I was wondering if The Stones are as much as popular in their 'home' country like they are in the rest of Europe/United States.

I don't anyone in Britain has actually heard of the band....

they're about two nights at Twickenham popular

hope that helps

I don't have any friends or colleagues who are prepared to pay these prices to see them. Most wouldn't "look over the fence if they where playing next door"

Correction,I know a couple who are going to Sheffield.

Mind you, Recent gigs in my town that have failed to sell out include;

Brian Adams - nearly full stadium, I think
REM - a few thousand short
Bon Jovi - heavy discounts buy 1 get 1 free ! Lots of empty sections
Simply Red -half empty 24000 seat stadium almost cancelled
Bill Wyman - half empty City hall 2004
Neil Diamond - sold out stadium !
Elton - sold out stadium !

John Mayall w/Mick Taylor 2004 - bursting at the seams sellout !

A bit lacking in music fans !

I think the Stones are not as pospular in the UK as in the USA and Europe. The Beatles are posular and Robbie Williams outsells the stones concerts! UK public are not really into rock n roll. It's a shame but it's the truth.

That said, seeing the Stones on home turf is always worth it.e population of the UK is 60 million and we are just a small island.

Two Twickenhams in the UK isn't alot. Remember that two twicks is probably a lot less than the percentage of people in, say, Germany or France who saw the Stones.

The Stones sold 180,000 tickets for their Licks shows in the UK - which in terms of population is equivalent to about a million tickets sold in the US. Not bad considering the shows were by far the most expensive rock concerts ever in the UK and tickets were on average double (and in some cases 4 times) what they cost on their previous tour 4 years earlier.

This time, with ticket prices rocketing even further in the last 3 years, and despite the fact there are just 5 stadium shows in 4 cities theyve sold about 110,000 tickets for London (more sales than any other city on the entire tour on one visit apart from Buenos aires (New York sold more but they played there in september and january) plus at least the same number again for the other 3 shows. London is also the only European city to have sufficient ticket demand for more than one concert. Both shows will be sold out by the time they take place.

So, despite what people seem to think, I reckon theyre pretty popular when compared to most other regions.

I stand corrected.

However, I still stick by my original answer. If you were to go t apart in the UK and ask the question - who do you prefer, Beatle or Stones, I reckon about 80% would say Beatles. I don't know if you would get the same answer in differnet countries but I always got the impression that the Stones were better appreciated - particularly in US.

sjs12 wrote:

>UK public are not really into rock n roll. It's a shame but it's the truth.



Spot on. I think that the Stones have always been perenially underrated in the U.K. I'm 23 years old and have been obsessed with the Stones since I was 17, and amongst my peers there is little appreciation of the Stones contribution to rock music.

I'm ashamed to say that when I met one of my corridor mates at Uni, he thought that the Stones were a U.S band (needless to say I corrected him immediately).

But, sjs12 has a valid point, the British public are diffident towards the type of music that the Stones play. The biggest selling albums band in this country is Queen, who last year surpassed the Beatles.

And despite supposedly 'cool' celebrities and youngsters in the U.K donning Stones tongue t-shirts which perhaps increases the awareness of the Stones as a brand, I bet that if you were to ask the majority of these they would struggle to name a Stones album.

Certainly amongst my peers, and amongst many of the people I met whilst studying at University (up North in Lancaster, NW England) there is a profound degree of ignorance towards the Stones achievements (although I think you could argue that this is the case for much of the U.K in general).

I also believe that is important to recognise that in the U.K the Beatles will always be considered an indiginous act, whereas because of the Stones genetic composition (i.e their blues, country, r&r influences) many British people posess an indifference towards the band because of the failure of themselves to embrace such influnces.

It is easier to embrace the warmth and civilty of the Beatles lyrics or the no-nonsense rock of Queen but many British people possess an indiffence towards the Stones catalogue because of an unwillingness to embrace the Stones musical heritage.

Along with sjs12 I often am bemused at how Robbie 'overrrated' Williams has become so popular in the U.K. I am ever so pleased that Robbie has not been able to make it in the U.S as it fundamentally confirms for me that U.S music fans have better taste in music than U.K music fans (this coming from a 23 year old guy from Kent).

