This is such a bloody difficult subject. It is so easy to sit here and say "yeah, they'll slow down, they can't go on forever, maybe they should stop doing stadiums, just smaller venues..." etc etc !!

The thing is, we have all been asking these questions for YEARS. We couldnt believe it after voodoo lounge, another tour - btb. Then licks. Well, i have seen one show on ABB and that was SF1. And it was an absolute blinder, just as good if not better than any stones show i have seen since my inaugeration at wembley july 11th 1995.

So then, i know they are getting older, but so are the lot of us, and why should the decline in performance be so sharp and/or noticable between now and, say 2008, compared to 1999 - 2002, or 2003 - 2005?

Bottom line is, i'm only 28 and I will literally cry (@#$%& anyone who wants to take the piss out of me for saying that) when they do eventually give it up. It wont be for some years yet, but when it happens... Oh yeah and it hurts...






_____________________________________________________

What's your favourite flavour?...........Cherry Red!!

Option B! I think the way it's going now is fine! Why not the others? Well..

A. New material is cool, but why the hell would I pick this one if there's also an option where I can get both a tour and an album?!

C. Theatre tours are cool, but they have to visit the whole world and they just did that sort of thing with Licks. Also, prices would go through the roof and I doubt if I could even get my hands on a ticket!! I failed on the Licks tour, I can't imagine not seeing the Stones on their tour!!

D. No new album? GET OUT OF HERE!! I want a new album!! No old crappy shit!!! Hee-haaah get the good rock 'n' roll they've still got in 'em out first, release the valts-material when they're dead and gone!!

E. A blues album? Would be funny.. but it wouldn't take long to record so they could do it in combination with a real rock album. And covers.. no thanks!

F. Solo projects.. hmm that's a tough one. If they'd actually all do a world tour, this would be great since I've never seen a Stones solo show. But they'll probably just release a 10-track album and do some club gigs in the US and the UK.

Yes I would like to see another album and a small venue tour, however, I feel we are witnessing the beginning of the end with this current leg of the tour. They have nothing left to prove and really I don't think the desire on their part to prove anthing anymore is there. During this tour I think we all realize and question if at times they are only going through the motions. Mick's ego has always played an important factor in all their decisions and I don't think his ego will allow him to do anything else than finish at the top of his game. Walking away from it all at this venture would allow them to do just this. If the "mutual fund" still needs to be funded open up the vaults and watch the stream of money roll in for years to come.

Don't you think it's sometimes wise not to grow up.

The simplest answer is: going back to arena / theater shows in US in the fall of 2006 - and then it is over......

Don't think Keith nor Charlie would go on a new tour because of "not good enough" health in 3 years from now.....

So, enjoy the last tour

PS - don't compare the end with 72 or 75 or ...... now the age is the difference

rsk45 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes I would like to see another album and a small
> venue tour, however, I feel we are witnessing the
> beginning of the end with this current leg of the
> tour. They have nothing left to prove and really I
> don't think the desire on their part to prove
> anthing anymore is there. During this tour I think
> we all realize and question if at times they are
> only going through the motions. Mick's ego has
> always played an important factor in all their
> decisions and I don't think his ego will allow him
> to do anything else than finish at the top of his
> game. Walking away from it all at this venture
> would allow them to do just this. If the "mutual
> fund" still needs to be funded open up the vaults
> and watch the stream of money roll in for years to
> come.
>
> Don't you think it's sometimes wise not to grow
> up.


Wise words...something deep inside me tells me that there is a lot of truth in them...

The only thing for them to "prove" would be to have a solid "hit" album in the U.S--maybe U2 sales level.

country honk,

does not make sense what you say.. after all if they knew like you know (and if you know i assume they should know too!) then why would they not say "this is our last tour"... at the very least it would guarantee sell outs every single joint they play.. what you're saying just does not compute

chas,

the only thing left for them to prove is that they can do what no one else has ever done which is continue rocking out all over the world and beind the highest grossing band tour after tour for longer... that IS something to prove...



my prediction is they will continue the way they are going.. they are playing great right now.. why suppose they will experience such a big decline before their next tour say in 2008 or 2009?

