Watch out for the man on the right.He is a well known scalper who will try to sell you tickets for much more than they are worth.

Quote
crawdaddy


Watch out for the man on the right.He is a well known scalper who will try to sell you tickets for much more than they are worth.

Yup, its the lack of mustache that gives him away as the scoundrel.

Simply, they don't give a shit about what we think,their focus are the bankers and the 2% that can afford their prices,the rest can go and @#$%& themselves and bitch and moan in the internet...

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

Despite my understanding for all the anger and enormous outbreak about the ridicolous ticket prices there are ways to explain such.

We knew already after 2007 that in any event the Rolling Stones would gather moss and play again only for the cash cow in her reach. Mind you you all pointing your fingers to Mick, but I tell you one thing it is also Keith for a very long time who's inspired to take the bucks as big as they can come.

The Rolling Stones had been offered 16 Mio US$ for the four concerts which also was on the News Site within IORR. It was crystal clear that these money is guaranteed for the Stones no matter how the Promoter will make any money out of it. Get me if the currency was £. Anyway it is now up to the Promoter to try to get the utmost out of the event. So he hits the high notes on tickets prices to see how many will go for those and at the end he might even have big cash, because the touts/scalpers took the risk to sell the tickets at even more flipping stupid prices.
As the Stones cash in only anyway the promised amount (perhaps with an upscale percentage on sales) they are never interested in the ticket business at all. We can discuss endlessly if this may be right or wrong. But at the end they concentrate on their ability of playing life while rehearsing or giving secredt clubshows. I do not say that it is fair or anything, but either we live with it even with a bitter taste in the mouth or we live with it anyway.

Quote
Grison
Despite my understanding for all the anger and enormous outbreak about the ridicolous ticket prices there are ways to explain such.

We knew already after 2007 that in any event the Rolling Stones would gather moss and play again only for the cash cow in her reach. Mind you you all pointing your fingers to Mick, but I tell you one thing it is also Keith for a very long time who's inspired to take the bucks as big as they can come.

The Rolling Stones had been offered 16 Mio US$ for the four concerts which also was on the News Site within IORR. It was crystal clear that these money is guaranteed for the Stones no matter how the Promoter will make any money out of it. Get me if the currency was £. Anyway it is now up to the Promoter to try to get the utmost out of the event. So he hits the high notes on tickets prices to see how many will go for those and at the end he might even have big cash, because the touts/scalpers took the risk to sell the tickets at even more flipping stupid prices.
As the Stones cash in only anyway the promised amount (perhaps with an upscale percentage on sales) they are never interested in the ticket business at all. We can discuss endlessly if this may be right or wrong. But at the end they concentrate on their ability of playing life while rehearsing or giving secredt clubshows. I do not say that it is fair or anything, but either we live with it even with a bitter taste in the mouth or we live with it anyway.

Good comments. The concept that Mick Jagger (alone) sets ticket prices is mis-leading. Maybe ten years ago, but not today. The one who posted this thread mentioned the legal battle between Live Nation and Cohl and what came forth during testimony. It appears the Stones had issues with Cohl in regards to ticket pricing. Too high, not too low. On the surface that doesn't make a lot of sense until you consider the backlash that some musicians get from their fan base in regards to the high cost of tickets. This is what is so puzzling about the recent ticket mess involving the Stones and the four shows. Mick should have seen this train wreck coming and done everything to avoid it. He certainly has a say in these matters. Of course what goes on behind closed doors in these negotiations often never sees the light of day. Everyone exits all smiles even though some may leave a little uneasy and with their fingers crossed. Mick very well could have been the one with his fingers crossed this time around.

Quote
Grison
Despite my understanding for all the anger and enormous outbreak about the ridicolous ticket prices there are ways to explain such.

We knew already after 2007 that in any event the Rolling Stones would gather moss and play again only for the cash cow in her reach. Mind you you all pointing your fingers to Mick, but I tell you one thing it is also Keith for a very long time who's inspired to take the bucks as big as they can come.

The Rolling Stones had been offered 16 Mio US$ for the four concerts which also was on the News Site within IORR. It was crystal clear that these money is guaranteed for the Stones no matter how the Promoter will make any money out of it. Get me if the currency was £. Anyway it is now up to the Promoter to try to get the utmost out of the event. So he hits the high notes on tickets prices to see how many will go for those and at the end he might even have big cash, because the touts/scalpers took the risk to sell the tickets at even more flipping stupid prices.