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I stand corrected.
>
> However, I still stick by my original answer. If
> you were to go t apart in the UK and ask the
> question - who do you prefer, Beatle or Stones, I
> reckon about 80% would say Beatles.

I reckon youd get that in pretty much every country on earth to be honest. When it comes to record sales and public familiarity, theres no comparison. However, why compare them just to the Beatles? Bottom line is that the number of acts who could sell as many tickets in the UK as the Stones could be counted on one hand. And none of those charge anywhere near as high a price for tickets


I don't know
> if you would get the same answer in differnet
> countries but I always got the impression that the
> Stones were better appreciated - particularly in
> US.


compared to the Beatles? I wouldnt think so. The Stones' US popularity is a bit schizophrenic. They sell an incredible amount of concert tickets and at very high prices - however that doesnt translate into record sales as well as it should. Sales of their new album in the US has been very mediocre compared to many other regions - especially Europe, and thats made even worse by the fact that about 75% of the shows to date on this tour have been in North America

Of the 180,000 tickets sold for UK Licks, I bet 179,000 were for people above the age of 50. When you go and see the Stones in Europe (i.e. France, Spain etc) the crowd is obviously so much younger.

I don't want to read to much into this, but the Stones are just not what the young people are in to in the UK. This is partly due to bands like Oasis going on about the Beatles. Pop is bigger than rock in the UK and I'm afraid that I'm often emarressed by the state of British music.

Apart from the Stones, the other thing about UK is the lack of understanding about country music. No one in the UK understands country music or has even heard of Gram Parsons. I tried to start a country inspired band recently and got no where because no-one listens to the stuff I like.

British kids just listen to what they're told to listen to and don't really rebel against anything any more. It's sad but it's been true for about 20 years. There have been some good British bands recently but even so, we're just not where we should be.

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of the 180,000 tickets sold for UK Licks, I bet
> 179,000 were for people above the age of 50.

as Im 43, I can tell you thats something of an exaggeration. On the 2003 tour it certainly was nowhere near that.

When
> you go and see the Stones in Europe (i.e. France,
> Spain etc) the crowd is obviously so much younger.

yes. because the ticket prices are much lower. However, having seen the Stones several times in both the Uk and in the US, the audience in America is definitely older than in the UK from my experience
>
>
> I don't want to read to much into this, but the
> Stones are just not what the young people are in
> to in the UK.

Nor should they be. Why should a 20 year old be obsessed with a band 3 times their age? Not helped by the fact they cant afford to see them, they hardly ever make any records, hardly ever make a video and are rarely seen on TV or heard on radio. Kids have an attention span similar to a squirrel. Its pretty unreasonable to expect them to give a shit about the Stones under those circumstances


This is partly due to bands like
> Oasis going on about the Beatles. Pop is bigger
> than rock in the UK and I'm afraid that I'm often
> emarressed by the state of British music.

Pop is bigger than rock in every country that I'm aware of. Thats why its called "pop"!
>
> Apart from the Stones, the other thing about UK is
> the lack of understanding about country music. No
> one in the UK understands country music or has
> even heard of Gram Parsons.

well I live in the UK and I can tick both boxes!! A rather sweeping statement wouldnt you think? Johnny Cash's new album charted in the top ten last month. As country music isnt endemic to UK musical culture theres no real reason fro it to be big, but it does OK. In Ireland, country music is bigger than pretty much any type of music..well apart from U2!

sjs12 wrote:

>but the Stones are just not what the young people are in to in the UK. This is >partly due to bands like Oasis going on about the Beatles. Pop is bigger than >rock in the UK and I'm afraid that I'm often emarressed by the state of >British music.

>Apart from the Stones, the other thing about UK is the lack of understanding >about country music. No one in the UK understands country music or has even >heard of Gram Parsons. I tried to start a country inspired band recently and >got no where because no-one listens to the stuff I like.

>British kids just listen to what they're told to listen to and don't really >rebel against anything any more. It's sad but it's been true for about 20 >years. There have been some good British bands recently but even so, we're >just not where we should be.



