I read somewhere that the Stones were going to be on the cover of ROLLING STONE this month but the new one is out and the White Stripes are on the cover. There's not even a review of the album...Kanye West gets a lead 5-star review which seals the fate of the Stones album...no #1 again, and this was probably their last chance.
I predict, sadly, that it will debut at #3 behind West and 50 Cent.
It's not THAT important, I know, but it would have been nice. Kind of like seeing your team be #1, you know?

Anyone know about the ROLLING STONE cover story? When (and if ) it's happening?

Be cool, Jack.
They broadcasted PC from their site - remember?
Sure they´ll come up with something huge!
Why shouldnt they? They are not crap-writers, these blokes...

But I surely also wanna know when its gonna happen.

The Stones coming out with the new album plus the tour kicking into gear pretty much gurantees the cover of RS. RS LOVES the Stones. They will get their 4-5 star review. (Even Primitive Cool got 4 stars back then...)The Stripes are redhot right now; as is Kanye. He was on the cover of Time. (As gifted as think Kanye is an artist, I can not STAND him as a person).
But Jack, I don't understand what you're saying: why can the Stones not get to No 1? Does it have to be this week? Or did you mean debut at No 1? O realize with the new system of Billboard you come in at your peak position, and hold it and then leave.

A ROLLING STONE cover and great review BEFORE the album came out would have helped sales, I think. But now, it won't be coming out until after the album is released. And on that same day, September 6th, 50 Cent is releasing a re-issue of "The Massacre" with a DVD, and the week before Kanye West's album is coming out, and he's on the cover of TIME this week. It will be the same as with "Forty Licks"; the second week sales of Kanye West will be better than the first week sales of "A Bigger Bang," keeping it out of the top spot, with 50 Cent probably coming in at #2.
You're right...with someone like the Stones, you get ONE chance....first week...to hit #1. I'm just sad it's not to be.

Jack Knife, why do you overrate so much the element "peak position" that depends on the casual conditions of every week? The real figure are the WHOLE SALES of the album. Voodoo Lounge had in the USA peak position #2, not #1, because of the soundtrack of Lion's King. So what? As you know VL is mentioned as one of the most successful, the "best sellers" albums of the Stones (8 million copies worldwide).

It's just a game really...but having a number one album would be much more talked-about than how many albums sell in the long run.

See the story in BILLBOARD a couple of weeks ago. The headline was "The Stones Have Not Had A No. 1 Album Since 1981. Will 'A Bigger Bang' Give Them Back The Crown?" So you see that it is THE measure of success to the general observer.

Bragging rights, ya know?

Didn't Steel Wheels go to #1?

"See the story in BILLBOARD a couple of weeks ago. The headline was "The Stones Have Not Had A No. 1 Album Since 1981. Will 'A Bigger Bang' Give Them Back The Crown?"

Jack Knife, as you said it's just a game. Billboard obviously wrote that to give a "historical" element to the expectations, something like suspence. That's the nature of Billboard magazine! Statistics and playing with the numbers. But the same magazine wrote (not only once) how strong the sales of "40 Licks" were worldwide, including USA, even the compilation had #2, not #1.

PS (1): By the way, the whole world is not USA! VL had #1 in the UK and the Eurochart. B2B had #1 on the Eurochart.

PS (2): In the early 90s an album of Pearl jam (i can't remember the title) had peak potition #2 (or #3??) but sold 9 million copies! So that's the real figure...

About my example with Rearl Jam: I mean only in the USA, of course. An album 9Xplatinum, without having #1...

SW went to #2 int USA....

STONES JAM!! MICKEYS RULES!!! (burp) NADER IN 2016!!!!! GO GIANTS!!