$25 million = £16 million.

You're correct in that the entire band are all culpable and that, as I've said before, the promoters are obliged to set a high ticket price to get a return on their very high investment (they had to average approximately £210 per ticket JUST TO BREAK EVEN). However, it still goes back to the Stones only playing these shows because they demanded and were given such an exorbitant guarantee.

By demanding so much money, they're effectively leaving the promoter with little option but to minimise THEIR risk by allowing what was an unregulated secondary market free for all bunfight and passing the financial risk of ticket selling down the chain to third parties. It still doesn't alter the two basic outcomes which are 1) The Stones are demanding and getting paid a crazy amount of money and 2) their fans are being bled white as a result of those demands.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Grison
Despite my understanding for all the anger and enormous outbreak about the ridicolous ticket prices there are ways to explain such.

We knew already after 2007 that in any event the Rolling Stones would gather moss and play again only for the cash cow in her reach. Mind you you all pointing your fingers to Mick, but I tell you one thing it is also Keith for a very long time who's inspired to take the bucks as big as they can come.

The Rolling Stones had been offered 16 Mio US$ for the four concerts which also was on the News Site within IORR. It was crystal clear that these money is guaranteed for the Stones no matter how the Promoter will make any money out of it. Get me if the currency was £. Anyway it is now up to the Promoter to try to get the utmost out of the event. So he hits the high notes on tickets prices to see how many will go for those and at the end he might even have big cash, because the touts/scalpers took the risk to sell the tickets at even more flipping stupid prices.

$25 million = £16 million.

You're correct in that the entire band are all culpable and that, as I've said before, the promoters are obliged to set a high ticket price to get a return on their very high investment (they had to average approximately £210 per ticket JUST TO BREAK EVEN). However, it still goes back to the Stones only playing these shows because they demanded and were given such an exorbitant guarantee.

By demanding so much money, they're effectively leaving the promoter with little option but to minimise THEIR risk by allowing what was an unregulated secondary market free for all bunfight and passing the financial risk of ticket selling down the chain to third parties. It still doesn't alter the two basic outcomes which are 1) The Stones are demanding and getting paid a crazy amount of money and 2) their fans are being bled white as a result of those demands.

Landing the Stones is a great "catch" for any promoter. Could be that it wasn't so much the Stones "demanding" as it was the promoters "offering". Your "scenario" sort of paints the promoters as victims in this deal. It's really hard to say what went on behind closed doors. I am certain Mick had no desire in pissing off his fan base and coming across as some greedy old rock legend only interested in one last "heist" at the expense of his fans. No, he is much smarter than that. There must be some sort of explanation that probably won't come out until after these four shows are over with. It will be interesting to see if this same group actually promotes the shows next year, or if they do whether the same ticket scale is used. Something doesn't add up here.

Quote
DoomNGloom

Quote
Gazza

Quote
Grison
Despite my understanding for all the anger and enormous outbreak about the ridicolous ticket prices there are ways to explain such.

We knew already after 2007 that in any event the Rolling Stones would gather moss and play again only for the cash cow in her reach. Mind you you all pointing your fingers to Mick, but I tell you one thing it is also Keith for a very long time who's inspired to take the bucks as big as they can come.

The Rolling Stones had been offered 16 Mio US$ for the four concerts which also was on the News Site within IORR. It was crystal clear that these money is guaranteed for the Stones no matter how the Promoter will make any money out of it. Get me if the currency was £. Anyway it is now up to the Promoter to try to get the utmost out of the event. So he hits the high notes on tickets prices to see how many will go for those and at the end he might even have big cash, because the touts/scalpers took the risk to sell the tickets at even more flipping stupid prices.

$25 million = £16 million.

You're correct in that the entire band are all culpable and that, as I've said before, the promoters are obliged to set a high ticket price to get a return on their very high investment (they had to average approximately £210 per ticket JUST TO BREAK EVEN). However, it still goes back to the Stones only playing these shows because they demanded and were given such an exorbitant guarantee.

