Re: Why not any concerts on tv?
Date: October 16, 2005 03:50
retired_dog Wrote:
>
> Gazza, I'm not sure that they really employ him.
> Cohl buys the rights for the their tours and
> guarantees them a looooooooooaaaaaad of money, so
> they're not out there on their own risk, but
> Cohl's risk - if a tour is not successful, it's
> not the Stones who lose money, but Cohl. So I
> believe Cohl has a more important role than any
> "employee", he invests a lot of money, frees them
> from any risks, but on the other hand he may have
> the final say in many aspects concerning their
> tours - ticket prices, merchandise prices, theatre
> shows, tv broadcasts etc. Of course, no one knows
> the exact details of their deal with Cohl. But if
> you take this amount of money involved in account,
> you can bet that he has a certain power, if not
> even control.
a stones tour is so heavily corporate sponsored that its not really as high risk as it is for other acts
The job you're describing above is that of the band's promoter. It is indeed an important role, but the bottom line is that they're employing him to do that task. As this is his 5th world tour with them, they obviously feel its working.
The band also has considerable input (and as the 'employer' the 'final say') in anything. Jagger even stated in Forbes magazine 3 years ago that HE determines the ticket prices, for example.
And, as Rupert Lowenstein has now retired, (correct me if I'm wrong), Cohl has also taken over his managerial role. Last I heard he was assuming those duties anyway.