so since every one seems to be bitching about the stones, i would like to know how sir paul is doing? Because when you think about it, he is the only one in real competition with our boys.

cant stand the guy..funny his always touring when the stones are..and what was that he said on the last tour..his cooler than the stones...give us a break paul..stick with ya knitted jumpers and make sure you in bed by nine....so far his new album of shit songs has sold 3 copies

I could be wrong, but , I think the chances of Macca (with all due respect) doing what The Stones are doing now are pretty slim. He's 'NOT' The Beatles.

I ain't stupid, I'm just guitarded.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-17 02:20 by RankOutsider.

Regardless, his tour is selling out MUCH faster than the Stones -- or U2 for that matter. And I don't think anyone would have predicted it.

Well, I've had a listen into C&CITB (you all like acronyms, don't you ;-) in a shop, but I found it boring. Only 3 or 4 good tracks. His single, A Fine Line, borrows heavily from ELO's Livin Thing. Strange how Paul McCartney sounds most like Jeff Lynne when Jeff Lynne is NOT playing with him, like it was the case on his mid-90s single Young Boy, too.

I love Paul, he's my favorite Beatle. He can play just about all the instruments, he's still got an amazing vocal range and lots of energy. he also knows that his fans are paying a lot of $$$ to see him so he puts on a longer show than most bands. I commend him. I mean I don't know ppl here have to put him down b/c back in the day the Stones and the Beatles were so-called competitors. They're both in their early 60s now and I'm sure neither really care. They both are going to make lots of $$$ anyways

paul hasnt written a decent song since 1970 - stay out of this @#$%& forum

stonedmike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> paul hasnt written a decent song since 1970 - stay
> out of this @#$%& forum


Bjornulf should really start deleting posts now.. threats never go down well in any forum.
Let me see you wtite a decent song, then you can complain.

McCartney stopped selling really well with Pipes of Peace, if I'm not mistaken. And that album has one of his biggest hits (Say Say Say). After that he sold always a good amount of copies but no real hit albums. With the exception of Flaming Pie that entered the US chart at #2. And I thought Flowers in the Dirt was a hit, but I don't know numbers from europe. So i guess, this new album will do well, but no millionseller. But I guess Macca doesn't release albums anymore to sell millions of them.

His albums pre-Pipes of Peace nearly all were top 3 albums with a lot of #1s.

The important thing is: his new album is really strong.

Flaming Pie went to nr 2 in the US in 1997.

Jimmie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Flaming Pie went to nr 2 in the US in 1997.


That's exactly what I said.

jumpinjackgreg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I love Paul, he's my favorite Beatle. He can play
> just about all the instruments, he's still got an
> amazing vocal range and lots of energy. he also
> knows that his fans are paying a lot of $$$ to see
> him so he puts on a longer show than most bands. I
> commend him. I mean I don't know ppl here have to
> put him down b/c back in the day the Stones and
> the Beatles were so-called competitors. They're
> both in their early 60s now and I'm sure neither
> really care. They both are going to make lots of
> $$$ anyways

Absolutely, positively 100% correct. Right on the money (no pun intended).

No comparison. The Stones are attracting much more people worldwide.

"Flaming Pie went to nr 2 in the US in 1997." - So what; Mull of Kintyre was number one in the UK for several weeks (it felt like years) but it was a still a pile of shit.

Bowie Stone is correct - after "Tug Of War" Paul's US album sales, based on chart data, aren't even close to the Stones - the latter have always reached top 5 w/ new albums, Paul rarely beginning w/ POP in '83 (# 15).

His new album is #5 at the moment in the US charts (after 15%). Stones are still #3 (also after 15%).

stickydion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No comparison. The Stones are attracting much more
> people worldwide.

Wrong. Go to ticketmaster.com and try punching in, say, two tickets for almost any McCartney show in the U.S., or even one ticket. Most likely, it will come back as being sold-out. Then try the Stones and U2. Most likely, something will show up in the venue. McCartney's shows are selling out faster.

RockR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Wrong. Go to ticketmaster.com and try punching
> in, say, two tickets for almost any McCartney show
> in the U.S., or even one ticket. Most likely, it
> will come back as being sold-out. Then try the
> Stones and U2. Most likely, something will show
> up in the venue. McCartney's shows are selling
> out faster.
>
>

Ok, but aren't the stones playing larger venues than McCartney?

aren't the Beatles still cuter? would you still let your daugther marry a Rolling Stone?

jeeezus - can't folks get over it? Two great bands - all fantastic musicians. Ain't that enough?

Saying The Beatles are crap is the same as saying that Stephen Hendry can't play snooker or Tiger Woods can't golf.

album sales from Hits daily double (thanx georgelicks) 29.92% in: ABB drops from # 3 - # 9, 17,645 copies; Paul's debut week # 12, w/ 16,093. Final sales sometime tomorrow.

RockR: "McCartney's shows are selling out faster."

So what? We talking about "how many people", not about "how fast". The Stones play more bigger venues (and they are packed), have hihger tickert prices and their fans know how to play with time and the "scalpers" too...

I was just curious about his new album vs ABB. The fact that these guys sell any new albums is really @#$%& incredible when you think about it. The young kids like rap, and it really doesnt matter how good Paul or the stones albums are, they should really not be selling at all.
These guys have been selling records for over 40 years. Think about it folks.
When did Sinatra start? 1940's I think
Was he in the top 10 at all 40 years after he struck it big especially with new material? If he was, I dont remember.
Kids dont like what their parents listen to for the most part, and the stones and Sir Paul are their parents music. So in that respect, both these artists should be extremely proud of their current acheivements.

God I knew it! Beatles fanatics think Macca IS The Beatles!

I could care less how well Macca's sales are doing compared to The Stones. If I wanted to rave about Macca I'd go to one of his boards. Give The Stones their space!

At least post the Macca threads as OT: threads.

I ain't stupid, I'm just guitarded.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-20 07:18 by RankOutsider.