GNR's Pollstar Rankings for First-Half of 2013 are in...

[TheSeeker]

IN THE NORTH AMERICAN RANKINGS OF THE TOP 100 NORTH AMERICAN TOURS FOR JANUARY-JUNE 2013, GUNS N' ROSES RANKED.....

http://www.pollstarpro.com/files/charts2013/2013MidYearTop100NorthAmericanTours.pdf

they didn't make the Top 100, lol

IN THE WORLD RANKINGS OF THE TOP 100 WORLDWIDE TOURS FOR JANUARY-JUNE 2013, GUNS N' ROSES RANKED.....

http://www.pollstarpro.com/files/charts2013/2013MidYearTop100WorldwideTours.pdf

93. Guns N' Roses

Gross: 6.1 million dollars

Average ticket price: $115.32

Average attendance:per show: 4,069

Tickets sold: 52,896

Average gross per show: $469,231

What a worldwide touring FORCE, ladies and gentlemen.

[Guest NGOG]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

Edited July 18, 2013 by NGOG

[riot]

IN THE NORTH AMERICAN RANKINGS OF THE TOP 100 NORTH AMERICAN TOURS FOR JANUARY-JUNE 2013, GUNS N' ROSES RANKED.....

http://www.pollstarpro.com/files/charts2013/2013MidYearTop100NorthAmericanTours.pdf

they didn't make the Top 100, lol

IN THE WORLD RANKINGS OF THE TOP 100 WORLDWIDE TOURS FOR JANUARY-JUNE 2013, GUNS N' ROSES RANKED.....

http://www.pollstarpro.com/files/charts2013/2013MidYearTop100WorldwideTours.pdf

93. Guns N' Roses

Gross: 6.1 million dollars

Average ticket price: $115.32

Average attendance:per show: 4,069

Tickets sold: 52,896

Average gross per show: $469,231

What a worldwide touring FORCE, ladies and gentlemen.

your post is just plain stupid. you don't consider the number of shows nor the venues size. these numbers are good and they are simply the maximum they could be considering the facts (number of shows + size)

[Silent Jay]

The band is surrounded by a new team. Apart from a few festivals, guys playing in smaller venues than what they are accustomed to bring their things right.

[TheSeeker]

GNR's average ticket prices per year/average tickets sold per show, according to Pollstar Charts:

2002 - $46.72 / 8.660

2006 - $58.91 / 8,730

2010 - $71.81 / 6.500

2011 - $52.65 / 6,446

2012 - $91.14 / 3,481

2013 - $115.32 / 4,069

Notice something?

[originalgnrnewgnr]

here's hoping for worse numbers for the next years.

[Apollo]

IN THE NORTH AMERICAN RANKINGS OF THE TOP 100 NORTH AMERICAN TOURS FOR JANUARY-JUNE 2013, GUNS N' ROSES RANKED.....

http://www.pollstarpro.com/files/charts2013/2013MidYearTop100NorthAmericanTours.pdf

they didn't make the Top 100, lol

IN THE WORLD RANKINGS OF THE TOP 100 WORLDWIDE TOURS FOR JANUARY-JUNE 2013, GUNS N' ROSES RANKED.....

http://www.pollstarpro.com/files/charts2013/2013MidYearTop100WorldwideTours.pdf

93. Guns N' Roses

Gross: 6.1 million dollars

Average ticket price: $115.32

Average attendance:per show: 4,069

Tickets sold: 52,896

Average gross per show: $469,231

What a worldwide touring FORCE, ladies and gentlemen.

your post is just plain stupid. you don't consider the number of shows nor the venues size. these numbers are good and they are simply the maximum they could be considering the facts (number of shows + size)

You and NGOG are a bit wrong in your assessment too.

You are factoring in issues related to GnR..........without realizing that those SAME EXACT things factor into other bands as well. The 91 bands in front of GnR didn't all play 300 shows in 50,000 seat venues.

