classicrawker Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Like I said in an earlier post this will be the first tour since 1975 I might not attend all due to the ticket prices...for the ABB tour Boston Fenway Park opener I had seats in the first 5 rows directly in front of Keef near the runway for the small stage which cost me $150 which to me was still too expensive...for the NJ and Brooklyn shows $150 gets you a nose bleed or obstructed view seat...When asked about the ticket prices Ron Woods claimed that they spent millions on the rehearsals and the staging of these shows so they need to make some money...anybody buying that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 I remember the Baylion uk tour was delayed because of some tax exile scam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Like I said in an earlier post this will be the first tour since 1975 I might not attend all due to the ticket prices...for the ABB tour Boston Fenway Park opener I had seats in the first 5 rows directly in front of Keef near the runway for the small stage which cost me $150 which to me was still too expensive...for the NJ and Brooklyn shows $150 gets you a nose bleed or obstructed view seat...When asked about the ticket prices Ron Woods claimed that they spent millions on the rehearsals and the staging of these shows so they need to make some money...anybody buying that?Course you did Ronnie, course you did, why i bet they're hardly breaking even, the poor Rolling Stones, pack of wankers.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 No wonder punk took the legs out of these guys.I agree with everything you said Sugar except this..Not saying this to be defensive but IMHO The Stones were one of the few old bands that punk never really impacted...these guys never went out of fashion for all of their 50 years.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 (edited) No wonder punk took the legs out of these guys.I agree with everything you said Sugar except this..Not saying this to be defensive but IMHO The Stones were one of the few old bands that punk never really impacted...these guys never went out of fashion for all of their 50 years....Or, more accurately, they were so far out of fashion by that point that it didn't even matter, The Stones hadn't been relevant for years by 1977...and i think they knew it too...and didn't give a fuck which is to their credit i suppose. Keith knew it and i think it damaged him in ways, it's there in little hints and whispers in the things he says, like being a junkie was about "keeping one foot in the gutter", well Christ Keith, you might've done better by laying off all that and actually stepping out into the gutter with your guitar and REALLY saying something. And Mick, well as much as he was making clever comments in the paper in the late 70s they certainly pulled their socks up with Tattoo You...not to mention Charlie Watts making silly comments like Mick wanting to be Johnny Rotten which was ridiculous cuz all Johnny was was a version of Mick, excuse me grandad but fuck you, Mick Jagger could never be what Rotten was, not ever, Jaggers so fake he looks like they take him to bits every night at bedtime. He even tried to bail Sid Vicious out of jail and get him onboard their whole thing when the murder charge happened, thats how big a vulture and a snake Mick Jagger is.Like the people don't get it, like the people don't know, like they can't smell a fake and/or a desperate move to curry favour from a fuckin' mile off. Edited November 26, 2012 by sugaraylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 (edited) No wonder punk took the legs out of these guys.I agree with everything you said Sugar except this..Not saying this to be defensive but IMHO The Stones were one of the few old bands that punk never really impacted...these guys never went out of fashion for all of their 50 years....Or, more accurately, they were so far out of fashion by that point that it didn't even matter, The Stones hadn't been relevant for years by 1977...and i think they knew it too...and didn't give a fuck which is to their credit i suppose. Keith knew it and i think it damaged him in ways, it's there in little hints and whispers in the things he says, like being a junkie was about "keeping one foot in the gutter", well Christ Keith, you might've done better by laying off all that and actually stepping out into the gutter with your guitar and REALLY saying something. And Mick, well as much as he was making clever comments in the paper in the late 70s they certainly pulled their socks up with Tattoo You...not to mention Charlie Watts making silly comments like Mick wanting to be Johnny Rotten which was ridiculous cuz all Johnny was was a version of Mick, excuse me grandad but fuck you, Mick Jagger could never be what Rotten was, not ever, Jaggers so fake he looks like they take him to bits every night at bedtime.Like the people don't get it, like the people don't know, like they can't smell a fake and/or a desperate move to curry favour from a fuckin' mile off.Relevance is not the question here mate my point is they never went out of fashion and lost their fan base or took the abuse many of the old 60's/70's bands did.....they have sold out tours their entire 50 year existence which most old classic rock bands cannot claim...........how many old or new bands could sell out O2 in 17 minutes with such outrageous ticket prices? Edited November 26, 2012 by classicrawker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Len B'stard Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 No wonder punk took the legs out of these guys.I agree with everything you said Sugar except this..Not saying this to be defensive but IMHO The Stones were one of the few old bands that punk never really impacted...these guys never went out of fashion for all of their 50 years....Or, more accurately, they were so far out of fashion by that point that it didn't even matter, The Stones hadn't been relevant for years by 1977...and i think they knew it too...and didn't give a fuck which is to their credit i suppose. Keith knew it and i think it damaged