u2 360 Boxscore

[Moggio]

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Thank you for making me laugh at your expense. I am really ignorant. You are the expert, Sir.

HERE IT IS AGAIN:

I think you two have NO business in this thread due to your extreme ignorance.

 

[Moggio]

You never learn, do you?

I've learned that you're a hypocrite. So, yes, I have learned something.

 

[Moggio]

The decline and stagnation of the Stones outside of the United States and Canada:

Here are the Stones tour grosses outside the United States/Canada adjusted into 2007 dollars:

Voodoo Lounge: $270,116,738

Bridges To Babylon: $196,690,624

Licks: $195,293,575

A Bigger Bang: $265,582,081


So, there is steady decline and stagnation in the Stones numbers outside the USA/Canada until A Bigger Bang when the Stones bring in Strategic Scheduling, better pricing, and split their European tour up over two summers.

ONCE AGAIN, individual markets hit per tour and total shows per tour differed and alter things considerably...

 

[Vlad n U 2]

I think you two have NO business in this thread due to your extreme ignorance.

It's a free forum, maaaaaan.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

ONCE AGAIN, individual markets hit per tour and total shows per tour differed and alter things considerably...

LOL, I love how you can't handle facts and respond with inaccurate generalizations.

Here, we'll be a little more specific this time:


The decline and stagnation of the Stones outside of the United States and Canada:

Here are the Stones tour grosses outside the United States/Canada adjusted into 2007 dollars:

Voodoo Lounge: $270,116,738
shows: 69

Bridges To Babylon: $196,690,624
shows: 60

Licks: $195,293,575
shows: 66

A Bigger Bang: $265,582,081
shows: 63



Every tour has slightly different numbers of shows played. There is no major difference here in the numbers of shows played. The average over the four tours is 64 outside the USA/Canada. There is NO major difference in the markets that are hit.

Yes, A Bigger Bang played 6 fewer shows than Voodoo Lounge, but the number of shows you can play is dependent upon demand. Nearly all of the shows on A Bigger Bang FAILED to sellout, while nearly all of the shows on Voodoo Lounge soldout. ANYONE who wanted to see A Bigger Bang had a good chance to, and was not blocked by sellouts. On Voodoo Lounge that was not the case.

Finally, If A Bigger Bang was indeed a bigger tour outside the USA/Canada than Voodoo Lounge, 63 shows would be more the enough to defeat it. HELL, U2 360 beat the 143 shows of A Bigger Bang with just 85 shows. Plus, A Bigger Bang has the advantage of strategic scheduling, while Voodoo Lounge has NOTHING like that.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

You mean LOTS of exceptions. And of course the North American 360 tour shows would have been in arenas, if it weren't for HEAVY strategic scheduling and strong openers.

ANOTHER MISQUOTE.



As long as their ticket prices are scaled lower than expected, several artists could, including The Stones...

LOL, you know there is something in between playing stadiums in 360 which is something NO one has ever done, and playing arena's. Its called playing stadiums in 270. U2 could easily do a tour coast to coast in the USA without any "strategic scheduling", playing stadiums in 270 with about an average of 43,000 people per show at the same prices.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

"...the Stones ONLY averaged $104 dollars in tickets charged for the 89 stadiums shows they did on their last tour"?!!!



Exactly.



Huh?

Yep, its not $140-$300. So why bring up some random price that no one charges, not even the Stones?

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

No, you haven't shown that. A chunk of them have stagnated, but almost none of them have declined. And like I said, the vast majority of markets that most artists perform in, including The Stones, are in North America. Also, their per tour shows totals differ greatly in some cases. That also makes a difference in overall average totals, etc.

These are not overall average totals. These are THE TOTALS of what the Stones did outside the USA/Canada period and it shows a consistent decline, only stopped with strategic scheduling on A Bigger Bang:

The decline and stagnation of the Stones outside of the United States and Canada:

Here are the Stones tour grosses outside the United States/Canada adjusted into 2007 dollars:

Voodoo Lounge: $270,116,738
shows: 69

Bridges To Babylon: $196,690,624
shows: 60

Licks: $195,293,575
shows: 66

A Bigger Bang: $265,582,081
shows: 63

But that's not exactly what I said. You're quoting me OUT OF CONTEXT AGAIN.

Nope, you stated that the Stones increase EVERY TIME. The above proves that is totally FALSE!

