The Rolling Stones got it right.

[STING2]

Sting2...my whole point was nobody really plays stadiums in North America. That is the caviat to my whole list of bands. There is no point really in debating each bands status since the essence of what I was saying is that North American fans don't generally respond well (i.e. purchase great amounts of tix for) stadium shows. There are markets where every one of those bands would fill a stadium, perhaps not 120,000...and I was just pointing out that it is less a reflection of the quality of the bands available today but more the economics of playing stadiums that is causing a decline in stadium tours.

I would wager that when most of the bands do go out, they are actually playing in front of more people now than bands that played stadiums years ago. More dates, large arenas. Look at Dave Matthews Band for example...he plays 20-45 sold out arena/amphitheater shows every year. His inability to play in Europe is more lack of a record label that distributes/promotes him worldwide. That is changing for him.


Again...artists are as good today, venues are better today, risk for tour in smaller venues is lower today so the desire to play stadiums is not there.

A stadium tour is always possible in the USA provided that the artist in question is popular enough as a concert selling act. Few artist have the popularity though to play a full stadium tour in the USA.

Its true there are a number of artist that have the ability to do it in Europe, but thats a reflection of that artist popularity there, not the publics prefence for or against shows in a stadium.

As of right now in 2005, I know of no market where these artist could attract 40,000+ people to a stadium show:

Cher
David Hasselhoff
Britney Spears
Depeche Mode
The Cure
Stereophonics

Attendance across the industry is down. The best year ever was 1994 and since then things have steadily declined across the industry. Most attendances for various tours, especially for stadium shows were higher in the 1980s.

Dave Matthews Band has had every opportunity to success outside the United States, including opening for the Rolling Stones all across Europe in the late 1990s, but it has not worked. The only place they have succeeded is in the USA. Their tours are smaller now and they do not go into the stadiums, although the fact that they tour EVERY year certainly has an impact on the demand to see them.

This is not about the true quality of the artist. Having the demand to play stadiums is a difficult thing, and its not surprising to see so few artist with the ability to do a global stadium tour.

 

[matt_tx00]

Its true there are a number of artist that have the ability to do it in Europe, but thats a reflection of that artist popularity there, not the publics prefence for or against shows in a stadium.

Attendance across the industry is down. The best year ever was 1994 and since then things have steadily declined across the industry. Most attendances for various tours, especially for stadium shows were higher in the 1980s.

Dave Matthews Band has had every opportunity to success outside the United States, including opening for the Rolling Stones all across Europe in the late 1990s, but it has not worked. The only place they have succeeded is in the USA. Their tours are smaller now and they do not go into the stadiums, although the fact that they tour EVERY year certainly has an impact on the demand to see them.

This is not about the true quality of the artist. Having the demand to play stadiums is a difficult thing, and its not surprising to see so few artist with the ability to do a global stadium tour.

Personally, I'm glad there aren't too many stadium tours here in the U.S. because I think they're horrible. Now that I think of it, I think I've only been to one true stadium show, and that was the Eagles Hell Freezes Over concert at Texas stadium in Dallas. And I think that was in 1994. I remember being in what seemed like the nosebleed section and bad reverb all the way around. The tickets were like $60 or $70 each which seemed crazy back then.

The ticket prices have got to be the biggest reason why the concert industry has been diminishing, especially in these most recent 3-4 years. For years the prices were just going up like crazy year after year. Finally in the last couple of years there's been some positive signs like some artists cutting their prices in half, and others like Green Day charging what seems like a bargain - every ticket on their upcoming tour is $35-$45.

DMB could pull in a stadium crowd in the U.S., just like Robbie Williams could overseas. But I guess its harder for them to do that now?

I used to like to go see everyone in concert, now its like saving all your hard-earned cash for just your favorite 2 or 3 every year. No one else really seems to be worth $75 or $100 a ticket.

 

[pepokiss]

well... to do a stadium show you have toi have 2 things:

popularity

a real SHOW...

how is that?... you need a real show, like ZooTV Outside Broadcast, or Popmart, or the Voodoo Lounge tour... those were stadium shows.. where the WHOLE STADIUM actually got something to see...

