How many tickets will be sold? 650,000 to 750,000. That's a lack of ticket sales?

Quote
timmyj3
Fans shun tickets to Stones gigs = Biggest grossing tour of 2022 in Europe

Right?

The quick and simple fix: Announce this is your farewell tour like Elton!

Quote
illyad1960
For me the formula is simple. Expensive ticket + No new Lp + Static set list = lack of ticket sales. The Stones really aren't giving fans a reason to purchase tickets. Almost the same song list from 50th anniversary tour only without Mick Taylor guest appearance. Times are economicly difficult for many fans and as we all know, when it comes to money the Stones won't be giving anyone a break.

Yes to all of the above, and then add the fact that that Charlie is no longer with them which results in a much lesser of a band in the eyes of many fans.
Sure the casual fans and general masses might not be able to tell the difference with a different drummer, but many lifelong Stones fans certainly do.
When all of these reasons are added up, it's just not the same experience as it once was, and some people have more important priorities now than they once did.

As for the tickets that have been sold, I'd say a majority of them were purchased by people who have never seen the band before. They might only know the names Mick Jagger and Keith Richards.
Ultimately they want to be able to say they've seen the Stones in their lifetime. I know if I had never seen them I'd want to add them to my list, but the fact is it would be a far cry from what it once was.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Topi
I don't know if a new album would have made much of a difference on ticket sales, you have to remember that most patrons at a given show will still be casual fans who are there to hear the greatest hits/warhorses.

I think it’s a cumulative effect. Imagine 4 new albums of original material in the nearly 18 years since the last one, a couple of songs from each as the tours/years went by, and we’d all be getting essentially half a NEW show thru those years - admitting several warhorses NEED to be played! But no, we get 3 singles and that’s it. So the show, as great as it is, remains the same. For $100s of bucks.

And that's why Elton John is selling out everywere: he still release new albums, his catalog is selling like crazy, he's all over TV/radio, he had 2 UK number 1 singles last year, so the demand is there.

The Stones released their latest album of new material 17 years ago, their catalog is not doing so well on streaming, almost no media presence, their last hit single was 33 years ago, and the show is always the same.

Quote
georgelicks

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Topi
I don't know if a new album would have made much of a difference on ticket sales, you have to remember that most patrons at a given show will still be casual fans who are there to hear the greatest hits/warhorses.

I think it’s a cumulative effect. Imagine 4 new albums of original material in the nearly 18 years since the last one, a couple of songs from each as the tours/years went by, and we’d all be getting essentially half a NEW show thru those years - admitting several warhorses NEED to be played! But no, we get 3 singles and that’s it. So the show, as great as it is, remains the same. For $100s of bucks.

And that's why Elton John is selling out everywere: he still release new albums, his catalog is selling like crazy, he's all over TV/radio, he had 2 UK number 1 singles last year, so the demand is there.

The Stones released their latest album of new material 17 years ago, their catalog is not doing so well on streaming, almost no media presence, their last hit single was 33 years ago, and the show is always the same.

I really liked the blues record & wish they would've played more of it in concert. It would've been nice for the older fans. Spice up the setlists a bit. There still would've been plenty of time for the warhorses.

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Topi
I don't know if a new album would have made much of a difference on ticket sales, you have to remember that most patrons at a given show will still be casual fans who are there to hear the greatest hits/warhorses.

I think it’s a cumulative effect. Imagine 4 new albums of original material in the nearly 18 years since the last one, a couple of songs from each as the tours/years went by, and we’d all be getting essentially half a NEW show thru those years - admitting several warhorses NEED to be played! But no, we get 3 singles and that’s it. So the show, as great as it is, remains the same. For $100s of bucks.

No. The problem is not the lack of new material, it's their increasing combined age that does not allow more than 20 songs maximum, most of the time even less, and the fact that they feel they have to play their most large audience-tested, well-known hit material to deliver a "great show", and that's not necessarily the most interesting concert in musical and artistic terms.