Well, The Bridges To Babylon / No Security tour seems to be the exception. But you're CONVENIENTLY not including the fact that the Licks tour had about 25 less shows than the Bridges To Babylon / No Security tour.

WRONG AGAIN!



OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES/CANADA

Bridges To Babylon: $196,690,624
shows: 60

Licks: $195,293,575
shows: 66



Licks has a lower gross outside the USA/Canada despite playing 6 more shows than Bridges To Babylon.

Definitely not. In this case, that 6 show difference makes up a roughly $20 million difference. Why don't you apply that difference to the totals and averages you compared and then see the difference?

And ONCE AGAIN, the A Bigger Bang tour had very little strategic scheduling.

1. If the Stones could have played more shows outside of the USA/Canada, they would have. They stopped at 63, and most of those shows had very low attendance. Anyone who wanted to see the Stones could have done so. Besides, it only took U2 85 shows to beat A Bigger Bang's 143 show total overall, so Outside the USA/Canada, 63 shows was plenty to beat the 69 of Voodoo Lounge, but they FAILED.

2. A Bigger Bang had significant strategic scheduling outside the USA/Canada. They played 19 shows across Europe in the summer of 2006. Then they waited a year and played 30 shows across Europe in 2007. If they had just played one leg of Europe in one summer, A Bigger Bang's gross would have been smaller. Voodoo Lounge would have grossed more if they had done a 2nd leg in Europe in the summer of 1996!



Your claim that the Rolling Stones GROSS increases EVERYWHERE each time they tour has been crushed by the facts! But please, if you think otherwise, show us FACTS that would prove otherwise!

 

[roy keane]

Dont know what is wrong with strategic scheduling. I thought everyone used it. It is natural to try to do as best as you can. Another pathetic argument.

 

[BVS]

Dont know what is wrong with strategic scheduling. I thought everyone used it. It is natural to try to do as best as you can. Another pathetic argument.

No one uses strategy when planning a tour except U2, everyone else just throws darts at a map. People who know the business know this kind of thing.

 

[fedeu2]

I've learned that you're a hypocrite. So, yes, I have learned something.

I wonder how much more bullshit from this guy we are supposed to take before he´s banned for good.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

On the subject of concert demand outside the United States/Canada, here is how U2 360 tour did:

U2 360 TOUR: 1ST LEG EUROPE STATS

GROSS: $188,344,444
ATTENDANCE: 1,759,222
Average Gross: $7,847,685
Average Attendance: 73,301
Average Ticket Price: $107.06
Shows: 24
Sellouts: 24

U2 360 TOUR: 3RD LEG EUROPE STATS

GROSS: $131,502,367
ATTENDANCE: 1,312,784
Average Gross: $5,977,385
Average Attendance: 59,672
Average Ticket Price: $100.17
Shows: 22
Sellouts: 22

U2 360 TOUR: 4TH LEG AUSTRALIA/NEW ZEALAND STATS

GROSS: $60,918,582
ATTENDANCE: 500,437
Average Gross: $6,091,858
Average Attendance: 50,043
Average Ticket Price: $121.73
Shows: 10
Sellouts: 10

U2 360 TOUR: 5TH LEG SOUTH AFRICA STATS

GROSS: $15,540,805
ATTENDANCE: 166,764
Average Gross: $7,770,403
Average Attendance: 83,382
Average Ticket Price: $93.19
Shows: 2
Sellouts: 2

U2 360 TOUR: 6TH LEG SOUTH AMERICA STATS

GROSS: $60,854,813
ATTENDANCE: 519,285
Average Gross: $8,693,545
Average Attendance: 74,184
Average Ticket Price: 117.19
Shows: 7
Sellouts: 7

U2 360 TOUR: MEXICO STATS

May 11, 14, 15, 2011
Mexico City Mexico
Estadio Azteca
GROSS: $22,866,542
ATTENDANCE: 282,978
SHOWS: 3
SELLOUTS: 3
Average Ticket Price: $80.81

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Now here is the total of all those legs that occured outside the United States/Canada on U2 360:

U2 360 TOUR: 2009-2011 TOTAL STATS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES/CANADA

GROSS: $480,027,553
ATTENDANCE: 4,541,470
Average Gross: $7,059,229
Average Attendance: 66,786
Average Ticket Price: $105.70
Shows: 68
Sellouts: 68


THE ROLLING STONES - A BIGGER BANG TOUR: 2005-2007 TOTAL STATS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES/CANADA

GROSS: $265,582,081
ATTENDANCE: 2,540,224
Average Gross: $4,215,589
Average Attendance: 40,321
Average Ticket Price: $104.55
Shows: 63
Sellouts: 12


Well, given these facts, one wonders how the Stones will be able to top U2 outside of the United States/Canada. They would essentially have to double what they did on A Bigger Bang which clearly exhausted the market and ran out of steam with only 12 sellouts in 63 shows.

