Or does it not matter to them if they are playing in front of 100 or 100.000 so long as they feel that they are playing well and getting good feedback?

I wonder if, as Gazza has infered in so many threads, that the management make the judgements, about what prices to charge and judgements about the "market" and presumably they make the excuses when they get it wrong?

It does seem like they are getting that judgement wrong more often these days. Maybe they should sack Cohl?

I,m available Mick.

Cohl is a busted flush. Proof - look at Streisland (spelling?). Cancelling all over Europe.

if they cancel Franfurt

I Think I'm Going Mad

if they cancel Frankfurt, I think I´m not going

Ticket sales clearly matter to their egoes. If they werent bothered about empty seats, they would have lower prices and Cohl wouldnt be resorting to the type of 'firesales' that were the norm in several cities on the last tour to fill up the stadiums.

Plus, from past experience, if shows get postponed and have to be rescheduled later in the tour, it will be the existing shows that are selling relatively slowly which will get cancelled to make way for them.

personally i love the low ticket sales; it means i can actually afford to go to frankfurt!

No Band or performer wants to see empty seats.

Are the Band/Stones actually aware of "fire sales" and marketing ploys to fill seats?

Cohl can do the above and the Stones might never know.

Remember that "Fortune" magazine interview/feature that came out a few years ago?
I don´t think that any of this happens without the band (Jagger?) knowing

I think everybody likes to see a well attended show...but I've never understood this obsession with "sold out" show.
To me, if shows are sold out it means that some folks who wanted to see them can't .
Comfortably full venues with a few spare seats mean everybody gets to go...even if they just turn up at the door.

The Stones probably care about two figures: gross and ticket sales. Both. It's normal to me, rock and roll always had and always has two sides. Music and music industry. Passion and business. The problem is that M. Cohl, with his tactics, has destroyed any sense of balance, between these two factors...

M. Cohl obviously does think like a grocer: "What can i do through these high ticket prices? I can make an incredible gross record, i can sell 4,700,000 tickets for the Stones concerts worldwide. Great, we have the gross record in our pocket and the Stones remain the most popular, the most attended live act in the planet. Now, let's suppose that i'm prepared to reduce 30% the prices. What exactly will happen in this case? Sales 30% increased, perhaps? No, maybe 10-15% stepping up on the ticket sales, but not 30%. So, long live the too high prices! If the Stones are able to attract 4,700,000 people by these prices, why the hell the band should necessarily play in front of 5,500,000. Mmm???"

As i said, that's a logic of a grocer. No, not because the whole ticket sales figures are low - on contrary, attracting so many people on the fourth tour in the last 13 years is still very remarkable. No, not because every stadium should be packed to death. Just because there is here a factor that has to do with the relation between the Stones and people, a lot of funs included. Young people or new markets like Poland (and i suppose M. Cohl should know very well the sence of the word "market") that cannot afford the prices, aren't a cold estimate on Cohl's note book. These people have to do with band's legacy, band's ability to be penetrating. Sometimes they have to do with the concert's atmosphere, too. That's something mr Cohl doesn't care about. But the Stones should care...

In addition, we're seeing some signs of amateurism, here: opener gig on Tuesday (!) in the middle of nowhere. What a great idea!

Well, M. Cohl has almost destroyed Streisand's reputation, if she really had a good one- i don't know. The only reason that the Stones don't run the same danger, at the moment, is their incredible popularity. But enough is enough with mr Cohl. When all is said, the Stones could easily break this @#$%& gross record- maybe at a level lower than $500 + million, but who cares?- without the rediculous prices that are triming away an important part of band's fanbase. And without Cohl, for sure...

I think they care about ticket sales THE MOST.

I would not blame Cole for Streisands reputation, I blame Streisand. She's the one who wants a certain guarantee for an entire tour. Cole is trying to deliver. After you do the breakdown per show, why this woman thinks she needs over 3 million a performance is beyond me. Her demographics are the people who rarly go to concerts. They spend their entertainment money on Broadway productions, his & his towels and food for their 36 cats. Her show is not a concert its an event in their eyes. Babs is the Super Bowl of shows for them to see and they do not want to pass up the one oportunity. She is taking advantage of that mind set.

trainarollin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would not blame Cole for Streisands reputation,
> I blame Streisand. She's the one who wants a
> certain guarantee for an entire tour. Cole is
> trying to deliver. After you do the breakdown per
> show, why this woman thinks she needs over 3
> million a performance is beyond me. Her
> demographics are the people who rarly go to
> concerts. They spend their entertainment money on
> Broadway productions, his & his towels and food
> for their 36 cats. Her show is not a concert its
> an event in their eyes. Babs is the Super Bowl of
> shows for them to see and they do not want to pass
> up the one oportunity. She is taking advantage of
> that mind set.


