Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Cocaine Eyes
And as I said - Jagger wants this all done and dusted PRIOR to his 70th birthday.

I know, I know......he's in excellent shape. BUT, does our Peter Pan really want to read headlines about an aging, 70-year-old, once sex-symbol, once-rebel,etc. thrown in his face?

No, he doesn't.

As for Glasto and Hyde Park.......I'd bet on Hyde Park. And for Glasto, I'll just say "perhaps".

When will they announce it? It could be any minute now that the paper work seems to be locked up.

Or, to quote BV......"SOON"! How soon? I'd say not before the Ronnie gig at Ambassadors.

So are you saying that Mick Jagger will never perform with the Stones once he turns 70?

The show at the Ambassadors is not Ronnie's. He's guesting with James McCartney for a song or two, not a reason to delay any Rolling Stones announcement.

Pollstar says that's expected in early April.

I can even imagine Mick sees a point in performing after turning 70. I don't think the world ever has seen an artist in better physical shape after 70.
I'm sure Mick wants to hear that...

Quote
bye bye johnny
Pollstar says that's expected in early April.

But this is getting tricky if you would like to make travel arrangements and/or try t get good flight deals, if the tour would really start in May.
In May are quite a lot of long weekends due to public holiadys which increase prices for travel quite a bit.
Anyway just a thought.
They gave a six weeks notice in Oct. for the first concert in November. I assume that is what it's like.

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Cocaine Eyes
And as I said - Jagger wants this all done and dusted PRIOR to his 70th birthday.

I know, I know......he's in excellent shape. BUT, does our Peter Pan really want to read headlines about an aging, 70-year-old, once sex-symbol, once-rebel,etc. thrown in his face?

No, he doesn't.

As for Glasto and Hyde Park.......I'd bet on Hyde Park. And for Glasto, I'll just say "perhaps".

When will they announce it? It could be any minute now that the paper work seems to be locked up.

Or, to quote BV......"SOON"! How soon? I'd say not before the Ronnie gig at Ambassadors.

So are you saying that Mick Jagger will never perform with the Stones once he turns 70?

The show at the Ambassadors is not Ronnie's. He's guesting with James McCartney for a song or two, not a reason to delay any Rolling Stones announcement.

Pollstar says that's expected in early April.

1. Oh no, I'm not saying that Jagger will never perform with the Stones after age 70. I'm saying that these relatively large, long, big announcement tours/concerts will take a much lower key. Of course they'll continue. But on a much smaller scale. It's just that with the 70th birthday approaching makes Jagger ripe for the media to go crazy. I doubt he wants that! I doubt he wants to read this in the media:

IN SPITE OF TURNING AGE 70 TOMORROW, MICK JAGGER MANAGED TO ROCK THE HOUSE ALONG WITH HIS AGING BANDMATES LAST NIGHT!

Once the big 70 birthday has passed, sure he'll continue. It's not his physicality I'm speaking about. Rather, it's his EGO!!

2. I know it's not Ronnie's show. But, Ronnnie will be present for the announcement. As far as I've heard, the announcement will take place in NYC. That's why I was saying Ronnie was too busy overseas to be at the announcement.

3. Trust me - look for an announcement in the first week of April!!



With all of the above said......let's hope there isn't yet another change in plans!!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-21 14:18 by Cocaine Eyes.

Rehearsals will start in april in the USA. i think there will be an announcement, indeed, first week of April.

Everybody is there , at the right moment .

jeroen

Quote
Grison

Quote
bye bye johnny
Pollstar says that's expected in early April.

But this is getting tricky if you would like to make travel arrangements and/or try t get good flight deals, if the tour would really start in May.
In May are quite a lot of long weekends due to public holiadys which increase prices for travel quite a bit.
Anyway just a thought.
They gave a six weeks notice in Oct. for the first concert in November. I assume that is what it's like.

Pollstar article also mentions that the exact routing is still being confirmed, which could imply the rumored May 2 start date won't happen, and they need to rejigger some venues and dates accordingly.