 

[beLIEve]

Now here is the total of all those legs that occured outside the United States/Canada on U2 360:

U2 360 TOUR: 2009-2011 TOTAL STATS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES/CANADA

GROSS: $480,027,553
ATTENDANCE: 4,541,470
Average Gross: $7,059,229
Average Attendance: 66,786
Average Ticket Price: $105.70
Shows: 68
Sellouts: 68


THE ROLLING STONES - A BIGGER BANG TOUR: 2005-2007 TOTAL STATS OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES/CANADA

GROSS: $265,582,081
ATTENDANCE: 2,540,224
Average Gross: $4,215,589
Average Attendance: 40,321
Average Ticket Price: $104.55
Shows: 63
Sellouts: 12

Well, given these facts, one wonders how the Stones will be able to top U2 outside of the United States/Canada. They would essentially have to double what they did on A Bigger Bang which clearly exhausted the market and ran out of steam with only 12 sellouts in 63 shows.

These are the facts, Moggio. From this point forward, no one wants to read or respond to your nonsense.

 

[CosmoKramer]

Anyways, once the schedule for the first two legs of 360 tour had been released and before any openers were announced, my overall prediction was that U2 would gross about $600 million from 100 shows, tops. Considering they've added 10 more shows than they originally planned, this means they'll gross about $660 million. And once the final numbers are released in August, my prediction will be very close to the actual result, minus their opener's draw of course...

So you made a revised prediction that the tour would gross $600 prior to knowing the openers. Now you say that the openers that U2 have utilized have allowed them to increase their gross per show, on AVERAGE, 10%. You often state that Muse and the BEP are two of the larger openers that U2 used, so they would in theory bring in an additional 15-18% in gross in order to average out the much smaller openers.

Even though I do not agree at all with your logic, to stay with it for a moment, there is a major issue at hand. See, when you made these predictions on the North American leg, you didn't know the openers, so you would have added 10% to the gross if you had, well...........

You predicted that U2 would SELLOUT the following shows without the assistance of these "10%" openers:

Giants Stadium for THREE shows (Muse opened up in NJ)
Chicago for TWO shows
Toronto for TWO shows
Boston for TWO shows
LA for one show....BEP
DC for one show....Muse
las Vegas for 1 show.....BEP
Vancouver for 1 show....BEP
Arizona for 1 show....BEP
Atlanta for 1 show.....Muse

So how does one sell 10% more tickets to a show that is SOLDOUT?

In the case of Giants Stadium, you predicted a gross of $19.5 million BEFORE you knew the openers that U2 were using, yet those shows grossed $16.5 million......so Muse had a negative impact on sales???????????

In Toronto you predicted U2 would gross $13 million before you knew Snow Patrol was opening, yet they only grossed $9.5 million. So Snow Patrol had a negative impact on the show according to you!!!!!

Ready for the kicker?????? For the Rose Bowl, you predicted that U2 would gross $11.5 million BEFORE you knew that the BEP were opening for them, yet the actual gross was $9.9 million. So according to your logic, the BEP actually REDUCED U2's gross by 13.9%.

 

[U2FanPeter]

There is no reason repeated Stadium tours can't be done. U2 played stadiums in the US from 1987 through 1997 on 3 tours. They stopped on Elevation as their popularity rebuilt, and then discovered to late on Vertigo that they were ready for Stadiums again in North America as the demand was clearly there.

Since the release of JT they've done 5 Stadium tour legs and 6 Arena tour legs plus Joshue leg 3 alternated.

Something I've wondered for awhile is why they never added some one-off 3rd leg stadium shows or two on Elevation or Vertigo like they did in Slane 01, Turin 01 and the Silverdome spring 1987. Both legs had late arena additions.

The fact is, stadium tours for the artist are less time consuming, which makes it very attractive. When your very popular like U2 is, its very difficult to meet the demand in the market by playing arena's. Thats why U2 went to the stadiums in 1987, and why they have stayed in stadiums for the most part with some exceptions, since that time.

