1. Stones should give CD away at the door for the prices they are charging..

2. Most concert goers clearly only going for the "event" which is why the setlists are so pathetic..

3. once again, the real fan (quite possibly an IORRian) gets shafted because we buy the CD, but have to listen to Satisfaction again....

1. Why?

2. Pretty much. A big part of the audience only knows the songs off of "Forty Licks". Also, it's cool to say you've seen the Stones.

3. I'm kind of torn when it comes to this. Yeah, I'd like to see some more obscure songs but I'm not gonna complain when they play Satisfaction. It's a great song and one of their biggest hits. You can complain about it on the internet all day, but when your actually there nothing beats the rush of when Keith starts that riff.

Simply put, non-hardcore fans don't care about new Stones music.

i think they should tack on a --so call free c.d.for every ticket holder..then the stones would have a sure hit...i alwayed believed it help sales...but then the stores would lose out on sales..may be the reason thats not done...don't want to pissoff wallmart.

1. Yes, they should give away HOT ROCKS 1964-1971 or FORTY LICKS.

2. Most concert goers clearly only go for popcorn and beer and that's why Keith is so pathetic during his infamous 2-song piss break.

3. Once again there is a new fan thinking the Rolling Stones are something else than a nostalgia act.

>Fans pay $1000 for a ticket BUT don't buy the CD..why?

because they're not REALLY fans ?

They passed that hump in their career where people just arent interested in new music. Very few artists of their age and stature sell new music anymore. The biggest moneymakers for classic rock acts is touring, catalog sales (i.e. not new releases) and film licensing, advertising etc.

It might be worth mentioning that the quality of the new songs on 40 Licks (which should have been a straight greatest hits CD) might have possibly contributed to the poor sales of the current release. I know I had no intention of buying A Bigger Bang either but thankfully changed my mind.

When you get to this "level" in the pecking order, isn't it also time to experiment, expand and grow? Playing down to the level of your audience should be beneath their greatness

"Fans pay $1000 for a ticket BUT don't buy the CD..why?"

Very funny/ironic thread! I kinda of shouted this on Beale last weekend after the show seeing all the folks so geared up (t-shirts, caps, general excitement, etc.) seeing the Stones (it kinda of pissed me off honestly)! But, I'm in agreement with Sir Gaz, "true fans" they're not!!

> "Fans pay $1000 for a ticket BUT don't buy the
> CD..why?"

I've been listening to the Stones as a serious fan since June 1965. And I own the new CD. I own _every_ CD and vinyl they ever put out, and hundreds more studio and live boots, too.

But the truth is, the new CD is a piece of crap. Absolute generic drivel. There are 2 good songs and 14 pieces of filler. If this shite floats your boat, so be it, but stop harping on why people want to see these guys live once or twice before they retire or die and won't shell out for the new CD. It's apples and oranges.

highanddry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But the truth is, the new CD is a piece of crap.
> Absolute generic drivel. There are 2 good songs
> and 14 pieces of filler. If this shite floats your
> boat, so be it, but stop harping on why people
> want to see these guys live once or twice before
> they retire or die and won't shell out for the new
> CD. It's apples and oranges.

Truer words (other than mine) have never been spoken.

I agree that the CD should come with the ticket. Prince did that, and it worked out very well for him. Of course, the price of the cheapest seats might have to come up just a little.

Okay then, once again, I must ask, what defines a "true fan." I think spending a grand on a pair of tickets qualifies. Maybe its our musical tastes that really suck. Perhaps most of the concert attendees are not impressed by the new music and feel no need to buy it. I am a "true fan" of a lot of artists but that doesn't mean I will buy just anything regardless of quality. Whatever "true fan" means I doubt its writing a blank check, especially after spending that kind of coin on tickets.

They could at least sell the current album at the merchandise stands at the shows. I find strange that they don't.

"But the truth is, the new CD is a piece of crap. Absolute generic drivel. There are 2 good songs and 14 pieces of filler. If this shite floats your boat, so be it, but stop harping on why people want to see these guys live once or twice before they retire or die and won't shell out for the new CD. It's apples and oranges."

Hey, millitant one, point taken regarding what folks pick and choose to spend there money on, ok? BTW, this "shite" floats alot of boats from what I've heard-including a Grammy Nom.

Your history on the board reflects a very insightful perspective (this is a joke) as a fan. Please remember this is a board where folks express opinion, good or bad, about their favorite (at least I'm guessing the Stones are everyone's favorite) band. If this "shite" does not float please expound as to why? Otherwise, kindly take your bitchin' elsewhere where you might be able to be taken more seriously.

crossfire Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> BTW, this "shite" floats alot of boats from what
> I've heard-including a Grammy Nom.

Milli Vanilli won a Grammy, so I'm not convinced this album getting a nomination means a lot.

>
> Your history on the board reflects a very
> insightful perspective (this is a joke) as a fan.

Well, I may not have a long posting history on this particular board, but my participation in other Stones fan boards dates back a decade, and I don't think I need to apologize for being a serious collector/fan of the Stones for 40 years.

> If this "shite" does not float
> please expound as to why?

Awkward lyrics. Lack of memorable musical hooks. Recycled tunes. Just to name three.

The Stones wanna stay on the road, because that's the way to make a lot of money.
The bigger part of the concert attendees don't care for new stuff or musical integrity, pictures of original band members on bad compilations or special edition rip offs.
They wanna see 'The Rolling Stones', whick thet associate with satisfaction, start me up, etc.
So for the Glimmers to make a lot of money, they need to organize a tour and play a setlist containing hits.
Since they've already done a greatest hits tour this decade, they need to release a studio album. As soon as it is released they loose interest.

