U2 tix in Australia starting at$39

They think they want to feature homegrown talent, but the people really would like to hear something different. I think they hit a home run last tour with Daughtry.

I think Kid Rock would be a fine choise for supporting act in my opinion even though i'm not a fan of his or anything....
It would give Bon Jovi more credibility if nothing else... It's pretty embarassing if Bon Jovi would tour for example with Simple Plan...which used to be at least a rumour few years ago....

[QUOTE=Crushgen24/88;1011084]Didn't they cancelled the tour this summer. Was supposed to see them in June and tickets were as expensive as BJ. My friend is a U2 fanatic I just pay 1/2 of whatever he buys, so it may have been some upgraded whatever, but it was as much as any of my BJ tickets were this tour.

Or someone in U2's PR department and someone at Live Nation figured out that having two back to back, within days of each other A list bands shows both getting top prices meant the one that showed up late to the party wasn't going to sell as well.
I'm not putting U2 down for lower prices, it's great news for U2 fans, I'm just not buying the holier than thou U2 loves their fans more and cares more about the music than money thing. Bands go on tour for one reason to promote their product and make money period.
U2 has as much pride as Bon Jovi they don't want to play to half full venues either, and they are promoting a record that's now considered "old", the live concert business has sucked for most artists this year, and they know as well as Bon Jovi does that their continued "success" as it were in the industry is based not on record sales but on their ability to sellout on tour.

U2 should be shot.Jay z as a support act.What a joke.

Please don't start with that crap.The last time u2 played in Sydney was on there last tour and they sold 3 stadium shows at the olypic stadium with 72000 people at each show.What makes you think they wouldn't sell out in Australia?U2 are massive worldwide.

The difference is that Bono ain't a greedy prick like our mate JBJ

I read about this in the paper the other day. The first thing I thought was, if the tickets start at $39, where on earth would you be sitting? At the back? When you think about it - or when I think about it - $39 is really cheap, so I wonder if you'd get your moneys worth paying such a small sum.

Oh well. I think U2 are trying to outdo Jovi's show with their big screens and all that.

Yep...$39 will be up the back...using AAMI Stadium here in 2006 for their Vertigo tour as an example [and those up the back tickets for that show were $60], that is a long way back. My daughter, her best friend and 2 of her cousins were on the arena [standing] at a cost of $99 each and the equivalent of 10 rows from the front....my youngest daughter and I were in the stadium seated at $149 each, and positionally our spot = less than a third back.
AAMI is a massive stadium inside and that night there were close to 65,000 people there.
Everyone knows my view on the ticket pricing for Jovi this time round so I am only going to mention it here in a 'roundabout' way. I LOVE U2 and if they do eventually add Adelaide I will buy a ticket. I LOVE BJ and IF they had added Adelaide I would not be going....anyone who needs to ask why will need to go back to the tour thread about the 2 extra BJ shows in Oz to get that answer.

Guess it depends on what you see value wise as money's worth. If position and position only is what it amounts to for the money, then no I suppose way back would not be money's worth. If it's about the show and more to the point, the music and performance, then hell yes.

Trying to out do Jovi....all bands try to out do each other. IF you like U2 and are thinking about going, go, and you will see for yourself whether they are a great live act or not.

[QUOTE=rainsong;1011185]The rescheduled the US dates for next year because of Bon's injury, and I was referring to 2009

And the Chicago prices I quoted were for the 2009 shows. $250 for the 300 level at Soldier Field.