Quote
RSbestbandever

Quote
proudmary

Quote
RSbestbandever
Agree, from that angle it does look pretty full.

that is not the angle it's just the way it was in fact
Staples Center was packed to capacity for the concert, the first of 17 dates the Stones are set to play throughout the United States.[www.washingtonpost.com]
LOS ANGELES, May 4 (Reuters) - The Rolling Stones rocked a packed house in Los Angeles on Friday on the opening night of their North American "50 and Counting" tour

Thanks proudmary for the info. It puts to rest the "Staples Center will be half empty" theory, hopefully.

Yes, let's just hope that the glass remains half empty.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
RSbestbandever

Quote
andrewt

Quote
benroyblenkle
THIS IS NOT A SAD BITTER TOUR

JUST SAD BITTER FANS WHO DIDN'T PLAN AHEAD

SOON AS BIGGER BANG TOUR ENDED I STARTED SAVING A BIT HERE AND THERE IN MY

ROLLING STONES PIGGY BANK BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANNA BE BROKE WHEN ANOTHER TOUR ROLLED AROUND

AND HERE IT IS AND YEP I HAVE MY TICKETS AND ILL BE THERE

HAPPY AS A @#$%& ON MAY 20TH AT STAPLES

STOP YOUR SOBBING PEOPLE

NEVER HEARD OF BEING PROACTIVE??????

If you up the point size and make the letters red I've think you've got a winner on your hands.

Now that's more like it, takes a while but you do catch on.

I think it wouldn't have been too much to just do it rather than criticize.

Now that's a positive attitude!

Rumors of a "half empty" house are not true. Virtually all of the seats were sold by show time. I know this because I did not like the location of the $85 seats and went back out to buy seats for the show. There were a very few scattered pairs available. I managed to get a great pair, side of the stage near the tongue ramp for $600 each, but that were really the only truly "good" seats still available. They filled the Staples Center, but based on the line outside the arena, I would guess that 1/3 of the seats were sold for $85.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
RSbestbandever

Quote
proudmary

Quote
RSbestbandever
Agree, from that angle it does look pretty full.

that is not the angle it's just the way it was in fact
Staples Center was packed to capacity for the concert, the first of 17 dates the Stones are set to play throughout the United States.[www.washingtonpost.com]
LOS ANGELES, May 4 (Reuters) - The Rolling Stones rocked a packed house in Los Angeles on Friday on the opening night of their North American "50 and Counting" tour

Thanks proudmary for the info. It puts to rest the "Staples Center will be half empty" theory, hopefully.

Yes, let's just hope that the glass remains half empty.

one more

[blogs.laweekly.com]

Quote
proudmary

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
RSbestbandever

Quote
proudmary

Quote
RSbestbandever
Agree, from that angle it does look pretty full.

that is not the angle it's just the way it was in fact
Staples Center was packed to capacity for the concert, the first of 17 dates the Stones are set to play throughout the United States.[www.washingtonpost.com]
LOS ANGELES, May 4 (Reuters) - The Rolling Stones rocked a packed house in Los Angeles on Friday on the opening night of their North American "50 and Counting" tour

Thanks proudmary for the info. It puts to rest the "Staples Center will be half empty" theory, hopefully.

Yes, let's just hope that the glass remains half empty.

one more

[blogs.laweekly.com]

See all those "people" dressed in yellow? Mannequins.

Quote
proudmary

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
RSbestbandever

Quote
proudmary

Quote
RSbestbandever
Agree, from that angle it does look pretty full.

that is not the angle it's just the way it was in fact
Staples Center was packed to capacity for the concert, the first of 17 dates the Stones are set to play throughout the United States.[www.washingtonpost.com]
LOS ANGELES, May 4 (Reuters) - The Rolling Stones rocked a packed house in Los Angeles on Friday on the opening night of their North American "50 and Counting" tour

Thanks proudmary for the info. It puts to rest the "Staples Center will be half empty" theory, hopefully.

Yes, let's just hope that the glass remains half empty.

one more

[blogs.laweekly.com]

Pan to the left.

