For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
mnewman505
Meh, you guys are splitting hairs. I paid my $25 to see Slash and Axl, that's what most of us are paying to see when it comes right down to it. Yes, Izzy's contributions to the band are absolutely massive but he CHOSE to turn down millions and not participate in this tour. His choice...he's not being excluded by anyone. Duff is a stud as always and the man has the body of an olympic swimmer with all that martial arts crap he does. I'm not sure what happened with the drummer situation and i'll admit Ferrer was the weak link of the sidemen. He kicked, but not hard enough. Fortus is a wonderfully fluid player and he belongs there, he knows the material inside and out. I can at least hear Dizzy in the mix but I have no idea what Melissa Reese is doing up there. Her musical credentials are impeccable for someone so young but i'm not sure I can identify what she is doing.
Is this tour worth the top $250, $150 prices? No. With Izzy and Adler/Sorum it would be. But if you have a chance to buy a ticket for under $100 in a decent spot in the stadium i'd go for it. Although very limited, their studio output is some of the best hard rock ever put to tape. Very happy I made the effort.
Quote
keefriffhard4life
thats capacity before the stage setup and closed off sections. for instance arrowhead stadiums attendance was 49,502 but capacity is 75,000.
look at the actual attendance numbers
[en.wikipedia.org]
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
keefriffhard4life
thats capacity before the stage setup and closed off sections. for instance arrowhead stadiums attendance was 49,502 but capacity is 75,000.
look at the actual attendance numbers
[en.wikipedia.org]
Well, I didn't see shows on this US tour, but the reports said packed stadiums, and the AT&T Stadium, for instance, looks packed to me: [www.iorr.org]
PS: He he, 59.000 was the highest attendance, I see now. Well, you're right about that being lower than 60.000
Quote
keefriffhard4lifeQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
keefriffhard4life
thats capacity before the stage setup and closed off sections. for instance arrowhead stadiums attendance was 49,502 but capacity is 75,000.
look at the actual attendance numbers
[en.wikipedia.org]
Well, I didn't see shows on this US tour, but the reports said packed stadiums, and the AT&T Stadium, for instance, looks packed to me: [www.iorr.org]
PS: He he, 59.000 was the highest attendance, I see now. Well, you're right about that being lower than 60.000
well all available tickets were sold so thats packed but you see its not like GNRs numbers are way off of what a huge band like the rolling stones are making sure sells out.
Quote
TKinOH
It was a great show last night... Big surprise to see Adler join them onstage, and he was all smiles the whole time. Come out for the final bow, too.
Surprising to see the size of the crowd. I assume they moved down folks from the upper deck, or did they not even sell those? I had a bud buy our seats so I never really checked TM to see where availability was... All business as far as a timely start time, and Axl seemed to enjoy himself up there... Slash is a beast and deserves all the praise he gets. Fortus (or against us) jammed too. Duff rocked it as well.
Only saw them once before, in '92 at the Hoosier Dome with Metallica and Faith No More about a week before the infamous meltdown at Stade Olympique in Montreal. That was a great show but started way late and Axl was wound up back then...
Had a great time last night, and check out Tyler Bryant & The Shakedown... Bluesy Nashville outfit kicked ass opening. Seein' them with AC/DC in Columbus in September.
Quote
RollingFreak
I assume they had a feeling the shows might not sell completely out in stadiums which is why they had the hefty price tag. Again, all guesses on my part, but as long as they sold a good chunk of tickets, maybe not even 50%, at the prices they had, they'd be fine. In the end, if they played arenas for this price, that's 20,000. The stadium is basically two nights in an arena, or more, so as long as they sell that, which by the looks of it they are, I'm guessing they're fine. If the shows were cheaper, I'd say they might be at risk, but at $300 a head, I'm sure they knew they could risk selling less and still breaking even/profiting.
Kurt!!!! gets it!!Quote
Kurt
Maybe although it wouldn't make sense why they waited till after the second Chicago show.Quote
gotdablouse
Nice to see Adler back in Cincinnati for two songs, guess they'd kept him in reserve to sell these difficult second nights ;-)
Quote
TheGreek
Maybe it's an audition for Adler , for Axl to see and hear if he still can bring it.Then you just need to get Izzy back in the fold but i think it is that much more complicated .