This is less true about the 360 tour.

It was a timeline commitment from July 2008 to May 2011(July 2011 taking in account Bono's surgery). This is when the stage was commissioned to be built and album sessions and tour pre-production begun. And didn't make money until 20 months after the stage was ordered. The 360 tour has trouble visiting more than 2 cities a week.

Why would Madge/ACDC/Stones/Waters-Gilmour/whoever or even U2 again want to take on such a tour in the future?

Madonna could not do a 360 stadium tour, despite what Moggio thinks. Hell, she couldn't even do a 270 stadium tour in most markets in the United States.

If it was summer only, had better openers, no arenas, appropriate pricing and did some markets she's never done I could see a dozen North American markets one year and dozen the next. 2012 would have been 4 years since the last tour having these stadium boxscores in 2008.

BC Place Stadium Vancouver 52,712 / 52,712 (100%) $5,389,762
Petco Park San Diego 35,743 / 35,743 (100%) $5,097,515
Dodger Stadium Los Angeles 43,919 / 43,919 (100%) $5,858,730
Minute Maid Park Houston 41,498 / 41,498 (100%) $5,170,100
Ford Field Detroit 30,119 / 30,119 (100%) $2,395,900
Dolphin Stadium Miami 47,998 / 47,998 (100%) $6,137,030
Foro Sol Stadium Mexico City 104,270 / 104,270 (100%) $10,428,743

Source?

"we like playing in arenas."
"I don't think we'd want to do another stadium tour"
Adam Clayton June 11th Rolling Stone

Exclusive: The Edge and Adam Clayton Reveal U2's Future Plans | Rolling Stone Music

Band member #2 talks(0:25 mark) the next touring being arenas. This is an informal quote and perhaps best placed in the "Bono says a lot of things" file folder.
YouTube - ‪Bono atendendo aos fãs no Hyatt (3)‬‏

 

[U2FanPeter]

A Bigger Bang had significant strategic scheduling outside the USA/Canada. They played 19 shows across Europe in the summer of 2006. Then they waited a year and played 30 shows across Europe in 2007.

BB went strategic in USA and most of Europe. Not much elsewhere.

Well, given these facts, one wonders how the Stones will be able to top U2 outside of the United States/Canada. They would essentially have to double what they did on A Bigger Bang which clearly exhausted the market and ran out of steam with only 12 sellouts in 63 shows.

These are the facts, Moggio. From this point forward, no one wants to read or respond to your nonsense.

The Bigger Bang tour gross and attendence numbers outside the USA do speak for themselves. "sellouts" for are open to interpretation. I must say that a cringe a little when I see U2 not acknowledging a single non-sellout show since Popmart. Are there specific examples of Billboard accepting 2/3rds full "sellout" stadiums prior to Popmart?

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Since the release of JT they've done 5 Stadium tour legs and 6 Arena tour legs plus Joshue leg 3 alternated.

Something I've wondered for awhile is why they never added some one-off 3rd leg stadium shows or two on Elevation or Vertigo like they did in Slane 01, Turin 01 and the Silverdome spring 1987. Both legs had late arena additions.

;[/url]

The arena legs on Joshua Tree and Zoo Tv were only done to test the waters to make sure of demand for stadiums, thats it. The only tour since Joshua Tree that was strictly arena or almost strictly arena and stayed that way was the Elevation tour.

As for the one offs, those were planned well ahead of time.

This is less true about the 360 tour.

It was a timeline commitment from July 2008 to May 2011(July 2011 taking in account Bono's surgery). This is when the stage was commissioned to be built and album sessions and tour pre-production begun. And didn't make money until 20 months after the stage was ordered. The 360 tour has trouble visiting more than 2 cities a week.

Why would Madge/ACDC/Stones/Waters-Gilmour/whoever or even U2 again want to take on such a tour in the future?

1. The ZOO TV tour outside broadcast, POPMART, and the stadium portions of the Vertigo Tour all had similar build up and planning. POPMART planning started in the spring of 1996. All these tours featured the fact that money was not made until later in the tour.

2. The band will gross nearly $750 million from just ticket sales on this tour. While the tour is the most expensive in history, the cost is not more than half of what is being grossed making it the largest profit ever from touring in history, and thats only considering ticket sales and not merchandise.

3. From October 1 to October 28 2009, the 360 tour visited 11 cities. 11 cities in 4 weeks is nearly 3 cities per week, NOT two. An arena tour would not be any faster as you would have to play multiple nights in each city.