THe last three years GnR has been in the 75-91 range and each time the poll is published, you guys have the same excuse. Forgetting that all the bands are judged by the same criteria. The numbers don't lie. This list is just the FACTS.

YOU might think GnR is a powerhouse touring band.

The numbers show they aren't. Don't blame the results or people who comment on it, place the blame in the proper place: Axl and Beta. Release a new album, lower your ticket prices, play more shows.......then they'd finish higher on the list. Pretty simple.

EVERY band is playing by the same rules. GnR doesn't get its own special caveat.

[Nosaj Thing]

GNR's average ticket prices per year/average tickets sold per show, according to Pollstar Charts:

2002 - $46.72 / 8.660

2006 - $58.91 / 8,730

2010 - $71.81 / 6.500

2011 - $52.65 / 6,446

2012 - $91.14 / 3,481

2013 - $115.32 / 4,069

Notice something?

Hahahahaha!

Keep the insane cash-grabbing alive!

[Ali]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

The main factor is that they played in March and a few shows in June. The ranking is based on total gross. Total gross is directly proportional to the number of shows played.

Ali

[Apollo]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

The main factor is that they played in March and a few shows in June. The ranking is based on total gross. Total gross is directly proportional to the number of shows played.

Ali

Yes. And that factor is applied to all 92 bands that finished ahead of GnR as well.

During the Use Your Illusions tour, GnR averaged just under 34,000 people per show.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Groghan

[Ali]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

The main factor is that they played in March and a few shows in June. The ranking is based on total gross. Total gross is directly proportional to the number of shows played.

Ali

Yes. And that factor is applied to all 92 bands that finished ahead of GnR as well.

Did I say otherwise?

My point was that number, in and of itself, may not be the best metric to judge a band's touring success by. For instance, RHCP was #14 on the year end list for 2012 NA tours. They are #94 for this 2013 mid-year list. That doesn't tell the whole story as they have only played 4 NA shows so far this year.

Ali

[Apollo]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

The main factor is that they played in March and a few shows in June. The ranking is based on total gross. Total gross is directly proportional to the number of shows played.

Ali

Yes. And that factor is applied to all 92 bands that finished ahead of GnR as well.

Did I say otherwise?

My point was that number, in and of itself, may not be the best metric to judge a band's touring success by. For instance, RHCP was #14 on the year end list for 2012 NA tours. They are #94 for this 2013 mid-year list. That doesn't tell the whole story as they have only played 4 NA shows so far this year.

Ali

But it does tell the "whole" story, as the same criteria is applied to EVERY band on the list. You are implying (well, not you so much as some others) is that "IF" GnR had played more shows in 2013, and played them at bigger venues - then they would be higher on the list. Basically making an excuse as to why GnR is so low on the list (which they have been for three straight years now).

But you guys don't figure in the same criteria for all the other bands as well. If the 94th ranked band had played more shows and had played at bigger venues, they they would be higher on the list as well.

Do you see why your guy's excuses don't work? You are only applying them to GnR, not to every other band on the list.

Ali, in the Illusions tour, GnR averaged 33,800 people a show. The last three years, that number is in the 5,000 range. IF GnR could still average 33,800 people a night, then Beta wouldn't be booking them at bowling alleys and weddings. They wouldn't be playing to half empty 10,000 seat venues. THEY would be playing stadiums that hold 40,000 people.

You guys sound like the sports guy/fan/player/etc who won't just admit they lost a game. "Well, the other team had bigger players and nicer bats and faster pitchers and better uniforms. If we had all those things, we would have won. So it really shouldn't count that we lost."

[Guest NGOG]

"IF" GnR had played more shows in 2013, and played them at bigger venues - then they would be higher on the list.

That is not excuse making, it is fact. Aside from Australia and the run in more middle eastern parts, GNR have tended to play more exclusive shows where ticket prices are high and capacity is less. Had GNR opted to play shows in environments closer to 2010 (where exclusive events were an absolute rarity) as well as playing more shows, quite clearly they would be higher up on that dubious list.