So even with your imagined 4 new albums of original material since the last one, it's highly doubtful that more of an extremely limited 2 song-slot would be made up of new material. That's why I've always said concerning new material "time is on their side" - commercially, it does not make a difference how long it takes them to complete a new album or if they release new music at all, they simply don't need it - and that's probably the very reason why they're not exactly pushing it, as they know the truth all too well, too.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-05-11 03:32 by retired_dog.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
illyad1960
For me the formula is simple. Expensive ticket + No new Lp + Static set list = lack of ticket sales. The Stones really aren't giving fans a reason to purchase tickets. Almost the same song list from 50th anniversary tour only without Mick Taylor guest appearance. Times are economicly difficult for many fans and as we all know, when it comes to money the Stones won't be giving anyone a break.

Yes to all of the above, and then add the fact that that Charlie is no longer with them which results in a much lesser of a band in the eyes of many fans.
Sure the casual fans and general masses might not be able to tell the difference with a different drummer, but many lifelong Stones fans certainly do.
When all of these reasons are added up, it's just not the same experience as it once was, and some people have more important priorities now than they once did.

As for the tickets that have been sold, I'd say a majority of them were purchased by people who have never seen the band before. They might only know the names Mick Jagger and Keith Richards.
Ultimately they want to be able to say they've seen the Stones in their lifetime. I know if I had never seen them I'd want to add them to my list, but the fact is it would be a far cry from what it once was.

Alas, the show must go on. And has it always has for The Rolling Stones, whoever they are.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Topi
I don't know if a new album would have made much of a difference on ticket sales, you have to remember that most patrons at a given show will still be casual fans who are there to hear the greatest hits/warhorses.

I think it’s a cumulative effect. Imagine 4 new albums of original material in the nearly 18 years since the last one, a couple of songs from each as the tours/years went by, and we’d all be getting essentially half a NEW show thru those years - admitting several warhorses NEED to be played! But no, we get 3 singles and that’s it. So the show, as great as it is, remains the same. For $100s of bucks.

No. The problem is not the lack of new material, it's their increasing combined age that does not allow more than 20 songs maximum, most of the time even less, and the fact that they feel they have to play their most large audience-tested, well-known hit material to deliver a "great show", and that's not necessarily the most interesting concert in musical and artistic terms.

So even with your imagined 4 new albums of original material since the last one, it's highly doubtful that more of an extremely limited 2 song-slot would be made up of new material. That's why I've always said concerning new material "time is on their side" - commercially, it does not make a difference how long it takes them to complete a new album or if they release new music at all, they simply don't need it - and that's probably the very reason why they're not exactly pushing it, as they know the truth all too well, too.

The tours have basically sold out for the last however many years, what, 10 years. Obviously new songs are not an issue for the people buying tickets. The Stones continue to ignore anything past 1981, with great exception, because the people that are more interested are of a certain age group, that make a certain amount of money, and very likely own HOT ROCKS, REWIND or JUMP BACK (haven't looked at HONK's numbers recently, which, understandably, would be much lower) and maybe some of the Big 4 or Big 6, perhaps a deluxe reissue. Their 1964-1981 catalog is basically bigger than them.

Then there's the youngins that say, Well, it's only half a mortgage payment, why not!? and they go to one show.

Go to or watch an NFL game in the US and you'll at least hear Start Me Up at some point. That kind of says it all.

Agree with your points there Hairball.
I will see the 3 shows in the UK and that’s it.The days of flying out to Auz and South America are over for me.But really glad I did it.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
illyad1960
For me the formula is simple. Expensive ticket + No new Lp + Static set list = lack of ticket sales. The Stones really aren't giving fans a reason to purchase tickets. Almost the same song list from 50th anniversary tour only without Mick Taylor guest appearance. Times are economicly difficult for many fans and as we all know, when it comes to money the Stones won't be giving anyone a break.

Yes to all of the above, and then add the fact that that Charlie is no longer with them which results in a much lesser of a band in the eyes of many fans.
Sure the casual fans and general masses might not be able to tell the difference with a different drummer, but many lifelong Stones fans certainly do.
When all of these reasons are added up, it's just not the same experience as it once was, and some people have more important priorities now than they once did.

