haVoc 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2003 Stones Lick Up $300 Million In Milestone Tour The Rolling Stones' 2002-03 Licks world tour posted the second-highest gross ever, Billboard Bulletin reports. The tour grossed nearly $300 million and played to more than 3.4 million people, putting it behind only the Stones' marathon Voodoo Lounge stadium tour, which grossed $320 million in 1994-95. For Licks, the Stones played stadiums, arenas and theaters -- sometimes all three in the same market -- and filled venues to 99% capacity over 116 dates. Billed as the band's 40th-anniversary tour, Licks began Sept. 3, 2002, in Boston, and ended Oct. 2 in Zurich. "This tour is finished," says tour producer Michael Cohl, but he adds that another may follow in 2005. "I'm always ready." As previously reported, a comprehensive DVD chronicling the tour, "Four Flicks," is being sold exclusively at Best Buy. Credit: Billboard.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B. Brian Brunzell 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2003 $300,000,000 on one tour? That's fucking INSANE. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pochorenella 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2003 That's truly an amazing figure. What I don't understand quite well is how different the Stones perform concert-wise and album-sales-wise. Their albums barely go Double-Platinum, if they even reach that. Most just sell a Million copies or so. Bad numbers for one of the longest-living Rock bands and truly one of the greatest ever. You only see huge sales numbers for rap acts or the latest fad band. They haven't had a #1 record in decades, yet 4 gazillion people go to their shows. Why aren't this people buying the Stones' music? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted November 28, 2003 People rather see them live? Also you have to consider their huge ticket prices. This tour is US and Foreign dates, so you need to add US and Foreign album sales together for comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haVoc 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2003 Voodoo was a #1 album in 93/94, right? I have no idea how to explain the Stones except for "their the Stones." Their album don't sell like they did in the first 25-30 years of their career, but their still great live. It's true when bands say "the talanted bands will keep their following through playing live." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B. Brian Brunzell 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2003 Voodoo was a #1 album in 93/94, right? Yes it was. And Bridges to Babylon was #1 when it was released in either late '97 or early '98. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Edwin MacPhisto 0 Report post Posted November 28, 2003 No one gives a crap about anything the Stones have done since the mid-80's, but they're the only big rock band that was active in the 60's and early 70's that's really still going with a lot of its original line-up. One of the reasons Aerosmith sells really well, too. But people go see the Stones because they're absolute icons, and they appeal to pretty much every music fan ever. That's what I think really sets them apart from: anyone'll go to a Stones show. They've written some of the most snarling rock songs ever and a lot of the prettiest too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JericholicEdgeHead Report post Posted November 29, 2003 The Stones are THE Greatest band of all time. Some may say the Beatles, and they would have a point, but for my money nothing beats the Stones. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spiny norman 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 In my opinion, the reason The Stones get more money from their tours than their albums is because they haven't released a decent album in how many years now? But in concert they might still do some awesome song from their early years. But nobody cares about their recent material. Same as most older artists, people prefer to see them perform their old stuff live than listen to their new stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mr. Brook River Report post Posted November 29, 2003 Although I myself have never been a fan of the Stones, (partially because I don't like what I've heard, but mostly because I havn't listened to enough of them) I have definately noticed a surge of fans of early rock. I think that the most popular t-shirt in my high school is the Pink Floyd: Dark Side of the Moon CD cover. Its good to know that these great artists are living on in the younger generation...and I'm not sure why I call it a younger generation considering it is my generation. Whoo-doggy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MrRant 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 Queen owns them. In my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Youth N Asia 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 I saw them in 98 (Third Eye Blind opened). They put on an amazing amazing show. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agent of Oblivion Report post Posted November 29, 2003 Keep in mind the INSANE ticket prices they were probably charging, too. Not to mention the huge venues and numbers of dates. Good for Keith, though. This should provide him with enough heroin and preservatives to last him, oh, about 11 more years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLAGIARISM! 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 They better cryogenically freeze Charlie Watts. Unless they already have, and are using an animatronic version for this tour. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Baron 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 300 Million is a lot of money. Its not like they need it so badly, do they? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest XxSmashxXxHeadxX Report post Posted November 29, 2003 300 Million is a lot of money. hell yea it is. Its not like they need it so badly, do they? why wouldn't they need it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spiny norman 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 Yes, I know I couldn't survive without my 300 million dollars. And Smash Head, your sig is way too long. Cut it down, seriously. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Baron 0 Report post Posted November 29, 2003 sigs? sigs are worthless IMO, and makes pages load easier Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest XxSmashxXxHeadxX Report post Posted November 29, 2003 And Smash Head, your sig is way too long. Cut it down, seriously. I just fucking changed it!!!!!! damn! i'm tired of this shit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pochorenella 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2003 Yes it was. And Bridges to Babylon was #1 when it was released in either late '97 or early '98 Not that I have reason not to believe you guys, but are you sure? I consider myself a Billboard magazine buff, so for me to screw up this facts disappoints me. I'm still gonna check this when I get home. If I was wrong then it sure puts my theory down in the mud, huh? Still, it's puzzling they don't sell that much albums. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamoaRowe 0 Report post Posted December 1, 2003 I work at Best Buy and we've only sold a handful of those "Four Flicks" dvds. No one is really anxious to own it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pochorenella 0 Report post Posted December 2, 2003 (edited) Voodoo was a #1 album in 93/94, right? Yes it was. And Bridges to Babylon was #1 when it was released in either late '97 or early '98 Ok, boys and girls. I checked my facts and I was right from the beginning. The last Stones' album to go #1 was Tattoo You back in 1981! It's also their best-selling album of the past 24 years at 4 million copies sold in the US. The previously mentioned Voodoo Lounge spent a single week at #2 and sold 2 million copies, tying 1989's Steel Wheels as their best-selling of the past 20 years. Bridges to Babylon reached #3 and only went Platinum, as did most of their releases since 1982's "Still Life" live album, except Rewind from 1984 and Flashpoint in 1991, which barely went Gold. Rock & Roll Circus from 1996 and No Security from 1998 (their last album to date) didn't even go Gold. And there's your facts. I knew I was right. Yeah! So most people care to only go see the Stones live than buy their music. Like somebody above said, maybe it's just 'cause they are the Fricking ROLLING STONES. Edited December 2, 2003 by pochorenella Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haVoc 0 Report post Posted December 2, 2003 Haven't the Stones sold more then 100 million albums world wide? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pochorenella 0 Report post Posted December 2, 2003 That's entirely possible. Even Julio Iglesias is said to have sold 100 million albums worldwide, so I'm sure the Stones must be at least near that number, if not totally above it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