Spot on sjs12, my sentiments exactly. I place much of this indifference towards the Stones music down to ignorance. Your exactly right about the 'NME' generation. British kids have been been fed the Holy mantra of the Beatles (don't get me wrong...I love the Beatles) and many profess contempt for the Stones because it is not 'cool' to like the Stones, well I'm sorry but I'd rather possess a more than a little interest in the greatest r&r band ever than be cool.

I've been yearning for a U.K band to rock like the Stones or to see a lead singer strut, but its just not happening in the U.K music scene. The pervasive hegemony in the the U.K is that of Indie bands fronted by morose-laden lead singers who wouldn't know the meaning of the words 'strut' or 'exuberance'.

Sorry everyone for the above rant, but I gotta get a few things off my chest. Lol.

Oh Gazza, no need to take every thing so seriously. Of course I'm exagerating. Life would be so boring without exageration.

Anyway, apart from your good self, very few people in the UK will take country music seriously. Indeed, even the hint of country music will make most british people puke their guts out. You must know this, being british.

I take your point about the Irish though. However, it tends to be the southern Irish who are into country and they aren't exactly UK citizens, are they? I recently met a young (20 year old) irish girl who was well into Gram Parsons. I was well impressed by her singing along to my Gram Parsons live album. However, tat was very much the exception.

I have travelled around Europe alot and it is my observation that the Stones are more poular in other countries than they are in the UK. All the good points you make are fair enough, but just technicalities. You can catch me out lying and exagerating as much as you like but I'm still right. The Stones are more popular in Europe and USA than in UK.

Beast,

You will probably agree with me then that one of the best "young" bands in the UK is Primal Scream. And the're getting on a bit now!

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh Gazza, no need to take every thing so
> seriously. Of course I'm exagerating. Life would
> be so boring without exageration.

LOL...I dont...Im just a pedantic bastard
>
> Anyway, apart from your good self, very few people
> in the UK will take country music seriously.
> Indeed, even the hint of country music will make
> most british people puke their guts out. You must
> know this, being british.

yep...I see plenty of that amongst people of a certain age in many countries however.
>
> I take your point about the Irish though.
> However, it tends to be the southern Irish who are
> into country and they aren't exactly UK citizens,
> are they?

I live in Northern Ireland, and I can assure you that country music is very big here too. Every bit as much as in the south, I would think.

I recently met a young (20 year old)
> irish girl who was well into Gram Parsons. I was
> well impressed by her singing along to my Gram
> Parsons live album. However, tat was very much
> the exception.
>
> I have travelled around Europe alot and it is my
> observation that the Stones are more poular in
> other countries than they are in the UK. All the
> good points you make are fair enough, but just
> technicalities. You can catch me out lying and
> exagerating as much as you like but I'm still
> right.


LOL


The Stones are more popular in Europe and
> USA than in UK.


in the US, yeah, I would agree - in Europe, well I think that we're one of the bigger Stones countries in Europe. The current and last tour stats would seem to suggest that. Even though we pay double for tickets what the rest of Europe pays!

Gazza wrote : "They sell an incredible amount of concert tickets and at very high prices - however that doesnt translate into record sales as well as it should."

Yes. But personally i feel satisfied seeing that they're -atleast- quite stable as album sellers. ABB in 2005 sold better than a lot of their records from 70s and 80s. And, speaking about UK, ABB's sales are similar to B2B sales, despite the fact that in 2005/06 downloading is much more popular than what had been in 1997/98. Also, their best selling record in UK ever is "40 Licks", a compilation from 2002- not from 70s, 80s or 90s...

sjs12 wrote


>Beast,

>You will probably agree with me then that one of the best "young" bands in the >UK is Primal Scream. And the're getting on a bit now!




Spot on...yeah agree with you on that one. Particularly like their latest track. A fair Stonesy, the lead singer can strut.

sjs12 wrote

(A) "Of the 180,000 tickets sold for UK Licks, I bet 179,000 were for people above the age of 50."

Comon, don't exaggerate so much... The mumber of the younger guys on Twics DVD are enough to deny your estimate! (Just kidding)

( "When you go and see the Stones in Europe (i.e. France, Spain etc) the crowd is obviously so much younger."

Yes, that's true.

