defenSe

I hear ya Sjs12, I think your comparison is a fair way for some people to look at the ticket prices. I wouldn't worry about those who like to be nitpicky and condescending with their comments.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-18 07:14 by RSbestbandever.

lets see gazza,maybe because they have been the greatest band in the world 45 years prior to that,duh.

Quote
sjs12
I don't really know why I'm posting this because I do believe the ticket prices for these gigs is too high, but...

I was thinking how much it costs for a night out.

If I go out for a big night out, perhaps a meal, a nice bottle of wine, followed by a few drinks, entry to a club and taxis home etc. - well I don't know how much that would come to but:

If I went to one of the best restaurants in London, surely that would be at least £50 per person on food for a 3 course meal, and I don't know how much the wine would be on top. Let's call it £80.

Taxis - £10 each way

A few beers - maybe another £20

Night club - in London that must be £10 or so plus probably another £20 on booze

Well that lot comes to about £150.

Not that I can afford nights out like that but it has been known that I accidentally spend a bloody fortune when I go out for a few beers.

So £106 to see the greatest rock n roll band in the world is probably not too bad in comparison.

£150 seems OK too, maybe even up to £250.

So if you've got the money, paying £400 for a special once in a lifetime gig is maybe not that bad?

Of course, it probably prices most people out in these hard economic times. Certainly it makes it harder for people to attend multiple gigs. But maybe the downside of the Stones doing smaller arena gigs when they can easily sell out a stadium is that people can only afford to see them once per tour, instead of maybe 4 or 5 times.

If I can get tickets at less than about £250 I'll attend a show. I don't think I'll be able to afford more. (I probably can't really afford that.)

This time it's £ 5-600 + beers, food and drinks - this needs to be added up as well

Quote
cowboytoast
defenSe

The spelling in the thread title is correct outside of the US.

Gotta say i'm not surprised at the prices sounds about right I have no idea why people feel betrayed, if you consider the following -

1) how much should a rolling stones ticket be worth if it is possibly the last shows they ever play? There will never be another band like them ever and they will be spoken about for 100's of years - the last legends of a bygone era?

2) any ticket should be charged compared to competition i.e how much should the rolling stones be worth compared to other acts out there, Rhiannia, justin beiber all the crap of the day, madonna even - considerably higher in my opinion it's like seeing the dodo for the last time

3) we have been able to see our band countless times over the last 20 years for £50.00 on average.

4)there are some fans on here that follow them round when they tour and see them 10+ so these prices won't mean anything to them and will ensure they see them, unlike led zepplin who played once and had 20 million fans apply for tickets.

5) I keep reading how they have betrayed fans on here and how it's a kick in the teeth.......are we a fan of the same band? the whole point of the stones attitude and appeal is they don't give a f*ck about what anyone thinks, and they don't care about anyone else, they were punk before punk. If you want a band that cares and wants to save the world try U2.

6) there's a good chance they may tour again next year so not all is lost anyway.

7) so far this year they have given us more product than ever before, in the mid 90's I would have killed for ladies and gents in blu ray quality, charlie is my darling and live in texas. As for the stones archive releases......brill.

With that kind of maths you can justify anything, if you consider that part of a big night out must be a 3 course meal in one of the best London restaurants, if you have to take cab, and so on.

My maths goes like this - the Stones get 16 million pounds for 4 shows, which makes it pretty much 1 million for each one of them per one show (the cost of the backing musicians and the crew, which I suppose are part of that, are negligiable in those figures). The average price of a ticket is 400 pouds, maybe more with those special packages, but let's count "only" 400 (the amount of the "cheap tickets" seems to be minimal). There are about 20 000 seats in the O2, so about 80 000 tickets in total, so they sell the tickets for 32 mil. pounds. 16 To The Stones, 16 left. Sure, to rent an arena costs something, the organisation, but it is nothing compared to those amounts, which are close to the pure profit. For 4 shows. 8 hours of music. I can not find any means of justyfying that, no matter how hard I try.

I am looking forward to discussing how much money those bloody greedy bastards like Bono or Springsteen demand for their tickets (in Springsteen's case for only 4 hours of pure music)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-18 12:03 by Happy24.

