Hollywood Bowl November 2, 2023

[DoMw94]

8 minutes ago, meadsoap said:

It's the norm for most successful rock bands, except a very small handful, because rock music is not as popular in the United States in general.

Exactly! Pretty much every American rock band that tours globally plays bigger venues outside the US

[Nintari]

1 hour ago, DoMw94 said:

What else is there?!

Integrity, legacy, artistic credibility etc. Personally, if it were me, I'd have pulled an Izzy. GNR was never going to be what it was, no matter what. So why go back? You've got all the money in the world. Go make something befitting of your age/current life. Or, perhaps retire and find something else to do. But going up there as a grandparent, playing music that was written by a bunch of angry, drug addicted street punks in their mid-to-late twenties... no. Not my cup of tea.

But hey, if it's theirs, so be it.

Edited October 13, 2023 by Nintari

[DoMw94]

17 minutes ago, Nintari said:

Integrity, legacy, artistic credibility etc.

That ship sailed decades ago. I'm talking anout the present day

[Spike Killer]

I'm not disputing that they weren't a stadium tour act in North America during the original run.   I would point out that outside of the GNR/Metallica tour - they didn't really tour America during the time bands would play stadiums.

GNR toured America from 24 May until 3 August 1991.  While they didn't play stadiums, they played some really large amphitheaters and big venues.  A few of the venues sold as much tickets as a stadium on the GNR

The next North American tour was from 5 December 1991 - 1 February 1992.  I don't think anyone would tour a stadium then.  There was a mini tour scheduled for April 1992 that ended early due to arrest according to GNRontour.

The next time GNR toured America it was from 23 February 1993 through 18 April 1993.  Not exactly stadium tour season.

 

Also, if you believe the numbers.  GNR sold 47,498 tickets on the first night of the Metallica/GNR summer tour.  GNR sold 40,000 tickets two nights in a row at Alpine Valley in Summer 1991.

 

GNR is awesome, in other words.

[Blackstar]

8 minutes ago, Spike Killer said:

I'm not disputing that they weren't a stadium tour act in North America during the original run.   I would point out that outside of the GNR/Metallica tour - they didn't really tour America during the time bands would play stadiums.

GNR toured America from 24 May until 3 August 1991.  While they didn't play stadiums, they played some really large amphitheaters and big venues.  A few of the venues sold as much tickets as a stadium on the GNR

The next North American tour was from 5 December 1991 - 1 February 1992.  I don't think anyone would tour a stadium then.  There was a mini tour scheduled for April 1992 that ended early due to arrest according to GNRontour.

The next time GNR toured America it was from 23 February 1993 through 18 April 1993.  Not exactly stadium tour season.

 

Also, if you believe the numbers.  GNR sold 47,498 tickets on the first night of the Metallica/GNR summer tour.  GNR sold 40,000 tickets two nights in a row at Alpine Valley in Summer 1991.

 

GNR is awesome, in other words.

That's correct, but maybe that was exactly the reason why they didn't tour much in the US during the summer, but preferred to play in Europe instead where they could fill stadiums.

[vloors]

On 10/11/2023 at 12:05 PM, BillConnor_1982 said:

Flights to LA are probably cheap because it’s a war zone now.  Hollywood, while always grimy, now looks like skid row. Crime is through the roof. Moved there in 2010. Left in 2022.  It’s changed so much and not in a good way. 

I heard this. Theres streets of junky houses and camping everywhere and they have wacky rules like you wont get arrested if you steal less than $1000 from a store.

Hope something is done soon to fix up the state.

[vloors]

1 hour ago, DoMw94 said:

Exactly! Pretty much every American rock band that tours globally plays bigger venues outside the US

Might also be because US is a saturated touring market. Plenty of options to choose from where europe may only have a few major bands/artists touring there at a time.

[General2112]

Do we think they’ll have an orchestra for any songs

[Blackstar]

5 hours ago, colonizedmind said:

Yes...but like how we adjust for inflation with box office in the 80s to now....in those days, the tour was to support the album....the tour is (often) the be all and end all, especially for vintage acts now! More is put behind the show and what that it is....

Anyways, going back to arenas would be great! I'd be for it....would the Guns guys? Most..... but i'm sure letting anything that slightly pisses you off go is a lot easier when you're racking it in.....arenas will definitely change the pay packet ...anyways moving on. General soon!