Quote
andrewt

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
RSbestbandever

Quote
andrewt

Quote
benroyblenkle
THIS IS NOT A SAD BITTER TOUR

JUST SAD BITTER FANS WHO DIDN'T PLAN AHEAD

SOON AS BIGGER BANG TOUR ENDED I STARTED SAVING A BIT HERE AND THERE IN MY

ROLLING STONES PIGGY BANK BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANNA BE BROKE WHEN ANOTHER TOUR ROLLED AROUND

AND HERE IT IS AND YEP I HAVE MY TICKETS AND ILL BE THERE

HAPPY AS A @#$%& ON MAY 20TH AT STAPLES

STOP YOUR SOBBING PEOPLE

NEVER HEARD OF BEING PROACTIVE??????

If you up the point size and make the letters red I've think you've got a winner on your hands.

Now that's more like it, takes a while but you do catch on.

I think it wouldn't have been too much to just do it rather than criticize.

Now that's a positive attitude!

I help wherever needed.

I wouldn't pay 850 a ticket to see Jesus Christ. God Bless that people are willing to pay that. Stones need the money more than you do...right?

What exactly is the extra $63 fee for? I can live with $5 or maybe $10 but $63 EACH TICKET? For what?

Looks like the Oakland fire sale is on, and not just the $85 ones.
We'll find out soon (if the folks going care to be candid about it)
How successful this ploy is at filling in the large gaps.

Seems this time around it's the opposite: the best seats at the best prices the closer you get to the show.

I guess there's something in Ticketmaster's policy about changing prices but I'd be a tad ticked off if the person sitting next to me paid $300 less than I did, from the same, official source. $85 Lotto excepted.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-06 01:39 by bleedingman.

Quote
bleedingman
I guess there's something in Ticketmaster's policy about changing prices but I'd be a tad ticked off if the person sitting next to me paid $300 less than I did, from the same, official source. $85 Lotto excepted.

We tried to warn people that they were being played for chumps but if they didn't listen there's not much that can be done about it now.

From SweetVirginia on RO

Rolling Stones face pay cut as poor sales force them to slash US ticket prices


The rock giants are taking desperate measures to ensure full houses for their anniversary US gigs


[www.guardian.co.uk] rices-slashed


Could it be the tour too far for the Rolling Stones? Insiders are even speculating that the band will have to renegotiate the huge guaranteed fees for their American tour, which opened on Friday, as ticket prices are radically reduced in light of poor sales. A perfect storm of management hubris, fan indifference and technology change is threatening to turn the tour into a disaster.

Last week the band said it was dropping the price of thousands of premium seats – "flexing" in industry parlance – rather than play to half-empty arenas. The situation was so dire, one insider revealed, that the band's own allotment of tickets was released because of a lack of requests.

"Total disaster. Too expensive and no vibe on the shows … it's a terrible way to go out," a source said. He added that the band could hardly refuse if their reputed $20m fees for the tour were revised. "What's the band gonna do? Say we're not going to play if you touch our gross?"

In the UK, by contrast, tickets for the groups's two Hyde Park shows, priced from £95-£300, quickly sold out, although £750-plus hotel package tickets remain. The , and they are also headlining the Glastonbury festival.

Although there was widespread grumbling about ticket prices after the Stones played in London and New York last year, it is since this tour reached the US west coast and heartlands such as Chicago that outright hostility has emerged towards the band and its promoter, the giant AEG Entertainment.

"I have to give them respect for what they have done, but now they seem like an embarrassment," fan Cameron Bowman told the San Francisco Chronicle recently. "Seriously, how much more money do they need? I feel like they are in Donald Trump or Gordon Gekko territory – just money for money's sake."

By setting prices at $170 (£110) for a cheap seat, $635 for a top seat or up to $2,000 for a VIP ticket, the band alienated blue-collar fans who have kept their tours profitable through the decades. Their 2005 tour grossed £350m.

This year is a different story. The Stones are playing in arenas holding from 10,000 to 15,000 people, not stadiums. In theory that should be more profitable – if fans will pay more for a closer view.

But the plan has backfired. The band has no new material to tour behind and its new management has allowed ticket prices, not the show, to become the story. By contrast, bands such as Fleetwood Mac and Tom Petty are selling out, but their tickets are a fraction of the price.

Playing in only a few cities – Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Toronto, Boston and Philadelphia – means it is less expensive to tour. But that plan relies on hardcore fans willing to travel – and they may not want to sit in an upper tier that's within their budget but is farther from the stage. So they are sitting out the tour.