Pushing it back to mid-May would still allow 6 weeks for 18 shows ahead of Glastonbury and Hyde Park in late June-early July.

Quote
Thommie

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Cocaine Eyes
And as I said - Jagger wants this all done and dusted PRIOR to his 70th birthday.

I know, I know......he's in excellent shape. BUT, does our Peter Pan really want to read headlines about an aging, 70-year-old, once sex-symbol, once-rebel,etc. thrown in his face?

No, he doesn't.

As for Glasto and Hyde Park.......I'd bet on Hyde Park. And for Glasto, I'll just say "perhaps".

When will they announce it? It could be any minute now that the paper work seems to be locked up.

Or, to quote BV......"SOON"! How soon? I'd say not before the Ronnie gig at Ambassadors.

So are you saying that Mick Jagger will never perform with the Stones once he turns 70?

The show at the Ambassadors is not Ronnie's. He's guesting with James McCartney for a song or two, not a reason to delay any Rolling Stones announcement.

Pollstar says that's expected in early April.

I can even imagine Mick sees a point in performing after turning 70. I don't think the world ever has seen an artist in better physical shape after 70.
I'm sure Mick wants to hear that...

Or anyone else for that matter?

Macca is in very good shape for a guy coming up to 71,and the start of a major tour.
Don't think he puts in as much effort as Mick to keep, and look fit and healthy,apart from the hair dye and not drinking too much.Differant to Mick though,being a veggie.Whether that is more healthy is a matter of opinion.

Rolling Stones Settle on Promoter for Arena Tour

Sources: Band will make between $4 million and $5 million per show; top tickets to cost $500-$600



By Steve Knopper
March 21, 2013 10:51 AM ET

The Rolling Stones have chosen AEG Live to promote their upcoming North American tour, according to concert-business sources privy to the tour negotiations, after the concert giant made what one source calls "a real crazy offer" to outbid a coalition of promoters including Australia's Paul Dainty and veteran independent companies in U.S. cities. The Stones will receive between $4 million and $5 million per show, which likely means top tickets will cost $500 to $650 – slightly less than what the band charged for the priciest seats at its shows in Brooklyn, Newark and London in late 2012.

As previously reported, the tour will include 18 North American arena dates. A source close to the band told Rolling Stone the tour is set to kick off on May 2nd. The Stones will also play London's Hyde Park in July, and may add European festival dates. It's possible the Stones might expand the tour even further later in 2013, but the band has no concrete plans. "Are the Stones going to do anything after this? I doubt it," says one source. Adds another source, "Look, anything's possible. But it's Mick and Keith's show, so we don't know."

The Stones were planning to go with Dainty's group until Tuesday morning, when a lawyer for the Stones called AEG executives and granted the bid before lunch. AEG tentatively plans to announce the tour in early April. Sources for the Los Angeles promoter – the world's second-biggest after Live Nation – declined to comment.

The Stones, who haven't done a full tour since 2006-2007, grossed $18.3 million with their four North American shows last year, according to Pollstar. After the 2012 run, which included guests from Lady Gaga to the Black Keys, the band seemed energized. "This thing wasn't enough," Keith Richards told Rolling Stone in early January. "It would be dopey to bring things up to this level and say, 'Well, that's that, 50 years, bye-bye.' Really, all you're going to have to do is wait for an announcement."

[www.rollingstone.com]

Arena tour....would any stadiums be thrown in at all?

Quote
daytime
Arena tour....would any stadiums be thrown in at all?

Design, build and pay a stadium stage for a few shows?

[www.rollingstone.com]

BINGO!!

<<<< The Stones will also play London's Hyde Park in July, >>>>



And be prepared for this Hyde Park shindig to happen PRIOR to Jagger's birthday (26th July).



And.........

BINGO #2!!

<<<< Sources for the Los Angeles promoter – the world's second-biggest after Live Nation – declined to comment. >>>>



Rehearsals will be in LA, as I've alluded to before. Now, we just have to scope out where in LA the prvate, small gig will be!

