Lazy and greedy touring

so are members of....u2....def leppard....metallica....rolling stones....need i go on or do you get my point.

I don't remember the last time Metallica played in the US. Def Leppard tours about as much as Bon Jovi does.

If those bands wanted to tour 365 days a year, that's their choice. Jon Bon Jovi has made it crystal clear that he has other priorities now other than touring with the band. Who has the right to judge him for that?

They could make a lot of money in Brazil.

They've all made it clear that they have other things in their life. On some recent interview Richie said they pay them to travel, but they enjoy the shows. It always goes back to they hate traveling so much. They play the fewest shows to the most people they can. From a fan's perspective it makes it kind of hard to see them, but from their perspective they're still biting the bullet and traveling and being away from their families.

Becky

U2 goes out on the road for a year then takes three years off, The Stones hit the road once every five or six years. Mettalica have always been road dogs but I think that time has now come to an end, you won't be seeing them on a two year tour for a record anymore.
Bon Jovi have been on the road lets see, in 2000 and 2001, end of 2002 and 2003, done two specialty projects and oh yeah wrote a new record. It's 2005 and they are on the road again going halfway through 2006 at least. Now just because you don't like where they tour, and at this point why would they go places where no one wants to see them? You all accuse them of being money hungry but I see just the opposite, if they only cared about making money they would stay out on the road since truthfully that is where the real money is for a big time band. If money were the priority, they wouldn't take the breaks they do to go home and se their families etc.... they would just stay out and play and rake in the bucks.

You want the real reason behind shorter tours?? It's time. Like it or not these guys are dedicated to their families and to other things as well as music, it is not all they live for anymore. Does it make them a better band?? I don't know but it does keep them doing it, and I for one am pleased about that so if 80 to 100 shows a tour is all there is then well, I'll find a place to go see them and enjoy it.

My original point was that with this touring schedule they will lose their original fan base in some countrys. After that the general record sale is dropping even more and that means goodbye to big time touring in europe. Record companys won't support big broductions if there's only two or three countrys where they can fill stadiums. If they would really like to reach fans they could play big festivals like roskilde and glasto with minimum expenses. That's the way REM and rhcp are doing all the time even though they are capable of filling stadiums on their own. And when it comes to money festivals and arenas are the money makers in europe. If you follow the industry magazine Pollstar you will find out that all the biggest money makers are long arena tours made in the USA. European stadiums tend to generate losses and i really think that jovi is doing those gigs only because of ego. Few gigs in germany and uk are logistically possible without huge losses. With this they can create illusions about being in a stadium scale act but in real life they couldn't compete with stones, maiden, rhcp or even green day. One word, rammstein! their summer tour reached every corner of the old continent and that show was biggest ever. I think that even popmart was small compairing to that. If you have real following you can do big shows ,otherwise not,,and yes i don't count 10 gigs as a tour.

I don't remember any tour of Def Leppard here in Germany, so they leave out countries,too. Bands play where it is worth it to play. BJ said already years ago that they don#t want these massive tours anymore and that they play in places that are reachable for a lot of people.

Sorry, but I prefer less concerts. You know what happened earlier where the band left each other without a good-bye because they were physically and mental broke.

I don`t agree...if they toured just for the money, wouldnt they gone for an longer tour?? They are still big around they world. I think that U2 are doing it moore for the money then Bon Jovi.
U2 played this summer i Norway ( I wasnt there ), but 40 000 others Norwegians was there, and most of them payed somwere between 90 and 100 us dollars for ordinary tickets..Now thats making money!

Yeah, they could... their cds always sell very well here... and every international concert is sold out...

Going back to the families issue, Jon had his young family 10 years ago (albeit with fewer kids), so did David (i think), and Tico and Richie were both married.
What's changed? It's their job at the end of the day produce music and to tour it. Refusing to tour places where it does sell (i know the Australian fans have been let down the past tour, and it looks as though Scandinavia will this time) is letting the fan base down in those countries.
True, all of the guys have other projects, but it was the music that gave them the ability to persue other areas, and not to 'thank' the fans by touring places other than the 'must-tour' countries is almost like snubbing what made them what they are.
I don't think anyone realistically believes in another SWW or NJ tour, as it had a negative effect on the band touring throughout the eighties, but like Seb says, what's wrong with touring for a month or two, then taking a month off?
It's easily achievable, but it probably boils down to monitary gain or laziness, that i think is a shame for fans of the other countries.