"They did everything backwards," said one tour veteran. "It was a last-minute decision to celebrate their 50th anniversary. A bit more thought should have gone into it because now they are up against all this summer competition."

The Stones have a history of pushing the boundaries of ticket prices; they were one of the first bands to adopt multi-tiered pricing. But now legitimate secondary ticket sellers such as StubHub.com allow artists to see exactly what people are willing to pay to see their show.

The escalation in prices is partly testing the top of the market and partly an effort to squeeze touts out of the business. But touts may be a necessary evil. They took the risk in buying tickets for resale and priced that into their business. Now the Stones are taking on that risk, they also take the chance of getting burned.

"Price does matter," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert industry publication Pollstar. "The market is speaking."

I wonder if they're doing that because keeping tix for sale at the Box Office for Staples didn't produce the results they hoped for...and dumping 1000+ last minute tix at $85 created a big mess they couldn't handle?

Quote
bleedingman
What exactly is the extra $63 fee for? I can live with $5 or maybe $10 but $63 EACH TICKET? For what?

It's for being able to stay at home or work to buy tickets. The technology is painfully expensive + credit card fees, etc. $63 is way too expensive, but most of that is promoter profit since big bands these days get 100% of the gate.

The Guardian is hardly privy to the terms of the contract between AEG and the Stones.

It serves them right for being so f...ng greedy...
Rolling Stones face pay cut as poor sales force them to slash US ticket prices

The rock giants are taking desperate measures to ensure full houses for their anniversary US gigs

Could it be the tour too far for the Rolling Stones? Insiders are even speculating that the band will have to renegotiate the huge guaranteed fees for their American tour, which opened on Friday, as ticket prices are radically reduced in light of poor sales. A perfect storm of management hubris, fan indifference and technology change is threatening to turn the tour into a disaster.

Last week the band said it was dropping the price of thousands of premium seats – "flexing" in industry parlance – rather than play to half-empty arenas. The situation was so dire, one insider revealed, that the band's own allotment of tickets was released because of a lack of requests.

"Total disaster. Too expensive and no vibe on the shows … it's a terrible way to go out," a source said. He added that the band could hardly refuse if their reputed $20m fees for the tour were revised. "What's the band gonna do? Say we're not going to play if you touch our gross?"

In the UK, by contrast, tickets for the groups's two Hyde Park shows, priced from £95-£300, quickly sold out, although £750-plus hotel package tickets remain. The , and they are also headlining the Glastonbury festival.

Although there was widespread grumbling about ticket prices after the Stones played in London and New York last year, it is since this tour reached the US west coast and heartlands such as Chicago that outright hostility has emerged towards the band and its promoter, the giant AEG Entertainment.

"I have to give them respect for what they have done, but now they seem like an embarrassment," fan Cameron Bowman told the San Francisco Chronicle recently. "Seriously, how much more money do they need? I feel like they are in Donald Trump or Gordon Gekko territory – just money for money's sake."

By setting prices at $170 (£110) for a cheap seat, $635 for a top seat or up to $2,000 for a VIP ticket, the band alienated blue-collar fans who have kept their tours profitable through the decades. Their 2005 tour grossed £350m.

This year is a different story. The Stones are playing in arenas holding from 10,000 to 15,000 people, not stadiums. In theory that should be more profitable – if fans will pay more for a closer view.

But the plan has backfired. The band has no new material to tour behind and its new management has allowed ticket prices, not the show, to become the story. By contrast, bands such as Fleetwood Mac and Tom Petty are selling out, but their tickets are a fraction of the price.

Playing in only a few cities – Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Toronto, Boston and Philadelphia – means it is less expensive to tour. But that plan relies on hardcore fans willing to travel – and they may not want to sit in an upper tier that's within their budget but is farther from the stage. So they are sitting out the tour.

"They did everything backwards," said one tour veteran. "It was a last-minute decision to celebrate their 50th anniversary. A bit more thought should have gone into it because now they are up against all this summer competition."

The Stones have a history of pushing the boundaries of ticket prices; they were one of the first bands to adopt multi-tiered pricing. But now legitimate secondary ticket sellers such as StubHub.com allow artists to see exactly what people are willing to pay to see their show.