4. The band does not build the stage and take it down. They play the shows, but when they are not playing, they have time off to be with family and friends. Stadiums means less shows and more time for family, friends, or recording that new album.

5. Madonna and AC/DC can't do a tour on this scale. When Pink Floyd was still alive, they did a couple of tours that were similar to this in scale. The Stones of course have done this before, but are unlikely to do it in the future because of their ability to fill stadiums. When you can only draw and average of 40,000 people to a stadium, you can't do a full stadium tour in 360.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

"we like playing in arenas."
"I don't think we'd want to do another stadium tour"
Adam Clayton June 11th Rolling Stone

Exclusive: The Edge and Adam Clayton Reveal U2's Future Plans | Rolling Stone Music

Band member #2 talks(0:25 mark) the next touring being arenas. This is an informal quote and perhaps best placed in the "Bono says a lot of things" file folder.
YouTube - ‪Bono atendendo aos fãs no Hyatt (3)‬‏

Stop cutting up what their saying to support your claim. Here is what Adam said:

I don't think we'd want to do another stadium tour, but I don't know. If the record caught fire in a certain way, then we would. So we have to work these things out. I do like arena tours – they're much, much easier.

This is JUST about the NEXT tour! He doesn't say STADIUMS NEVER AGAIN!


I have been a U2 fan for 25 years, and these sort of predictions about the band never doing this or never doing that again have been around all that time. They have never been true. The band keeps doing what it does best.

We had people in here that went to great lengths to try and prove U2 would never do stadiums all over the world again or at least not in North America. Your buddy Moggio used to make that claim.

Adam and Larry said around Joshua Tree that they did not forsee U2 having a lot of staging and effects on the NEXT tour. The next tour was of course ZOO TV.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

If it was summer only, had better openers, no arenas, appropriate pricing and did some markets she's never done I could see a dozen North American markets one year and dozen the next. 2012 would have been 4 years since the last tour having these stadium boxscores in 2008.

BC Place Stadium Vancouver 52,712 / 52,712 (100%) $5,389,762
Petco Park San Diego 35,743 / 35,743 (100%) $5,097,515
Dodger Stadium Los Angeles 43,919 / 43,919 (100%) $5,858,730
Minute Maid Park Houston 41,498 / 41,498 (100%) $5,170,100
Ford Field Detroit 30,119 / 30,119 (100%) $2,395,900
Dolphin Stadium Miami 47,998 / 47,998 (100%) $6,137,030
Foro Sol Stadium Mexico City 104,270 / 104,270 (100%) $10,428,743

Vancouver happened because she had not played the Pacific Northwest at all in 21 years and this was the only show.

First show in Texas in 18 years. Only one show. Ford Field was a failure.

Finally, none of these boxscores suggest any ability to do stadiums in 360.

Madonna had wanted to stadiums across North America on the last tour, but Arthur Fogul was only able to book a few where demand warrented it.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

BB went strategic in USA and most of Europe. Not much elsewhere.


?

Well, how is that any different from 360?

The Bigger Bang tour gross and attendence numbers outside the USA do speak for themselves. "sellouts" for are open to interpretation. I must say that a cringe a little when I see U2 not acknowledging a single non-sellout show since Popmart. Are there specific examples of Billboard accepting 2/3rds full "sellout" stadiums prior to Popmart?

Once again, you fail to understand how sellouts are done in the industry. At least since 1976, a venue is marked as soldout when all tickets that have been released have been sold. If an artist plays Madison Square Garden and only releases 8,000 tickets and all 8,000 are sold, the concert is marked as a sellout! If they sell less than that, then it says if 7,567 tickets are sold, 7,567 attendance, capacity 8,000. There are shows every year that are marked as sellouts but have LESS than 50% of the full potential capacity in attendance. Its been that way since the billboard boxscore chart started in 1976!

The Rolling Stones sellouts and non-sellouts are not open to interpretation. What it reflects is the inability of the Stones to sell all of the tickets that were initially released. It essentially reflects that the Stones and Live Nation overestimated the demand for the band in most markets outside the United States and Canada. Thats why you have only 12 sellouts out of 63 shows played.

U2 does not have to acknowledge any non-soldout shows since POPMART since they have been able to sell all the tickets they have released for their shows since then. Again, sellouts in Billboard Boxscore are about the selling of tickets released, not the overall maximum physical capacity of the VENUE being played! Why don't you understand that?