"country honk,

does not make sense what you say"

Ask Charlie what makes sense - surely he knows more about that, than you do.....

i call bullshit!

if mick knew they were stopping he would exploit the fact that its the stones' last tour commercially and say so.. right?

take care

I like what is said above about Mick's ego. If they stop now, or soon, they go out on top, with a bang, so to speak. Also, I don't think Mick would announce the last tour because (a) he really doesn't know, and (b) that might be perceived as a bit cheesy, no?

well we'll definetly see what happens.. thats for sure...

we can meet up back here and hand out appropriate prizes..

keith has indicated they are going to go on forever and thats what i expect (forever being until they can't do it).. people like howlin wolf and muddy waters played til they dropped dead and thats the model here.. if charlie wants to drop out they will continue without him.. of that i am sure.. so its up to mick and keith.. without either the stones are done.

best

The post 2006 Stones?

......... will be magnificent. You just watch.

I personally think the ONLY issue they've really got to get to grips with is this business of Mick's onstage antics, because at the end of the day the man still does continue to do a lot of running around and carrying on etc. Face it, the guitarists can continue to stand on their own two legs for a good while yet, and even if those legs become tired, there's always chairs ? You might laugh, but why not ? I saw BB King once what seems like AGES ago now, and he and Lucille were happily sat in a chair and it diminished the power of the performance NOT ONE BIT ! Don't tell me we wouldn't applaud them for a mainly acoustic set delivered from from chairs when they're say ..... 70 years of age ? If they want to continue playing live performances, THAT's the one issue they've really got to address. They just good old fashionedly need to "wind it down" a bit. No need to "fade away", just perhaps a need to modify the act a little bit.

The idea of an "everyone on their feet" type song like JJF or BS delivered by the Rolling Stones from a bunch of chairs onstage is, I admit, a strange notion to get one's head around, but their catalogue is SO huge that a set of songs ideally suited to being delivered to an audience from such an arrangement is easily achievable. Ballads, slowish numbers, acoustic numbers, the OCCASIONAL howler, why the hell not ? It would ALSO mean that inevitably, they'd have to concurrently scale down the size of venues they'd play in. In other words, no more bloody stadiums. Arenas, smaller venues, that would I think lend themselves far better to a "toned down" act.

Anyway, that's my theory an' I'm stickin' to it !!

Mick n' Keef .......... if you're listenin' and/or readin' this: DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT RETIREMENT !!

NO WAY BOYS, you're in it for the long run !!

The Stones have to prove nothing. They ARE the Stones, they epitomise r'n'r and surrepticiously or not WE all live/love them.

New Material? Great.
Vaults? Great
Tours of ANY kind? Great.
NOTHING from them ever again? The world, and music, will be the worse off, by miles, and so will we all be.

Rod



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-03-30 10:53 by RoddyD.

RoddyD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones have to prove nothing. They ARE the
> Stones, they epitomise r'n'r and surrepticiously
> or not WE all live/love them.
>
> New Material? Great.
> Vaults? Great
> Tours of ANY kind? Great.
> NOTHING from them ever again? The world, and
> music, will be the worse off, by miles, and so
> will we all be.
>
> Rod
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 03/30/06 10:53 by
> RoddyD.

Sums it up perfectly. Thank you RoddyD

In the end, it's all guessing. I'm pretty sure that even the Stones themselves don't know by now if this is their last time on tour or not. After this tour, there will be a break as usual. After one or two years they will come together as usual and see if they're up to do it again. Who knows what their state of mind will be in two years? At this age, you simply don't make 10 years career master plans anymore. Their physical conditions aside - when they're up for it, they will continue. When they're not, they won't. Remember the 80's? After DW, Jagger said "no" and consequently, there was no tour after DW. Don't count too much on Keiths words like "we will carry on forever". That's what he says now. In a couple of years, his opion might change. Again, who knows?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-03-30 11:52 by retired_dog.

retired_dog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the end, it's all guessing. I'm pretty sure
> that even the Stones themselves don't know by now
> if this is their last time on tour or not. After
> this tour, there will be a break as usual. After
> one or two years they will come together as usual
> and see if they're up to do it again. Who knows
> what their state of mind will be in two years? At
> this age, you simply don't make 10 years career
> master plans anymore. Their physical conditions
> aside - when they're up for it, they will
> continue. When they're not, they won't. Remember
> the 80's? After DW, Jagger said "no" and
> consequently, there was no tour after DW. Don't
> count too much on Keiths words like "we will carry
> on forever". That's what he says now. In a couple
> of years, his opion might change. Again, who
> knows?
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 03/30/06 11:52 by
> retired_dog.


well put retired_dog. as they so stated-"time waits for no man, no favors has he."