stadium and tickets being printed before you will believe it.
OK, I will play, what is YOUR concrete evidence that they WONT play stadiums??? I havent even heard any semi rumors that they will only do an arena only tour?? While stadiums have been talked about since 2002.
AGAIN, nothing is concrete yet. Stadiums are definately being discussed. Europe and some other countries will see stadium shows for sure. N. America is also likely to see some. LOL, I have never seen a fan so against U2 playing live. Who cares where they play, just as long as they play. As I said before some of the U2 stadium shows I have seen were some of the best shows I have ever seen period.
Why does it really even matter?? 99% dont really care that much as long as U2 is going to play. Sure some would prefer arenas over stadiums (personally I like aspects of both). But you are probebly one of the few that would actually just skip seeing them for the sole reason they are playing a stadium. Based on what you have posted it is probebly a good idea that you do. Because even if you did go to a stadium show, you would have such a bad attitude about it that there is no way you would enjoy it. Its really sad in a way because I think you missed out on two great tours because of your stadium hatred.
OK, I will play, what is YOUR concrete evidence that they WONT play stadiums??? I havent even heard any semi rumors that they will only do an arena only tour?? While stadiums have been talked about since 2002.
AGAIN, nothing is concrete yet. Stadiums are definately being discussed. Europe and some other countries will see stadium shows for sure. N. America is also likely to see some. LOL, I have never seen a fan so against U2 playing live. Who cares where they play, just as long as they play. As I said before some of the U2 stadium shows I have seen were some of the best shows I have ever seen period.
Why does it really even matter?? 99% dont really care that much as long as U2 is going to play. Sure some would prefer arenas over stadiums (personally I like aspects of both). But you are probebly one of the few that would actually just skip seeing them for the sole reason they are playing a stadium. Based on what you have posted it is probebly a good idea that you do. Because even if you did go to a stadium show, you would have such a bad attitude about it that there is no way you would enjoy it. Its really sad in a way because I think you missed out on two great tours because of your stadium hatred.
Last edited:
Martha,
What hard evidence do you have to back up a claim that there will be NO stadium tour?
I suppose to answer the question for any artist of whether they will do a stadium tour is:
1. Can they do it? Are they popular enough? Can they attract a large enough crowd to pay for the cost and make sense of having a Stadium show?
These questions are easily answered by simply looking at the statistics of what the band did on their last tour, in terms of venues played : attendence : gross , and how well their latest album has sold. I have all the statistics for U2 in regards to these factors and based on them, they can easily play Stadiums through out most cities in Europe, South America, Canada, and in a large number of cities in the USA, Australia and Japan.
The lowest point of U2s popularity since the release of the Joshua Tree was the POP album and POPMART tour. The POPMART tour despite slim attendence on many dates is currently the third highest Grossing Stadium tour in World History with a Gross of $171 million. Over 3,900,000 people saw the 93 shows of the POPMART tour worldwide. That is an average of 42,000 per show.
The POP album itself sold over 5.5 million copies in 1997 worldwide and was one of the 20 biggest selling albums of the year worldwide in 1997.
When those are your low points, the ability to do a stadium tour is pretty much a given.
Here are the reasons U2 might decide not to play stadiums:
Playing Arena's takes less than a 1/3 the road crew and equipment. From a logistical standpoint it is easier and there are often more venue's that can be played, especially considering the smaller towns. Weather is not a factor. Go on the road any time of year anywhere and its no problem. Your always going to make more money per ticket sold in an Arena than a Stadium. The number of seats available is much smaller, driving up demand, which drives up price. Arena shows cost much less. The Profit you make from each ticket sold in an arena, is much greater than that in a stadium.
That being said, the main reason to play a stadium anywhere, is to avoid having to play multiple arena shows in one market in order to meet demand. In addition, the size and spectical of the stage show offers an "effect" not found in Arena shows. Then there is the crowd, 40,000 or 50,000 people singing together is cool to see.
What hard evidence do you have to back up a claim that there will be NO stadium tour?
I suppose to answer the question for any artist of whether they will do a stadium tour is:
1. Can they do it? Are they popular enough? Can they attract a large enough crowd to pay for the cost and make sense of having a Stadium show?