By demanding so much money, they're effectively leaving the promoter with little option but to minimise THEIR risk by allowing what was an unregulated secondary market free for all bunfight and passing the financial risk of ticket selling down the chain to third parties. It still doesn't alter the two basic outcomes which are 1) The Stones are demanding and getting paid a crazy amount of money and 2) their fans are being bled white as a result of those demands.

Landing the Stones is a great "catch" for any promoter. Could be that it wasn't so much the Stones "demanding" as it was the promoters "offering". Your "scenario" sort of paints the promoters as victims in this deal. It's really hard to say what went on behind closed doors. I am certain Mick had no desire in pissing off his fan base and coming across as some greedy old rock legend only interested in one last "heist" at the expense of his fans. No, he is much smarter than that. There must be some sort of explanation that probably won't come out until after these four shows are over with. It will be interesting to see if this same group actually promotes the shows next year, or if they do whether the same ticket scale is used. Something doesn't add up here.

Stop with this sickening propaganda! You are nothing but a corporate whore that is doing a messy job of damage control! Stop trying to cover for these greedy bastards!

PS: On the flip side of things tell Mick I love both new songs! You see, I can be fair and balanced.

Quote
slew
Ticket prices are a scam, The Stones have some sort of input but who knows who really drives it.

This town needs a new Sheriff.

Ronnie Wood defends Rolling Stones ticket prices

The Rolling Stones' Ronnie Wood has defended the ticket prices for the band's up-coming shows in London and New Jersey.

The guitarist has said that the band don't feel bad about the price of a ticket for the shows at the O2 Arena (November 25, 29) and Newark Prudential Center (December 13, 15) as they've already spent millions on the gigs.

Speaking to The Telegraph, Wood said: "We've already spent a million on rehearsing in Paris. And the stage is going to be another few million. And the lights. We feel no bad thing about ticket prices. We've got to make something."

Tickets for the London shows range from £90 to a deluxe VIP package priced at £950, which has left many fans frustrated as they cannot afford to fork out to see the legendary group.

Previously, Keith Richards claimed the ticket prices – which will see the band personally pocket around £16 million – were "about right to us". However, he added: "I just wanna do some shows and I don't want to charge over the bloody top."

[www.nme.com]

If they don't need the money how you going to get some guys on either side of 70 who hate each other to come together for a few shows?

The typical $500,000 to $1,000,000 per gig high tier classic rock bands can command probably isn't going to cut it.

And with only 60,000 to 70,000 tix available, it's obvious they can't accommodate everybody.

Whether I see a show with my own eyes or not I am just happy to be getting another pro-shot video down the line.

If they were going to offer some low cost tickets, a multi-week residency at River Plate, broadcast online would be more appealing to my sensibilities as a rock music fan than seeing them play the usual LA megadomes at more affordable prices of $165-450.

If we leave the blind fanship away for a minute...

The best thing that can happen to LIVE music is that all these veteran acts who are going their sixties, seventies or whatever, who are 'rock and roll legends' and living off from that 'historical, revolutionary, rebellous or whatever' baby-boomers fantasy, with a potential audience enough old and wealthy to pay anything asked for, to just die off and disappear. After that probably a certain common sense might prevail again. It just gone out of hand big time, and The Stones are just the biggest symptom of that. They are the monster the whole rock and roll business - once a living genre and movement, now just another barbrastreisend entertainment for wealthy folks - have created.

I suppose that in a rather near future there will be a strong counter reaction or movement against all of that what The Stones, and their type of old $$$$$$$$ entertainers, do represent (by their actions). Something compared to which even the punk movement once critizing 'dinosaurs' was just a children's game, and that movement supposedly have nothing to do with 'rock and roll' music any longer, since these old acts ruined everything what the music was once good for. And that will be a better world. "It's Only Rock'n...pleeeeeezzee

Just my two cents.

- Doxa

And to continue my 'doom' speculation...

The Stones damn well know it as well. They milk every damn dollar out of it, while it lasts. Like Andrew Oldam once forcely throw GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! LP to American market to get every possible dollar out of the moment when the band was still 'hot'. But at the same time they are clever enough to take care of the 'legacy', and give the impression that the last 30 years doesn't really matter; it is the 'real story' there back in the 60's and the 70's that has a historical value, and the reason why this band should be remembered now and in future. And yeah, that story of the world's 'most dangerous band' will most likely fascinate the folks now and in future. And as we have seen, it still does sell a lot of tickets to see the 'legends' one more time 'live'. With a glass of champaigne and a cigar, I guess (to not forget the caviar).

