Bon Jovi tour's big payoff

rainsong · #21 12-07-2005, 07:23 PM

You all may want to remember that this is AEG's first real foray into bigtime tour promoting. They seem to be concentrating on one market at a time. Right now it's the US. After the new year you may well see some more shows added overseas if the timeline will allow.

Shaz · #22 12-08-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilsSon

How would you like to call it if not world tour? Half world tour? 3 continent tour? i don't get it? It's obvious they call it world tour.

And even if they played Australia and South America, there wouln't be more than let's say 6-7 additional shows so it would not change anything really.

In my opinion, if they play North America,Europe and Asia it IS a world tour.

Fine...you go right on believing that the 'world' is actually made up from ONE hemisphere.

What would they call it if not a 'world tour'?...here's a wild idea...what about the HAND tour...plain and simple.

S.

{_Warrior_} · #23 12-10-2005, 07:41 PM

Hey this thing about not touring in south has nothing to do with money....
Pearl Jam sold out 5 gigs here last week, and U2, Oasis and Rolling Stones are confirmed for 2006....and this if you don't count the "smaller" ones that made their fame in 2005 (Sebastian Bach, Judas Priest, Whitesnake, Scorpions, White Stripes, Placebo, Strokes, Good Charlotte, Iggy Pop, Sonic Youth, Nightwish, WASP, Elvis Costello....and goes util 2004 with Iron and Linkin Park) there are much more I don't remember now....

They just don't wanna be big anymore..... just some hometown boys....

Stut · #24 12-10-2005, 08:14 PM

Have you thought that if there´s no or very little demand for Bon Jovi in other countries near Brazil (Chile, Argentina), it isn´t worth travelling to Brazil for just one gig. I read interview where Finnish promoter said that since there isn´t any interest for Bon Jovi in Denmark, only little in Sweden, so there´s no point from them to come to Finland even if they would sell out the show. That´s 2 or 3 days travelling for the crew (from Germany for example) so it probably isn´t worth it. Unfortunately.

DevilsSon · #25 12-10-2005, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by {_Warrior_}

Hey this thing about not touring in south has nothing to do with money....
Pearl Jam sold out 5 gigs here last week, and U2, Oasis and Rolling Stones are confirmed for 2006....and this if you don't count the "smaller" ones that made their fame in 2005 (Sebastian Bach, Judas Priest, Whitesnake, Scorpions, White Stripes, Placebo, Strokes, Good Charlotte, Iggy Pop, Sonic Youth, Nightwish, WASP, Elvis Costello....and goes util 2004 with Iron and Linkin Park) there are much more I don't remember now....

They just don't wanna be big anymore..... just some hometown boys....

Nightwish have split up last month.Tarja was some sort of , how shall I call it, hmm....Michael Ballack so they threw her out. Do you know if somebody is going to replace her?

Well, Bon Jovi might headline Pop in Rio or Country in Rio, would that not be fun?

{_Warrior_} · #26 12-10-2005, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stut

Have you thought that if there´s no or very little demand for Bon Jovi in other countries near Brazil (Chile, Argentina), it isn´t worth travelling to Brazil for just one gig. I read interview where Finnish promoter said that since there isn´t any interest for Bon Jovi in Denmark, only little in Sweden, so there´s no point from them to come to Finland even if they would sell out the show. That´s 2 or 3 days travelling for the crew (from Germany for example) so it probably isn´t worth it. Unfortunately.

Chile and Argentina have the same demand of Brazil, every rockstar the comes here goes there too (use the last example of Pearl Jam) and the Bon Jovi's fan base there is really big too, so this is not the problem here....

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilsSon

Nightwish have split up last month.Tarja was some sort of , how shall I call it, hmm....Michael Ballack so they threw her out. Do you know if somebody is going to replace her?

Yeah, it seems that Tarja became the new Jon Bon Jovi (she said in a interview here that the last album she bought was HAND and she really enjoyed it) but forgot that Nightwish is no Rolling Stones.... About the replacement there are some rumours about Sabine Dünser from Elis and Lady Angellyca from Forever Slave.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilsSon

Well, Bon Jovi might headline Pop in Rio or Country in Rio, would that not be fun?

Yes it would, especially if they decide to play an entire Garth Brooks album or something like that...(like Dream Theater with Master of Puppets)

JoviForever · #27 12-10-2005, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassack

I remember back in 92 when Keep the Faith came out and everyone wrote the band off. I remember hearing reports that during the first leg of the US tour the arenas were less than half full.

What made that album huge (correct me if I am wrong but the total sales of that album equal that of New Jersey give or take a couple of million) was there reletentless touring and promoting.

The album spawned 6 singles and it made a resurgence in the charts in mid-93 through this touring.

This gave Bon Jovi the base for the success of Crossroads (I believe if it were not for the success of Keep the Faith then Crossroads would not have been the hit it was and we would not have had the extensive These Days tour).

We come to this centuary and Bon Jovi's tours hit the US and some European shores. The tours do not last as long as they once did and the band does not seem to give, outside of the US, the promotion they need to do.

To me this is costing the band popularity. The band is more than the US (again remember what made Bon Jovi big in the 90s was the support they got from the world outside of the US) .

I think HAND could follow KTF. It is a good album and it is the best potential they have produced since 95. They need to get it out there, and like everything, to do that will take work. They have families now and they may not want to do it....I hope they do.

You've summed it up really well. Everything regarding promotion of albums seems to be geared up for the American market at the expense of everywhere else.
I realise it's the biggest market in the World and where the band come from, but as you've said, when America turned it's back on the band in the 90's, the rest of the World, Europe especially kept the band going.
I think there may come a point in the future, when they tour only America. At the bands present rate, selling out stadiums in Europe may become impossible, and it seems as if playing Arenas over here is below them. Or should I say, dosen't make them enough money!

rainsong · #28 12-10-2005, 09:16 PM

Why do you think it's always about money???? If I had to guess, I;'d say it had more to do with the amount of time the band is willing to be out on the road, thousands of miles from their families than it does with money. Playing stadiums allows them to play for the most people in the least amount of time.

Like it or not, these guys families live in the US. When they tour here, there is nowhere they they can't get home on an off day in just a few hours. Four or five weeks in Europe is a long time to be away from your family, if they played everywhere everyone wanted them to they'd be out for months at a time, never going home. That's what they did in the old days, before families, now they have to balance it out more. For the bands BJ is being compared to, U2 and the Rolling Stones, both of their home bases are in Europe, they can play a ton of shows over there and still go home, just like BJ does here.

Christo · #29 12-10-2005, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainsong

Why do you think it's always about money???? If I had to guess, I;'d say it had more to do with the amount of time the band is willing to be out on the road, thousands of miles from their families than it does with money. Playing stadiums allows them to play for the most people in the least amount of time.

Like it or not, these guys families live in the US. When they tour here, there is nowhere they they can't get home on an off day in just a few hours. Four or five weeks in Europe is a long time to be away from your family, if they played everywhere everyone wanted them to they'd be out for months at a time, never going home. That's what they did in the old days, before families, now they have to balance it out more. For the bands BJ is being compared to, U2 and the Rolling Stones, both of their home bases are in Europe, they can play a ton of shows over there and still go home, just like BJ does here.

But U2 spend as much time in the US on tour as Bon Jovi does! Not to mention that their European tour is about the same length as Bon Jovi's, so they are spending less time at 'home' and more time 'away' for the sake of the tour.

Bon Jovi tour's big payoff

Tour Discussion