I think that's the way it works:

They'll go back to arenas if/when they get to a point where they sell less tickets than full arena capacity. But as long as they can still sell an amount of tickets that equals the full capacity of a large arena (~20,000), they'll continue to be booked at stadiums, and that's simply because both the band and the promoter make more money that way. E.g. they make more even if they sell just 21K tickets at a 40K capacity stadium over selling out a 20K capacity arena with the same ticket prices; not only because of the additional 1K tickets, but also because a big number of the unsold tickets are given away, and although these attendees haven't paid for a ticket (or have paid very little), they're likely to buy merchandise. Moreover, I believe that the band gets paid a fixed fee that has been agreed upon beforehand regardless of how many tickets are sold at each show - although I suppose that the fee depends on how many tickets the promoter expects to be sold, so probably now GN'R gets paid less than in 2016.

So I won't be surprised if they do a stadium tour again in the US in 2025 or 2026 or whenever they tour again.

Edited October 14, 2023 by Blackstar

[Nintari]

3 hours ago, DoMw94 said:

That ship sailed decades ago. I'm talking anout the present day

Present day, you say?

 

 

[DoMw94]

8 hours ago, Nintari said:

Present day, you say?

 

 

What's the point you're trying to make?

[allwaystired]

10 hours ago, General2112 said:

Do we think they’ll have an orchestra for any songs

Zero chance. That would cost them money. 

[meadsoap]

9 hours ago, Nintari said:

Present day, you say?

 

 

A single beer commercial nearly 15 years ago as the only commercial he's ever done.

vs

a commercial promoting predatory lending and banks. Which he has done multiple times. And tons of other soulless commercials for decades. 

 

Yes, these are surely the same thing.

Edited October 14, 2023 by meadsoap

[DoMw94]

43 minutes ago, meadsoap said:

A single beer commercial nearly 15 years ago as the only commercial he's ever done.

vs

a commercial promoting predatory lending and banks. Which he has done multiple times. And tons of other soulless commercials for decades. 

 

Yes, these are surely the same thing.

Right?! 😂 Not only that, but they've already happened. If they were worried that staying together would affect the legacy, it's too late for that – which is what I was getting at. So these really were weird things to highlight.

Even so, why do people even care about the commercials? It has no bearing on the music, and if people want to cling onto the bullshit 'image' of years past, that's their problem, not the band's.

As I said, that ship sailed years ago. In the present day, they're not going to throw away the good thing they have now

[Nintari]

1 hour ago, meadsoap said:

A single beer commercial nearly 15 years ago as the only commercial he's ever done.

vs

a commercial promoting predatory lending and banks. Which he has done multiple times. And tons of other soulless commercials for decades. 

 

Yes, these are surely the same thing.

They're the same thing. Exactly the same thing. A large conglomerate comes to you, offers pile of money to promote their shit, you sign on the dotted line and then immediately promote their shit. In the old days, back when (some) artists cared about not being corporate whores, they'd call it selling out. Now, it's just the cost of doing business, and everyone's doing it. But it doesn't change anything. It's still just as unseemly as it's always been.

I just wish that most of the anti-establishment people from my youth had stayed that way. Instead, I have to watch most of them become something that their younger selves would have disavowed. Hell, if Axl knew that he'd be on Budweiser commercials later in life, he'd have probably found a tall bridge and jumped. That's how much against it he use to be.  

Edited October 14, 2023 by Nintari

[meadsoap]

38 minutes ago, Nintari said:

They're the same thing. Exactly the same thing. A large conglomerate comes to you, offers pile of money to promote their shit, you sign on the dotted line and then immediately promote their shit. In the old days, back when (some) artists cared about not being corporate whores, they'd call it selling out. Now, it's just the cost of doing business, and everyone's doing it. But it doesn't change anything. It's still just as unseemly as it's always been.

I just wish that most of the anti-establishment people from my youth had stayed that way. Instead, I have to watch most of them become something that their younger selves would have disavowed. Hell, if Axl knew that he'd be on Budweiser commercials later in life, he'd have probably found a tall bridge and jumped. That's how much against it he use to be.  

It's really not the same thing. Doing a commercial one time is a choice, and he was in dire financial straights at the time. But seeing as he never did it before or again, can you really say he enjoyed it or was happy to do it? 

Doing it regularly like Slash does is a lifestyle and speaks to his core values a lot more. I generally think Slash is a cool guy, but his choice to do a bunch of commercial for actively damaging companies like Mastercard and Capital One is something that never say right with me. And he doesn't even need the money because he's already making it hand over fist from touring. It's a rich man helping to exploit the lower class with a product that he'll never have to use, just because he wants more money to hoard away. Or maybe he's so out of touch that predatory lending practices never even register. Either way, it's not great.