(C) "I don't want to read to much into this, but the Stones are just not what the young people are in to in the UK. This is partly due to bands like Oasis going on about the Beatles. Pop is bigger than rock in the UK and I'm afraid that I'm often emarressed by the state of British music."

There are two "capitals" of music industry. USA market and UK market. That means very strong, contiuing hype and promotion supporting avery act the industry wants to "push". In both countries. IMO, that's why Oasis are still very big in UK (i suppose not as big as they had been in the middle 90s), while in the rest of the planet they don't even play stadiums. That's why in US chart can get #1 hip-hop or modern country acts which are completely uknown in the rest on the planet. I remember something, a few months ago, about a hip-hop act- i don't remember it's name : in it's first week on charts, 520,000 (or even more) copies sold in US. In the rest of the world? Just 3,000 units!!!






British kids just listen to what they're told to listen to and don't really rebel against anything any more. It's sad but it's been true for about 20 years. There have been some good British bands recently but even so, we're just not where we should be.

Oooopsss...Don't count the two last lines. It is something from sjs12 post. I forgot to cancel it after doing "copy-paste"...

The USA loves the Stones. But, they are here to often. It seems like the Stones are in your town every night.

But, the Bigger Bang tour was huge in the USA.

I always thought the Stones were more of an American band than a UK band.

Nobody in the USA knows or cares who Robbie Williams or Oasis are. But, the Stones just had the higgest grossing tour of all time and most of it was due to US sales.

Since 1982, almost every Stones album reached a better peak position in the UK charts than in US.
Exceptions: B2B and No Security.

James Kirk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But, the Stones just had
> the higgest grossing tour of all time and most of
> it was due to US sales.


the fact that the vast majority of shows so far have been in the US may have something to do with that...

Doesn't the fact that the majority of shows have been in the US tell you something?

How many times in the last quarter century have the Stones kicked off a tour in England?

The USA is a better Stones market than the UK.

I live in UK and they are very popular with me, but i wouldn,t pay more than £50 to see anybody in this country. What with all the traffic wardens in yellow vests telling you to sobber up and sit down, get-out-a-here man!

i was in london today on my way back home from vacationing in norway, unfortunately i was the only one wearing my tye dye stones shirt

"You've got to roll me"

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> UK public are not really into rock n roll. It's a
> shame but it's the truth.

i'm sorry- but with respect, you are very wrong.

Live music is going through the roof in the UK.

The Carling Weekend Festivals in Reading and Leeds sold out in 4 hours...
the V Festival in Chelmsford and Stafford sold out in record time.

T in the Park in Glasgow was a complete sell out and NEXT YEARS event has ALREADY sold its 'early bird' promotion of an amazing 30,000 tickets.

Ticket sales are going through the roof, despite a scandalous increase in prices and the ni-criminal activities of scalpers/touts.

There is a huge hunger for live music in the UK- and there is a blossoming live music scene...especially here in London.
Venues are packed everywhere.

The Stones have priced themselves out of the market with the younger/NME generation... these kids/students/young adults would love to see this band... i hear people talking about them at gigs all the time -bu the true reality is, kids cannot afford £150-£60, for a 2 hour all-seater stadium show.

..that's the reality- In The final analysis,
The Stones and their management have cut themselves off from their next generation of disciples, in the name of gluttony and pure greed.

ilovethe80sstbk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i was in london today on my way back home from
> vacationing in norway, unfortunately i was the
> only one wearing my tye dye stones shirt

why would you want anyone else wearing YOUR shirt?

Joram...

Not popular enough : www.everyhit.com/recordalb.html

Adrian L is right in what he says about the Stones in Britain.


The likes of the Who play festivals like T in the Park (I think). McCartney & U2 play the likes of Live Aid, Dylan plays arenas where ticket prices are not extortionate, I believe Rod Stewart played at Glastonbury failry recently. You also see the likes of Elton John peforming with younger artists. So whilst this may not translate into good CD sales there is a whole generation of new people exposed to these artists.

No one who likes rock music could fail to like the Stones but if the band had the inclination they could perhaps do a little more to remind young people why they are the greatest rock and roll band in the world rather than charging high prices for their concerts.

Perhaps they are not bothered about their legacy and perhaps I am talking nonsense!!