Quote
backstreetboy1
lets see gazza,maybe because they have been the greatest band in the world 45 years prior to that,duh.

which proves what?

And how - again, duh - do you measure that anyway?

Because Sam Cutler announced it from a stage in 1969?

Because they're YOUR favourite band?

Its a worthless comment.

So. basically, if they go on stage next month, forget the words and chords and embarrass themselves, thats Ok - because they're 'still the 'greatest band in the world', man?

behave yourself.

You could argue that they 'were' the greatest band in the world - but to say that a band who have been inactive for five years 'is' the greatest band in the world is farcical, when they havent even been a band in that time.

Its as absurd as suggesting that if Pele or Zinedine Zidane came out of retirement tomorrow they's still be the 'best footballer in the world'.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-18 12:44 by Gazza.

Quote
cowboytoast
defenSe

No, defence. Look it up in the Oxford English Dictionary if you like.

Quote
Happy24
With that kind of maths you can justify anything, if you consider that part of a big night out must be a 3 course meal in one of the best London restaurants, if you have to take cab, and so on.

My maths goes like this - the Stones get 16 million pounds for 4 shows, which makes it pretty much 1 million for each one of them per one show (the cost of the backing musicians and the crew, which I suppose are part of that, are negligiable in those figures). The average price of a ticket is 400 pouds, maybe more with those special packages, but let's count "only" 400 (the amount of the "cheap tickets" seems to be minimal). There are about 20 000 seats in the O2, so about 80 000 tickets in total, so they sell the tickets for 32 mil. pounds. 16 To The Stones, 16 left. Sure, to rent an arena costs something, the organisation, but it is nothing compared to those amounts, which are close to the pure profit. For 4 shows. 8 hours of music. I can not find any means of justyfying that, no matter how hard I try.

I am looking forward to discussing how much money those bloody greedy bastards like Bono or Springsteen demand for their tickets (in Springsteen's case for only 4 hours of pure music)

I don't go to one of London's best restaurants as a part of every big night^#, just as I don't go to see the Rolling Stones every Thursday.

I've set my limit of what I can possibly afford (£250ish). If I can get a ticket for that then I'll go. If not I won't. I'd prefer to pay £20 or less of course. But then I'd rather not pay £100 to fill the tank on my car!

#Edit - I have never been to one of London's best restaurants



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-18 13:13 by sjs12.

One way to get lower ticket prices would be for them to only do stadium shows. That way more people can see them and they can't demand such high prices. Simple economics. (Mick did go to LSE after all so he must understand this.)

For years people have been complaining about stadium gigs. In my opinion these ticket prices are the result of playing only arenas and not stadiums.

OK so the Stones could tour for less profit, but then it is simply supply and demand. They don't have a monopoly on rock n roll concerts. You can always go and see someone else instead. Just like you can buy a Ford instead of a Bentley.

@Gazza, next thing, you'll be saying that there isn't just only one true religion either !

It's a free market. They are free to charge what they want. I'm free to be pissed off because I can't afford to go.

Can we all agree they're the greatest rock'n'roll brand in the world?

I remember paying almost $400 in 2007 for a ticket to see the band at the Verizon Center, an arena, in Washington DC. I don't know why anyone would expect them to be cheaper this time around.

Quote
sjs12
One way to get lower ticket prices would be for them to only do stadium shows. That way more people can see them and they can't demand such high prices. Simple economics. (Mick did go to LSE after all so he must understand this.)

For years people have been complaining about stadium gigs. In my opinion these ticket prices are the result of playing only arenas and not stadiums.

OK so the Stones could tour for less profit, but then it is simply supply and demand. They don't have a monopoly on rock n roll concerts. You can always go and see someone else instead. Just like you can buy a Ford instead of a Bentley.

An ageing Bentley thats been lying rusting in a garage for five years, then?

Another way would be just for them to not be so f**king greedy and refusing to work unless someone gives them £4 million per show.

You know, like at least PRETEND that its not such a horrendous ordeal for them to go through that they have to be pretty much bribed into making the effort.

Christ, they really must hate performing together that much!

Quote
71Tele

Quote
treaclefingers


The jury is hung I tell ya!

How would you know? Even the female members of the jury?

I have inside sources.