I always get surprised when I see the Rattle & Hum video (no DVD yet) and when STREETS starts they show the Tempe Stadium and is FULL (yet, GA was seated)... and I start to think: what did the people in the other side of the stadium see, if there were no TV screens?... just them and their tiny cowboy hats a zillion miles away... yet they pulled it off

then you see some Popmart shots, especially that one of the
helicopter outside the stadium, and showing the other end of the stadium, and the people all the way up there and you STILL could se the arch and some of the screen

You need a SHOW to tour... if you have a show, people will come. If its just you and a stage, forget it




so DMB...

 

[thatsnotmypuppy]

Cher could have done stadiums in Australia - she did in New Zealand. She played 4 arena dates in Sydney to a combined sales of 45,000, and three in Melbourne for 36,000. Billy Joel and Elton John could do stadiums - together and apart.

As for Robbie Williams - in the UK, Europe, South Africa, Australia, NZ and debatedly most of Asia he could sell out stadiums. His 'Greatest Hits' CD sold just under 10 million worldwide - only 120,000 of which were in the USA. Its debatable if even HTDAAB has sold over 9 million outside the USA. Mr Willaims is indeed a global (excl. US) phenomenon.

By saying that, I'd rather he toured arenas - the stadiums in Australia tend to be mainly circular to accomodate cricket and aussie rules football, or rectangular with lesser capacity end stands for rugby. Circular grounds mean heaps of sound issues - and the rectangular ones mean you can be very far from the stage.

 

[Yahweh]

When was the last time the Rolling Stones made a half decent album?

It hasnt been anytime in this generation I can tell you that.

They better have Emergency Services ready at every venue just incase Mick and Keith need them.

 

[cmb737]

David Hasselhoff was a joke.

There is no way to prove either of us wrong, but I think Depeche Mode, The Cure, and Stereophonics could all do a few stadium shows on a tour. Not an entire stadium tour, but a few here and there. Certainly a one-off stadium show pretty much anywhere in Europe. Britney's last tour before she cancelled it (for reasons that can be debated) had many stadiums in South America in it. She could easily go anywhere in Asia and sell out stadiums. Even now.

 

[matt_tx00]

When was the last time the Rolling Stones made a half decent album?

It hasnt been anytime in this generation I can tell you that.

They better have Emergency Services ready at every venue just incase Mick and Keith need them.

Probably the late '70s or early '80s. I'm thinking the albums with "Miss You" or "Start Me Up" on them.

 

[innominata8]

i tried this morning to get rolling stones tix to fenway and the prices were outragous: the prices i got quoted on the phone were $160 and $245. makes me feel like maybe u2 tix we're all that pricey....

 

[STING2]

David Hasselhoff was a joke.

There is no way to prove either of us wrong, but I think Depeche Mode, The Cure, and Stereophonics could all do a few stadium shows on a tour. Not an entire stadium tour, but a few here and there. Certainly a one-off stadium show pretty much anywhere in Europe. Britney's last tour before she cancelled it (for reasons that can be debated) had many stadiums in South America in it. She could easily go anywhere in Asia and sell out stadiums. Even now.

Some of these artist used to be able to do that, but based on the statistics from their last tours and the size of venues played, they can't today. Could you point me to a tour schedual for Britney's last tour showing the South American dates? The fact that the tour was cancelled does not sound to good as far as sells. If it was really a hot ticket down there, I kind of doubt she would pass it up. Her last show in LA, the second largest market in the USA, failed to sellout despite the fact that capacity was set at 15,000. Just because she may have sold a lot in Asia, does not mean she would necessarily sellout stadiums there or even arena's. To the best of my knowledge, she has yet to fill a stadium anywhere, and her career from selling point has cooled.

 

[STING2]

Cher could have done stadiums in Australia - she did in New Zealand. She played 4 arena dates in Sydney to a combined sales of 45,000, and three in Melbourne for 36,000. Billy Joel and Elton John could do stadiums - together and apart.