Quote
jambayQuote
RollingFreak
I assume they had a feeling the shows might not sell completely out in stadiums which is why they had the hefty price tag. Again, all guesses on my part, but as long as they sold a good chunk of tickets, maybe not even 50%, at the prices they had, they'd be fine. In the end, if they played arenas for this price, that's 20,000. The stadium is basically two nights in an arena, or more, so as long as they sell that, which by the looks of it they are, I'm guessing they're fine. If the shows were cheaper, I'd say they might be at risk, but at $300 a head, I'm sure they knew they could risk selling less and still breaking even/profiting.
It is a success and that is a good thing.
On the other hand...
I continue to find it puzzling and somewhat amusing how certain people always feel obligated to park themselves in threads like this when they are not fans of the topic, band, tour, person or RIP person etc etc... and go on and on and on arguing with people who are simply talking about the good times.
I find it odd how weirdos getoff on yelling at other people online telling them they are not really having a good time and/or the thing they enjoy actually sucks... as if they are going to suddenly convince anyone to also hate the topic, band, tour, person or RIP person. But I guess that is just the way some people are.
Quote
Swayed1967
in my twenties, GNR joined KISS, the Bay City Rollers and the Osmonds as bands I had simply outgrown. But I've never outgrown the Stones. I ask again : am I wrong in thinking the music of the Stones is more 'mature' than say that of KISS or GNR?
Quote
Swayed1967Quote
jambayQuote
RollingFreak
I assume they had a feeling the shows might not sell completely out in stadiums which is why they had the hefty price tag. Again, all guesses on my part, but as long as they sold a good chunk of tickets, maybe not even 50%, at the prices they had, they'd be fine. In the end, if they played arenas for this price, that's 20,000. The stadium is basically two nights in an arena, or more, so as long as they sell that, which by the looks of it they are, I'm guessing they're fine. If the shows were cheaper, I'd say they might be at risk, but at $300 a head, I'm sure they knew they could risk selling less and still breaking even/profiting.
It is a success and that is a good thing.
On the other hand...
I continue to find it puzzling and somewhat amusing how certain people always feel obligated to park themselves in threads like this when they are not fans of the topic, band, tour, person or RIP person etc etc... and go on and on and on arguing with people who are simply talking about the good times.
I find it odd how weirdos getoff on yelling at other people online telling them they are not really having a good time and/or the thing they enjoy actually sucks... as if they are going to suddenly convince anyone to also hate the topic, band, tour, person or RIP person. But I guess that is just the way some people are.
I don't think the 'weirdos' begrudge you your right to attend any concert you wish or the online funerals of RIP persons but I don't mind admitting that in my ideal world fans of the Rolling Stones and fans of GNR are mutually exclusive. I'm almost ashamed to hold that opinion but I do.
As I wrote before, I'm genuinely puzzled that an adult would want to see GNR perform or still be interested in their music. Same applies to KISS. I was part of the KISS army as a 10 y/o but I outgrew them. I still recognize them as talented songwriters/performers but I don't - or only very rarely - listen to their music anymore. Am I wrong to assume that most KISS army kids have long since deserted? Am I wrong to assume that the music of the Stones is more 'mature?'
I was in university when GNR was at the height of their popularity and I was a qualified fan. I mean they had some good songs, and Slash was a lot better than he had to be, but I always felt vaguely silly drunkenly singing along to Paradise City with my friends. After sobering up in my twenties, GNR joined KISS, the Bay City Rollers and the Osmonds as bands I had simply outgrown. But I've never outgrown the Stones. I ask again: Am I wrong in thinking the music of the Stones is more 'mature' than say that of KISS or GNR?
A real Stones fan doesn't listen to GNR. Keith certainly doesn't. And a quick perusal of the post histories of the main contributors to this thread reveals - not unsurprisingly - that the majority of their posts on a Rolling Stones board are NOT about the Rolling Stones.
It's not something I lose sleep over of course...but if you're gonna call me a weirdo...
Quote
Swayed1967
A real Stones fan doesn't listen to GNR.
Quote
Swayed1967
A real Stones fan doesn't listen to GNR.
Quote
jambay
And Adler's drums sounds better sloppier more guns and rosier!
And hell yeah they added in My Michelle... WELL WELL WELL!!! HELL YES!!