Hey Jon or Obie....
 

On the off chance either of you are reading this - The people in Philly paid the same price for tickets as the people in Montreal. What gives?

Just because an arena isn't as large doesn't mean you should half-ass the show, unless of course you're going to charge less for tickets, which I sure as hell know you're not doing for this weekend's shows in Connecticut.

Why is it you can mix things up and give one audience 30 songs, then the next show, go on auto-pilot and only play 24 songs? Stop half-assing 2/3's of the damn shows already.

I wouldn't vote you in to the Hall of Fame either with a shit attitude like that.

Dude, 24 songs is great. 30 is just that one lucky day. So every show with 24 songs is cool. Remember Honolulu where they only got 22 songs if i'm not mistaken? So ..
And i tell you.. during the crush tour, the show in belgium contained only 18 songs. A couple days after that, they played about 25 or 26 songs in Wembley..

Stop moaning about the number of songs.
Everyone knows a jovi show is between 2h15 and 3h. It has ALWAYS been that way.

Have you even read the reviews of these shows. Not a single person whose been to them considers them auto-pilot at all.

What you're suggesting, that the band play the same length of show or the same number of songs at each venue would be ridiculous and would be robotic.

Maybe there's a perfectly logical explanation for the difference. Venues in the USA typically have strict curfews and bands can get fined per minute for going over. Perhaps the venue in Montreal doesn't have that kind of curfew. Just a theory.

Still, one show gets some gems, and the next show gets a standard set. I see a bit of unfairness in that, considering there are die-hards in every crowd as people who saw them multiple times over the years and would welcome some new songs instead of repeating "Sleep" or "Cpt. Crah" all over or bringing back "I Love This Town" when they could play "I'd Die For You" instead. But you know that song and dance. ;-)

But I agree: Still a setlist that looks uninspired on paper can be a fantastic show. And on this tour the performances seem to be really great. I'm OK with a 24 song set, of course I would leave a bit disappointed if I got the same old 24 as I'M one of those following every setlist. BUT, a high level performance can make up for it. And the boys seem to perform tight and passionate this tour. And we shouldn't forgive, they are indeed playing songs we never thought would see the spotlight again. They even made a These Days song a stable!!!!!!! I mean... :-)

On the other hand, a nice setlist could also make up for a shitty performance, but not totally. The show in Hessisch Lichtenau in 2006 is an example: It was a very cold summer day, Jon was not happy with the weather, did not much talking to the crowd (of "only" about 30.000+ people), except for complaining about the weather ("this is what you call a german summer, huh?), rushed through the songs like one huge medley and the band left after 2 hours straight after a quick bow. That was the shortest BJ gig I've ever seen. Still, the performance was pretty tight and the set was nice. I have to say, tickets were about 15 Euros cheaper than usual.

They opened with "Raise Your Hands", which was perfect, as Jon was running around on the catwalk, they played "These Days" and "Garageland". So even though I was disappointed and could understand people being pissed off, I still think the performance was a solid one. A couple of days later in Munich they play exactly one hour (!) longer. Ok, tickets were indeed more expensive, and there more than twice the people than at the show above. But what bothers me is the suspicion that the short show was not only about the weather, but also about a small festival crowd with many non-fans and less money. And that is, dear Jon, totally un-professional.

But yeah, it has always been the way that some shows are longer than others. And hey, if Montreal goes nuts it's only fair that they get an extra encore. Same happens in Munich every time. Still, every other show should still get a nice setlist too...

Guess I shouldn't be pissed that the face value on the ticket for last night's show was $200 and they played 10 fewer songs than they did in Montreal, right?

When reading the reviews and listening to the audio recordings of the Philly shows the band was doing awesome, no auto-pilot at all. It was the first time in a long time that I enjoyed listening to a recording from start to finish. Still, I agree that they could have thrown in a few more rarities.

The last thing I think about once I've paid for a show is how much I pay for it.

It does suck that the length of the show for you was so short but you said yourself it was the casino that pulled the plug. Curfew's are shit.

But the thing that bugged me more is your auto-pilot comments. Do you still feel that way!

Hope you have a better show tonight man.

Another song or two would have been great. We got Only Lonely in Philly which has been a running joke between a friend and me (he wont go to another show until I saw it live). Between that, Happy Now, LFS, and HT, I thought we got a pretty good second night. Jon was definitely not on auto-pilot for either show but I think we probably all knew that since it was Philly.

It would be silly to pissed at Jon about it. That show was at a casino which will up the price.