The escalation in prices is partly testing the top of the market and partly an effort to squeeze touts out of the business. But touts may be a necessary evil. They took the risk in buying tickets for resale and priced that into their business. Now the Stones are taking on that risk, they also take the chance of getting burned.

"Price does matter," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert industry publication Pollstar. "The market is speaking."

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

i'm sure chuck leavell is gonna be blamed for this...so sad.

What many of us have opined for some time...the term hubris in the article is spot on.

Quote
treaclefingers
What many of us have opined for some time...the term hubris in the article is spot on.

isn't that made from garbanzo beans? bv's not gonna be happy...not supposed to talk about food here...

I would think they have a guarantee from the promoter for a set amount. I don't see Mick or Keith as the types who would give back a penny to a promoter.

But the article is very right on: "Price does matter," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert industry publication Pollstar. "The market is speaking."

There is little, if any, buzz about what should be the biggest tour of the year.

Quote
GRNRBITW
i'm sure chuck leavell is gonna be blamed for this...so sad.

Let's put the blame where it is due...if Chuck hadn't demanded and received a $3500 per show guarantee, we might not be sitting at our computers bitching about this...or something.

Quote
GRNRBITW

Quote
treaclefingers
What many of us have opined for some time...the term hubris in the article is spot on.

isn't that made from garbanzo beans? bv's not gonna be happy...not supposed to talk about food here...

you're leaving us a bit gas gas gassy...

Quote
buffalo7478
I would think they have a guarantee from the promoter for a set amount. I don't see Mick or Keith as the types who would give back a penny to a promoter.

But the article is very right on: "Price does matter," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert industry publication Pollstar. "The market is speaking."

There is little, if any, buzz about what should be the biggest tour of the year.

bigger than the black crowes with jackie greene? saw them last week...i think they win out here...

"Last week the band said it was dropping the price of thousands of premium seats"

Where did they say that? Or are they referring to the $85 lottery...which I guess is a way of "saving face" by getting people into the arena.

"Total disaster. Too expensive and no vibe on the shows"

Doesn't sound like Staples was a disaster as far as the vibe goes?

Anyway, where was that published? Got a link?

"Last week the band said it was dropping the price of thousands of premium seats"

Where did they say that? Or are they referring to the $85 lottery...which I guess is a way of "saving face" by getting people into the arena.

"Total disaster. Too expensive and no vibe on the shows"

Doesn't sound like Staples was a disaster as far as the vibe goes?

Anyway, here is the link to the original article : [www.guardian.co.uk]

The question now is whether Mick is going to say "sod it, that's it" or won't want to go out on a trainwreck and will be humbled into trying to "fix it"...lower guarantee, lower prices and...a last album?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-06 02:48 by gotdablouse.

....hey coach....put that kid Taylor in.....get rid of some of the warhorses and do a 4-5 song set with Taylor and they'd sell out in minutes...and get a ton of buzz

Quote
GRNRBITW

Quote
buffalo7478
I would think they have a guarantee from the promoter for a set amount. I don't see Mick or Keith as the types who would give back a penny to a promoter.

But the article is very right on: "Price does matter," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert industry publication Pollstar. "The market is speaking."

There is little, if any, buzz about what should be the biggest tour of the year.

bigger than the black crowes with jackie greene? saw them last week...i think they win out here...

Sadly, tours like Mumford and Sons and Taylor Swift and maybe Macca have more buzz and are more 'relevant' to the masses (and more accessible).

Quote
buffalo7478

Quote
GRNRBITW

Quote
buffalo7478
I would think they have a guarantee from the promoter for a set amount. I don't see Mick or Keith as the types who would give back a penny to a promoter.

But the article is very right on: "Price does matter," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of the concert industry publication Pollstar. "The market is speaking."

There is little, if any, buzz about what should be the biggest tour of the year.

bigger than the black crowes with jackie greene? saw them last week...i think they win out here...

Sadly, tours like Mumford and Sons and Taylor Swift and maybe Macca have more buzz and are more 'relevant' to the masses (and more accessible).

why sad? don't be sad.

Quote
GRNRBITW
i'm sure chuck leavell is gonna be blamed for this...so sad.

Why sad? Don't be sad.