him in ways, it's there in little hints and whispers in the things he says, like being a junkie was about "keeping one foot in the gutter", well Christ Keith, you might've done better by laying off all that and actually stepping out into the gutter with your guitar and REALLY saying something. And Mick, well as much as he was making clever comments in the paper in the late 70s they certainly pulled their socks up with Tattoo You...not to mention Charlie Watts making silly comments like Mick wanting to be Johnny Rotten which was ridiculous cuz all Johnny was was a version of Mick, excuse me grandad but fuck you, Mick Jagger could never be what Rotten was, not ever, Jaggers so fake he looks like they take him to bits every night at bedtime.Like the people don't get it, like the people don't know, like they can't smell a fake and/or a desperate move to curry favour from a fuckin' mile off.Relevance is not the question here mate my point is they never went out of fashion and lost their fan base or took the abuse many of the old 60's/70's bands did.....they have sold out tours their entire 50 year existence which most old classic rock bands cannot claim...........how many old or new bands could sell out O2 in 17 minutes with such outrageous ticket prices?Oh definitely, in terms of like, their audience? That'll be there in perpetuity. They took a fair bit of abuse though mind, shit, they were named in the call to arms, "No Elvis Beatles or The Rolling Stones" and that odd rant at the end of The Swindle, "Mick Jagger, white ni g ger", The Stones bore the brunt of the abuse but, to their credit, they gave it right fuckin' back in their own arrogant little ways (thats not an insult, the punks were just as arrogant to be pegging them in the way they did but, to this boy at least, they were arrogant and righteous as well).But yeah, your point is spot on in that sense, if we're putting like, relevance to one side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 The Stones have always taken abuse for their ticket prices and never flinched. Back in 1969 they were charging $5-7 for the good seats when other bands were getting a couple of bucks.One of the reasons they did the Altamont free concert was because of the outrage over their ticket prices.I don't like the fact they charge so much but evidently it is what the market will bear so I just refuse to pay it. I don't begrudge others for paying to go see them as I do think this is the last time they will tour together and they are fucking legends but I just can't reconcile the ticket prices for myself......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsh327 Posted November 26, 2012 Author Share Posted November 26, 2012 Keith is unapologetic for the Stones not doing benefit shows every time they're asked, and how much they charge fans. Don't make Mick out to be the only one all about money in that band. Mick was really snobby about punk rock when it came out, but I'm sure he understood where they were coming from, he knew about all the roots of punk because they were all influenced by his band. It was a "been there, done that" attitude on his part, but the Stones have all said Mick has a lot of personalities and is very guarded. Marianne Faithfull and Keith Richards gave their take on it, Bill Wyman, Andrew Oldham as well, a few ex-lovers here and there, but even with them he still maintained distance. That's prob. why there's so many books just about Mick, because people are going to try to figure him out, the way this forum's full of Axl speculations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GivenToFly Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Keith is unapologetic for the Stones not doing benefit shows every time they're asked, and how much they charge fans. Don't make Mick out to be the only one all about money in that band.Mick was really snobby about punk rock when it came out, but I'm sure he understood where they were coming from, he knew about all the roots of punk because they were all influenced by his band.It was a "been there, done that" attitude on his part, but the Stones have all said Mick has a lot of personalities and is very guarded. Marianne Faithfull and Keith Richards gave their take on it, Bill Wyman, Andrew Oldham as well, a few ex-lovers here and there, but even with them he still maintained distance. That's prob. why there's so many books just about Mick, because people are going to try to figure him out, the way this forum's full of Axl speculations.Isn't Get Off Of My Cloud pretty much punk rock, or some sort of proto-punk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash Diet Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Jagger still sounds pretty good at 69. Better than Axl.thisawesome set btw No wonder punk took the legs out of these guys.I agree with everything you said Sugar except this..Not saying this to be defensive but IMHO The Stones were one of the few old bands that punk never really impacted...these guys never went out of fashion for all of their 50 years....Or, more accurately, they were so far out of fashion by that point that it didn't even matter, The Stones hadn't been relevant for years by 1977...and i think they knew it too...and didn't give a fuck which is to their credit i suppose. Keith knew it and i think it damaged him in ways, it's there in little hints and whispers in the things he says, like being a junkie was about "keeping one foot in the gutter", well Christ Keith, you might've done better by laying off all that and actually stepping out into the gutter with your guitar and REALLY saying something. And Mick, well as much as he was making clever comments in the paper in the late 70s they certainly pulled their socks up with Tattoo You...not to mention Charlie Watts making silly comments like Mick wanting to be Johnny Rotten which was ridiculous cuz all Johnny was was a version of Mick, excuse me grandad but fuck you, Mick Jagger could never be what Rotten was, not ever, Jaggers so fake he looks like they take him to bits every night at bedtime.Like the people don't get it, like the people don't know, like they can't smell a