As for the tickets that have been sold, I'd say a majority of them were purchased by people who have never seen the band before. They might only know the names Mick Jagger and Keith Richards.
Ultimately they want to be able to say they've seen the Stones in their lifetime. I know if I had never seen them I'd want to add them to my list, but the fact is it would be a far cry from what it once was.

I fully agree with you there, Hairball. But don't you think that that "far cry" is merely "memories"? The miracle af memories is that you can live them your own way. The Stones (among other musicians off course) gave us great musical memories and technology allows us the live them over and over again. One day we will listen to Living in a ghost town with a smile on our faces: "only 20 million people died from corona, which is peanuts compared with the 50 million victims of WW2". And ... the global population increased (!!!) with some 50 million during "corona days". Very cynical, I know.
All those new people going to see the (mini) Stones can only feel great after the show. Just like those two guys, 20 years young and who heard about the Stones a bit, who saw the Stones on my 50th birthday in Amsterdam (1998). Halfway the concert they were totally in the clouds, sooooo happy! It filled my 50 years old heart with joy.



I'm a GHOST living in a ghost town

Hairball, I think you may be right about the majority of ticket buyers at a given show going to their first Stones concert (or, perhaps, having seen them once or twice decades ago, given the longevity of the band).

Quote
Topi
Hairball, I think you may be right about the majority of ticket buyers at a given show going to their first Stones concert (or, perhaps, having seen them once or twice decades ago, given the longevity of the band).

I have to disagree as the casual fan IMHO is not going to fork over $ for the expensive ducats in today's turbulent global economy .

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
Topi
Hairball, I think you may be right about the majority of ticket buyers at a given show going to their first Stones concert (or, perhaps, having seen them once or twice decades ago, given the longevity of the band).

I have to disagree as the casual fan IMHO is not going to fork over $ for the expensive ducats in today's turbulent global economy .

without the casual fans the venues would be quite empty

Get less for much, much more. When they played Sofi Stadium in Los Angeles last year the venue parking was $60 USD. Something has to crack. I wanted to see McCartney when he was here, but I'm not paying $200 USD for a nosebleed, plus $60 parking to see anybody at this point. And I sure as hell wouldn't stand in an open field to see them like I did in '78 in Cleveland. It was such crap that I never again went to a general admission/festival seating concert.

So glad I have great memories of the real band, and Blu Ray DVDs to watch the real thing over and over. The drinks are cheap, the cannabis high quality, the TV and stereo great, in my living room.

I will probably miss my first Stones Tour since 1972. I have been to every tour in the last 50 years - including South America. But the cumulative effect of everything all of you gentlemen (and ladies) have mentioned on this thread - insane prices in a dire and precarious economic climate, no fresh new material that they are willing to play on stage, (though through their re-issues they have unearthed and released nunerous fabulous old songs that would be great to hear in concert) no new album of fresh material in decades, the Chinese pest and its historical-scale (and mostly suicidal) destruction of economies, the risk of super-spreader consequences, the war in Ukraine, the list goes on and on...

And of course, for me at least, when Charlie passed away... that changed everything.

No Bill, no Charlie, no Mick Taylor (why not? That would have really spiced up this tour)... a much-diminished sense of myth and musicianship, especially without Charlie. We did mostly without Bill and Mick the last 30 years... but losing Charlie... that's an entirely different impact.

It just all seems rote and stale, needlessly repetitive, crassly commercial... tone deaf to the times and lives people are living... and almost sad now.

Diamond rings, Vaseline, you gave me disease, well, I lost a lot of love over you.

For everyone complaining and whining about why they won't go, don't go. No one there (including those on stage) will miss you. Plenty of people are going and even if fewer people actually do go than the promoters expected who cares. The band is having fun, the fans in attendance are having fun and the cities hosting shows will get the economic boost.

If you do not want to go,then don't go. If you can't afford to go, then don't go. If you don't like the setlist then don't go. If you don't want to see a band without Charle,without Bill, without Mick Taylor, without Lisa Fischer etc etc then stay home. Just don't waste everyone's time telling us the shows sucked because you watched someone stream a few songs on their phone. YOU WEREN'T THERE.

