not just from the point of view of the band being active, and making records, doing concerts, releasing old concerts, releasing the vaults, but when the day comes that they no longer exist as the rolling stones for whatever reason, ive always wondered how long it would take for every other avenue of stones commercial activity to dry up.

maybe depend on a few things, probably how many concerts from the past can be released till there cant be anything new, and the point where the vaults dry up or become just not interesting.

would like to think theres plenty more in the tank to keep me going for a couple more decades.

I would prefer they release everything sooner rather than later. I'm 23, and huge stones fan, but honestly the core audience base is significantly older than me (no offense anybody!). Waiting to release precious material would be unwise. Lets just hope the stones have a while to go still. The day they stop will be a sad day indeed. I'd love to see a 90 gear old Jagger still out there killing it, but remember everytime, "this could be the last time, may be the last time, I dont know."

THE ROLLING STONES WILL NEVER DIE. The members will....

You're seeing it. This is probably going to be it, this new album, if they do one, and whatever tour or tours this year.

I sure hope they keep touring for at least a few more years. Then again, maybe that's selfish...I love the Stones and their music, so of course when they want to retire I'll understand. But I think they'll keep going for a while yet! They all (especially Keith) have so much talent and musical genius left to give the world.

I think they will go on until they can't. So grateful I saw them this summer- twice. First time. I thought they would be awful, I had to be convinced to go....really to pay for my kid's ticket. My teenager dragged me to a show...so there's that.

And since I believe in God and Heaven and all that- I amend my comment to say, they will never stop.

Quote
buttons67
not just from the point of view of the band being active, and making records, doing concerts, releasing old concerts, releasing the vaults, but when the day comes that they no longer exist as the rolling stones for whatever reason, ive always wondered how long it would take for every other avenue of stones commercial activity to dry up.

maybe depend on a few things, probably how many concerts from the past can be released till there cant be anything new, and the point where the vaults dry up or become just not interesting.

would like to think theres plenty more in the tank to keep me going for a couple more decades.

Elvis Presley (Estate) earned $55 million and had another compilation album released this last year that became his 53rd to reach the Top 40.

The Rolling Stones are now (way) bigger than Elvis and like Elvis will be releasing material decades and decades from now.

The Beatles finished in 1970 but the Beatles Business entity continues to flourish and prove there can be a demand for 50 year old product.
Likewise Presley and Sinatra.

The Stones aren't in the same league but the people entrusted to manage the band's affairs for their respective Estates will make sure every effort is made to keep the gravy train going and maximum all potential income streams.That includes record companies (in whatever form they may evolve into) and perhaps more importantly the publishing companies.
Advertising, use of songs in films will keep the Jagger/Richards show going for at least the next 25 years, in my opinion.
And the ABKCO show also, of course.

They will stop when they drop............... The Stones will never announce the end ...

__________________________

Rolling Stone had a panel of experts (including Keith Richards) rank the 100 Greatest Artists of all time.
Agree or disagree I believe it is likely fairly accurate in terms of translating to post (career, band, life..) $uccess and longevity.

#1 Beatles
#2 Bob Dylan
#3 Elvis
#4 The Rolling Stones

Only thing not factored in to this short list..
The Rolling Stones and Dylan aren't even done yet.

[www.rollingstone.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-12-31 01:08 by MisterDDDD.

Quote
NICOS
They will stop when they drop............... The Stones will never announce the end ...

Not the question posed.
The question is how long will they be viable (successful) after the end...

Quote
MisterDDDD

Quote
NICOS
They will stop when they drop............... The Stones will never announce the end ...

Not the question posed.
The question is how long will they be viable (successful) after the end...

Sales wise no....live yes....for all those baby boomers and the ones who don't want to miss a live Stones concert..............

__________________________

The Rolling Stones will die for me when I take my last breath, not a second before. After that I'm pretty sure I won't care how long the legacy lasts.

I've speculated before that there will be a European leg of the tour perhaps next year which will likely be the last time we see them actively touring. Perhaps a few one-offs, short appearances at awards ceremonies and guest appearances by various members. I'm ok with it, they have given me more than I ever expected. I just don't want or expect they will try to tour once the wheels are truly starting to rust, they will go out on top, per se, as they well should.

I do however wonder if Bjornulf will continue to keep the IORR site running after the Stones are done. The database is certainly valuable and might be sold to another entity or something. In any case I am grateful for both the band and the forum in 2015.

Re-packaging the catalog can go on into infinity. Touring and recording wise, it'll end when it ends...but whenever that is, it'll be too soon for me.

I love The Rolling Stones.

I find this topic and speculating morbid and distasteful, yet here I am with a quick thought that I've been thinking (and it's not negative)

Cuba sure would be the cherry on top.
The 50 and counting started them back up, and they've kept fit exercising it, graciously extending to their loyal fan bases in the outer areas of the world the last few years.

I think that in their early 70's now, once uncommitted and free, it would be harder/ more difficult/ to try to put the pieces back oiled up again.

Exibition-ism Museum type Retrospect now set to roll to major cities---

The Rolling Stones are the master class, truly set above-----
even they don't speak of an 'end'
No, in the present moment, living, thank God.

Wouldnt it be cool if the current studio sessions so the burst of creativeness the Some Girls sessions had and they have enough good songs to fill up a couple of albums worth?

I thought we already knew this... they'll go until Charlie says he's done...

--------------------------------------------

"I hope you didn't record any of this""No I didn't"

Keith and Mick are 72 now. I can see them touring at 75, possibly still doing small shows at 80. Hell, if Muddy and B.B. can do it, they can do it. I hope they take it as far as they can.

