Garth Brooks goal: to overtake the marks set by U2 360 tour

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
There isn't a snowball's chance in hell the JT30 configuration is only 8k less than 360.

Taylor Swift did the following with the same configuration as JT30

Taylor Swift
October 17, 2015
Arlington Texas
AT&T Stadium
Attendance: 62,630
Capacity: 62,630
Gross: $7,396,733
Shows: 1
Sellouts: 1
Average Ticket Price: $118.10

The 360 configuration can fit more than 70,000, but U2 set the capacity at 70,000 for that show. The 270 configuration can obviously fit far more than just 49,700 as seen with the Taylor Swift show at 62,630. So yes, the 360 show crushed the JT 30 show in terms of attendance.

This is not the only city where this is happening. Happened in Pittsburgh as well.
 
Didn't the Dallas show sell out the first day? Like, not "sell out" like Pittsburgh did, but legitimately sell out, as in couldn't buy tickets anymore?

U2 did to 49,087 this year with an end stage concert.
U2 did 70,766 in 2009
Coldplay did 52,538.
Metallica did 45,860
Rolling Stones did 47,535
GNR did 39,015 / 43,449
Beyonce did 42,235
Tay Sway did 62,630 in 2015
Tay Sway did 53,020 in 2013
Tay Sway did 55,451 in 2011
Kenny Chesney did 47,269 / 50,427 in 2013
One Direction did 51,074
George Strait did 104,793
Paul McCartney did 35,903

U2 2009 and George Strait were 360 shows, and it's been established that U2 didn't fully "sell out" their 2009 show. GS is a Texas man, was playing his final show (turned out not to be his final show) and couldn't pull in anywhere near those numbers anywhere else in the world, so that's a special circumstance. MOST concerts held there seem to hold on an average 50,000, with an end stage show. In a stadium that big, with different stage configurations, its pointless to argue about crowd sizes within a few thousand of each other. I believe U2 sold all available tickets in 2017 in Dallas.
 
Last edited:


Looks like a pretty full show. Comparing 360 to JT 2017 is absolutely pointless, unless you're doing it to say "Wow, look at what a difference 360 makes vs. 270!"
 
Didn't the Dallas show sell out the first day? Like, not "sell out" like Pittsburgh did, but legitimately sell out, as in couldn't buy tickets anymore?

U2 did to 49,087 this year with an end stage concert.
U2 did 70,766 in 2009
Coldplay did 52,538.
Metallica did 45,860
Rolling Stones did 47,535
GNR did 39,015 / 43,449
Beyonce did 42,235
Tay Sway did 62,630 in 2015
Tay Sway did 53,020 in 2013
Tay Sway did 55,451 in 2011
Kenny Chesney did 47,269 / 50,427 in 2013
One Direction did 51,074
George Strait did 104,793
Paul McCartney did 35,903

U2 2009 and George Strait were 360 shows, and it's been established that U2 didn't fully "sell out" their 2009 show. GS is a Texas man, was playing his final show (turned out not to be his final show) and couldn't pull in anywhere near those numbers anywhere else in the world, so that's a special circumstance. MOST concerts held there seem to hold on an average 50,000, with an end stage show. In a stadium that big, with different stage configurations, its pointless to argue about crowd sizes within a few thousand of each other. I believe U2 sold all available tickets in 2017 in Dallas.

AT&T stadium is one of the largest stadiums in the world. Its fact that Taylor Swift did an end stage 270 configuration show like JT and was able to fit 62,630. For whatever reason, U2 decided to cap the show at 49,087. U2 could have gotten a lot more out of the 270 configuration. Notice a smaller stadium like Lincoln Financial Field they were able to fit 56,000 people.

I find this very interesting that the 360 tour is actually beating JT in attendance in various cities in the United States and its not just because of extra seating. NLOTH and the marketing push behind it obviously had more impact than many people think.
 


Looks like a pretty full show. Comparing 360 to JT 2017 is absolutely pointless, unless you're doing it to say "Wow, look at what a difference 360 makes vs. 270!"


Actually that is not true given what we know about the full physical capacity o stadiums in either 270 or 360 configuration. AT&T stadium is almost large enough to support a 70,000 capacity show in a 270 configuration. Taylor Swift got to 62,630. Pittsburgh 360 had 55,000, but Taylor Swift did a 270 show there to 56,000. Even if attendance were equal, that is still not what one would typically think would happen with a 360 vs JT30 situation. Either way, its all pretty interesting.
 
I find this very interesting that the 360 tour is actually beating JT in attendance in various cities in the United States and its not just because of extra seating. NLOTH and the marketing push behind it obviously had more impact than many people think.