Between half a million and three quarters of a million seats will be sold. Those are numbers most bands will not see touring all over all year.

Quote
Turd On The Run
I will probably miss my first Stones Tour since 1972. I have been to every tour in the last 50 years - including South America. But the cumulative effect of everything all of you gentlemen (and ladies) have mentioned on this thread - insane prices in a dire and precarious economic climate, no fresh new material that they are willing to play on stage, (though through their re-issues they have unearthed and released nunerous fabulous old songs that would be great to hear in concert) no new album of fresh material in decades, the Chinese pest and its historical-scale (and mostly suicidal) destruction of economies, the risk of super-spreader consequences, the war in Ukraine, the list goes on and on...

And of course, for me at least, when Charlie passed away... that changed everything.

No Bill, no Charlie, no Mick Taylor (why not? That would have really spiced up this tour)... a much-diminished sense of myth and musicianship, especially without Charlie. We did mostly without Bill and Mick the last 30 years... but losing Charlie... that's an entirely different impact.

It just all seems rote and stale, needlessly repetitive, crassly commercial... tone deaf to the times and lives people are living... and almost sad now.

All valid points, and I think your post sums it all up in a nutshell for many - especially the last line. There's definitely an all around weird vibe for this upcoming mini-tour for a variety of reasons.
I guess we won't really know what's in store until it all starts, but something tells me it will mostly be the same old nostalgia-fueled song and dance. And no denying without Charlie it's all diluted even further...

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Kind of feel like last tour was the most bland. Understandable without Charlie but even 2019 at least had the 2 unplugged songs in the set. Last year was LIAGT and the same 'ol. To each their own. It would be nice to see them add something new to the 2022 shows. A mini 4 song set to celebrate 50 years of Exile night be nice.

the last tour was bland..but I still saw them in Tampa and it was a dynamite show...they are still showmen...but I can understand the malais....they'd be a great act on a smaller stage but they won't do that...they want and deserve the big bucks....

my bad I meant r waters

I have never EVER Seen a Stones Show in almost 50 years as bad as Brussels - not even close . . .i was shocked when I went on the site the other day . . . it looks like only 1/2 sold . . . and weeks since on sale . . .in the US worst case was 1-2 % and huger venues + in only recent years also in the boon dock added seats side stage . . . . crappy seats that generally sell eventually . . . and i am an etetnal optimist - not one of those "doom n gloom" posters that get off on others strife . . . its just one hit to the body for crazy mama realty

Quote
Rip This
the last tour was bland..but I still saw them in Tampa and it was a dynamite show...they are still showmen...but I can understand the malais....they'd be a great act on a smaller stage but they won't do that...they want and deserve the big bucks....

They should do another show like Sticky Fingers at the Fonda. Being compressed on a small stage really brings out their greatness. I don't think Steve Jordan is a bad drummer for them at all. At least he respects the way Charlie played on the record, and tries to hew close to that. Unlike the other half of the current rhythm section. Of course we don't have to go. But please, let people moan and whine. Most of the complaints are legitimate. That doesn't mean we don't love the Stones, it just means the never ending Greatest Hits Tour has played out. Let the tourists cross them off their bucket list. I can't wait to get El Mocambo.

Quote
KevinPenthouse
I have never EVER Seen a Stones Show in almost 50 years as bad as Brussels - not even close . . .i was shocked when I went on the site the other day . . . it looks like only 1/2 sold . . . and weeks since on sale . . .in the US worst case was 1-2 % and huger venues + in only recent years also in the boon dock added seats side stage . . . . crappy seats that generally sell eventually . . . and i am an etetnal optimist - not one of those "doom n gloom" posters that get off on others strife . . . its just one hit to the body for crazy mama realty

Did you actually look at the number of seats available. Aside from the obstructed view side stage sections most sections and other obstructed view areas there are limited seats.