 

[U2FanPeter]

The band will gross nearly $750 million from just ticket sales on this tour. While the tour is the most expensive in history, the cost is not more than half of what is being grossed making it the largest profit ever from touring in history, and thats only considering ticket sales and not merchandise.

Does that mean Salt Lake City($3.02m) and Istanbul($3.7m) could have potentially lost money on ticket sales?

It also blows me away that one of the 3 claws was in storage for a total of nearly 17-18 months DURING the tour. Only 2 claws were used beetween Rome and Denver.

I'm stunned that U2/Fogel looked at a $300m bill and said "looks good".

 

[U2FanPeter]

Well, how is that any different from 360?

Once again, you fail to understand how sellouts are done in the industry. At least since 1976, a venue is marked as soldout when all tickets that have been released have been sold. If an artist plays Madison Square Garden and only releases 8,000 tickets and all 8,000 are sold, the concert is marked as a sellout! If they sell less than that, then it says if 7,567 tickets are sold, 7,567 attendance, capacity 8,000. There are shows every year that are marked as sellouts but have LESS than 50% of the full potential capacity in attendance. Its been that way since the billboard boxscore chart started in 1976!

U2 does not have to acknowledge any non-soldout shows since POPMART since they have been able to sell all the tickets they have released for their shows since then. Again, sellouts in Billboard Boxscore are about the selling of tickets released, not the overall maximum physical capacity of the VENUE being played! Why don't you understand that?

My point is if Mick Jagger cared about "optics" as much as u2 he could have said they sold out 63/63 shows. How does BB verify?

This is the 2nd time I've ask to cite pre-popmart boxscore examples of stadiums shows listed as sell out with unused sections in the front of the house.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Does that mean Salt Lake City($3.02m) and Istanbul($3.7m) could have potentially lost money on ticket sales?

It also blows me away that one of the 3 claws was in storage for a total of nearly 17-18 months DURING the tour. Only 2 claws were used beetween Rome and Denver.

I'm stunned that U2/Fogel looked at a $300m bill and said "looks good".

No, the band don't go anywhere if they can't at least break even or make money.

Remember, there were huge cost on ZOO TV, POPMART, and the stadium part of Vertigo. So this was not something new in that sense.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

My point is if Mick Jagger cared about "optics" as much as u2 he could have said they sold out 63/63 shows. How does BB verify?

This is the 2nd time I've ask to cite pre-popmart boxscore examples of stadiums shows listed as sell out with unused sections in the front of the house.

Optics? I'm telling you how its been since 1976. You don't get to simply state that x concert is soldout because you want it to be. You release tickets, and if all tickets in the initial release are sold, and no more are released the show is marked as a sellout. If it was just a matter of declaring it a sellout, all concerts everywhere would all be listed as soldout. Thats obviously not the case.

The numbers can be verified through the boxoffice as well as other ways. Why do you consistently assume the results are somehow false or inaccurate? Do you make the same accusations about any of Billboards other charts? Its amazing that you only question numbers when it comes to U2.

Plus, I seriously doubt you or anyone knows anything about what Mick Jagger truely cares about when it comes to the business.

I could cite hundreds for different artist. For U2, take a look at their first stadium show in the United States at the Silver Dome in 1987. Just under 52,000 in attendance for this show in a 270 configeration and its listed as a sellout. Yet, the full maximum capacity for a show in 270 configeration there is 78,000.

How about U2's two shows at Veterans stadium in 1992, listed as soldout at 88,000. JFK stadium listed as soldout at 86,000 in 1987. Two shows at RFK stadium listed as soldout at 97,000 in 1992. A stadium in Dallas texas listed as soldout at 39,000 in 1992.

All of these shows did not sell all the seats that were possible given the maximum physical capacity in a 270 configeration. They are sellouts because all of the tickets that were RELEASED were sold.

 

[U2FanPeter]

No, the band don't go anywhere if they can't at least break even or make money.

May 21 Denver
May 24 SLC
May 29 Winnipeg

LN are on record saying it costs $750k a day. Ticket gross for SLC would have been chewed up in 4 days.

With average ticket price around $63 for SLC it leads me to believe they raised the ratio of cheap seats to fill the place.

 

[U2FanPeter]

Optics? I'm telling you how its been since 1976. You don't get to simply state that x concert is soldout because you want it to be. You release tickets, and if all tickets in the initial release are sold, and no more are released the show is marked as a sellout. If it was just a matter of declaring it a sellout, all concerts everywhere would all be listed as soldout. Thats obviously not the case.