I find it very interesting that there's more surface area on this Danish than on that donut. Must have been the great marketing plan put forward by Big Danish.
 
I find it very interesting that there's more surface area on this Danish than on that donut. Must have been the great marketing plan put forward by Big Danish.

Taylor Swift used the same surface area as U2 and got 62,630 for AT&T stadium while U2 only got 49,087 on JT30. Taylor Swift used less surface area than U2 for the Pittsburgh show on the Red Tour and got 56,047 attendance to U2's 360 attendance of 55,823. JT30 only had 41,413.

Those are the indisputable facts. In several markets, U2 360 outperforms JT30 in attendance and not because of the extra available seating. JT30 failed to sellout all physically available space in a 270 configuration in several of these markets meaning the 360 tour beat it.
 
Then why did Taylor Swift sell out the stadium in 2011 and 2013 with *only* 55,000 ish people? They did something different to accommodate an extra 10,000 people somewhere. U2 sold all that they could sell, based on the fact that you couldn't get on ticketmaster and buy any tickets. Maybe they could have slid the stage back a bit and added a few more thousand people. But U2 sold out that concert months before the show. The fact that The Stones, Coldplay, and all the other shows I posted also sold mostly in the 50,000ish ballpark back up the fact that for the standard end stage configuration, that's the capacity. I know that some of those shows didn't really "sell out", but a lot of them did. I know Coldplay sold that place out immediately after they went on sale, there were no more tickets available due to the "Super Bowl effect", and yet they only had 52,000. If there was a way they could've sold an extra 10,000 tickets without changing their stage, they would've done it.

Pittsburgh, on the other hand, was about 10,000 short of selling what it potentially could have.
 
Last edited:
Those are the indisputable facts. In several markets, U2 360 outperforms JT30 in attendance and not because of the extra available seating. JT30 failed to sellout all physically available space in a 270 configuration in several of these markets meaning the 360 tour beat it.

It seems that the only one that they didn't sell out was Pittsburgh. Sure, there maybe have been a few unsold seats here and there in Louisville or Houston, but not enough to make an impact. Obviously 360 outperforms JT30 on all levels... that was always assumed.
 
U2360 had 20 to 30k more tickets available than JT30, and this putz is trying to figure out why 360 sold more tickets. What a world, what a world.

Well, see you still don't understand what I explained, I'll try one more time.

Heinz Field was played by Taylor Swift in configuration the same as JT30, a 270 configuration.

56,000 people were in attendance for Taylor Swift.

55,000 people were in attendance for U2 at Heinz Field on 360
41,000 people in attendance for U2 at Heinz field on JT30.

Lesson: Although the 360 configuration does potentially allow for greater seating, it does not mean attendance will automatically be higher. In fact, Taylor Swift had higher attendance with her 270 configuration show than U2's 360 show.

Dallas Texas or Arlington Texas

U2 360 70,000 attendance
U2 JT30 49,000 attendance
Taylor Swift 62,680 attendance

Lesson: AT&T Stadium is a large stadium and as Taylor Swift showed and can fit 62,000 people in a 270 configuration, meaning that U2 JT30 was at least 13,000 tickets shy of full capacity.

Just because the 360 configuration allows for more physical capacity does not mean attendance is necessarily going to be higher. Otherwise Taylor Swift would not be beating U2 in attendance or coming close to it with 270 configuration shows.
 
Because NLOTH was clearly more popular than The Joshua Tree....do try and keep up.

It is very revealing that 360 had 55,000 people in Pittsburgh and JT30 only had 41,000. Again, the Pittsburgh show had empty seats all across the upper level sections on both sides. Its interesting that a tour for NLOTH did better in Pittsburgh than a nostalgia tour for the bands most popular album did. Same thing happened in Dallas given that the 270 configuration there can fit over 62,000 people and U2 only had 49,000.
 
200.gif
 
Garth isn't going to touch the Gross record ever. Coldplay are gonna come close. If anybody can beat 360, it'll be Coldplay someday, provided they don't royally fuck things up.

Coldplay Surpasses Madonna for No. 5 Highest Grossing Tour of All Time | Billboard

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._concert_tours

So far, they have the 5th highest grossing tour of all time. They still have a 20+ show North American leg beginning next week, which is a combination of stadiums and arenas. Then 5 stadium shows to close things out in Brazil and Argentina. They should easily beat out ACDC and Rogers Waters tours, and end up with the 3rd highest grossing tour of all time by the time they're done. If they wanted to make the commitment, they could add a bunch more shows and overtake the Stones #2 spot. U2's 360 record is unlikely to be broken anytime soon.
 
