Cost of Tour
 

From Bloomberg Business Week, April 20, 2017

Bon Jovi’s Cost of Doing Business
The tab to keep the This House Is Not for Sale tour running

It costs about $10.4 million for Bon Jovi to stage its This House Is Not for Sale tour. Here are some of the larger expenses:

$4.6 million to lease the light, sound, video, and motion-*control equipment. At each show, there are 225,000 preprogrammed video and lighting cues.
$1.1 million ​to provide catering for ​80 local crew members in each city and 75 full-time touring crew members who together eat about 465 meals and drink 415 cups of coffee a day.
$700,000 to lease the stage, which is made from 3,500 feet of aluminum and held together by 7,300 magnets (and takes seven hours to assemble).
$350,000 to lease the rigging, which supports 110,000 pounds of gear hanging from the roof. There are 925 lights.
$25,000 per show for venue security ($35,000 in some major markets).

Spending all this allows the tour to charge a fan $1,750 to sit front row in a package deal that includes a backstage tour, a preshow party, parking, a USB drive with the concert download, and exclusive merchandise.

link to above
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...doing-business

Very cool info!

Do we have any similar data for any of the previous tours?

I have a feeling that the real reasons for production being "stripped down" is not the "focus on music", but the band not wanting to do a proper non-stop tour like they used to, which would inflate costs of an expensive stage, lights, etc. exponentially if they were to use on a such a fragmented schedule that they have planned for 2017-2018.

225,000 preprogrammed lighting and video cues probably explains the repetitive set lists.

No, it clearly doesn't.

The Circle-GH tour was filled with video cues and prepared mini-movies, moving screens, lights etc. overall, a much higher degree of prepared production; yet it was their most rarity-filled tour of their careers.

I'm shocked people still buy this as an excuse. A long time die-hard like yourself should know better.

Has anyone considered maybe Bon Jovi just didn't feel like doing a "big production" type of tour? Since they focused a bit more on new material from THINFS, the songs are a little more stripped down, maybe they felt that a big production wasn't necesarry or not needed, maybe the second leg will be different, who knows, just a thought.

I just don't find the new album any more stripped down than the past handful.

what I meant by stripped down I didn't mean the songs were not loud or heavy, there certainly are a couple of loud and heavy songs in THISNF, but I think when Jon was listening to this record and visioned the tour, I think he didn't see this tour being a big production, at least in comparison to other tours, this was a little more intimate, you saw more the audience because of the venues they played, I think Jon got this idea from the promo tour the band did when the album came out, just a thought.;)

Personally I think they didn't want to do a huge video production for a couple reasons..

1. For the first time ever there might have been some doubts about shows selling out
2. They didn't want video all night of jbj hanging on to the Mic for dear life.

I have joked that the catwalk was gone this tour because Jon didn't want to be seen close up. Plus they only did one leg and probably didn't know if they would be doing another one - a reason for no screens.

They spent a lot of money for Sofia for the 2013 stadiums. I don't see that happening if there are stadiums this tour.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

None of this is closely remote to being true...

1.Tickets went on sale months prior which gave them projected sales figures...

2. I was at these shows and Jon didn't hang onto the mics at all.

Try again!!!

Sent from my HTCD160LVW using Tapatalk

Try again? To What?

Everyone here knows there has been many times when he grabs the Mic and drapes both arms over it. And he always does it when the livin on a prayer overlay dub hits.

So many people at the shows I went to commented on the lack of video screens and if you look on Facebook after shows there were lots of comments there .

Why can't disagreement be seen as only that? Rather than some attempt to tarnish the band and their legacy?

Because he enjoyed the shows for what they were and that makes any other argument invalid!

I'm not arguing your point of there being a lack of video screens. I'm arguing your points for the reasons why...

Your first reason was, they wanted to keep costs down in fear of low ticket sales which in my option is absolutely ridiculous to begin with but in truth, they had projected numbers because the shows went on sale months prior...

Your second reason for not having screens was because Jon didn't want people to see him glued to the mic which is also absolutely ridiculous BTY but also untrue because I was at three of those shows, and he was running around like a mad man...

So yes, try again

Sent from my HTCD160LVW using Tapatalk

Gotta agree here with RDK, the fact that you want to say no video screens was a cost saving measure is beyond ludicrous. If there was even a slight chance of low ticket sales, they have insurances and safety nets for that. So yes as said above, try again.

You could look for reasons and excuses for just about anything, but lack of video screens could just be a stylistic choice for this leg of the tour. They've taken a very simplistic approach to the stage set up and no big jumbo video screens was just another layer of that set up. Sometimes the simplest answer is the right one, or, you could just choose to believe whatever theory you have....

Agree!!!!!

Sent from my HTCD160LVW using Tapatalk

Probably right on the ticket sales.... But the idea that Jon himself was insecure and his vocals were the worst they've ever been is absolutely a fair theory. And yes while he did "move aroind" at both Toronto shows, more than the last time I saw them in 2013... he absolutely was glued to the Mic stand for any song that had tougher vocals.

Substantially less than a new Broadway/West End musical, and with substantially less risk.

I just wonder what Jon was thinking after seeing U2 in Chicago with their the Joshua Tree Tour. This stage is (again) such a state of the art production and U2 are so on top of their game. Jon - competitive as he is - surely does go home with a feeling that U2 are outperforming his band big time.

I know a Jovi show holds the middle between a Bruce and a U2 show, so in terms of lights, production, stage etc, ... they will never try to be more spectacular than U2, but i remember that he has mentioned to be very disappointed in their own productions in past tours and that the creative agency they are working with had their final chance with the 'Sofia' stage.

They did a great job and Jon was really proud of that .
Can't image if you're 'Bon Jovi' that you don't want to show off a little bit just to show the world who they are and were they come from.

A bit of visual magic just adds to the experience of a live show.


If I had a chance to talk to Jon once, this would probably be one of my first questions.