[Ali]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

The main factor is that they played in March and a few shows in June. The ranking is based on total gross. Total gross is directly proportional to the number of shows played.

Ali

Yes. And that factor is applied to all 92 bands that finished ahead of GnR as well.

Did I say otherwise?

My point was that number, in and of itself, may not be the best metric to judge a band's touring success by. For instance, RHCP was #14 on the year end list for 2012 NA tours. They are #94 for this 2013 mid-year list. That doesn't tell the whole story as they have only played 4 NA shows so far this year.

Ali

But it does tell the "whole" story, as the same criteria is applied to EVERY band on the list. You are implying (well, not you so much as some others) is that "IF" GnR had played more shows in 2013, and played them at bigger venues - then they would be higher on the list. Basically making an excuse as to why GnR is so low on the list (which they have been for three straight years now).

But you guys don't figure in the same criteria for all the other bands as well. If the 94th ranked band had played more shows and had played at bigger venues, they they would be higher on the list as well.

Do you see why your guy's excuses don't work? You are only applying them to GnR, not to every other band on the list.

Ali, in the Illusions tour, GnR averaged 33,800 people a show. The last three years, that number is in the 5,000 range. IF GnR could still average 33,800 people a night, then Beta wouldn't be booking them at bowling alleys and weddings. They wouldn't be playing to half empty 10,000 seat venues. THEY would be playing stadiums that hold 40,000 people.

You guys sound like the sports guy/fan/player/etc who won't just admit they lost a game. "Well, the other team had bigger players and nicer bats and faster pitchers and better uniforms. If we had all those things, we would have won. So it really shouldn't count that we lost."

Yet again, you are arguing against points that were never made. I was making a point about the value of "total gross" as a metric for an artist's success as a touring entity. I cited RHCP as a data point to illustrate the point I was making.

I said absolutely nothing about these points applying only to GN'R. Never, not once, not ever. So, I have no idea why you are bringing that up and arguing against that point. It's a point never made.

Ali

[volcano62]

When you consider that GNR have only toured sporadically this year and scaled the productions down to more intimate venues, those are very solid figures. The average attendance also refutes the theory that enthusiasm for GNR is dwindling to irreversible lows.

The main factor is that they played in March and a few shows in June. The ranking is based on total gross. Total gross is directly proportional to the number of shows played.

Ali

Yes. And that factor is applied to all 92 bands that finished ahead of GnR as well.

Did I say otherwise?

My point was that number, in and of itself, may not be the best metric to judge a band's touring success by. For instance, RHCP was #14 on the year end list for 2012 NA tours. They are #94 for this 2013 mid-year list. That doesn't tell the whole story as they have only played 4 NA shows so far this year.

Ali

But it does tell the "whole" story, as the same criteria is applied to EVERY band on the list. You are implying (well, not you so much as some others) is that "IF" GnR had played more shows in 2013, and played them at bigger venues - then they would be higher on the list. Basically making an excuse as to why GnR is so low on the list (which they have been for three straight years now).

But you guys don't figure in the same criteria for all the other bands as well. If the 94th ranked band had played more shows and had played at bigger venues, they they would be higher on the list as well.

Do you see why your guy's excuses don't work? You are only applying them to GnR, not to every other band on the list.

Ali, in the Illusions tour, GnR averaged 33,800 people a show. The last three years, that number is in the 5,000 range. IF GnR could still average 33,800 people a night, then Beta wouldn't be booking them at bowling alleys and weddings. They wouldn't be playing to half empty 10,000 seat venues. THEY would be playing stadiums that hold 40,000 people.

You guys sound like the sports guy/fan/player/etc who won't just admit they lost a game. "Well, the other team had bigger players and nicer bats and faster pitchers and better uniforms. If we had all those things, we would have won. So it really shouldn't count that we lost."

Yet again, you are arguing against points that were never made. I was making a point about the value of "total gross" as a metric for an artist's success as a touring entity. I cited RHCP as a data point to illustrate the point I was making.