The numbers can be verified through the boxoffice as well as other ways. Why do you consistently assume the results are somehow false or inaccurate? Do you make the same accusations about any of Billboards other charts? Its amazing that you only question numbers when it comes to U2.

Plus, I seriously doubt you or anyone knows anything about what Mick Jagger truely cares about when it comes to the business.

I could cite hundreds for different artist. For U2, take a look at their first stadium show in the United States at the Silver Dome in 1987. Just under 52,000 in attendance for this show in a 270 configeration and its listed as a sellout. Yet, the full maximum capacity for a show in 270 configeration there is 78,000.

How about U2's two shows at Veterans stadium in 1992, listed as soldout at 88,000. JFK stadium listed as soldout at 86,000 in 1987. Two shows at RFK stadium listed as soldout at 97,000 in 1992. A stadium in Dallas texas listed as soldout at 39,000 in 1992.

All of these shows did not sell all the seats that were possible given the maximum physical capacity in a 270 configeration. They are sellouts because all of the tickets that were RELEASED were sold.

I have never questioned a U2 attendance or gross figure published by Billboard.

The only BB number I've questioned was how the Phish 12/31/99 number was submitted when they did 18 hours of music in a 52 hour period for a single act event that was only available as a "2 day pass".

You've mentioned minor mistakes in past numbers. This past week had the wrong venue for a Jovi show, plus also said the Waters show with a rumoured Gilmour cameo wasn't a sellout.

Thank you for that answer, wasn't sure if you ignored it or missed in 20 or 30 pages ago.

I read the album sales figures, but ignore the playlist charts because of how they are tabulated.

 

[superglen]

hi guys, I'm from Turin, Italy.
new member here, but I've reading Feedback a lot over the years.
I've been a u2 fan since 1984 (now i'm 39) and seen them live nearly 40 times all over europe between 1987 and 2010.

re: strategic scheduling

probably you don't know that the shows played by the Stones in europe in summer 2007 were mainly re-schedules from 2006. the 2006 european run was scheduled to run from late may to late august and would have had about 35/40 stadium shows.
in late april 2006 Keith Richards notoriously "fell from a coconut tree" while vacationing in Fiji and to undergo head-surgery, so all the shows from late may to early july had to be rescheduled to 2007, and the shows that went ahead had a lot of changes too (ie: Milan was mid-june and was moved to early july). the band cinically took the chance to move most of the european tour to 2007: 2006 tix sales were not that good and one of the reasons was the Soccer World Cup in Germany, from mid-june to mid-july. moreover, the band couldn't reschedule past-early september 2006 for 2 reasons:
1) keith in september 2006 had to film an episode of "pirates of the caribbean"
2) there was an US leg looming, starting in late september.
moreover, 2 shows in spain, arleady re-scheduled, had to be cancelled for Jagger's vocal problems, and were moved to 2007.
so, the Stones came back to europe in 2007, did all the cancelled and postponed shows, and added some additional shows here and there...

so much for "strategic scheduling" by the Stones...

anyway, this neologism is utter nonsense: every artist and promoter, all over the world, schedule their shows in a way that they find most-effective and logical.
the difference between the Stones and U2 (both managed by LN, in fact Michael Cohl was introduced to u2 by Jagger): Stones care more about the gross and milking the markets dry, regardless if the shows are sold out or not. examples: 5 or 6 shows (4 in stadiums) played in the Chicago area in 12 months between 2005 and 2006, the last couple of which were not sell-outs. u2 care more about the attendance and selling-out, hence the constant underplaying of most markets, a practice they've had forever, since becoming superstars in 1987. example: not playing strong markets like holland, uk and ireland in 2010, or skipping japan alltogether on the 360tour. in fact, they take good pride in having sold out all the shows they've played between 2001 and today.
jagger could not care less, and he's laughing all the way to the bank...;-)

 

[CosmoKramer]

hi guys, I'm from Turin, Italy.
new member here, but I've reading Feedback a lot over the years.
I've been a u2 fan since 1984 (now i'm 39) and seen them live nearly 40 times all over europe between 1987 and 2010.