Looks like Garth Brooks tour finally came to an end after three years. He only toured the US and sold 6.4 million tickets but never reported nothing officially.

https://www.pollstar.com/article/is-garth-brooks-tour-the-biggest-ever-by-a-solo-artist-133970


Of course who knows if he’ll add dates in Australia or Europe later on... I think I read a billboard article saying that all his world tours are three years long... but how can it be a world tour if he only tours the US?
 
Odd that a guy so consumed with sales numbers and records wouldn't have kept an official count.
 
Looks like Garth Brooks tour finally came to an end after three years. He only toured the US and sold 6.4 million tickets but never reported nothing officially.

https://www.pollstar.com/article/is-garth-brooks-tour-the-biggest-ever-by-a-solo-artist-133970


Of course who knows if he’ll add dates in Australia or Europe later on... I think I read a billboard article saying that all his world tours are three years long... but how can it be a world tour if he only tours the US?

Canada isn't part of the US and I can tell you that Garth Brooks had 9 shows in Edmonton where I live and all of them sold out within minutes. Difference between Garth Brooks and U2 is that Garth Brooks actually ensures his tickets are affordable and will continue playing shows until the demand is met.

U2, Rolling Stones, Madonna set records for one simple reason they fleece every cent they can out of their fanbase. 500 dollars for a concert ticket in a 20 thousand seat arena or 350 in a 60 thousand seat stadium is ridiculous - but they get away with it because they have fans that have money and loyalty.
 
While U2 does have higher priced tickets, they also ensure that GA is affordable. There are options. And these days, I don’t think an artist has as much control over prices as in the past. Record sales are minimal - touring is where the money is. And everyone has a hand out.
 
U2, Rolling Stones, Madonna set records for one simple reason they fleece every cent they can out of their fanbase. 500 dollars for a concert ticket in a 20 thousand seat arena or 350 in a 60 thousand seat stadium is ridiculous - but they get away with it because they have fans that have money and loyalty.



U2 360 set the record with an average ticket price around $100. What’s even more insane is that they sold over 7.2 million tickets at $100, imagine if the tickets were $70 or $60. Also, they did that during a global recession.

I do agree that their prices for the current tour are absurd and they are “paying for that” in total attendance, which will be low even if the grosses are higher. Now you can argue that the gross is all that matters(how much money you make) and I agree BUT for a band that is trying to remain relevant and gain new and younger fans....they are way out of touch. No young fan who likes TBT or GOOYOW is going to fork over $350 for a ticket...even if they discover U2s back catalog.

I understand that U2 doesn’t set the prices but there is no way I believe they couldn’t couple with a promoter or influence their current promoter to make the prices more reasonable.
 
Canada isn't part of the US and I can tell you that Garth Brooks had 9 shows in Edmonton where I live and all of them sold out within minutes. Difference between Garth Brooks and U2 is that Garth Brooks actually ensures his tickets are affordable and will continue playing shows until the demand is met.

U2, Rolling Stones, Madonna set records for one simple reason they fleece every cent they can out of their fanbase. 500 dollars for a concert ticket in a 20 thousand seat arena or 350 in a 60 thousand seat stadium is ridiculous - but they get away with it because they have fans that have money and loyalty.

Hey, didn’t mean to offend you! Didn't know he went to Canada or that Canadians cared about country music :S
 
U2 360 set the record with an average ticket price around $100. What’s even more insane is that they sold over 7.2 million tickets at $100, imagine if the tickets were $70 or $60. Also, they did that during a global recession.

I do agree that their prices for the current tour are absurd and they are “paying for that” in total attendance, which will be low even if the grosses are higher. Now you can argue that the gross is all that matters(how much money you make) and I agree BUT for a band that is trying to remain relevant and gain new and younger fans....they are way out of touch. No young fan who likes TBT or GOOYOW is going to fork over $350 for a ticket...even if they discover U2s back catalog.

I understand that U2 doesn’t set the prices but there is no way I believe they couldn’t couple with a promoter or influence their current promoter to make the prices more reasonable.

I agree for any new fans that they may be gaining from this album there is no way they are going to go to the tour at the current prices - I would much rather see them have more affordable tickets like 360 rather then the stuff they've been pulling the last few tours.

I know the real hardcores have been saving up for the last few years for this tour and they are going to need every penny if multiple shows are something they are interested in :)
 
The SOI tour venues were stupid, why play 6 nights in London, NY & LA at 20k capacity venues, why not just play 2 nights each at 60k capacity stadiums, or even 3 nights at 60k capacity stadiums with lower ticket prices. That way they can hit more cities too, they cover the US pretty well, but only seem to want to play the capitals in Europe now.
 