As for Robbie Williams - in the UK, Europe, South Africa, Australia, NZ and debatedly most of Asia he could sell out stadiums. His 'Greatest Hits' CD sold just under 10 million worldwide - only 120,000 of which were in the USA. Its debatable if even HTDAAB has sold over 9 million outside the USA. Mr Willaims is indeed a global (excl. US) phenomenon.

By saying that, I'd rather he toured arenas - the stadiums in Australia tend to be mainly circular to accomodate cricket and aussie rules football, or rectangular with lesser capacity end stands for rugby. Circular grounds mean heaps of sound issues - and the rectangular ones mean you can be very far from the stage.

Elton John plays arena's by himself and sometimes fails to sellout. He used to be a big stadium act in the 70s though. Billy Joel can always play a couple of stadium shows in New York City, but he is more of an arena act in most other markets. Together of course, they do very good business and have been booked in stadiums often in the past. That of course is part of the reason why they toured together.

If Cher did stadiums in New Zealand, why not in Australia? It may be because she is unable to there. The total attendance from 4 arena dates is not the equilavent of what would happen for one stadium show. Fans go to multiple shows and or many people who are unable to go a certain night or able to go to one of the following nights. She would probably need to do at least 6 arena shows at a 10,000 seat arena to have a good shot at attracting 40,000+ people to a single stadium show. 4 shows shows that she is close, but not completely there which is probably why the arena shows were booked in the first place.

 

[The_acrobat]

Just a fun fact about Dave Matthews Band on this 2005 tour.

He is playing 6 stadium shows.
2 in Randall's Island, NY
2 in SBC Park, San Francisco
2 at Home Depot Center, LA

He also plays multiple nights in amphitheaters that usually sellout and average about 40,000 for a 2 night stand. June 8th I'll be there in Columbus to see DMB! 2nd favorite band!

 

[xellente]

U2 would never book dates without finishing the album.

cough popmart cough

True-dat!

Even though i think we can all agree that this was the exception and not the rule as far as this band is concerned.

I am lost though...are we saying we WANT stadium tours?

U did two nights in Anaheim and Two in LA. The could have done one show at the Collisuem or Dodger Stadium and had the same amount of people for one nights work. i like that the smaller arenas give a more intimate feel to the show.

If i never saw a concert in a stadium it would be too soon.

However i must say...another a band must have to do stadium shows is the ability to make the person sitting in section 589 Row Y, seat 45...(me during one ZOOTV in Anaheim) feel like he's part of the show.

 

[xellente]

i tried this morning to get rolling stones tix to fenway and the prices were outragous: the prices i got quoted on the phone were $160 and $245. makes me feel like maybe u2 tix we're all that pricey....

Assuming you meant "weren't"...

I think you summed up the discussion nicley

Again, FOUR of us got to see an awesome U2 show in April for $225. Still can't beat it.

 

[STING2]

Just a fun fact about Dave Matthews Band on this 2005 tour.

He is playing 6 stadium shows.
2 in Randall's Island, NY
2 in SBC Park, San Francisco
2 at Home Depot Center, LA

He also plays multiple nights in amphitheaters that usually sellout and average about 40,000 for a 2 night stand. June 8th I'll be there in Columbus to see DMB! 2nd favorite band!

Another fact is that so far there are no shows outside the United States, not even in Canada. I also noticed that while Dave Matthews Band has sold some albums in Canada, the level of sales there are nothing compared to their USA sales. Lets take a look at the studio albums:

USA

Remember Two Things Platinum 1,000,000
Under The Table..... 6 x Plat. 6,000,000
Crash 7 x Plat. 7,000,000
Before These........ 3 x Plat. 3,000,000
Everyday 3 x Plat. 3,000,000
Busted Stuff 2 x Plat. 2,000,000


Canada

Under The Table.... GOLD 50,000
Crash PLAT. 100,000
Before These... PLAT. 100,000
Everyday PLAT. 100,000

Remember Two Things and Busted Stuff have not sold enough in Canada to be certified GOLD. None of Dave Matthews Live releases have sold enough to go GOLD in Canada. An album must sell 50,000 copies in Canada to go GOLD.