Edited October 14, 2023 by meadsoap

[Nintari]

29 minutes ago, meadsoap said:

It's really not the same thing. Doing a commercial one time is a choice, and he was in dire financial straights at the time. But seeing as he never did it before or again, can you really say he enjoyed it or was happy to do it? 

Doing it regularly like Slash does is a lifestyle and speaks to his core values a lot more. I generally think Slash is a cool guy, but his choice to do a bunch of commercial for actively damaging companies like Mastercard and Capital One is something that never say right with me. And he doesn't even need the money because he's already making it hand over fist from touring. It's a rich man helping to exploit the lower class with a product that he'll never have to use, just because he wants more money to hoard away. Or maybe he's so out of touch that predatory lending practices never even register. Either way, it's not great.

It's all sad to me. Once, twice, a billion times. Doesn't matter. As I've said, I got into GNR as a kid because they seemed genuine. At least as far as artists go, anyway. So to see them, and Metallica, and a lot of the other guys of that era now hawking beer and credit cards and jamming with Hannah Montana/Carrie Underwood... it's just so off-putting.

[DoMw94]

13 minutes ago, Nintari said:

It's all sad to me. Once, twice, a billion times. Doesn't matter. As I've said, I got into GNR as a kid because they seemed genuine. At least as far as artists go, anyway. So to see them, and Metallica, and a lot of the other guys of that era now hawking beer and credit cards and jamming with Hannah Montana/Carrie Underwood... it's just so off-putting.

If that image they portrayed was genuine, you wouldn't have heard of them. They wouldn't sell records or do big international tours in major venues.

It's all an act, all an image, it's not real, it's never been. It's designed to be relatable so people fall for it, but it's all fake. If they weren't making money, the band wouldn't have lasted five minutes and they'd all have day jobs now. They all wanted to be stars and have the trappings that come with it – and that includes not only making a lot of money, but having the opportunities to make even more (e.g. appearing in commercials).

Even Izzy, who quit when it got big, he's quite happy living off his royalty checks, but if he lost it all tomorrow and he needed to, he'd whore himself out to anyone that would pay instantly. He wouldn't get a job in a supermarket

[colonizedmind]

3 hours ago, allwaystired said:

Zero chance. That would cost them money. 

Did it for NR 2022....sure they didn't appear for free....

Had it back in the day too....somewhat. however, sadly very unlikely.

[colonizedmind]

1 hour ago, meadsoap said:

It's really not the same thing. Doing a commercial one time is a choice, and he was in dire financial straights at the time. But seeing as he never did it before or again, can you really say he enjoyed it or was happy to do it? 

Doing it regularly like Slash does is a lifestyle and speaks to his core values a lot more. I generally think Slash is a cool guy, but his choice to do a bunch of commercial for actively damaging companies like Mastercard and Capital One is something that never say right with me. And he doesn't even need the money because he's already making it hand over fist from touring. It's a rich man helping to exploit the lower class with a product that he'll never have to use, just because he wants more money to hoard away. Or maybe he's so out of touch that predatory lending practices never even register. Either way, it's not great.

Two words: Marriage / Divorce....

[allwaystired]

56 minutes ago, colonizedmind said:

Did it for NR 2022....sure they didn't appear for free....

Had it back in the day too....somewhat. however, sadly very unlikely.

Did they? What gig? 

Or do you mean the 'new version' from the reissue? I think the poster was asking if the chances of an orchestra playing with them at this gig. I think there's no chance of that whatsoever. 

[Blackstar]

2 hours ago, colonizedmind said:

Two words: Marriage / Divorce....

Slash was doing commercials long before the divorce.

[colonizedmind]

33 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

Slash was doing commercials long before the divorce.

Does everything have to be retorted to on here ? Sometimes wish our posts had tone 😬

I did say marriage too...

I was generalising....I could of just said, the ladies in his life in general...but don't wish to be offensive. Also Me Brownstone didn't come cheap once-upon-a-time....

Edited October 14, 2023 by colonizedmind

[DSTK]

1 hour ago, allwaystired said:

Did they? What gig? 

Or do you mean the 'new version' from the reissue? I think the poster was asking if the chances of an orchestra playing with them at this gig. I think there's no chance of that whatsoever. 

Not at a gig !!! Last orchestra was mtv awards with elton...it won't happen here

[colonizedmind]

1 minute ago, DSTK said:

Not at a gig !!! Last orchestra was mtv awards with elton...it won't happen here

Yes....but if they offered it up to us but extra 20 bucks a ticket would we be cool with that? I sure would, it could enhance a bunch of songs, freshen up again and give a bigger bed of music to help Axl....get a couple of Bv's like the 90s too....