These questions are easily answered by simply looking at the statistics of what the band did on their last tour, in terms of venues played : attendence : gross , and how well their latest album has sold. I have all the statistics for U2 in regards to these factors and based on them, they can easily play Stadiums through out most cities in Europe, South America, Canada, and in a large number of cities in the USA, Australia and Japan.
The lowest point of U2s popularity since the release of the Joshua Tree was the POP album and POPMART tour. The POPMART tour despite slim attendence on many dates is currently the third highest Grossing Stadium tour in World History with a Gross of $171 million. Over 3,900,000 people saw the 93 shows of the POPMART tour worldwide. That is an average of 42,000 per show.
The POP album itself sold over 5.5 million copies in 1997 worldwide and was one of the 20 biggest selling albums of the year worldwide in 1997.
When those are your low points, the ability to do a stadium tour is pretty much a given.
Here are the reasons U2 might decide not to play stadiums:
Playing Arena's takes less than a 1/3 the road crew and equipment. From a logistical standpoint it is easier and there are often more venue's that can be played, especially considering the smaller towns. Weather is not a factor. Go on the road any time of year anywhere and its no problem. Your always going to make more money per ticket sold in an Arena than a Stadium. The number of seats available is much smaller, driving up demand, which drives up price. Arena shows cost much less. The Profit you make from each ticket sold in an arena, is much greater than that in a stadium.
That being said, the main reason to play a stadium anywhere, is to avoid having to play multiple arena shows in one market in order to meet demand. In addition, the size and spectical of the stage show offers an "effect" not found in Arena shows. Then there is the crowd, 40,000 or 50,000 people singing together is cool to see.
OP
OP
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Boys, boys, all I wanted was for those of you yammering on about stadiums to put up or shut up. I never claimed to have evidence that they wouldn't play stadiums, I never denied anything. I thought that maybe a few people got a little too sure of themselves over the stadiums rumors. Turns out I may have been right. No one has any hard evidence, even after assuring people in other threads that stadiums were a done deal.
So, we'll wait and see, and if I'm wrong, I'll be the first one to pull up this thread and eat crow.
Blue Room, there's no need to get so hostile, dear. The band remains unthreatened by me and my dislike for any stadium show. If you'll pay closer attention and maybe settle down a bit, you'll find that I'm not against the band playing live. I happen to dislike stadium shows. That any band plays. I'm quite comfortable with that.
When any of you can back up your claims with scheduling proof (and the US is all I'm concerned with here, because I don't plan to travel to Europe next year), an official announcement that we all have access to, or anything else concrete, then get that crow to the BBQ. Meanwhile, as I said, time will tell.
Popmartijn
Blue Crack Supplier
martha said:
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
LOL, Martha, who is getting hostile?
Also, put up or shut up??? LOL That sounds a bit hostile to me, what did I say that was hostile anyway? If we want to discuss this and the fact that alot of things are pointing to stadiums there is nothing wrong with that. You are the one that started this thread anyway. You want hard evidence, there is none for either right now. If there is hard evidence, its certainly not going to be shared at this stage. But there are more indications of stadium shows than there are arena only shows. I'am not going to discuss how I know what I know just to show it is being discussed. No offense intended but I could really care less if you go to the stadium shows or not. I just think your reactions have been interesting and some respects I'am trying to understand them. What I find amusing is that you simply want to ignore the indications of stadiums simply because you dont want it to happen.
Eating crow?? LOL I really dont care if they play stadiums or arenas next tour. Just as long as they are on tour. You are the one that has turned this into some type of vendetta. I'am not going to come in here and call you out next year when they announce stadium dates for the next tour. I dont need this place to justify who I'am or my self esteem. So its simply not that big of a deal to me. I will admit that if U2 comes out and says arenas only accross the world I will be shocked based on what I know. But I'am about 98% sure that wont happen. I'am 100% sure though that they will be on tour and thats all that matters to me.
I guess my question is this. Would you just rather they not tour if they are going to play stadiums? Also, I have never indicated it would be stadiums only in the U.S. I said there would be some stadium dates in large markets.