Quote
sjs12

Quote
Happy24
With that kind of maths you can justify anything, if you consider that part of a big night out must be a 3 course meal in one of the best London restaurants, if you have to take cab, and so on.

My maths goes like this - the Stones get 16 million pounds for 4 shows, which makes it pretty much 1 million for each one of them per one show (the cost of the backing musicians and the crew, which I suppose are part of that, are negligiable in those figures). The average price of a ticket is 400 pouds, maybe more with those special packages, but let's count "only" 400 (the amount of the "cheap tickets" seems to be minimal). There are about 20 000 seats in the O2, so about 80 000 tickets in total, so they sell the tickets for 32 mil. pounds. 16 To The Stones, 16 left. Sure, to rent an arena costs something, the organisation, but it is nothing compared to those amounts, which are close to the pure profit. For 4 shows. 8 hours of music. I can not find any means of justyfying that, no matter how hard I try.

I am looking forward to discussing how much money those bloody greedy bastards like Bono or Springsteen demand for their tickets (in Springsteen's case for only 4 hours of pure music)

I don't go to one of London's best restaurants as a part of every big night^#, just as I don't go to see the Rolling Stones every Thursday.

I've set my limit of what I can possibly afford (£250ish). If I can get a ticket for that then I'll go. If not I won't. I'd prefer to pay £20 or less of course. But then I'd rather not pay £100 to fill the tank on my car!

#Edit - I have never been to one of London's best restaurants

I know you were not decribing your typial night out, that you just wanted to "understand it." I didn't and don't want to argue with you, I myself payed 160 Euro for a McCartney ticket (close to the stage) the last year, which is also really a lot, but it was gret and I don't regret a single cent. And I would actually do it again.

And I would pay something like that for a Rolling Stones FOS ticket (just one show, though I would like to see them 3 times for half of that price, which would make me more happy and they would actually earn more. Of course, they would have to work a bit more).

It all depends where one sets the limit and that is very personal. But in this case I feel safe to say that they crossed the limit waaay to much, no matter which way one looks at it. Just mine opinion. Well, just not mine obviously. But I think we can somehow agree on that



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-18 18:28 by Happy24.

Quote
Erik_Snow
@Gazza, next thing, you'll be saying that there isn't just only one true religion either !

You mean there isn't?

Quote
Gazza
Its as absurd as suggesting that if Pele or Zinedine Zidane came out of retirement tomorrow they's still be the 'best footballer in the world'.

Beep. It´s Diego Maradona.

Something tells me I'd rather see Zidane for one more soccer match than Keith and Chuck.

The value of the tickets here are subjective, of course, depending on what the individual values. They have made a business decision that the "market" for the last series of Rolling Stones shows justifies these prices, and that enough people will pay them. I have no problem with that. Personally, I don't go to many concerts, so for the artists I truly love I will pay sky-high prices for a great seat. I paid $1400 to see the Stones at Roseland ballroom (which my friends considered insane) but I was able to afford it at the time, and it was a club show, and an opportunity that might never come again, so the value to me was there. For a show featuring Mick Taylor and Bill Wyman in a great venue, I would pay this and more. For a Taylorless, Wymanless show in a large arena, and a band that is five years older from the rather weak band I saw last time, I will not pay these prices.

Quote
robertfraser
Gotta say i'm not surprised at the prices sounds about right I have no idea why people feel betrayed, if you consider the following -

1) how much should a rolling stones ticket be worth if it is possibly the last shows they ever play? There will never be another band like them ever and they will be spoken about for 100's of years - the last legends of a bygone era?

2) any ticket should be charged compared to competition i.e how much should the rolling stones be worth compared to other acts out there, Rhiannia, justin beiber all the crap of the day, madonna even - considerably higher in my opinion it's like seeing the dodo for the last time

3) we have been able to see our band countless times over the last 20 years for £50.00 on average.

4)there are some fans on here that follow them round when they tour and see them 10+ so these prices won't mean anything to them and will ensure they see them, unlike led zepplin who played once and had 20 million fans apply for tickets.

5) I keep reading how they have betrayed fans on here and how it's a kick in the teeth.......are we a fan of the same band? the whole point of the stones attitude and appeal is they don't give a f*ck about what anyone thinks, and they don't care about anyone else, they were punk before punk. If you want a band that cares and wants to save the world try U2.

