The Rolling Stones

Psy-Fi · 04-03-2013, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plankton

It's the "Steel Wheelchairs" tour.

Necromancer · 04-03-2013, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neardeathexperience

Personally I believe the Rolling Stones to be the second most recognized band behind the Beatles. I mean it's all image. The Beatles were promoted as a cute well behaved band and the Stones were presented as the band you should not let your Daughters listen to. In the end though both bands are the most talked about most written about bands of all time.

I agree with most of what you said

except, I put the Stones before the Beatles. And maybe the Who as well.

I've replied to so many different threads concerning the Stones, theres not much left unsaid.

They made it through the 70s Disco era with flying colors. Not many (Blues/Rock) bands, originally from the 60s can say they did the same themselves. If any at all.

Neapolitan · 04-03-2013, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neardeathexperience

Personally I believe the Rolling Stones to be the second most recognized band behind the Beatles. I mean it's all image. The Beatles were promoted as a cute well behaved band and the Stones were presented as the band you should not let your Daughters listen to. In the end though both bands are the most talked about most written about bands of all time.

Maybe that's true in Rock and Roll circles, but in Pop circles The Beatles, Jacko, Madge and ABBA are probably the most written about and talked about Pop artists. And what does the UK have to offer before & after The Beatles... Cliff Richard, and Westlife? They might be an endearing phenomenon to the British peoples but honestly who has heard of them outside England? But see that what makes The Beatles so special is that have been heard outside of England. and they're not just a Pop band but a band that have both feet in the Pop and Rock world and they are heard outside their country of origin and are talked about 50 years after the fact. That is an amazing feet for a band to do.

**Scarlett O'Hara** · 04-04-2013, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psy-Fi

Glad I got to see them a few times before they decided to jack up their ticket prices to laughably ridiculous (IMO) levels.
The Stones (and all the other overhyped, overpriced, big name acts) lost me as a paying customer when their ticket prices went over 50 dollars (US) per ticket.
These days I stick to the small theaters and clubs where tickets are usually between 20 to 40 dollars and you have a shot at great seats for those prices.
I recently had front row center for Billy Joe Shaver at a club for $25
Saw Robby Krieger's Jazz Kitchen from a front row table for $25
Also got second row (slightly left of center) for The Residents for $30
And just got front row center for Sonny Landreth for $28
Lots of great bands out there playing small venues who don't gouge their fans.

I paid $150 NZ to see them. Beat that.

Psy-Fi · 04-04-2013, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanilla

I paid $150 NZ to see them. Beat that.

$150 NZ is roughly equivalent to $125 US at current exchange rates.
The prices I paid were all in US dollars at the time.

1981 tour - $22.50 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $57 today)

1989 tour - $28.50 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $53 today)

1994 tour - $35.00 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $54 today)

1998 tour - $40.00 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $56 today)

Back in 1981, $22.50 was the most I had ever paid to see a show.
I saw them twice in 1989 & 1998, so that doubles my total price for those 2 years.

TheBig3 · 04-04-2013, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plankton

It's the "Steel Wheelchairs" tour.

That funny. I remember the first time I laughed at it in 1995.

Plankton · 04-05-2013, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3

That funny. I remember the first time I laughed at it in 1995.

So they extended the tour a bit... wut?

**Janszoon** · 04-05-2013, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3

That funny. I remember the first time I laughed at it in 1995.

What the hell is up with her computer?

**Scarlett O'Hara** · 04-05-2013, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psy-Fi

$150 NZ is roughly equivalent to $125 US at current exchange rates.
The prices I paid were all in US dollars at the time.

1981 tour - $22.50 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $57 today)

1989 tour - $28.50 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $53 today)

1994 tour - $35.00 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $54 today)

1998 tour - $40.00 (adjusted for inflation, would be roughly $56 today)

Back in 1981, $22.50 was the most I had ever paid to see a show.
I saw them twice in 1989 & 1998, so that doubles my total price for those 2 years.

Ah I see. I honestly would pay any price to see them. I am really hoping they come to New Zealand this year. They will make fuck loads of profit if they do.

Monkeyleg · 04-20-2013, 01:20 PM

Hi, all. I just now joined this forum to reply to this post above:

Quote:

I paid $150 NZ to see them. Beat that.

On the 1981 tour I got my buddy and me 8th row center seats at the Rosemont Horizon outside Chicago for $20+. I went to the Ticketmaster location at a local mall at 10 am, and there was nobody else there.

Of course, my friends and I saw Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin (1st tour), The Doors, Janis Joplin, Steppenwolf, and a whole slew of other big names in the 1960's and very early 1970's for $2.50, $3.50 or $4.50 a seat. We saw the Stones in Indianapolis in 1972 on the Exile tour, and I'm sure we didn't pay much more than $10, as I was a broke college student at the time.

Now I'm paying $633 each for 52nd row floor seats for the 5/28 Chicago concert.

My buddy and I have seen the Stones on every tour but one since 1972 (he saw them in '65 as well). I thought $300 a seat for the 2005 concert was a lot.