The Stones were never anti-establishment. To think they were is, frankly, naive. 'Anti-establishment' was/is a ‘brand’ in itself - another way to sell one's self. But the Stones were without a doubt a great rock and roll band - and, arguably, still are.

The Stones are both a rock and roll band and a business. One does not cancel the other out. I think people feel they belong to us (the fans) and I understand this, but there is a problem in accepting this when one regards the Stones too romantically. They probably do not have any such feelings about themselves, though they probably realise what they mean to others.

I do think they have become far too greedy, and, as others have said (including myself) they could damage their legacy as a result. In fact, if you ask any casual observer now, they will probably mention the Stones’ wealth (and implied greed) before they mention, or even think about, the music – which is very sad given what they have achieved in defining popular music.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 10:44 by Rock'n'roller.

>> 1. Who says this is an acoustic show?
2. How is it a slap in the face to fans? <<

1. apparently some Spanish newspaper has stated that it may be an acoustic show,
but they may have been quoting iorr.
2. i'm not sure, but i hope they do Rain Fall Down :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 10:46 by with sssoul.

For heaven's sake.
Regardless of the scale, the money ,the politics ...the Stones are a band.
Bands play for money, they play becuase they like playing, they play to do a somebody a favour, etc etc.
A band plays because it wants to play, period.
the fact that it's the Rolling Stones and they're worth a bob or two makes no difference !

Everyone get real. Who cares if they do a private show. Its their business, not ours.

If people don't like the product or think its too expensive , they don't have to go to the shows. Looks like some people made the decision to do that on this tour.

But-what about the million people who saw them free in Rio-many of whom I'm sure are too poverty stricken to pay for tickets. If some billionaire hedge fund bankers want to subsidize the free shows-why not.

(in my opinion)

Perhaps more worrying is the fact they have ended up in a museum........!!

Halup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I haven't read all the posts with complaints about
> the Stones doing private shows, but what I feel is
> that people are a little upset in this case that
> the Stones, who never do all acoustic shows, are
> about to do one for a crowd where probably no one
> in attendance will be able to appreciate the
> uniqueness of what they're getting as much as the
> users of this website.
>
> Some people may feel the Stones are sell outs for
> doing private shows, which is a bit silly to feel,
> but I think people feel this all acoustic
> performance is being wasted on an unappreciative
> audience instead of being done in a performance
> where hard core fans at least stood some chance of
> attending.


amen

Goldsmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ummm, they are a company, incorporated in the
> British Virgin Island, with approximately $250
> million in annual revenue and over 300 employees.


i wonder if they need a data base analyst - that would sort of be my dream job, who do i send my resume to ? ;-)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 13:53 by loochie.

Montrealsuperfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone get real. Who cares if they do a private
> show. Its their business, not ours.

Fine. If they want to do one, I've no problem with that. Only issue for me is that these type of megabucks exclusive shows seem to be the ONLY way they'll play a show that isnt in a stadium or some enormous arena. 49 shows in Europe over the last two summers (and a lot of fans inconvenienced greatly by cancellations) and THIS is the only small show? Remember Juilliard when Cohl actually quoted the ticket prices for the theatre shows, getting thousands to sign up for rs.com memberships as a result? Short memory, methinks.. EVERY show since this tour began that has taken place in anything smaller than an arena has had an ulterior motive behind its concept which has not been fan-friendly (Two megabucks shows in Barcelona and RCMH and the 2 Beacon 'film shoots' where they made a token gesture to let some local based fans in to share the same airspace as various celebs, hangers on and models)

I think a lot of people are missing the big picture here. Doesnt it bother you that a band who repeatedly say theyre not JUST in it for the dough, "you can keep the money pal" and how much of a buzz they get from a vibrant audience are now playing shows for people who in many cases couldnt care less about them? A few bankers having a mealin an expensive hotel and having the Rolling Stones as their after dinner cabaret? Yeah, nothing screams 'greatest rock n roll band in the world' as loudly as that...Christ almighty, if this is what theyve been reduced to, it's demeaning.