Also, put up or shut up??? LOL That sounds a bit hostile to me, what did I say that was hostile anyway? If we want to discuss this and the fact that alot of things are pointing to stadiums there is nothing wrong with that. You are the one that started this thread anyway. You want hard evidence, there is none for either right now. If there is hard evidence, its certainly not going to be shared at this stage. But there are more indications of stadium shows than there are arena only shows. I'am not going to discuss how I know what I know just to show it is being discussed. No offense intended but I could really care less if you go to the stadium shows or not. I just think your reactions have been interesting and some respects I'am trying to understand them. What I find amusing is that you simply want to ignore the indications of stadiums simply because you dont want it to happen.
Eating crow?? LOL I really dont care if they play stadiums or arenas next tour. Just as long as they are on tour. You are the one that has turned this into some type of vendetta. I'am not going to come in here and call you out next year when they announce stadium dates for the next tour. I dont need this place to justify who I'am or my self esteem. So its simply not that big of a deal to me. I will admit that if U2 comes out and says arenas only accross the world I will be shocked based on what I know. But I'am about 98% sure that wont happen. I'am 100% sure though that they will be on tour and thats all that matters to me.
I guess my question is this. Would you just rather they not tour if they are going to play stadiums? Also, I have never indicated it would be stadiums only in the U.S. I said there would be some stadium dates in large markets.
Last edited:
The large markets that U2 would strongly consider doing Stadium shows in order to fully meet demand are:
Boston
New York City
Philadelphia
Washington DC
Miami
Chicago
San Francisco
Los Angeles
Despite the multiple arena shows played in the above cities on Elevation, demand was not close to being met. Thats why U2 should consider doing Stadium shows in them on the next tour.
Boston
New York City
Philadelphia
Washington DC
Miami
Chicago
San Francisco
Los Angeles
Despite the multiple arena shows played in the above cities on Elevation, demand was not close to being met. Thats why U2 should consider doing Stadium shows in them on the next tour.
The_acrobat
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I think U2 could sell out stadiums in the cities mentioned in the previous cities and then some, if their marketing approach is just right, for the tour, the album and the band in general. U2 has become a household name. Everyone knows who they are, rock fans or not. In the past week, my sociology class had a discussion on Bono's work with Africa, and everyone knew all aobut it, and they were praising him up and down. More recently, today in church, the pastor's sermon was based around Bono's work, U2's lyrics and their relationship with Christianity. It was not entirely about U2, but rather using U2 as a metaphor to connect more with the point the pastor was making. I suddenly realized that U2 are actually going to be remembered for years to come.....they are in fact, the next Rolling Stones....only not as sleazy and irrelevant.
I think they are extremely well known and well liked. I was in high school during Popmart era. U2 was a laughing stock, and so was I for liking them. Now, my younger brother is in high school, and everyone likes or has an appreciation for U2. I'm not saying do an all out stadium tour. They could do like how they did on the Joshua Tree tour. Stadiums in the bigger markets and arenas in the smaller ones. That was a smart strategy.
I think they are extremely well known and well liked. I was in high school during Popmart era. U2 was a laughing stock, and so was I for liking them. Now, my younger brother is in high school, and everyone likes or has an appreciation for U2. I'm not saying do an all out stadium tour. They could do like how they did on the Joshua Tree tour. Stadiums in the bigger markets and arenas in the smaller ones. That was a smart strategy.
Tip Top Prince
War Child
Zoo Television
bono_man2002
Blue Crack Addict
i hear stadiums are harder to record shows in....
so i'd prefer areanas as a recorder....as a fan, i dont care , as long get to see them live!
so i'd prefer areanas as a recorder....as a fan, i dont care , as long get to see them live!
Vox02
War Child
STING2, you forget Atlanta? I think that U2 could sellout a single stadium date in Georgia Dome ( 50/55,000 tickets ).
And U2 could sellout stadiums in Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton and Vancouver in Canada!!
So... Around 20-25 stadium dates and another 20-25 in arenas
Vox!
And U2 could sellout stadiums in Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton and Vancouver in Canada!!
So... Around 20-25 stadium dates and another 20-25 in arenas
Vox!