Quote
24FPS
Get less for much, much more. When they played Sofi Stadium in Los Angeles last year the venue parking was $60 USD. Something has to crack. I wanted to see McCartney when he was here, but I'm not paying $200 USD for a nosebleed, plus $60 parking to see anybody at this point. And I sure as hell wouldn't stand in an open field to see them like I did in '78 in Cleveland. It was such crap that I never again went to a general admission/festival seating concert.

So glad I have great memories of the real band, and Blu Ray DVDs to watch the real thing over and over. The drinks are cheap, the cannabis high quality, the TV and stereo great, in my living room.

Right on! AND! You can catch the same show over and over again via BluRay or DVD!

Quote
daspyknows

Quote
KevinPenthouse
I have never EVER Seen a Stones Show in almost 50 years as bad as Brussels - not even close . . .i was shocked when I went on the site the other day . . . it looks like only 1/2 sold . . . and weeks since on sale . .

Did you actually look at the number of seats available. Aside from the obstructed view side stage sections most sections and other obstructed view areas there are limited seats.

Daspyknows is correct. Lots of sections available for Brussels but limited # of tickets within those sections.

Quote
Turd On The Run
I will probably miss my first Stones Tour since 1972. I have been to every tour in the last 50 years - including South America. But the cumulative effect of everything all of you gentlemen (and ladies) have mentioned on this thread - insane prices in a dire and precarious economic climate, no fresh new material that they are willing to play on stage, (though through their re-issues they have unearthed and released nunerous fabulous old songs that would be great to hear in concert) no new album of fresh material in decades, the Chinese pest and its historical-scale (and mostly suicidal) destruction of economies, the risk of super-spreader consequences, the war in Ukraine, the list goes on and on...

And of course, for me at least, when Charlie passed away... that changed everything.

No Bill, no Charlie, no Mick Taylor (why not? That would have really spiced up this tour)... a much-diminished sense of myth and musicianship, especially without Charlie. We did mostly without Bill and Mick the last 30 years... but losing Charlie... that's an entirely different impact.

It just all seems rote and stale, needlessly repetitive, crassly commercial... tone deaf to the times and lives people are living... and almost sad now.

The Rolling Stones are who they are, regardless of who, even as always, especially at this point, the exception being Mick and Keith, so if you elect to miss out than you miss out.

They will do what they do and you will do what you do. No big deal.

I think i'm right in saying the Stones are paid for the tour by the promoters and everything is insured { in case of illness etc } so the Stones don't lose out for alleged poor ticket sales.

Are the Stones to blame for greedy promoters asking too much money for tickets ? Are ticket prices more expensive than other top acts ? I'm not so sure.

Come show time with lucky dips etc i'm sure expensive tickets will be sold at down to earth prices as will 90% of all tickets across the board.

Perhaps this was the time to call it THE LAST TIME, time will tell.

But definitely a missed opportunity not to tour on the new album, if they couldn't finish the new originals studio album in time why not take a week or so to make a Blue And Lonesome part 2 kind of thing, would have given them the opportunity to play a few new tracks with possibly a new song in the charts to play to the audience. Who knows maybe the Stones will release a one off single just prior to show time and play it live.

At the end of the day if you want to see the best you got to pay for the best, remember the Stones were financially the most successful profitable touring band last year, is Elton John better value for money live than the remaining Stones ? Hell No.

Quote
keefriffhards


Come show time with lucky dips etc i'm sure expensive tickets will be sold at down to earth prices as will 90% of all tickets across the board.

It doesn't quite work that way. The face value price will almost invariably stay the same, they rarely go below that.

Now, tickets included in VIP packs, if unsold, may become regular tickets (at face value), and dynamic/Platinum-priced tickets will get flexed back down to face value.

Lucky Dips are one of the ways to fill up some of the empty seats, yes, but that doesn't mean the "expensive tickets" would eventually be sold at Lucky Dip/discounted prices.

But yes, if there are empty "expensive" seats left, the production and the venue will find ways to fill them up by showtime to make it look better.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2022-05-12 11:37 by Topi.

The worse the ticket sales the bigger the opening acts will be. We will know soon.