6) there's a good chance they may tour again next year so not all is lost anyway.

7) so far this year they have given us more product than ever before, in the mid 90's I would have killed for ladies and gents in blu ray quality, charlie is my darling and live in texas. As for the stones archive releases......brill.

Well said Robertfraser though trying to be logical isn't going to go over too good with some fans on here.

Wait to you see the prices for the 60th anniversary shows, these will seem like a bargain!

Quote
71Tele
The value of the tickets here are subjective, of course, depending on what the individual values. They have made a business decision that the "market" for the last series of Rolling Stones shows justifies these prices, and that enough people will pay them. I have no problem with that. Personally, I don't go to many concerts, so for the artists I truly love I will pay sky-high prices for a great seat. I paid $1400 to see the Stones at Roseland ballroom (which my friends considered insane) but I was able to afford it at the time, and it was a club show, and an opportunity that might never come again, so the value to me was there. For a show featuring Mick Taylor and Bill Wyman in a great venue, I would pay this and more. For a Taylorless, Wymanless show in a large arena, and a band that is five years older from the rather weak band I saw last time, I will not pay these prices.

Makes sense. Good point about seeing them at Roseland even with the ticket price being that high. I believe most, if not all fans, think the ticket prices for these shows are far too much but as you said, the value is subjective.

Lets ask this guy, he is the D-FENS expert.

Being an editor, I will tell you that Defence and Defense are both acceptable...depending on where you live.
The United States used to use the same spelling as our friends in the U.K. until Webster himself decided to change the spelling after the American revoloution. He was responsible for changing "colour" to color, organise to organize, and so forth. He wanted to create an "American" language.
However, the ticket price debate is too touchy to handle.

mc I am happy you can overlook me being the typo-king...
I wish spell check worked here, but it doesnt. I am a bad
speller, horrible grammarist and worse typer.. and my lysdexia doesnt help anything.

and that is why most of my posts have 5-10 edits.


that and changing my mind/mood all the time



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2012-10-18 19:42 by Max'sKansasCity.

Quote
Max'sKansasCity
mc I am happy you can overlook me being the typo-king...
I wish spell check worked here, but it doesnt. I am a bad
speller, horrible grammarist and worse typer.. and my lysdexia doesnt help anything.

and that is why most of my posts have 5-10 edits.


that and changing my mind/mood all the time

Puhleeze no apologies. I am an AWFUL speller!! Your posts are purrfect!

Quote
robertfraser
Gotta say i'm not surprised at the prices sounds about right I have no idea why people feel betrayed, if you consider the following -

1) how much should a rolling stones ticket be worth if it is possibly the last shows they ever play? There will never be another band like them ever and they will be spoken about for 100's of years - the last legends of a bygone era?

2) any ticket should be charged compared to competition i.e how much should the rolling stones be worth compared to other acts out there, Rhiannia, justin beiber all the crap of the day, madonna even - considerably higher in my opinion it's like seeing the dodo for the last time

3) we have been able to see our band countless times over the last 20 years for £50.00 on average.

4)there are some fans on here that follow them round when they tour and see them 10+ so these prices won't mean anything to them and will ensure they see them, unlike led zepplin who played once and had 20 million fans apply for tickets.

5) I keep reading how they have betrayed fans on here and how it's a kick in the teeth.......are we a fan of the same band? the whole point of the stones attitude and appeal is they don't give a f*ck about what anyone thinks, and they don't care about anyone else, they were punk before punk. If you want a band that cares and wants to save the world try U2.

6) there's a good chance they may tour again next year so not all is lost anyway.

7) so far this year they have given us more product than ever before, in the mid 90's I would have killed for ladies and gents in blu ray quality, charlie is my darling and live in texas. As for the stones archive releases......brill.

Sorry Robertfraser but I wouldn't pay £100 to see a Dodo for the last time. Certainly wouldn't pay £430 to see the Rolling Stones. You comparing the Rolling Stones to a Dodo? Funny!

The Stones were punk before punk? Funnier still.

You've summed it all up here. The Stones don't care about the fans, it's really the fans with money who care about them.