Still, Canada is perhaps one of the few if not the only country outside of the United States where Dave Matthews Band has sold any albums.

So why does the current tour not play any shows in Canada?

 

[tarquinsuperb]

Right just a couple of things as even by Interference standards this thread has gone very US focused.
I think it's worth calling attention to something more Europe orientated (after all the two acts we're debating here are from Europe) is the U2 focus on stadiums on the second leg of this tour.
Just to compare the last time the Stones toured and I don't think it's going to be any different this time they played two dates at Twickenham stadium, one at Wembley Arena and one at the Astoria theatre in London. U2 are at least as big a draw with as big an active fan base in London yet are only doing the two stadium dates. I was pretty disapointed by this when Vertigo was announced as the Stones seemed willing to reward their hardcore fans with a more intimate show whereas U2 have not.


Not to be too picky about other details but I thought I'd just clear one more thing: up the Sterophonics don't have a snow ball's chance in hell of launching a Stadium tour. They played a single stadium on their last tour, in their home town on a saturday night and didn't even come close to selling it out even with a couple of very strong support acts and I think it was probably the worst gig I have ever been to.

 

[Klink]

I think many missed the point. The Stones will be going to far more exotic places than U2, at least as it stands now. To me this is good. I dont care when the last good Rolling Stones album came out or how much they're charging for tix. Markets determine ticket prices ultimately, not bands. If your face value is 50% of the market value, scalpers and brokers will buy more tickets and charge the market value and then the band and its ticket outlets will be criticized for selling to brokers. Arguably- and ironically - the fact that U2 charges far below market value has actually hurt fans more than helped, since this strategy makes it viable for scalpers and brokers to sign up for as many fan club memberships as they want for $40 each (bringing the total for a GA ticket to USD $90), and still make a profit by selling them closer to the $300+ market value. I'd rather the band profit than brokers, but U2 knows as well as anybody that image can be more important than reality and to keep the appearance of fan-friendly low prices alive they have to charge less. Of course, brokers have bought a large portion of the tix and can control the supply to a great degree, and by creating scarcity they force prices up for fans. It's all a game and U2 is not to blame. The demand for low ticket prices and membership perks from fans is ignorant, but also very forceful for a band that is fan-friendly. So even though it hurts the fans more, there's nothing U2 can do about it except give the ignorants what we want.

The Stones know that people will pay $400 to see them so they charge it. It just means brokers and scalpers will profit less. They are a nostalgia act. Nobody is claiming they are still on top of the world. But they did do a good job with selecting venues, in my opinion.


Jon

 

[Klink]

Sellouts are also irrelevant. Sure you don't want tons of empty seats but maximizing revenue is the goal and if you can fill up 5/6 of a 20,000 building while charging an average of $200/ticket, you will make more money than selling out 6/6 (sellout) at $100 or even $150.


5/6 x $200 = $166.67 x 20,000 = $3,333,333.33
6/6 x $150 = $150.00 x 20,000 = $3,000,000.00


When you subtract the cost of having the show to calculate the margin and profit, this difference is even more significant. If you were a business like a tour promoter, which would you choose?

Jon

 

[U2matthew]

NO BAND ON EARTH ENJOYS THE CRITICAL AND COMMERCIAL ACCLAIM MORE THEN U2. THEY CAN SELL OUT ANY ANY STADIUM WORLDWIDE. NO OTHER BAND CAN SAY THAT.

 

[Klink]

You're right. No question about it. So why don't they go do that? Instead they're playing NY/NJ 10 times (or whatever it is), Boston and Chicago 7 times etc. My suggestion is that they should go do that...take advantage. Don't mean any disrespect to fans at these shows but I have a good buddy who went to one of the Chicago shows. He said the crowd was lame... And this doesn't surprise me. When you play 7 shows in one city you become part of the landscape a little. That's why I think diversifying is exciting. Not to mention that fans would go crazy in smaller cities that usually get ignored because acts like U2 are rare there.