I dont really see much difference in that stereotyped demographic and that of a 2007 Stones audience (and the Stones' guarantee is higher than the one youve quoted for Streisand)

If it's a ridiculous figure for one of them, its a ridiculous figure for both. Personal taste in music is irrelevant - the bottom line is that it's two enormously successful artists with huge egoes and a promoter whose sole motivation is profit at all costs taking the piss out of their prospective audience.

Profit is not a dirty word. Promoters and everyone else who owns a business are not in business to lose money. Fans have the power in numbers. If you do not want the promoters to make a profit and to stop offering acts silly guarantees - stop buying tickets. Ticket prices for a few acts are the equivelant to a monthy car payment.

I like the Police and Genesis , but will not pay what they want for tickets. That's my protest. I'll wait for the $14.99 DVD following the tour or watch clips from the shows I would have attended on youtube. I'll get over it.

The Stones care about ticket sales and grooses form shows, but I think they are long past caring about whether stadiums shows are 100% sold out or not. The band and Cohl are smart enough to realize that when they continually jack up the prices each tour that they are not going to continually sell out stadium sized shows. They accept this fact, even though as performers, I would assume the Stones don't get a lot of joy looking out and seeing 10-20,000 empty seats.

There's a lot of fans who seem to obsess over the fact that the Stones are no longer selling out every show. I think the reality is that the Stones would rather play to 40,000 people in a 60,000 capacity venue than play to 15,000-20,000 in an arena in that same market. They don't expect that just because they booked a show into a place that can hold 60,000 that they are going to sell all of those tickets, exspecially at full price.

A stadium show obviously costs more to put on than an arena show, but maybe the difference in the amount of the tickets they have to sell is around 10,000 to cover the additional costs. That means that if they can sell 40,000 and have a non sold out stadium versus selling 20,000 and have a sold out arena, they can come out well ahead both in profit and in total numbers of fans that get to see the band.

I'm sure that when Cohl booked this primarily stadium European leg of the tour for this summer, he fully expected that maybe 1/2 or more of the shows would not sell out, but that doesn't matter. There are very few acts in the world today that can sell 30,000-40,000 tickets in any market, especially at the very high prices that the Stones charge. It's irrelevant to them in the long run that a stadium has empty seats, because they already take that into consideration when factoring the economics of the tour.

Halup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

a)
> There's a lot of fans who seem to obsess over the
> fact that the Stones are no longer selling out
> every show.

I am of these. Sure I must be wrong. But I do care ( of not being wrong ).


b)

> I'm sure that when Cohl booked this primarily
> stadium European leg of the tour for this summer,
> he fully expected that maybe 1/2 or more of the
> shows would not sell out, but that doesn't matter.
> There are very few acts in the world today that
> can sell 30,000-40,000 tickets in any market,
> especially at the very high prices that the Stones
> charge.

I still incline to think that The Stones are not an act like the happy few others. Aside from this suicidiary supposed management decision. But who cares.

does a bear sh#t in the woods?

i'd guess that keith cares less about attendance/ticket sales than mick.
obviously they're not hurting for $$ but i'm sure they care about
their legendary status/ego and the appearance that they can
or cannot pull in HUGE crowds.

future US tours will probably be arena shows.....unless they
strike gold with another tattoo you/some girls caliber album.


IORR............but I like it!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-05-31 22:47 by sweet neo con.

Halup wrote:

(A) "The Stones care about ticket sales and grooses form shows, but I think they are long past caring about whether stadiums shows are 100% sold out or not. The band and Cohl are smart enough to realize that when they continually jack up the prices each tour that they are not going to continually sell out stadium sized shows."

But why do they need to jack up the prices continually? That's the question. Noone says that every stadium must be 100% sold out. When all is said, today they do much more gigs than they did in the past, so normaly the whole attendance splinter of smaller parts. And the entire attendance remain incredibly HUGE, considering ot only the prices, but also the high frequency of their tours in the last years. But the point is different: if the band could attract 55,000 people in a city (let's say Warzaw), why on earth is logical to play in front of 45,000? For the benefit of Cohl's dogma, that nothing is most important than a historical gross record, except a ...bigger gross record??