A casual 'fan' (wrong word actually) doesn't care for new or obscure Stones material and won't buy ABB or Rarities (which is targeted at fans who do care, which is why it is a shame they released it as it is).

A concert could convert a fan or two (I don't get the absence of cd's after concerts), but the Stones don't tour to promote an album anymore. They release an album to can get on the road and collect millions.

This must be the most cynical post I have ever written. But my Stones 'mentality' is a bit shaken, I guess...





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-12-09 17:46 by mr edward.

highanddry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > "Fans pay $1000 for a ticket BUT don't buy
> the
> > CD..why?"
>
> I've been listening to the Stones as a serious fan
> since June 1965. And I own the new CD. I own
> _every_ CD and vinyl they ever put out, and
> hundreds more studio and live boots, too.
>
> But the truth is, the new CD is a piece of crap.
> Absolute generic drivel. There are 2 good songs
> and 14 pieces of filler. If this shite floats your
> boat, so be it, but stop harping on why people
> want to see these guys live once or twice before
> they retire or die and won't shell out for the new
> CD. It's apples and oranges.

Regarding the new album - each to their own.

However, I cant believe youre seriously suggesting that a high proportion of people going to see the Stones on this tour are first-timers...

Dan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Okay then, once again, I must ask, what defines a
> "true fan." I think spending a grand on a pair of
> tickets qualifies. Maybe its our musical tastes
> that really suck. Perhaps most of the concert
> attendees are not impressed by the new music and
> feel no need to buy it. I am a "true fan" of a lot
> of artists but that doesn't mean I will buy just
> anything regardless of quality. Whatever "true
> fan" means I doubt its writing a blank check,
> especially after spending that kind of coin on
> tickets.


I'm loathe to define what a 'true fan' is because I've had a pop at others on here for dictating to me their own narrow definition of the same thing.

However, I think its a lot easier to pay $15 for a CD than $1,000 on a couple of tickets.

Being able to throw $1,000 away on tickets to see an act who you dont really care enough about to be aware of their new record says more about the customer's affluence and available cash flow than it does about their interest in the band's music. A lot of people on here who Do have a great passion for the band's music have spent a lot of money in getting their tickets, because they'd little alternative. However, when you compare ABB's sales to the concert ticket sales, its quite obvious that those fans are in the minority. So, yeah, when you take into account the number of corporate tickets being dished out in this tour, the lack of enthusiasm reported in anything but the obvious hits and the less than outstanding album sales, I would suggest that a lot of the people paying that kind of money for tickets are there to be 'seen' or to see the 'legend' rather than because of much of a passion for the music.

Re: The general public purchasing "ABB" along with seats for The Big Show.

Sure, the album is flabby as hell--lots of forgettable/lame stuff to go with the hot tracks. But still, it's the Rolling Stones and it has been (excessively, to my mind) well-reviewed and it's the disc for which the tour is named...why not make the small investment of time and money in the CD--perhaps to better enjoy the show?

I can't figure out why more people wouldn't do this, but then I think:

I like "ABB" alright and I believe in continuing to support legendary artists...but if someone approached me and wanted a list of Stones albums to buy--by order of priority/quality--where would "ABB" fall?

Eighth? Tenth? Lower? (Probably lower for me, I'd have to say.)

How many people out there will ever own eight CD's by any band?

Only a reiteration of the old cliche: they're having a hard time competing with themselves.

"Milli Vanilli won a Grammy, so I'm not convinced this album getting a nomination means a lot."

You're in a minority opinion regarding the acclaim this album is receiving and friend that IS fact (pick up any industry periodical). And a grammy nomination (at a minimum) DOES separate your work from others by the voting establishment (tell me where I can find your Grammy nom?), you don't need to be convinced, once again this is a Fact... If you didn't like Milli Vanilli (and I do agree, I don't care for them either) apparently some folks did back in 90 with 15 million albums sold as newcomer of the year. I would agree with you if you said that the Stones genre in general has passed its time for the most part except among hardcore's. Industry trends and marketing has changed alot over the years, but I guess the Stones really don't care about that award stuff much anymore (if they ever did at all-more for the fans IMO).

No one is asking you to apologize, in fact I'd probably be curious to learn more about your 40 year old collection? Just when people make a slam with nothing to back it up- it leaves one open to criticism IMO.

Lyrically may not be their best effort, but I don't think you need to be when the guitars and Charlie's snare are in your face most of the time!

Hooks? Your hearing something different than I, RJ, ONNYA, IWTL, SSMC, BOMH all hook me (not to mention UTR and WDWGH). I'll take this kind of recyclability from 60 year old icons everyday of the week-including Sunday.

Beats me why anybody would shell out $1,000 for tickets and not spend the other $15 to get the CD. I saw McCartney in 2002 and paid about $200 for that ticket as I recall. I spent another $15 on his then-current CD, Driving Rain, even though I had it on good authority that it sucked (and IMO it did, except for one or two songs).

I figured what's another $15 to get the full concert experience? I wanted to already be familiar with the new songs when he started playing them. I figured that if anything, I could say "oh, I recognize this one, it's a new one I don't like. Time for a bathroom break!"

I agree that people that go to see a band without checking out their new stuff first are lame and are probably a lot more interested in the social aspects of the concert than the music. There's nothing wrong with the social aspects, I enjoy them quite a bit, but to me the music is the most important thing and comes first.