Have fun everyone!!





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-21 19:59 by Cocaine Eyes.

i know, from experience, that Brazilian women at discotheque Help, at the Copacapana in Rio cost a lot.

But the ticket for a Stones ticket will cost a lot more.

Jeroen

Any way, i hope the Stones will Blow me, in London, away in July.

Jeroen

Quote
Cocaine Eyes
[www.rollingstone.com]

BINGO!!

<<<< The Stones will also play London's Hyde Park in July, >>>>

And be prepared for this Hyde Park shindig to happen PRIOR to Jagger's birthday (26th July).

Hyde Park has been mentioned several times previously. Those rumors strengthened recently when the BST Festival changed it's schedule, speculated as an effort to better accommodate the Stones. Those Hyde Park dates were reported to be July 6 and July 13.

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Cocaine Eyes
[www.rollingstone.com]

BINGO!!

<<<< The Stones will also play London's Hyde Park in July, >>>>

And be prepared for this Hyde Park shindig to happen PRIOR to Jagger's birthday (26th July).

Hyde Park has been mentioned several times previously. Those rumors strengthened recently when the BST Festival changed it's schedule, speculated as an effort to better accommodate the Stones. Those Hyde Park dates were reported to be July 6 and July 13.

True indeed. As far as the exact dates go......I don't think we can be certain until THEY announce it. However, I still say the Hyde Park dates will be prior to Jagger's birthday. (Which is also what those rumours were saying).





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-21 21:04 by Cocaine Eyes.

Quote
gotdablouse

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
Karlos123
You think the change from Virgin to AEG will affect Hyde Park or Glastonbury? Someone predicted an announcement which didn't take place...bad signs?

I had signals they would announce. That was not difficult to predict. Everything pointed at last weekend because the 18 shows two month tour was supposed to start in May,
No, no bad signs. Other signs. Nothing changed for G'bury or Hyde Park.
Maybe some other/new shows at other/new locations because of the change.

Someone said "Mick knows just what he is doing...making Virgin do all the work and logistics but not quite sealing the deal with them....giving AEG ( or someone else ) a chance to come in and sweeten the deal"

But the same reality is this: AEG will go for something extra because one big party fell out which means the Stones cannot afford to loose AEG as well.

How could they lose (not loose as in "Let in Loose" !) AEG if the deal's been agreed and signed on. Well I guess there is a get out clause but the Stones signed it because it worked for them.

Again, my guess is that the BSC concerts in Hyde Park where the sweetener that made AEG bite the bullet on the $80 Million. That's probably the guarantee the Stones wanted for that "mini-tour" and they'll play Hyde Park for AEG as part of the deal. It's good for their image, brings back sweet memories of 1969 and AEG can launch this new event in style, more so than if they only had friggin' Bon Jovi as the biggest act!

Actually someone had pointed out last week that it didn't make sense to have Branson/Dainty promote the US tour and the Stones playing "for" AEG at Hyde Park, now that's been fixed.

One thing I wonder though is why the Stones ask for guarantees when they could make more money by simply taking a cut, I remember that being the irony of the Bill Graham deal falling through in 1989, the guarantee was irrelevant...so that might mean it's a "minimum guarantee" rather than a "fixed amount".

As for Branson having something "bigger" to announce, not sure what could be bigger than the Stones touring? Unless John Lennon is no longer dead (to loosely quote George Harrison).

How could they lose (not loose as in "Let in Loose" !) AEG if the deal's been agreed and signed on.
While talking to AEG...in other words just before there was a deal.
I'm sure people at AEG know how to negogiate, maybe even better then MJ.
Oh and excuse me for my use of the language!
But you can let it loose indeed

Anyway; nothing much will be different because of AEG.
Hyde Park again and probably G'bury as well and rehearsals in LA.
We will all hear it April 5 I guess. And let's hope prices will be not so high as we fear sometimes.