(Â) "They accept this fact, even though as performers, I would assume the Stones don't get a lot of joy looking out and seeing 10-20,000 empty seats?"

They rarely are looking so much empty seats. Don't forget, one year ago, on this problematic (especially in Germany) european leg of the tour, they sold 87% of the tickets. Eleven from 19 shows were almost sold out. Also, if somewhere there are 15,000 empty seats Cohl has the ability to fabricate a decent enough venue's picture. He is good on this...

phd wrote:

"I still incline to think that The Stones are not an act like the happy few others"

You're right. The Stones aren't an act like the others. First of all they're the best rock band. That's why they' re still attracting so many people- more than they attracted on 1981/82 tour! Despite the prices. So i think your thought is right. Stones is a rock and roll miracle...

All the Stones care about these days is money.

Where is a new cd?

I was in Boston ( of course ) last January and had some nosebleed seats . We got lucky and were moved to some prime location seats about 50 feet from the stage , I'm sure the guys don't wanna see empty seats in the money sections

Cohl works for the band no the other way around,of course they are aware of the ticket prices,they just don't give F--k.
Before they play a single note they have been paid in full, no matter if there are 25,000 or 50,000 in attendance.

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

If they played theaters & 10K-14K capacity arenas then they would sell out their shows quicker and more often.

When they play 130+ shows with the majority in big stadiums then they oversaturate the market. However, comma, whether it be in a stadium, arena, theater or club, 80,000 people, 12,000, 2,500, or 400...I don't care...I'll see them anyway!

sweet neo con Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> does a bear sh#t in the woods?
>
> i'd guess that keith cares less about
> attendance/ticket sales than mick.
> obviously they're not hurting for $$ but i'm sure
> they care about
> their legendary status/ego and the appearance that
> they can
> or cannot pull in HUGE crowds.
>
> future US tours will probably be arena
> shows.....unless they
> strike gold with another tattoo you/some girls
> caliber album.

I reckon they ALL care about atendance, with the possible exception of Charlie, whohas always come across as the most reluctant of The Stones. Besides, he regularly plays/played small venues wirth his jazz combo. I don't buy into the Keith "rebel" vs Mick "businessman" dichotomy at all. It's as much about the money for Keith as it is Mick. I do think Ronnie genuinely enjoys it up there though. He's where people think Keith's at.

As for future tours .... not just in the US but elsewhere - and in the plural - let alone another great album .... do you really think they'll do it again after this year?

"As for future tours .... not just in the US but elsewhere - and in the plural - let alone another great album .... do you really think they'll do it again after this year?"

Yes! They still need the success, and they can still work for it! It's a way of life. Look, they rehearsed nearly 60 songs for this 2007 tour.

sweet neo con Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>> future US tours will probably be arena
> shows.....unless they
> strike gold with another tattoo you/some girls
> caliber album.


we've assumed since 1999 that future US tours would be in arenas, because at that time the Stones worked out a formula where they could gross as much in an arena selling ticckets at an average of $110 and with less overheads as they previously could in a stadium selling them for $65.

However, since then theyve extended the pricing structure for their stadium shows as well.

The ABB US tour was supposed to see them play more arena shows than it actually ended up doing. The amount of money Cohl was asking promoters to pay the Stones as a basic guarantee simply scared too many away because it was simply too high a take for arena shows for the local promoters to take a chance on as their own profit would have been minimal. Which is basically why, for example, a proposed arena show in Auburn Hills, Michigan fell through and they played a stadium show in Ford Field, Detroit instead - which while it was one of the slowest sellers on the entire tour and required severe 'papering' to fill seats, still outgrossed and outsold what would have been a sell-out show in Auburn Hills.

phd wrote:

"I still incline to think that The Stones are not an act like the happy few others"

You're right. The Stones aren't an act like the others. First of all they're the best rock band. That's why they' re still attracting so many people- more than they attracted on 1981/82 tour! Despite the prices. So i think your thought is right. Stones is a rock and roll miracle...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thats the real deal , if i would be a rolling stone , i would do any show to play what i like , to keep rocknroll alive and thinking on my fans , money is not the only thing they care about .
Thinking in this way : ohhh , im gonna die , prices are so high!!
or - im not going , they only care about money or :All the Stones care about these days is money.

Where is a new cd?

You wont be a loyal fan for the stones