fake and/or a desperate move to curry favour from a fuckin' mile off.Relevance is not the question here mate my point is they never went out of fashion and lost their fan base or took the abuse many of the old 60's/70's bands did.....they have sold out tours their entire 50 year existence which most old classic rock bands cannot claim...........how many old or new bands could sell out O2 in 17 minutes with such outrageous ticket prices?zero, because NO other famous 50 year old bands existed now in the rock scene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Jagger still sounds pretty good at 69. Better than Axl.thisawesome set btw No wonder punk took the legs out of these guys.I agree with everything you said Sugar except this..Not saying this to be defensive but IMHO The Stones were one of the few old bands that punk never really impacted...these guys never went out of fashion for all of their 50 years....Or, more accurately, they were so far out of fashion by that point that it didn't even matter, The Stones hadn't been relevant for years by 1977...and i think they knew it too...and didn't give a fuck which is to their credit i suppose. Keith knew it and i think it damaged him in ways, it's there in little hints and whispers in the things he says, like being a junkie was about "keeping one foot in the gutter", well Christ Keith, you might've done better by laying off all that and actually stepping out into the gutter with your guitar and REALLY saying something. And Mick, well as much as he was making clever comments in the paper in the late 70s they certainly pulled their socks up with Tattoo You...not to mention Charlie Watts making silly comments like Mick wanting to be Johnny Rotten which was ridiculous cuz all Johnny was was a version of Mick, excuse me grandad but fuck you, Mick Jagger could never be what Rotten was, not ever, Jaggers so fake he looks like they take him to bits every night at bedtime.Like the people don't get it, like the people don't know, like they can't smell a fake and/or a desperate move to curry favour from a fuckin' mile off.Relevance is not the question here mate my point is they never went out of fashion and lost their fan base or took the abuse many of the old 60's/70's bands did.....they have sold out tours their entire 50 year existence which most old classic rock bands cannot claim...........how many old or new bands could sell out O2 in 17 minutes with such outrageous ticket prices?zero, because NO other famous 50 year old bands existed now in the rock sceneThere are a number of 60/70's bands still touring and IMHO none of them could sell the number of tickets at the prices the Stones are charging...Think about it, the tickets for these shows probabaly average more than $300 a piece yet they sold out all the shows........I have seen every tour since 1975 and tickets for everyone one of them were fast sellers. IMHO not many bands can claim to sell tickets like the Stones for their whole career.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage5 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Keith is unapologetic for the Stones not doing benefit shows every time they're asked, and how much they charge fans. Don't make Mick out to be the only one all about money in that band.Mick was really snobby about punk rock when it came out, but I'm sure he understood where they were coming from, he knew about all the roots of punk because they were all influenced by his band.It was a "been there, done that" attitude on his part, but the Stones have all said Mick has a lot of personalities and is very guarded. Marianne Faithfull and Keith Richards gave their take on it, Bill Wyman, Andrew Oldham as well, a few ex-lovers here and there, but even with them he still maintained distance. That's prob. why there's so many books just about Mick, because people are going to try to figure him out, the way this forum's full of Axl speculations.Isn't Get Off Of My Cloud pretty much punk rock, or some sort of proto-punk?I guess that could be argued. To me, The Who always had more proto-punk stuff though; I Can't Explain, My Generation, The Kids Are Alright, etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage5 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0KtgqwoKN8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QczfwoIMV9ICan't Always Get What You Want is very cool with the choir intro! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zint Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real McCoy Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Epic.That is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage5 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zint Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Dude's still got the tone...so cool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real McCoy Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I'll see your and raise you a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Rumour on the IORR Stones forum has Mick Taylor playing the next 4 Stones shows........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zint Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 P5 if you get that song with Mick Taylor on it...worth every penny of your ticket right there.Getting jealous already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerage5 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 P5 if you get that song with Mick Taylor on it...worth every penny of your ticket right there.Getting jealous already!I'm getting all giddy just thinking about the possibility of that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QczfwoIMV9IHoly crap on a cracker... :mellow:That's just amazing.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmo Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I know I'm a bit late but LOVED this outfit:And the stage is AMAZING!!Wish I could see 'em live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zint Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I have a hard time believing they built that stage for 5 shows!...which is good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.