re: strategic scheduling

probably you don't know that the shows played by the Stones in europe in summer 2007 were mainly re-schedules from 2006. the 2006 european run was scheduled to run from late may to late august and would have had about 35/40 stadium shows.
in late april 2006 Keith Richards notoriously "fell from a coconut tree" while vacationing in Fiji and to undergo head-surgery, so all the shows from late may to early july had to be rescheduled to 2007, and the shows that went ahead had a lot of changes too (ie: Milan was mid-june and was moved to early july). the band cinically took the chance to move most of the european tour to 2007: 2006 tix sales were not that good and one of the reasons was the Soccer World Cup in Germany, from mid-june to mid-july. moreover, the band couldn't reschedule past-early september 2006 for 2 reasons:
1) keith in september 2006 had to film an episode of "pirates of the caribbean"
2) there was an US leg looming, starting in late september.
moreover, 2 shows in spain, arleady re-scheduled, had to be cancelled for Jagger's vocal problems, and were moved to 2007.
so, the Stones came back to europe in 2007, did all the cancelled and postponed shows, and added some additional shows here and there...

so much for "strategic scheduling" by the Stones...

anyway, this neologism is utter nonsense: every artist and promoter, all over the world, schedule their shows in a way that they find most-effective and logical.
the difference between the Stones and U2 (both managed by LN, in fact Michael Cohl was introduced to u2 by Jagger): Stones care more about the gross and milking the markets dry, regardless if the shows are sold out or not. examples: 5 or 6 shows (4 in stadiums) played in the Chicago area in 12 months between 2005 and 2006, the last couple of which were not sell-outs. u2 care more about the attendance and selling-out, hence the constant underplaying of most markets, a practice they've had forever, since becoming superstars in 1987. example: not playing strong markets like holland, uk and ireland in 2010, or skipping japan alltogether on the 360tour. in fact, they take good pride in having sold out all the shows they've played between 2001 and today.
jagger could not care less, and he's laughing all the way to the bank...;-)

Welcome to the party!

 

[spookyz]

Here's what seems to be the initial schedule prior to the coconut incident:

27.05.06 Barcelona SP Olympic Stadium
29.05.06 Madrid SP Vincente Calderon
01.06.06 Brussels BE Stade Roi Baudouin
03.06.06 Paris FR Stade de France
06.06.06 Bergen NO tba
08.06.06 Copenhagen DK tba
10.06.06 Gothenburg SW Ullevi
13.06.06 St. Petersburg SS
16.06.06 Brno CZ Outdoor Exhibition Centre
18.06.06 Warsaw PL Airport Bemowo
20.06.06 Vienna AU Ernst Happel Stadion
22.06.06 Milan IT San Siro
29.06.06 Athens GR Olympic Stadium
02.07.06 Belgrade SE tba
06.07.06 Zagreb CR tba
10.07.06 Nurnberg DE Frankenstadion
12.07.06 Leipzig DE Zentralstadion
14.07.06 Frankfurt DE Commerzbank
16.07.06 Munich DE Olympiastadion
19.07.06 Hanover DE AWD Arena
23.07.06 Cologne DE Rhein Energie Stadion
30.07.06 Amsterdam NL Arena Stadium
03.08.06 Stuttgart DE Gottlieb-Daimler Stadion
05.08.06 Switzerland, city tba CH tba
08.08.06 Nice FR Palais Nikaia
12.08.06 Porto PT Estadio do Dragao
14.08.06 Valladolid SP Estadio Zorrilla
18.08.06 Dublin UK Phoenix Park
20.08.06 London UK Wembley Stadium
25.08.06 Glasgow UK Hampden Park
27.08.06 Sheffield UK Don Valley Stadium
29.08.06 Cardiff UK Millenium Stadium Coming Soon

Barcelona, Madrid, St. Petersburg, Warsaw, Brno, Belgrade were rescheduled in 2007.
Brussels was moved to Werchter and rescheduled in 2007.
Dublin, Phoenix Park was moved to Slane Castle in 2007
Copenhagen was moved to Horsens on the same leg.
Leipzig was moved to Berlin on the same leg.
London Wembley Stadium was moved to Twickenham Stadium.
Cancelled: Nürnberg, Zagreb, Athens, Valladolid

Despite the fact that Nürnberg was cancelled, only 53,000 tickets were sold in Munich after all. Either not many people decided to visit the concert in Munich instead, or ticket sales in Munich had been even weaker when Nürnberg had not been cancelled yet.

I wonder why they have cancelled Zagreb and Athens. I'm sure they could have grossed a lot of money there.