For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Midnight Toker
the more i think about it, i am OK if they call it quits and bow out gracefully.
Quote
bv
The reason why the Stones does not announce any shows or tours until last minute is simply because then they can change their plans without having to cancel anything. How can you cancel a tour that never got announced?
If someone have too many alcohol units per day or get the head injured by falling from a coconut tree or fall from a ladder or have problems with the voice or another major tour is on or a sponsor want them to tour another year or many other reasons then they might choose to change their plans. At any time.
Some people seem to think I am publishing some sort of 100% correct rumours at all times. Well a rumour is always a rumour and a plan is always a plan - until you change plans. The Stones have the great privilege of being able to change their plans at all times, unlike artists who tour non-stop because they are broke or because that is the only life they have.
Quote
drbryant
Paul McCartney set up his 2009 concerts very quickly. The drawbacks are that he goes with a very simple stage set up (no elaborate props, no b-stage), and he plays basically the same numbers that he's been playing for the past few years.
Quote
frankotero
Why do people think they need to quit because they're too old? BB King and Chuck Berry are 83. .
Quote
frankotero
That means The Stones have plenty more time.
Quote
turd
The Stones are the laziest (or at least the most unwilling) of the rock fraternity, with very little sense of occasion.
Keith particularly, now does just seem to be happy to rest on his laurels (and why not).
Charlie is the only guy in the band willing and able to go and tread the boards these days, with no heirs or graces.
Nothing left to prove, enough money in the bank and zero motivation are the key reasons I should think.
Clearly they need another album in the can first and maybe (dare I say) a different 2nd guitarist would actually do them good.
Trouble is they aint got that much longer to hang around and make up their collective minds...
Pity the album name 'Slow Rollers' has already been taken.
Quote
The Rolling Stones tonight announced they had no plans to tour this year.
Quote
frankotero
Why do people think they need to quit because they're too old? BB King and Chuck Berry are 83. That means The Stones have plenty more time. Also, don't believe people like them are capable of retirement, they thrive on what they do. Retirement = Death.
Quote
Ket
Stll no other news source picking up this story that I can see. This is a bit strange, I'm really wondering how 'official ' this is. But on the other hand there is no 'official ' denial either from the stones camp, hmmm
Quote
Gazza
Frank - an essential difference between the likes of Chuck/BB King and the Stones is that the first two acts work on a regular basis, each year and every year.
The Stones effectively cease to exist for years at a time.
I would imagine that by now Chuck and BB are comfortably enough to have been able to retire years ago. They still presumably work because they feel motivated to do so.
I don't see the same motivation with the Stones anymore. The impression I get is that they're at a stage where they don't really have a point in continuing because (in the case of all 4 band members) their hearts aren't really in it anymore and there's clearly no drive to do anything new, but they can't really find a way of bringing it to an end. There hasn't even been any solo activity by Mick or Keith since the last tour ended.
I cant agree with the 'push it out to the end' angle because I'd personally rather they didnt do anything half-arsed and I dont want them to get to the stage where they're performing for the sake of reaching some milestone whilst at the same time becoming a lauughing stock (and no, I dont feel they're at that stage yet) - but I'm with you on the last bit. If they don't tour again, I'll live with it and as a fan we've got a lot of mileage out of them.
Quote
melillo
well it must be that they really dont want to go out without ronnie and are going to give him every chance to get himself right instead of just dumping him
Quote
Bitches Brew
Nothing on their web site, but they are always last to put news!
Quote
And that's pretty much how I see it too. However, I can equally very well imagine that they're hugely tempted to invoke one last hurrah revolving around the impending 50th anniversary, 1962-2012. IF I was to give them the benefit of the doubt, I'd say that they're currently giving Ronnie time to sort himself out, and simultaneously giving themselves lots of time to work out exactly what they're going to do when the 50th rolls around, which lets face it .... it will do soon enough. That's what I'd LIKE to think anyway, not sure if I actually do !!
Quote
Silver DaggerQuote
Bitches Brew
Nothing on their web site, but they are always last to put news!
A really good point. This beggars the question who has officially received the statement besides The Daily Mail? There have been quite a few celebrity website hackings of late - Van Morrison being the highest profile. Could this be another celebrity bluff?
Quote
VoodooLounge13Quote
melillo
well it must be that they really dont want to go out without ronnie and are going to give him every chance to get himself right instead of just dumping him
Thinking about this, I wonder if they legally have to do this.....in today's day and age I imagine it must be far harder to just fire someone from a band without having exhausted every possible avenue first. If they didn't do this, could Ronnie not turn around and sue them for wrongful termination or something and take a good portion of all future proceeds and a goodly amount of royalties too? Just wondering.....
i agree with you . i think jagger/cohl read the tea leaves with the global economy in a mess and they said not the right time to tour .Quote
StonesTod
assuming the story is credible, i think the ronnie issue is a convenient excuse, as i don't even think he represents the biggest liability for this act...
Quote
The Greeki agree with you . i think jagger/cohl read the tea leaves with the global economy in a mess and they said not the right time to tour .Quote
StonesTod
assuming the story is credible, i think the ronnie issue is a convenient excuse, as i don't even think he represents the biggest liability for this act...
Quote
SwayStones
Touring in 2011/2012 will make more sense to me because of their 50 th anniversary .Especially with the European & US economic crisis .
But I find it weird the Stones announce there will be NO tour ?Quote
The Rolling Stones tonight announced they had no plans to tour this year.
Announced ? To who ? When ? Where ? Who spoke ?
May someone make a phone call to Ben Todd ?
Quote
The Greeki agree with you . i think jagger/cohl read the tea leaves with the global economy in a mess and they said not the right time to tour .Quote
StonesTod
assuming the story is credible, i think the ronnie issue is a convenient excuse, as i don't even think he represents the biggest liability for this act...