U2Soar
War Child
2004
1. Western Europe
2. North America
3. South America
Their first and likely only complete World Tour. PopMart has 4 million people attend. How about 10 million for the next one. Use the some of the profits of the first 2 in order to finance 2005. In addition to the cities / countries / continents played on PopMart ? they need to do stadiums in order to play these places:
2005 (including Eastern Europe / Australia and Japan)
1. Moscow / St. Petersburg / Kiev - Ukraine
2. Addis Ababa ? Ethiopia or Kampala - Uganda / Accra ? Ghana / Johannesburg ? South Africa
3. Bombay ? India / Delhi ? India / Calcutta - India
4. Manila ? Philippines / Seoul ? South Korea / Beijing ? China / Shanghai ? China / Hong Kong / Bangkok ? Thailand / Singapore ? Malaysia / Jakarta - Indonesia
Imagine the highlights of this Tour on a DVD!
1. Western Europe
2. North America
3. South America
Their first and likely only complete World Tour. PopMart has 4 million people attend. How about 10 million for the next one. Use the some of the profits of the first 2 in order to finance 2005. In addition to the cities / countries / continents played on PopMart ? they need to do stadiums in order to play these places:
2005 (including Eastern Europe / Australia and Japan)
1. Moscow / St. Petersburg / Kiev - Ukraine
2. Addis Ababa ? Ethiopia or Kampala - Uganda / Accra ? Ghana / Johannesburg ? South Africa
3. Bombay ? India / Delhi ? India / Calcutta - India
4. Manila ? Philippines / Seoul ? South Korea / Beijing ? China / Shanghai ? China / Hong Kong / Bangkok ? Thailand / Singapore ? Malaysia / Jakarta - Indonesia
Imagine the highlights of this Tour on a DVD!
ouizy
Rock n' Roll Doggie
U2Soar said:
I have to go back to the Stones on this one since they just played lots of these places. Production will know what is a success, and where to go back to...
U2Soar
War Child
Looking at the Stones current tour 2002 up till September 15 2003 ? they have not played South America / Africa / Israel / Eastern Europe / Russia / Indonesia / and the Philippines. The shows in China / Hong Kong / and Bangkok were cancelled. I do give them credit for playing India and Singapore.
On last Tour Larry spoke about ?unfinished business? on a number of occasions. Does anyone think that all that he meant by that was doing arenas in North America to win back those lost with Pop and PopMart? Or simply ?reapplying for the best band in the world?? U2 ought to do it now. Who knows about their health / goodwill towards each other / and the ?burning desire?? Just as importantly ? who knows about the health of their long time but older management and crew personnel?
I think the Slane DVD for Christmas 2003 is not primarily for a fond looking back at the Elevation Tour but more so to get us excited and work up our appetite for a World Stadium Tour in 2004-5. I think the Elevation Tour was more about ?damage control? and bringing together all ages of their fan. And from the way it turned out it was essentially about North America. Also it could have been about putting together money for World Stadium Tour in 2004-5. Sure U2 wants to pay their staff very well and be wealthy themselves. Yet I think U2 are willing to make less on this next Tour in order to likely achieve a career capping goal ? a complete World Tour (at least once) My feeling about U2 can see them using their personal profits from the Elevation Tour / their Best Ofs record deal / and some from their personal savings in order to finance the concerts in the ?second? and ?third? world countries. I really don?t think it would be about greed or about an embarrassing ego. They can do it. They want to do it. They should do it. Their music and live shows are inspiring / unifying / uplifting / etc. for humanity. U2 has a message(s). U2 makes the world a better place.
On last Tour Larry spoke about ?unfinished business? on a number of occasions. Does anyone think that all that he meant by that was doing arenas in North America to win back those lost with Pop and PopMart? Or simply ?reapplying for the best band in the world?? U2 ought to do it now. Who knows about their health / goodwill towards each other / and the ?burning desire?? Just as importantly ? who knows about the health of their long time but older management and crew personnel?
