KentK
The Fly
Last time I think there was just 1 Seattle and 1 Vancouver. Anybody have a hunch if they will add 2nd shows in the NW?
The_acrobat said:I just hate this new method of touring in which the band sets up shop in the big cities and makes everyone travel to them. I find that very unfair.
The_acrobat said:I think U2 are being selfish. Instead of doing 2 shows in Seattle, they should do one in Portland and one in Seattle. If I remember correctly, the single show in Tacoma wasn't an instant sellout. Same for the double shows in Denver and Phoenix. Phoenix is close enough to the Californian's who couldn't get tickets, so Phoenix will probably sell out the 2nd show with ease. But Denver and Seattle will have a tough time selling out 2 shows, I think. I'd have done one show in Phoenix, Denver and Seattle, and substituted the 2nd shows for shows in Vegas, SLC and Portland. I just hate this new method of touring in which the band sets up shop in the big cities and makes everyone travel to them. I find that very unfair.
theedge76 said:I sure hope so...or even a Portland show, or better yet a Salt Lake show would be fantastic. There sure seems to be dates to squeeze them in.
not because there's demand there for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
NoControl said:The first Vancouver show will sellout fast. And then when the second show goes on sale, it'll sellout eventually - but only because of the fact there's no other Canadian shows scheduled for the first leg (or at least so far), not because there's demand here for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
The first Seattle show will sellout fast. And then when the second show goes on sale, it'll sellout eventually - but only because of the fact there's no shows scheduled in Portland (or at least so far), not because there's demand there for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
The second Denver show will sellout, primarily because of the fact there's no shows scheduled in Salt Lake City or Kansas City (that are relatively nearby) yet (or maybe not at all), not because there's a great demand there for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
The first Phoenix area show will sellout fast. And then the second show will eventually - but primarily because there's no Las Vegas show scheduled (or at least so far), not because there's a great demand in this market for a second show, considering the prices they're charging.
The_acrobat said:Phoenix is close enough to the Californian's who couldn't get tickets, so Phoenix will probably sell out the 2nd show with ease.
Roland of Gilead said:The thing is Vancouver is the MOST North of all the cities on the West Coast. Edmonton AND Calgary fanatics WILL flock to Vancouver. Even Manitoba. Then there is Alaska. Might not be all that populated, but there are people from there that will want to try to reach Vancouver and Seattle. Without even considering the traffic going up and down between Vancouver and Seattle, Vancouver is going to be this Canadian magnet that just sucks u2 fans from far away to come visit.
The_acrobat said:I think U2 are being selfish. Instead of doing 2 shows in Seattle, they should do one in Portland and one in Seattle. If I remember correctly, the single show in Tacoma wasn't an instant sellout. Same for the double shows in Denver and Phoenix. Phoenix is close enough to the Californian's who couldn't get tickets, so Phoenix will probably sell out the 2nd show with ease. But Denver and Seattle will have a tough time selling out 2 shows, I think. I'd have done one show in Phoenix, Denver and Seattle, and substituted the 2nd shows for shows in Vegas, SLC and Portland. I just hate this new method of touring in which the band sets up shop in the big cities and makes everyone travel to them. I find that very unfair.
NoControl said:The first Vancouver show will sellout fast. And then when the second show goes on sale, it'll sellout eventually - but only because of the fact there's no other Canadian shows scheduled for the first leg (or at least so far), not because there's demand here for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
The first Seattle show will sellout fast. And then when the second show goes on sale, it'll sellout eventually - but only because of the fact there's no shows scheduled in Portland (or at least so far), not because there's demand there for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
The second Denver show will sellout, primarily because of the fact there's no shows scheduled in Salt Lake City or Kansas City (that are relatively nearby) yet (or maybe not at all), not because there's a great demand there for two shows, considering the prices they're charging.
The first Phoenix area show will sellout fast. And then the second show will eventually - but primarily because there's no Las Vegas show scheduled (or at least so far), not because there's a great demand in this market for a second show, considering the prices they're charging.
STING2 said:
I'm sure fans from all those places will go, the real question is how many U2 fans in each city are actually willing, to take off work, pay the expense of driving or flying such a long distance, and then pay for lodging and any other expenses involved with that length of travel time. How many fans will be traveling far enough that they have to spend the night in Vancouver? I think there will be less than 1,000 of these fans for Vancouver, a small enough number that it would not impact ticket sales if these show or shows sellout at the same rate that every other show has been selling out.
But, will know tomorrow the real story including whether 2nd shows will be added for Seattle, Vancouver and Phoenix.
NoControl said:Like I said...
Newtshoe said:
I can assure you more than 1000. There will be 1000+ people comming from Vancouver Island alone. Trust me a drive from Calgary + Edmonton to Vancouver isn't that bad. Elevation Tour sold out really quick in Vancouver, I was actually surprised they never added a second show. The market can take another show, I have no question about that.
STING2 said:
I would consider Vancouver Island to be part of the Vancouver city market. Its not the far, but I guess there are no trips back to Vancouver Island after midnight so they would have to stay in Vancouver the night.
So what do you think, 2,000 people? You have think about how many people are willing to pay all the expenses for such a trip and then think about how many of them are actually able to obtain tickets for the show.
that would be absolutely amazing. That is my favourite venue on Earth.BeckyK1114 said:OMG U2 at the Gorge would be awesome.
Yikes, I just thought about how hard it will be to get on one of the first few ferrys to Vancouver on either Thursday or Friday morning. There are gonna be so many sailing waits. Ugh, just another thing to worry about.Newtshoe said:
I live on Vancouver Island (Nanaimo) and it is 'the thing' we have to deal with (Staying over night that is). If want to see anything in Vancouver it's an overnighter. To me and to most Islanders it is no big deal to stay over night, as it's part of going to a show. We all budget for it. You'd be surprised how many people travel over to see a show. I could anywhere from 1000 to 2000 people from the Island. I went to a canucks game last year and on the fast passenger ferry there were 300 people on it all going over to see a canucks game on that one particular sailing. So for U2 it isn't out of the question to have a large number from VIlanders.