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-10 00:20 by Doxa.

Billboard: There's been controversy about your ticket pricing for the London and New Jersey shows. What's your take on that?

Mick: I don't think there should be a secondary ticket market. I don't think it should be legal. To my mind, there has to be a better way of doing it, but we're living, really, with the way the system functions. We can't, in four shows, change the whole ticketing system. You might say, "The tickets are too expensive"-well, it's a very expensive show to put on, just to do four shows, because normally you do a hundred shows and you'd have the same expenses. [laughs] So, yes, it's expensive. But most of the tickets go for a higher price than we've sold them for, so you can see the market is there. We don't participate in the profit. If a ticket costs 250 quid [$400], let's imagine, and goes for 1,000 quid [$1,600], I just want to point out that we don't get that difference.

full interview w/M&K here:

[www.billboard.com]

Quote
Glam Descendant
Billboard: There's been controversy about your ticket pricing for the London and New Jersey shows. What's your take on that?

Mick: I don't think there should be a secondary ticket market. I don't think it should be legal. To my mind, there has to be a better way of doing it, but we're living, really, with the way the system functions. We can't, in four shows, change the whole ticketing system. You might say, "The tickets are too expensive"-well, it's a very expensive show to put on, just to do four shows, because normally you do a hundred shows and you'd have the same expenses. [laughs] So, yes, it's expensive. But most of the tickets go for a higher price than we've sold them for, so you can see the market is there. We don't participate in the profit. If a ticket costs 250 quid [$400], let's imagine, and goes for 1,000 quid [$1,600], I just want to point out that we don't get that difference.

full interview w/M&K here:

[www.billboard.com]

OK, from basically no words to many words all in 24 hours. Mighty suspicious, if I do say so myself. Empty words I mighty add.

Quote
Glam Descendant
Billboard: There's been controversy about your ticket pricing for the London and New Jersey shows. What's your take on that?

Mick: I don't think there should be a secondary ticket market. I don't think it should be legal. To my mind, there has to be a better way of doing it, but we're living, really, with the way the system functions. We can't, in four shows, change the whole ticketing system. You might say, "The tickets are too expensive"-well, it's a very expensive show to put on, just to do four shows, because normally you do a hundred shows and you'd have the same expenses. [laughs] So, yes, it's expensive. But most of the tickets go for a higher price than we've sold them for, so you can see the market is there. We don't participate in the profit. If a ticket costs 250 quid [$400], let's imagine, and goes for 1,000 quid [$1,600], I just want to point out that we don't get that difference.

full interview w/M&K here:

[www.billboard.com]

Well thank You Mr Jagger,for those comforting words,you are totally full of it,and l hope that lots of those tickets go unsold on show night,and of course you set the price by the amount of money you demand and get from the promoters..><

Quote
DoomNGloom

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
LastStopThisTown

Quote
JumpinJackOLantern

Quote
corriecas
beacuse the Stones dont care.
if they are bought, thats fine by them,
and they dont give a toss about fans opinions
jeroen

Sort of seems that way doesn't it. Maybe the fans should send them a message by not attending. They just use us to feed their addiction to performing anyway. I am moving closer by the day to being done with them altogether.

I share this sentiment and have almost given up.
It's clear from Ronnie & Keith's comments that they're a) out of touch with 'regular' stones fans and/or b)they're not bothered what fans think.
Add to that the lack of output in recent years and Keith's below par performances on the last tour(s)... I kind of wonder, what am I hanging around for, they're done.

The ticket issue is shameful, but the new songs are really good in my opinion. I am thinking PPV is the way to go.

Smart man.

Ah yes, proof that the Stones wagon is (t)rolling...

Quote
Glam Descendant
Billboard: There's been controversy about your ticket pricing for the London and New Jersey shows. What's your take on that?