Try thinking ahead a bit here. If the Stones are going to perform again post-2007, its quite likely that they wont do another mega-tour like we're used to. To keep them accumulating the revenue that they demand, theres going to be more and more of these kind of shows instead. When those of you who are championing their 'right' (and they DO of course have a 'right' to do so, even if we dont care for it) and 'common sense' to maximise their income (like they need it) by playing these type of shows see that such a show becomes the norm and not the exception and you cant get a ticket for any Stones show unless youre paying a few grand for it or are a high ranking employee for a multi-national, you may feel a bit differently.

>But-what about the million people who saw them free in Rio-many of whom I'm sure are too poverty stricken to pay for tickets.

Yep..they were paid several million for that. However, 3 shows in South America for what the Stones admit is one of their favourite audiences is a pretty paltry return. Ask any fan from that area and you'll find that to be the reaction, I think. That continent actually got shortchanged because there wasnt enough money for the Stones in going down there for more than a week. They could have played several shows down there, such was the demand for tickets, but instead they went back to perform a few more lucrative shows in the US, some in cities theyd already visited previously...

>If some billionaire hedge fund bankers want to subsidize the free shows-why not.

Yes. and of course the 4 plus million fans who have 'subsidized' the band on this tour already putting them in a position where they can PLAY these shows and afford to occasionally play a theatre show to connect with their 'real' audience shouldnt be a factor, right? Unless you're suggesting that their 'real' audience is now the likes of corporate sponsors who deserve their own private gigs to the exclusion of what they'd see as the 'great unwashed'.

Rock'n'roller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones were never anti-establishment. To think
> they were is, frankly, naive.

Really? Its commonly accepted (even from 'establishment' figures) in this country that in 1967 there was a government/establishment campaign to remove them from society by fair means or foul.

I'd call that pretty ant-establishment, whether they themselves intended to be that way or not.

Donkey Girl Scout Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My questions is
>
> Will they do private shows for ANYONE who can
> afford it?
>
> If i won the 500 million in a lottery tomorrow
> will they play The Norva in Norfolk Va. this
> September for 75 million dollars?



Yep. probably for a tenth of that. Good luck!!

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Donkey Girl Scout Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My questions is
> >
> > Will they do private shows for ANYONE who can
> > afford it?
> >
> > If i won the 500 million in a lottery tomorrow
> > will they play The Norva in Norfolk Va. this
> > September for 75 million dollars?
>
>
>
> Yep. probably for a tenth of that. Good luck!!

Also good luck explaining this to your wife afterwards !



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 17:25 by Erik_Snow.

Halup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I haven't read all the posts with complaints about
> the Stones doing private shows, but what I feel is
> that people are a little upset in this case that
> the Stones, who never do all acoustic shows, are
> about to do one for a crowd where probably no one
> in attendance will be able to appreciate the
> uniqueness of what they're getting as much as the
> users of this website.
>
> Some people may feel the Stones are sell outs for
> doing private shows, which is a bit silly to feel,
> but I think people feel this all acoustic
> performance is being wasted on an unappreciative
> audience instead of being done in a performance
> where hard core fans at least stood some chance of
> attending.


Thats basically it. Of course, theres just speculation that its an acoustic show, but even if it wasnt, the 'small show' appeal is something that will be lost on much of that audience

For an example, see this review of the Pepsi corporate show in Hawaii in 1998, with particular attention to the 3rd paragraph

[iorr.org]

Imagine people walking out of an intimate Stones show half way through because they couldnt care less about being there. The Stones as a cabaret act for a disinterested audience. Makes ya feel good, doesnt it?

Manofwealthandtaste Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Perhaps more worrying is the fact they have ended
> up in a museum........!!


An ironic location, considering the significance of today's date!

TELL IT, GAZZA !!!!

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Donkey Girl Scout Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My questions is
> >
> > Will they do private shows for ANYONE who can
> > afford it?
> >
> > If i won the 500 million in a lottery tomorrow
> > will they play The Norva in Norfolk Va. this
> > September for 75 million dollars?
>
>
>
> Yep. probably for a tenth of that. Good luck!!

how much do Bon Jovi charge?