The SOI tour venues were stupid, why play 6 nights in London, NY & LA at 20k capacity venues, why not just play 2 nights each at 60k capacity stadiums, or even 3 nights at 60k capacity stadiums with lower ticket prices. That way they can hit more cities too, they cover the US pretty well, but only seem to want to play the capitals in Europe now.



I prefer arenas personally. Don’t get me wrong, seeing 80k singing along and cheering at MetLife was really cool but from a music listening experience, there is an intimacy with an arena show that makes the music easier to connect with (for me at least).
 
Canada isn't part of the US and I can tell you that Garth Brooks had 9 shows in Edmonton where I live and all of them sold out within minutes. Difference between Garth Brooks and U2 is that Garth Brooks actually ensures his tickets are affordable and will continue playing shows until the demand is met.

U2, Rolling Stones, Madonna set records for one simple reason they fleece every cent they can out of their fanbase. 500 dollars for a concert ticket in a 20 thousand seat arena or 350 in a 60 thousand seat stadium is ridiculous - but they get away with it because they have fans that have money and loyalty.

First off, Garth Brooks was trying to break U2's records, which is exactly why he set ticket prices so low. Second, he wasn't able to complete his crusade because people are starting to realize country music just, well, SUCKS. That's exactly why country acts like Taylor Swift have crossed over into Pop.

Look, U2 have bent over backwards to make seats available at very low prices, some at $35 for Christ's sake. And finally, I'm sick and tired of people trying to lump U2 in with the Rolling Geezers.. The bands are nothing alike.. the Geezers haven't been relevant for over 40 years and no one really cares about them except for wondering when one of them will shit their Depends or just keel over live on stage.
 
First off, Garth Brooks was trying to break U2's records, which is exactly why he set ticket prices so low. Second, he wasn't able to complete his crusade because people are starting to realize country music just, well, SUCKS. That's exactly why country acts like Taylor Swift have crossed over into Pop.



Look, U2 have bent over backwards to make seats available at very low prices, some at $35 for Christ's sake. And finally, I'm sick and tired of people trying to lump U2 in with the Rolling Geezers.. The bands are nothing alike.. the Geezers haven't been relevant for over 40 years and no one really cares about them except for wondering when one of them will shit their Depends or just keel over live on stage.



Elaborate troll?
 
First off, Garth Brooks was trying to break U2's records, which is exactly why he set ticket prices so low. Second, he wasn't able to complete his crusade because people are starting to realize country music just, well, SUCKS. That's exactly why country acts like Taylor Swift have crossed over into Pop.

Look, U2 have bent over backwards to make seats available at very low prices, some at $35 for Christ's sake. And finally, I'm sick and tired of people trying to lump U2 in with the Rolling Geezers.. The bands are nothing alike.. the Geezers haven't been relevant for over 40 years and no one really cares about them except for wondering when one of them will shit their Depends or just keel over live on stage.

Feeling a little defensive there, matey?
 
Looks like Garth Brooks tour finally came to an end after three years. He only toured the US and sold 6.4 million tickets but never reported nothing officially.

https://www.pollstar.com/article/is-garth-brooks-tour-the-biggest-ever-by-a-solo-artist-133970


Of course who knows if he’ll add dates in Australia or Europe later on... I think I read a billboard article saying that all his world tours are three years long... but how can it be a world tour if he only tours the US?

This article is hilarious for a couple of reasons.

In anticipation of the sheer deluge of ticket-buyers, Brooks (with Ticketmaster) changed the way high-demand tours are executed. Rather than putting scores of dates on sale at once, Brooks put each city up individually, announcing two or three shows and then adding dates in real time as demand dictated.

How the hell is this any different to what U2 - and many other bands - have done in the past? Heaps of artists previously have just announced a couple of shows in the city and then ended up with a pretty decent run. Hell, look at Pink in Australia. Or John Farnham before her!

Brooks solved the scaling conundrum by pricing all tickets the same (about $70), maintaining that he never wanted price to be a roadblock for anyone to see him live.

This is not some innovation by Brooks, but just a return to an old model. Until the eighties it was normal that all seats in the venue had the same price. It's only been since the nineties that artists have had multiple levels of pricing.

PS I doubt anybody in Australia, with the exception of the residents of Tamworth, has even the faintest clue who this guy is. I'd be surprised if he can play even a small arena in Melbourne, let alone Rod Laver (which, if U2 do an arena tour of Australia, is where they would play). I only know about him because people on Interference have mentioned him in relation to breaking U2's record from 360.
 
Back
Top Bottom