Mick: I don't think there should be a secondary ticket market. I don't think it should be legal. To my mind, there has to be a better way of doing it, but we're living, really, with the way the system functions. We can't, in four shows, change the whole ticketing system. You might say, "The tickets are too expensive"-well, it's a very expensive show to put on, just to do four shows, because normally you do a hundred shows and you'd have the same expenses. [laughs] So, yes, it's expensive. But most of the tickets go for a higher price than we've sold them for, so you can see the market is there. We don't participate in the profit. If a ticket costs 250 quid [$400], let's imagine, and goes for 1,000 quid [$1,600], I just want to point out that we don't get that difference.

full interview w/M&K here:

[www.billboard.com]

Mick Jagger and Ron Wood can go F themselves! What else are they going to say
? Thay are just bleeding the fans to death! Let see what kind of a show they give their fans!

I think they will be well aware of exactly how much they are making - Mick for sure. I've had several instances where they seem resentful of anyone who trys to make money out of 'their' band. These tickets seemed priced to make it difficult for any scalpers to make easy big money by selling the tickets on. Unfortunately,once you pay the big bucks, you can bet they will cost more next time.

>>"We're spending millions on the stage and we've already spent a fortune in Paris... I mean, we want to make some money."

This sounds pretty lame excuse to me. I can't see the band coughing up millions to build their own stage and all the other stuff that goes with it, and cart it about. Thought this is where sponsors came in.

I also can't see how you can justify ticket prices by adding rehearsal costs to the tab - that's down to personal choice where you do it. Kind of like someone writing a book saying - I'm gonna stay in the most expensive hotel in Jamaica for six months while I write it - So the cost of writing the book will be £3 million.

Sounds to me - with these costs, there will be more gigs next year for a sponsor to recoup something.

Maybe there will be cheaper ticket prices at some bigger venues. Can't see you would fill stadiums at these prices.

Ahhhhh. Let's see...

Billboard: There's been controversy about your ticket pricing for the London and New Jersey shows. What's your take on that?

Mick: I don't think there should be a secondary ticket market. I don't think it should be legal. To my mind, there has to be a better way of doing it, but we're living, really, with the way the system functions. We can't, in four shows, change the whole ticketing system. You might say, "The tickets are too expensive"-well, it's a very expensive show to put on, just to do four shows, because normally you do a hundred shows and you'd have the same expenses. [laughs] So, yes, it's expensive. But most of the tickets go for a higher price than we've sold them for, so you can see the market is there. We don't participate in the profit. If a ticket costs 250 quid [$400], let's imagine, and goes for 1,000 quid [$1,600], I just want to point out that we don't get that difference.

Mick doesn't think there should be a secondary ticket market...yet there is. So much for his thinking. COP OUT NUMBER ONE. However, they are "living" with the ticketing system. Yet for FOUR SHOWS they COULD change the system. Yet Mick says 'they' can't change the ticketing system. COP OUT NUMBER TWO.

So "most of the tickets go for a higher price than we've sold them for" means they didn't charge enough? EXACTLY. They "don't participate in the profit." Which means he knows they should charge more. COP OUT NUMBER THREE.

So, Mr DoomNGloom/GRRegory, what excuse do you have now? Ahhhh yes, the sound of silence. Or your typical response of "Mick is fighting ticket prices". Yes he is - the get everything he can.

Quote
JamesPhelge00

Maybe there will be cheaper ticket prices at some bigger venues. Can't see you would fill stadiums at these prices.

Agree - they absolutely couldn't. They haven't even sold out these four gigs yet - well, definitely not the London ones, I'm not keeping track of the New York ones. They have made people assess what a Stones concert is worth to them as opposed to a default position of buying tickets. A limited stadium tour would make a million or more tickets available and there just isn't that number prepared to pay £400.

Yeah it sounds about right to Keith, but I don't think he realizes the US could be going through another recession and no concert of the Stones will be affordable and noone will be able to go. They don't worry about the hard working people. They are worried about paying for the stage and the cost to get everything on the road. As for us working people who really don't get paid much and bust our butts 5-7 days a week to make a decent wage the Stones could care less now. They were once in the same boat as us long time ago..
It is rough these days and I don't think the Stones understand and care at all about the fans... A little cut in ticket prices wouldhelp us all out but that is not going to happen. My opinion.


drummer_dude

Rod Stewart says in his autobiography that one of the things he fears the most is empty seats. I think the Stones care more about the bottom line. If you charge £400 a ticket and sell 80% you make more than you would if you charged £200 and sold 0ut.