Jon

 

[Hawkfire]

It's cheaper to set up shop in NYC/Boston/Chicago and do 8-10 shows at each city than travel to some remote locale for what would be a single show.

MORE $$$$$$$$$$ - a factor that seems to drive the decision bus for U2 on everything these days.

 

[KUEFC09U2]

It's cheaper to set up shop in NYC/Boston/Chicago and do 8-10 shows at each city than travel to some remote locale for what would be a single show.

MORE $$$$$$$$$$ - a factor that seems to drive the decision bus for U2 on everything these days.

yes thats obviously where there charging alot less than the stones? hmm

also when was the last time the stones went to sarajevo? cant quite remember can you?

 

[Klink]

It's cheaper to set up shop in NYC/Boston/Chicago and do 8-10 shows at each city than travel to some remote locale for what would be a single show.

Not necessarily. Only if the shows are consecutive, which many are not due to basketball games and the division between first and third legs. The band has two sets of equipment, one in both the current host city and one in the next one (if possible setting up for the next show). This really makes the cost pretty marginal because they will still be paying for the second set of equipment and the crew, no matter where it is.

Jon

 

[Klink]

yes thats obviously where there charging alot less than the stones? hmm

also when was the last time the stones went to sarajevo? cant quite remember can you?

That's pretty anecdotal. The Stones were invited to play by the President of the Czechoslovakia almost immediately after it gained its independence from the former USSR, as a celebration of freedom. They were on tour in Japan at the time and Vaclav Havel (the new Czech President who helped overthrow the communists), flew there to personally invite them right away. How many people did they play to? 250,000 or something crazy like this.

More importantly, this is not a history discussion. U2 have no plans to visit Sarajevo yet this tour, while the Stones will be in the far east, mexico and South America.

Jon

 

[KUEFC09U2]

That's pretty anecdotal. The Stones were invited to play by the President of the Czechoslovakia almost immediately after it gained its independence from the former USSR, as a celebration of freedom.

More importantly, this is not a history discussion. U2 have no plans to visit Sarajevo yet this tour, while the Stones will be in the far east, mexico and South America.

Jon

whos to say U2 wont go to mexico and south america in the fourth leg?

 

[Klink]

I hope they do. My point is that they haven't done so yet. Not only that, but the number of continents is less important than the cities. The Stones will be playing in some of the cities I mentioned in the first post of this thread...smaller quaint places and they haven't even come close to releasing most of the dates yet. Omaha city is a good idea for U2. I am trying to encourage them to do more of this kind of thing.

Jon

 

[KUEFC09U2]

I hope they do. My point is that they haven't done so yet. Not only that, but the number of continents is less important than the cities. The Stones will be playing in some of the cities I mentioned in the first post of this thread...smaller quaint places and they haven't even come close to releasing most of the dates yet. Omaha city is a good idea for U2. I am trying to encourage them to do more of this kind of thing.

Jon

maybe its something to do with the "family illness"

 

[roy keane]

Playing less attractive places from any popular band almost certanly means selling out concert no matter if it is a stadium or arena show.Simply people in smaller cities or countries are delighted when some big name whom they can only wach on TV or read in papers decide to visit them .They massively buy tickets no matter if they are a fan of a band.And that is a big chance for a band to get plenty new fans.
For instance Metallica played in Belgrade last year and even though they were not too popular here they sold out 40000 seat stadium instantly.After that they becane one of the most popular bands here.
Off topic,but I am curious.Pavaroti is about to play in Belgrade soon and his cheapest ticket is 200$.I didn't know that opera stars are so popular so I wonder if he charges that amount in poor country as Serbia what would be the ticket price in ,for instance London or any other big city in EU?

 

[slimJim]

I heard that Pearl Jam is opening some dates for the Stones. I'd pay $200 to see that show.

 

[isabelle_guns]

It's nto fair to say what or who did what right considering that each band does things in their own way.

 

[beli]

maybe its something to do with the "family illness"

The last tour was the same. U2 only played North America and Western Europe. There was no world tour then either.