I think the Slane DVD for Christmas 2003 is not primarily for a fond looking back at the Elevation Tour but more so to get us excited and work up our appetite for a World Stadium Tour in 2004-5. I think the Elevation Tour was more about ?damage control? and bringing together all ages of their fan. And from the way it turned out it was essentially about North America. Also it could have been about putting together money for World Stadium Tour in 2004-5. Sure U2 wants to pay their staff very well and be wealthy themselves. Yet I think U2 are willing to make less on this next Tour in order to likely achieve a career capping goal ? a complete World Tour (at least once) My feeling about U2 can see them using their personal profits from the Elevation Tour / their Best Ofs record deal / and some from their personal savings in order to finance the concerts in the ?second? and ?third? world countries. I really don?t think it would be about greed or about an embarrassing ego. They can do it. They want to do it. They should do it. Their music and live shows are inspiring / unifying / uplifting / etc. for humanity. U2 has a message(s). U2 makes the world a better place.
U2Soar
War Child
Also a World Stadium Tour would be a great way to take advantage of new computer technology. And more and more people (at least in North America) are using high speed internet. People have better computer speakers or have it connected to their stereo. The Notre Dame show was their first live internet concert. How did people find it? It could be a way to finance the concerts in poorer parts of the world. U2 could offer a fee for viewing a live (or taped) concert through U2.com. (U2 already records and films every concert anyway) I think a lot of people would be excited to see a U2 concert let?s say live from India with 200 000 people on a Saturday afternoon in late January!
With them not being any younger, I kind of doubt they'll do any huge tours like Zoo TV or Popmart anymore. (I think Larry also said they will do shorter tours and focus on quality)
Having said that, I think it would be nice if they would play Australia/Asia again the next time around.
Having said that, I think it would be nice if they would play Australia/Asia again the next time around.
U2Soar
War Child
I?m thinking that Europe and Russia would be better for the Spring and early Summer of 2004 and then North America during the late Summer and Fall. Why? The 2004 US Elections. They set out to and helped to take down Bush l on the ZOOTV Tour. And if Bush ll does not fulfill his promises to assist Africa (and other things) then they can do the same to him! (likely not in the same mocking manner but there other effective ways!). As Bono has basically said in the last couple weeks: ?Time is running out. Patience is running thin. For playing Mr. Nice Guy.?
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
U2 Girl, actually doing stadium shows works in reverse. If age is a factor for the band (which I really dont think it is). Stadiums would be the way to go. Play to more people, on less nights, which would shorten the tour even more. As oppossed to playing 6 nights in the same city at an arena and taking a full week and a half for one market.
Its going to be a combo of both though and the tour will be just over a year if all goes to plan.
Its going to be a combo of both though and the tour will be just over a year if all goes to plan.
VOX,
U2 can play Stadiums in just about any city in Canada. I was just talking about the USA. As far as Atlanta, I'm not sure. Atlanta, Dallas, and Detroit are cities that could probably support one stadium show but it would be rough getting to the 40,000 mark. Atlanta had 53,000 on ZOO TV, but only around 30,000 on POPMART. Detroit always seems to top out at about 36,000 on ZOO TV and POPMART, although ZOO TV had an arena show earlier in the year which may have dampened demand for the Stadium show months later. Interestingly, on Joshua Tree, the Detroit show was U2s first headlining Stadium show in the USA. Although the Joshua Tree had only been released for 6 weeks, the band sold all 51,000 tickets.
Dallas is probably doable with 39,000 on ZOO TV(there was an arena show earlier in the year that may have dampened attendence for this show), 38,000 on POPMART (Rage was in support for that show) and two quickly soldout Arena shows on Elevation.
U2 can play Stadiums in just about any city in Canada. I was just talking about the USA. As far as Atlanta, I'm not sure. Atlanta, Dallas, and Detroit are cities that could probably support one stadium show but it would be rough getting to the 40,000 mark. Atlanta had 53,000 on ZOO TV, but only around 30,000 on POPMART. Detroit always seems to top out at about 36,000 on ZOO TV and POPMART, although ZOO TV had an arena show earlier in the year which may have dampened demand for the Stadium show months later. Interestingly, on Joshua Tree, the Detroit show was U2s first headlining Stadium show in the USA. Although the Joshua Tree had only been released for 6 weeks, the band sold all 51,000 tickets.
Dallas is probably doable with 39,000 on ZOO TV(there was an arena show earlier in the year that may have dampened attendence for this show), 38,000 on POPMART (Rage was in support for that show) and two quickly soldout Arena shows on Elevation.