Oh I see, well they didn't have much time to play hardball, call in the morning, ok by noon ;-)

As for prices, it's hard to see prices being a lot lower than for the 50th since the guarantee is more or less the same, now with AEG promoting the rumoured two Hyde Park concerts that could help...a bit.

Talking about the guarantee I'm still wondering if it's a "minimum guarantee" or a "fixed guarantee", maybe a bit of both...I suppose the Stones insist on a "guarantee" (minimum of fixed) to make the promoters do their best to sell all the tickets!

Quote
gotdablouse
Oh I see, well they didn't have much time to play hardball, call in the morning, ok by noon ;-)

As for prices, it's hard to see prices being a lot lower than for the 50th since the guarantee is more or less the same, now with AEG promoting the rumoured two Hyde Park concerts that could help...a bit.

Talking about the guarantee I'm still wondering if it's a "minimum guarantee" or a "fixed guarantee", maybe a bit of both...I suppose the Stones insist on a "guarantee" (minimum of fixed) to make the promoters do their best to sell all the tickets!

call in the morning, ok by noon
Yes that's the story. But if you don't have any information would you say yes by noon after a morning call to a deal like this??



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-21 21:57 by Dreamer.

Oh and minimum or/and a fixed guarantee...
In any case: financial satisfaction is guaranteed!

Quote
Thommie

Quote
bye bye johnny

Quote
Cocaine Eyes
And as I said - Jagger wants this all done and dusted PRIOR to his 70th birthday.

I know, I know......he's in excellent shape. BUT, does our Peter Pan really want to read headlines about an aging, 70-year-old, once sex-symbol, once-rebel,etc. thrown in his face?

No, he doesn't.

As for Glasto and Hyde Park.......I'd bet on Hyde Park. And for Glasto, I'll just say "perhaps".

When will they announce it? It could be any minute now that the paper work seems to be locked up.

Or, to quote BV......"SOON"! How soon? I'd say not before the Ronnie gig at Ambassadors.

So are you saying that Mick Jagger will never perform with the Stones once he turns 70?

The show at the Ambassadors is not Ronnie's. He's guesting with James McCartney for a song or two, not a reason to delay any Rolling Stones announcement.

Pollstar says that's expected in early April.

I can even imagine Mick sees a point in performing after turning 70. I don't think the world ever has seen an artist in better physical shape after 70.
I'm sure Mick wants to hear that...

The point is that Mick Jagger turning 70 will make headlines whether The Stones are performing or not on or around the day in question--but especially on the heels of recent Stones activity.

Recall that Jaggers 50th birthday was a headline grabber, and at that point The Stones hadn't even performed in 3 years.

I would guess that Mick is less age conscious than are his fans at concerts or his detractors in the media.

Quote
crawdaddy
Macca is in very good shape for a guy coming up to 71,and the start of a major tour.
Don't think he puts in as much effort as Mick to keep, and look fit and healthy,apart from the hair dye and not drinking too much.Differant to Mick though,being a veggie.Whether that is more healthy is a matter of opinion.

Not just a vegetarian, but a vegan. And actually it is more a matter of fact than a matter of opinion that, overall, a veggie/veeg diet is healthier in the long run. Meat and fish proteins are rich in two particular amino acids that produce large amounts of ammonia in the system that, over time, can lead to liver damage and consequently other diseases. Vegetable protein is poor in those two amino acids and actually helps flush toxic ammonia from the system more readily. Also, the process of digestion causes free radicals, and it taxes the body greatly to digest what is essentially bovine muscle fiber, which gets its toughness from standing in fields grazing all day while supporting a 1,660-lb [753 kg] bulk, whereas plant protein is easier to digest and derives its sturdiness from being blown about by the wind and rain--hence, less free radicals resulting from less energy taken to digest plant protein.

I believe ya.