I said absolutely nothing about these points applying only to GN'R. Never, not once, not ever. So, I have no idea why you are bringing that up and arguing against that point. It's a point never made.

Ali

I also noticed Groghan completely ignored your RHCP reference.

[Axl_morris]

Id like to see world wide rankings of the 2012 tour and 2010. Even the haters know 2013 has been a quiet year for guns.

Ticket prices are rising but people failed to mention that 2006 you would get a 2 hour 10 or 20 minute show. 2011 onwards the shows have been 3 hours, so adjust pricing to length and inflation. And add a bit on for smaller venues.

my last guns show was 3 hours 20mins in length for example.

Edited July 18, 2013 by Axl_morris

[ShadowOfTheWave]

LOL at this intellectual dishonesty. How can you skim over the fact that GNR have played so few shows this year, and yet compare the numbers to years they have toured massively? Suspend OP.

[originalgnrnewgnr]

Id like to see world wide rankings of the 2012 tour and 2010. Even the haters know 2013 has been a quiet year for guns.

Ticket prices are rising but people failed to mention that 2006 you would get a 2 hour 10 or 20 minute show. 2011 onwards the shows have been 3 hours, so adjust pricing to length and inflation. And add a bit on for smaller venues.

my last guns show was 3 hours 20mins in length for example.

3 hours total of course, but the total of music played remains the same.

[Axl_morris]

LOL at this intellectual dishonesty. How can you skim over the fact that GNR have played so few shows this year, and yet compare the numbers to years they have toured massively? Suspend OP.

Also they are comparing south americans to american. Different audiances. New gnr were playing similar number the last time they toured SA.

Also rock in rio 2001 top trumps every concert with 250,000

Edited July 18, 2013 by Axl_morris

[magisme]

lol adjusting price for show length

Fuck you, nutters.

Actually, I think you guys are right about the so few shows thing regarding the rankings, but don't tell anyone I said so, and I still hate you so fuck you again.

Edited July 18, 2013 by magisme

[batman007]

They played smaller venues, meaning smaller numbers. It's not rocket science.

[magisme]

They played smaller venues, meaning smaller numbers. It's not rocket science.

The only reason I didn't crack the top 100 is cuz I only play a small venue called My Shower, and I tend to do shows at like 5:00 am. If I played larger venues, I'd be right up at the top, so I see your point.

[Kapitch_77]

GNR's average ticket prices per year/average tickets sold per show, according to Pollstar Charts:

2002 - $46.72 / 8.660

2006 - $58.91 / 8,730

2010 - $71.81 / 6.500

2011 - $52.65 / 6,446

2012 - $91.14 / 3,481

2013 - $115.32 / 4,069

Notice something?

Next year, by my calculations, the average attendance will be 2000 people for an average ticket price of 250$

[Crash Diet]

GNR's average ticket prices per year/average tickets sold per show, according to Pollstar Charts:

2002 - $46.72 / 8.660

2006 - $58.91 / 8,730

2010 - $71.81 / 6.500

2011 - $52.65 / 6,446

2012 - $91.14 / 3,481

2013 - $115.32 / 4,069

Notice something?

Next year, by my calculations, the average attendance will be 2000 people for an average ticket price of 250$

what if something "new" happened?

(yes, i know that a new album won't be out next year, jsut hypothetically asking)

[Kapitch_77]

GNR's average ticket prices per year/average tickets sold per show, according to Pollstar Charts:

2002 - $46.72 / 8.660

2006 - $58.91 / 8,730

2010 - $71.81 / 6.500

2011 - $52.65 / 6,446

2012 - $91.14 / 3,481

2013 - $115.32 / 4,069

Notice something?

Next year, by my calculations, the average attendance will be 2000 people for an average ticket price of 250$

what if something "new" happened?

(yes, i know that a new album won't be out next year, jsut hypothetically asking)

Nothing will happen, and even if a new album would come out, it wouldn't change anything I think. GNR is a sinking ship.