Blue Room said:
Yes but aren't stadium tours more expensive in production and they would have to tour more countries - that will make the tour longer automatically - to cover the costs and make profit? (isn't that why Zoo TV and Popmart went to more places than Elevation did?) Touring longer will definitely affect Bono's voice.
Also playing one stadium show in a big city can be turned into more bashing over the setlist, whereas on the last tour they played more different songs when they were in a city for more than 2 or 3 days.
*edit* I was thinking what it would be like if their next tour would be clubs only. Cheaper to make, easier to throw in surprises in the setlist.
Last edited:
The_acrobat
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
In the US, they COULD sell out, or come close to selling out stadiums in these areas
NYC- 3 or 4
Boston - 3
Phili - 2
D.C. - 1 (maybe 2????)
Atlanta*
Miami
Detroit*
Chicago - 3
Denver*
Dallas*
Salt Lake City- They sold out a stadium here on Popmart. Go fig.
Phoenix*
San Diego*
Los Angeles - 2 (LA Coliseum holds 70,000)
San Fran - 2
Vancouver - 1
Edmonton - 2
Winnipeg - 1
Toronto - 2
Montreal - 1
*- indicates a possible non-sellout, but nothing devastating. 40,000 in a 50,000 capacity stadium is still two arena shows.
And they would sell out single shows in arenas in these cities:
Seattle
Portland
Sacramento
Las Vegas
Austin
Houston
New Orleans
Kansas City
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Milwaukee
Cleveland
Columbus
Indianapolis
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Albany
Charlotte
Tampa
Nashville
Hartford
Madison Square Garden
That'd be 55 shows in America. As compared to 80 on the last one.
NYC- 3 or 4
Boston - 3
Phili - 2
D.C. - 1 (maybe 2????)
Atlanta*
Miami
Detroit*
Chicago - 3
Denver*
Dallas*
Salt Lake City- They sold out a stadium here on Popmart. Go fig.
Phoenix*
San Diego*
Los Angeles - 2 (LA Coliseum holds 70,000)
San Fran - 2
Vancouver - 1
Edmonton - 2
Winnipeg - 1
Toronto - 2
Montreal - 1
*- indicates a possible non-sellout, but nothing devastating. 40,000 in a 50,000 capacity stadium is still two arena shows.
And they would sell out single shows in arenas in these cities:
Seattle
Portland
Sacramento
Las Vegas
Austin
Houston
New Orleans
Kansas City
St. Louis
Minneapolis
Milwaukee
Cleveland
Columbus
Indianapolis
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Albany
Charlotte
Tampa
Nashville
Hartford
Madison Square Garden
That'd be 55 shows in America. As compared to 80 on the last one.
Blue Room
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
U2girl, the setlist bashing will occur regardless of what U2 does. There is ALWAYS someone unhappy that a certain song or songs were not played or that certain songs are played every night. People complained on Elevation and they had some 6 night stands in some markets. So I dont think stadiums would have any effect on the setlist complainers. They will be unhappy regardless.
Zoo and Popmart went to more countries because they were stadium tours. Most of the proper venues in other countries are soccer stadiums only. Good arenas outside of N. America, Australia and parts of Europe are few and far between. So it necessitates that if U2 wants to play some of these countries they have to go with the best venue available, which is a stadium. This is why Popmart made it to South America, because playing shows of that says made it cost effective to go there and most of the proper venues were stadiums only. Not to mention that U2 had never played there before and there was a decent demand for tickets, which would have necessitated stadium shows anyway.
I guess I misread your prior post because I thought it sounded like you were saying that U2 would do arenas because they wanted to do a shorter tour. Also where is this interview with Larry where he says they dont want to do stadium shows any longer because they want to emphasize quality? I would like to read it. Although I disagree completely. Zoo TV and Popmart were two outstanding tours, so its like he is saying those tours were subpar. I have a feeling Bono and Edge would disagree with him on that. Which is nothing new LOL
Zoo and Popmart went to more countries because they were stadium tours. Most of the proper venues in other countries are soccer stadiums only. Good arenas outside of N. America, Australia and parts of Europe are few and far between. So it necessitates that if U2 wants to play some of these countries they have to go with the best venue available, which is a stadium. This is why Popmart made it to South America, because playing shows of that says made it cost effective to go there and most of the proper venues were stadiums only. Not to mention that U2 had never played there before and there was a decent demand for tickets, which would have necessitated stadium shows anyway.