Quote
stonehearted
Not just a vegetarian, but a vegan. And actually it is more a matter of fact than a matter of opinion that, overall, a veggie/veeg diet is healthier in the long run. Meat and fish proteins are rich in two particular amino acids that produce large amounts of ammonia in the system that, over time, can lead to liver damage and consequently other diseases. Vegetable protein is poor in those two amino acids and actually helps flush toxic ammonia from the system more readily. Also, the process of digestion causes free radicals, and it taxes the body greatly to digest what is essentially bovine muscle fiber, which gets its toughness from standing in fields grazing all day while supporting a 1,660-lb [753 kg] bulk, whereas plant protein is easier to digest and derives its sturdiness from being blown about by the wind and rain--hence, less free radicals resulting from less energy taken to digest plant protein.

OK, but will the Stones play in Amsterdam this year ?

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Quote
Rolling Hansie

Quote
stonehearted
Not just a vegetarian, but a vegan. And actually it is more a matter of fact than a matter of opinion that, overall, a veggie/veeg diet is healthier in the long run. Meat and fish proteins are rich in two particular amino acids that produce large amounts of ammonia in the system that, over time, can lead to liver damage and consequently other diseases. Vegetable protein is poor in those two amino acids and actually helps flush toxic ammonia from the system more readily. Also, the process of digestion causes free radicals, and it taxes the body greatly to digest what is essentially bovine muscle fiber, which gets its toughness from standing in fields grazing all day while supporting a 1,660-lb [753 kg] bulk, whereas plant protein is easier to digest and derives its sturdiness from being blown about by the wind and rain--hence, less free radicals resulting from less energy taken to digest plant protein.

OK, but will the Stones play in Amsterdam this year ?

If they play in Amsterdam this year, then you wouldn't want to see them play in Amsterdam next year.

Quote
stonehearted
If they play in Amsterdam this year, then you wouldn't want to see them play in Amsterdam next year.

Wrong

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Robin Leach still with the 18 "West Coast" dates.

The Rolling Stones might still stop in Las Vegas despite tour hiccups

By Robin Leach

Thursday, March 21, 2013 | 4:20 p.m.

Those overseas phone calls from Australia to Las Vegas to book dates for The Rolling Stones concerts at MGM Grand Garden Arena for now have proved pointless. In fact, all 18 rumored West Coast tour dates went up in smoke in an around-the-world financial drama this week.

The Stones management team took the deal away from Sydney music promoter Paul Dainty this week and have now handed the assignment to AEG Live, the company that operates The Colosseum at Caesars Palace and The Joint at The Hard Rock Hotel and promotes MGM Grand Garden Arena one-nighters.

Billboard.biz reports that the Australian company in partnership with Virgin Music failed to deliver The Stones’ $80 million guarantee for the dates, so The Stones asked AEG to intervene. This morning, AEG L.A. is busy “routing the show and penciling in new dates and arenas.”

I’m reliably told that it will take another 48 hours to put the jigsaw puzzle of tour locations together, so we’re on watch for the new final announcements likely in one week. Reportedly, the plan and the hope are for The Stones to still play Las Vegas after the Australian promoters surprise sudden exit threw everything up in the air this week.

[www.lasvegassun.com]

Quote
bye bye johnny
Robin Leach still with the 18 "West Coast" dates.

The Rolling Stones might still stop in Las Vegas despite tour hiccups

By Robin Leach

You mean the Robin Leach?



If so, that would explain the ticket prices--it's the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous Tour.

I am glad that the Stones have decided to do Hyde Park. It will give "normal" folks (not incredibly wealthy or incredibly dedicated) an opportunity to attend a show. They could get 200,000 in there - of course, most people will be watching screens, but still . . . .

The attendance limit for Hyde Park events these days is 65,000 - still a nice big figure though, provided the weather co-operates.

Quote
Green Lady
The attendance limit for Hyde Park events these days is 65,000 - still a nice big figure though, provided the weather co-operates.

I guess that's still enough to keep prices somewhat reasonable. What's the largest number of people ever for an event at Hyde Park?