Top Touring Act last month :)

rokenrola · #41 08-28-2011, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinFan

I like Bon Jovi better, but U2 and the Stones have both sold more records than Bon Jovi have, and both have had bigger tours in their past. Look at the highest grossing tours of all time. 6 of the top 10 are by U2 and the Stones. Bon Jovi barely cracks the top 20.

I think people compare Bon Jovi to U2 because they both had massive success in the late 80's, which then carried on into the 90's, and then had a massive comeback in 2000. They are also both known for being great live. It's become only natural to compare them.

with circle tour together with live tour 2011 bon jovi is no.7 highest grossing tours of all time with 343,592,419 million dollars!

TwinFan · #42 08-28-2011, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rokenrola

with circle tour together with live tour 2011 bon jovi is no.7 highest grossing tours of all time with 343,592,419 million dollars!

I was counting the Circle Tour and 2011 Tour separately, because I have no clue whether it's one or two tours. But even so, why is it so important to you to have Bon Jovi as the biggest band ever? They've still put out great music, and are still damn huge.

rokenrola · #43 08-29-2011, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinFan

I was counting the Circle Tour and 2011 Tour separately, because I have no clue whether it's one or two tours. But even so, why is it so important to you to have Bon Jovi as the biggest band ever? They've still put out great music, and are still damn huge.

it's not important at all,just don't like to hear that someone make Jovi small by saying they do small stadiums,they don't sold out anything,they don't change set lists,then compare them with U2 and Stones,they are bigger bands they play
bigger stadiums,and after all that those people are bon jovi fans-very stupid!
Like I said,I'm fan over 17 years,I have all songs, pro shot videos,concerts,everything that exist from Jovi,most of people here are fans since 2000 so we can't think a same about Jovi,they are for me the biggest band in the world but also I consider Queen for the biggest band,but today,specially performance wise BON JOVI are the biggest band-no match at all!

TheOriginalJez · #44 08-29-2011, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinFan

I like Bon Jovi better, but U2 and the Stones have both sold more records than Bon Jovi have, and both have had bigger tours in their past. Look at the highest grossing tours of all time. 6 of the top 10 are by U2 and the Stones. Bon Jovi barely cracks the top 20.

I'm not trying to argue either way here but again, not really a valid comparison. Jovi tend to tour for a year or so, whereas a lot of those higher grossing tours lasted a lot longer - there is no standard definition of 'tour' it's just what the promoters decide it is. In terms of the relevance of those things I prefer the Pollstar yearly reports since they effectively take into account the state of the industry as well since they're a snapshot of the same period of time for every act and they don't go by "tour", they go by all reported shows played (allbeit they do call it the top x tours). Jovi have topped that report twice in the last 3 years.

Lost on a Highway · #45 08-29-2011, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supersonic

Aloha !

No one in this topic said Bon Jovi are small, don't twist words here.

Ahem;

U2 played, in a period of 9 years (2001-2010) 111 shows in Europe.
The Rolling Stones played, in a period of 3 years (2003-2006) 94 shos in Europe.

Bon Jovi played, in a period of 11 years (2000-2011) 115 shows in Europe.

Now we all know Jon put a limit on the number of shows he wanted to do abroad, however, he also refused to play at places U2 and the Stones did simply because promoters wouldn't book them in a venue just as big as theirs because they knew they couldn't sell half the amount of tickets. Add to this that the Stones played in stadiums twice the size Bon Jovi plays in, it should be clear that Bon Jovi are not as big as they claim they are.

What it boils down to is that Jon and his issues of always being overlooked are starting to show up by them needing to adjust numbers in order to be able to say that they sold out every show. I follow other bands around simply because I'm interested in the logistics behind such a thing, and I can assure you that U2 doesn't claim that every show is sold out, simply by adjusting the numbers. All this bragging that Jon does about numbers would make sense if it was true but sadly it isn't. It's his behaviour of overcompensating of his own shortcomings by making everything bigger than it actually is.