I guess I misread your prior post because I thought it sounded like you were saying that U2 would do arenas because they wanted to do a shorter tour. Also where is this interview with Larry where he says they dont want to do stadium shows any longer because they want to emphasize quality? I would like to read it. Although I disagree completely. Zoo TV and Popmart were two outstanding tours, so its like he is saying those tours were subpar. I have a feeling Bono and Edge would disagree with him on that. Which is nothing new LOL
Last edited:
oliveu2cm
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Blue Room said:
That's for damn sure!
Blue Room said:
I guess I misread your prior post because I thought it sounded like you were saying that U2 would do arenas because they wanted to do a shorter tour. Also where is this interview with Larry where he says they dont want to do stadium shows any longer because they want to emphasize quality? I would like to read it. Although I disagree completely. Zoo TV and Popmart were two outstanding tours, so its like he is saying those tours were subpar. I have a feeling Bono and Edge would disagree with him on that. Which is nothing new LOL
No that was not what I was saying. (I remember seeing somewhere an interview with Edge where he said they pick the venue to best fit their music - and that they chose arenas the last time as it fitted the last album.)
I don't know exactly where or when Larry said that but I've seen it posted on this forum a few times - he said (if I remember right) that they would play less and focus on qulality in the future, regarding touring. He wasn't talking about their previous tours.
I agree with the setlist part comment you made. I guess U2 can't please everyone no matter what they do. (and now that I think of it you're probably also right about the stadium tours. I wonder if they'd ever do stadium shows in US and Europe and play nowhere else. Would it be profitable?)
Last edited:
Seabird
War Child
I don't want one since I don't live near any stadium
Acrobat,
I agree with your stadium lists except for NYC. If U2 have a level of demand on the next tour similar to Achtung or ATYCLB, they could do 6 Stadium shows in New York City. If were talking POPMART and the base level demand that had in the USA, then I would say 3 Stadium shows in NYC.
For cities that would more likely be Arena material:
Seattle- They could do two shows in an Arena in Seattle. They may not sell seats behind the stage, but they could definitely do two shows and in fact did just that on ZOO TV.
Portland- Two arena shows would be possible here if there is no seating behind the stage, but they would be better off just doing one show I think.
Las Vegas- could support two arena shows(no seating behind stage though), and if its the tour opener, a Stadium show.
Minneapolis- could definitely support two arena shows. The POPMART Stadium show was attended by over 30,000 people.
Pittsburgh- could definitely support two Arena shows(but no seating behind stage)
Hartford- I actually forget about Hartford. I think of it as "little boston". U2 could do a Stadium show if they wanted to in Hartford.
Whats unusual are the cities that have gone from being a potential stadium show to being a 1 night Arena stand. These are: St. Louis, Kansas City, and Cleveland.
I agree with your stadium lists except for NYC. If U2 have a level of demand on the next tour similar to Achtung or ATYCLB, they could do 6 Stadium shows in New York City. If were talking POPMART and the base level demand that had in the USA, then I would say 3 Stadium shows in NYC.
For cities that would more likely be Arena material:
Seattle- They could do two shows in an Arena in Seattle. They may not sell seats behind the stage, but they could definitely do two shows and in fact did just that on ZOO TV.
Portland- Two arena shows would be possible here if there is no seating behind the stage, but they would be better off just doing one show I think.
Las Vegas- could support two arena shows(no seating behind stage though), and if its the tour opener, a Stadium show.
Minneapolis- could definitely support two arena shows. The POPMART Stadium show was attended by over 30,000 people.
Pittsburgh- could definitely support two Arena shows(but no seating behind stage)
Hartford- I actually forget about Hartford. I think of it as "little boston". U2 could do a Stadium show if they wanted to in Hartford.
Whats unusual are the cities that have gone from being a potential stadium show to being a 1 night Arena stand. These are: St. Louis, Kansas City, and Cleveland.
Sweet Tart
Refugee
i would rather see an arena show. i don't wanna be a million feet back staring a bono on a videoscreen....i could do that at home and save the 150 dollars for the ticket.
Similar threads
- Sticky