The Rolling Stones should have done a free concert in Hyde Park to celebrate it.
"Free" for us as they get paid anyway



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 17:48 by Harm.

This was not their only private gig
Remember 2002, Las Vegas : [iorr.org]

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rock'n'roller Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Stones were never anti-establishment. To
> think
> > they were is, frankly, naive.
>
> Really? Its commonly accepted (even from
> 'establishment' figures) in this country that in
> 1967 there was a government/establishment campaign
> to remove them from society by fair means or
> foul.
>
> I'd call that pretty ant-establishment, whether
> they themselves intended to be that way or not.




Right, Gazza!
Some people tend to forget where it all comes from. All the great music..

It hasn´t always been that sloppy and pro-establishment as it seems nowadays!!

Small shows where everyone can afford the ticket prize? Well, they did that. Some 45 years ago. But for some reason they had to move...

And THANK YOU NumberOneStonesFan for your kind invitation!

But seriously... Just how big IS your barn?

klypp Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Small shows where everyone can afford the ticket
> prize? Well, they did that. Some 45 years ago. But
> for some reason they had to move...

er...They did it four years ago as well. Whats wrong with "everyone" being able to afford it anyway. Since when did rock n roll become elitist? A small show isnt going to cost them money anyway, considering theyve grossed about $500 million on this tour.

-



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-12-31 03:48 by cirrhosis.

Rock'n'roller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones were never anti-establishment. To think
> they were is, frankly, naive. 'Anti-establishment'
> was/is a ‘brand’ in itself - another way to sell
> one's self. But the Stones were without a doubt a
> great rock and roll band - and, arguably, still
> are.
>
>

No offence, but to call yourself "rock'n'roller" and yet be oblivious to the fact that the whole culture of rock'n'roll (as well as the band who are it's most consistently successful and notorious exponent) was anti-establishment and rebellious to begin with, is sadly very ironic.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 19:49 by Gazza.

Reasons that guys play rock and roll (in this order) -

1. Pick up girls
2. Money
3. Love of the music

Rock'n'roller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones were never anti-establishment. To think
> they were is, frankly, naive.

How can you write that ? Go back some 45 years and Rewind . I suppose HighWire is pro-establishment.

Now, I am not at all pro this private gig. The Stock Exchange is climbing today more than 1%, i.e Mick has earned far more than be the performer of this stupid gig. But maybe there is something compelling behind this : insurance coverage....I hope they will do better than Kylie Minogue !!!.

It's funny, the Stones are in Spain, and nobody's reporting anything.
No soundcheck, no news from outside the hotel, no SMS from outside the museum, noboby trying to get in ?

Even bv is silent, but I'm sure he'll find a way in.

phd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rock'n'roller Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Stones were never anti-establishment. To
> think
> > they were is, frankly, naive.
>
> How can you write that ? Go back some 45 years
> and Rewind . I suppose HighWire is
> pro-establishment.
>

how about sweet neo con ? they tactfully don't play it anywhere these days, but....they did write it pretty recently



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 20:19 by loochie.

if i had 10 million to blow i would have them play my sons b-day party....

Perhaps corporate gigs like this are the new rebellion. I think it sucks but its preferable to all the live earth pish. Cue Madonna "if you want to save the planet, let me see you jump".
I have absolutely no idea why The Stones need to pursue the fithy lucre in such an obvious manner at this stage. Maybe its really a fundraiser show for Ronnie so he can pay Mick and Keef the £250K he allegedly borrowed from them a few years back!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-07-12 20:30 by letitloose.

Is anybody going to send setlist reports?

"No Anchovies, Please"

loochie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> phd Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rock'n'roller Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The Stones were never anti-establishment. To
> > think
> > > they were is, frankly, naive.
> >
> > How can you write that ? Go back some 45 years
> > and Rewind . I suppose HighWire is
> > pro-establishment.
> >
>
> how about sweet neo con ? they tactfully don't
> play it anywhere these days, but....they did write
> it pretty recently


Sorry if I forgot about Neo-Con. Great simple song.