Salaam Aleikum,
Sebastiaan

Sorry Seb, but I have to disagree with some of your observations.

The entire technical "sold out" thing was actually started by U2 following the less than stellar performance of US leg of Pop Mart tour. It was widely reported in the media at that time just how poorly those shows were attended, some even below half the capacity. Others in the industry just followed their lead, including Bon Jovi.

There is not a single act in the world that is capable of selling each and every ticket it puts on sale every tour. U2 360 tour did really, really well in Europe but not every show was a legit sell out. Similarly in the U.S. they played some shows to full capacity and some to 3/4 or even less. Still every single show was reported as "sold out".

And these acts (Stones, U2, Bon Jovi) generally do play the same venues / stadiums barring a few. Just to name a few, they all played Twickenham, City of Manchester, Hampden Park etc. Stones played the Olympic Stadium in Barcelona and U2 played at Estadi Anoeta in San Sebastian. Attendance figures do vary though.

bjcrazycpa · #46 08-29-2011, 05:51 PM

I think the real gauge is the total attendance of over 528K for 12 shows. So an average of 44K people a show, honestly, only a handful of bands these days can average that kind of attendance. A "sell out" is determined by the promoter not the artist. If ticket sales are more than 80% sold, most promoters will deem that as sold out..So, sold out, not sold out, it's rather meaningless. The attendance figures themselves are what is more important.

nikos greece · #47 08-29-2011, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bjcrazycpa

I think the real gauge is the total attendance of over 528K for 12 shows. So an average of 44K people a show, honestly, only a handful of bands these days can average that kind of attendance. A "sell out" is determined by the promoter not the artist. If ticket sales are more than 80% sold, most promoters will deem that as sold out..So, sold out, not sold out, it's rather meaningless. The attendance figures themselves are what is more important.

nice said...reading this thread i can get why some are bothered by the exaggerating statements of bj bigness...but after all we are in a bj forum...i think its a bit strange that many people here insist on the negatives and the failures of the band all the time...u2 started the whole sold out hype...bj worlwide are huge, and imo easily in the top 5. only u2 and the stones are clearly bigger touring wise bands. like it or not the north america market is one of the most importants and saying that robbie williams, and muse in a degree, just havent make it there is misleading at least, france and spain business wise is not the same as being that huge in north america...
i really didnt want to jump in the wagon, defending the band again or giving arguments about bj's awesomeness but i feel like its unjustice for the band sometimes...the attendance numbers is what matters and the numbers are impressive for one more time, especially taking into consideration 1.no hit song-album(poor promo-press,media),2.overtouring certain markets(north america-germany-uk-japan f.e.x.), 3.the economical downturn wordlwide from 2009-2011, i hope they take their break, invest in their solo work and come back even stronger

TheOriginalJez · #48 08-29-2011, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikos greece

only u2 and the stones are clearly bigger touring wise bands.

Well, AC/DC are pretty consistently up there too. I think when you get to that point though you just have to sit back and say, ya know what, they can play stadiums. Most guys can't play a pub - sell out or not. It's a hell of an achievement however ya swing it.

The Rock · #49 08-29-2011, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikos greece

nice said...reading this thread i can get why some are bothered by the exaggerating statements of bj bigness...but after all we are in a bj forum...i think its a bit strange that many people here insist on the negatives and the failures of the band all the time...

I have to admit, I don't understand this myself. This is a BJ forum but yet, whenever there is a good article on the band or something positive, some feel the need to point out the negative. Granted, I don't go to every band forum out there but I highly doubt that if there was a good article on U2, the fans go on the forum and point out their negatives and write positive things about Bon Jovi on their forum. This comparisons gets old and it's always the same.

schlochty · #50 08-30-2011, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOriginalJez

Well, AC/DC are pretty consistently up there too. I think when you get to that point though you just have to sit back and say, ya know what, they can play stadiums. Most guys can't play a pub - sell out or not. It's a hell of an achievement however ya swing it.

Amen to that.

Top Touring Act last month :)

Tour Discussion