How will the new label affect the band in all ways?

Now that the band is under a "smaller" label, what is it going to happen with some things like the promotion and the tours? How much of the budget for these things come from the label and how much from the band's wallet?

For example, the fact that the show in Jakarta had a small and just "ok" stage (remember the blue car they had in BWC tour) and the sound seems to be bad, has something to do with the now low-budget because they left the big Mercury and are on a smaller part of Universal? Or is it random and the money for the show came from another wallet like it used to?

Does anybody know how these things work? It's a general question, feel free to discuss about every aspect.

Bon Jovi WAS on a smaller label within Universal, but unless he's signed a new deal very recently, they aren't on ANY label at the moment.

Of course, you're right: since no record deal also means that there was no advance money that could have been invested in this tour, a connection between between that and the low-budget production is certainly possible.

I read that the band is traveling with only one-third of their usual stage crew, which might explain why the set looked like a disco circa 1970.

I think it all depends what label it is and what type of deal is made. HAND had some good promotion but to me it never reached the level that it could have with the HAND logo and such. But it definitely was promoted better than any other release of the post 2000 era and I think that was down to Jon hiring a promotional company rather than relying on the label to do it. He might do that again but until the details are known nobody really knows how it all will change. But with Jon saying in Vancouver that the traditional model wasn't working for him, a big change will come in how it all gets handled that's for certain....

I was going to tell you, Seb, that you spelled "Wikipedia" wrong, and then it occurred to me...."NO, he spelled it exactly how he wanted to spell it." LOL.

More seriously, it seems like the board is always in an uproar with the subpar quality of voices, and sets, and setlists, etc, at the beginning of a new cycle...but let's remember, this is pretty much the norm, more or less of late. From the Tiger Jam Vegas 07 show (I was there) where they appeared to use the rooftop set from Crush, and showcased "Lost Highway" for the first time, to the parking lot show for the opening of Meadowlands and to promo "The Circle", and the BBC "What About Now" performance where Richie had a powercut.

Who knows maybe it's Jon's sick twisted homage to Ray Davies (the early shows have a lot of KINKS, HEYOH!), but lets remember, its been two years, the chemistry has suffered a HUGE change, we are officially in the Post-Richie Era now. Im not surprised he's most likely starting his personal/vocal odometer at Zero. It will (hopefully) follow past trends and get better from here.

Also, with nothing REALLY to promote, it doesnt make much sense to bring out all the big guns and the screens and the full crew. The people are just happy to hear the songs and see Jon in that corner of the world.

Seb...it's driving me nuts please set the record straight on who funds tours. I will add that the reduced crew for the Asia/Israel/Abu Dhabi shows has ZERO to do with not having funds for a big production but it wasn't ever planned (and most of their normal lighting and video crew had already been committed to other tours for the balance of the year).

As long as Seb has touched on the subject, here's some info from the actual Wikipedia:
P.S: Not having funds for a big production has zero to do with a production looking as though it was produced with zero funds!

I don't know about the music business or how tours work but in my field if a smaller firm gets a big client, common if the big client is scaling down operations, the firm turns into a bunch of 'yes' men, anything to keep the big client happy in the present and immediate future regardless of the long term outcome.

To speculate (again, don't know how the industry works, just for context) - if Bon Jovi moved to a smaller label and created an absolute stinker of a record, the label would still support it to hell and back because even if the sales aren't stellar, they're still superior to many of their other clients. The large client (Bon Jovi) gets more freedom.

Depends on how much far they scale down.

I just hope they get better promotion. I feel the last few albums didn't take advantage on any type of on line promotional opportunities going on at that time... I also hope they find ways to target all fans. Finally, some radio airplay would be nice. There is a station for everyone. Maybe not a mainstream station but some good rotation on a smaller one. Everyone flips through stations when driving.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I just found something out that was really cool and thought some fans here might appreciate this too.

Def Leppard wanted to give a few hit songs over to the movie 'Rock of Ages' and due to label issue, they weren't allowed to so instead, they rerecorded a handful of songs. If you go on YouTube and search 'Def Leppard ReRecorded' you could check them out. Of course you could hear the differences but they did one hell of job I must say. They just sound like another mastered take from the 80's. It's incredible to know that they could still record like that.

I'd love for Jon to do this. Even if they had to use every studio trick in the book, I'd still love to see how close they could actually get back to that original sound.

IMO, it probably helped DL capture their old school sound on this new album and would help Jon do the same. Total hypothetical and it will never happen but still a cool thought.

Yes, it would be really interesting! Some years ago, Scorpions recorded Comeblack which had their old songs re-recorded and and the differences are almost zero. I think Bon Jovi can do that but they would have only one problem: Jon's voice. I can't see him singing Bad Name, or Prayer even with the help of auto-tunes.