The question is ridiculous for someone like me. i saw the Stones first time in 1975. They were allegedly 'old' then as they were certainly no longer teenagers. In facts , they were in their early 30's! They eere even more ancient for Steel Wheels Tour! Then the 'geezers' were in their mid-forties! It seemed ridiculous that Jagger could still be Jagger at age 50. But he pulled it off. It seemed ridiculous that Jagger could still be Jagger at 60. but he pulled it off. It absofu€k!nglutely seemed impossible that Jagger could still be Jagger at 70! But I was in Ohio Stadium this past May and he pulled it off! Jagger has the body of a little pixie and he trains like an athlete. No, no, no....I have learned my lesson. surely Jagger CAN STILL BE Jagger at 80! My only concern: How much is my damn ticket gonna cost - because I WILL BE THERE! And on that day, I will be around 65 myself!

Who knew Keith was on radio 2 yesterday??

[www.bbc.co.uk]
C

The merchandising of archive releases can probably continue for many years. However, without them touring and the fan base getting older - the financial returns on these releases will gradually decrease.

As far as the band touring they will do as they say and keep going as long as they can. They seem to have a very workable touring scheduel - performing approximately two shows per week for 6-7 weeks on tour. If somthing happens to Mick or Keith they will be done though. The big question is if somthing would happen to Ronnie's or Charlie's health. In this event would they call it quits as a band? I'm not sure what the answer is in that scenario but it probably depends on the timing and specifically their commitments at the time.

If Mick's voice or energy level would begin to slip, I think that would bring
the touring to a halt. Mick strikes me as a perfectionist who would not want
to tarnish his legacy. In reality though I belive their core audience would
accept a "scaled down" show in the future; however I'm not so sure Mick could
accept this. I sincerely hope they continue as long as possible.

Quote
swimtothemoon
The merchandising of archive releases can probably continue for many years. However, without them touring and the fan base getting older - the financial returns on these releases will gradually decrease.

As far as the band touring they will do as they say and keep going as long as they can. They seem to have a very workable touring scheduel - performing approximately two shows per week for 6-7 weeks on tour. If somthing happens to Mick or Keith they will be done though. The big question is if somthing would happen to Ronnie's or Charlie's health. In this event would they call it quits as a band? I'm not sure what the answer is in that scenario but it probably depends on the timing and specifically their commitments at the time.

If Mick's voice or energy level would begin to slip, I think that would bring
the touring to a halt. Mick strikes me as a perfectionist who would not want
to tarnish his legacy. In reality though I belive their core audience would
accept a "scaled down" show in the future; however I'm not so sure Mick could
accept this. I sincerely hope they continue as long as possible.

Mick has too much of a Peter Pan complex to accept his limitations.

I truly think the idea of him not being able to physically do what he does onstage disgusts him. He'd never allow any weakness to show through either (a) sheer force of will, or (b) just disappearing from the stage for good.

It's a shame because I'd love to see him as a grizzled bluesman, but I don't think that's the future he envisions for himself. If he can still dance and sing at 80, then he's gonna be dancing and singing, even if the hips don't swivel quite as wide as they used to.

25-28 years

Quote
FickyStingers
The question is ridiculous for someone like me. i saw the Stones first time in 1975. They were allegedly 'old' then as they were certainly no longer teenagers. In facts , they were in their early 30's! They eere even more ancient for Steel Wheels Tour! Then the 'geezers' were in their mid-forties! It seemed ridiculous that Jagger could still be Jagger at age 50. But he pulled it off. It seemed ridiculous that Jagger could still be Jagger at 60. but he pulled it off. It absofu€k!nglutely seemed impossible that Jagger could still be Jagger at 70! But I was in Ohio Stadium this past May and he pulled it off! Jagger has the body of a little pixie and he trains like an athlete. No, no, no....I have learned my lesson. surely Jagger CAN STILL BE Jagger at 80! My only concern: How much is my damn ticket gonna cost - because I WILL BE THERE! And on that day, I will be around 65 myself!

You're so right...the late night talk shows were mercilessly mocking them for doing the STEEL WHEELS tour...and they weren't even 50!

And of course the Stones fittingly outlasted Leno and Letterman. Never say never with these guys.

I hope they all stay healthy and fit for many years to come - thats the priority!

As a side benefit, we may get several more years of touring and then a few one off gigs.

Their business will go on for as long as people remember them and have seen them live - maybe 60 or 70 years.

Their music will live forever.

As an active unit? Until one of them passes away. Whilst fit and living, there us really no need for an 'official' retirement.

They can call it quits at any time now and it would be fine with me.

We are now living in "the future," we all carry around Star Trek communication/data devices and have computers and there is an information web.

In my fantasies, the Rolling Stones simply leave a digital legacy and they effectively live on forever. In fact, that is already the case. But what I mean is that everything they own goes public domain and is available for download and viewing and listening. I would even go so far as saying they should acquire all the rights to their ABKCO stuff and also go public domain with that.

We have had the Beatles, the Stones, and Michael Jackson. In this watered-down age there is a possibility that there will never be any bigger acts than the Big Three.

Imagine that, you can gorge on all the Rolling Stones material you want and it will all be free. Sort of like the Star Trek universe where money is no longer an issue.

As long as you have money, They Will Be There ...

Quote
ouroux58
As long as you have money, They Will Be There ...

so very very very true....

I give them 2 weeks max, ha-ha