From #3 to #18

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Fleetwood Mac's summer tour ranked at #18 (Grossing 15.4 mill) in the best selling tours of 2004 list...a big difference in their #3 spot on last year's list...was the 2004 tour a bad idea for them , or does it not really matter? What do u all think?


Excerpt from one article on hitsdailydouble.com :

"Among those tours doing less well to bombing are Fleetwood Mac, Jessica Simpson, Norah Jones, Gloria Estefan and the American Idol tour.

Ticket sales for veterans Aerosmith and Clapton, as well as the Linkin Park/Korn/Snoop Dogg jaunt are disappointing in a few markets. The second leg of the Simon & Garfunkel tour, now hitting second-tier cities after having played New York, L.A., Chicago and other major markets, is having a difficult time selling what, in some venues, is a $500 top ticket.

----

I personally don't think it's Fleetwood Mac, or people losing interest...it is IMO simply that they have hit many of these markets a few times already in under a year, and that is a high price to pay more than once to casual fans...

Chris

[Tango]

Most "serious" fans have already caught this (essentially) EXACT tour in 2003. They've been milking this cow way too long. Moooooooo. "It's a high price for their luxery", as Stevie sings it. They same cheesy comments throughout the show, too. "Spontaneity." They really should have mixed up the set more. Nonetheless, they've probably done far better than they expected to do. I don't know that they've caused more of John Q Public to purchase the NEW album as a result of this tour. Anyone know?

[John Run]

#3 to #18 is a little misleading.

You need to compare apples to apples.

2003 numbers where for 70 US shows from May to October. They grossed 69 million dollars.

The numbers that are quoted here for 2004 are only for the first 23 US shows that grossed 15.4 million. Just under 700k per show and an average of about 10,000 paying customers per show.

This leg, with slightly reduced gt's to the band, needed around 10,000 paying attendees and a gross of 650-700k. It achieved that. Was it a wild sucess, no. Did everyone cover their costs, yes. Did the band members make money, yes.

[ryan8472]

Plus, they did their tours of Europe and Australia with inevitably raked in big bucks too. So no, the 2004 tour was a good idea for them. It made them more money (which you know is what it's all about).

I think that to a lot of people, FM is a band that they don't need to see every year. Maybe it's because of the fact that they have established themselves as a veteran semi/oldies act that only comes around every five years or so, and plays the same hits.

I think they could have gotten away with this type of tour (2 years in a row) at the time of the Dance. I think there was more interest back then, plus Christine was still with them.

None the less, i'm glad i saw them both years.

[dissention]

Like Tango said, this cow has been milked to death. They've hit the same markets three times already. Give it up and get in the studio.

[David]

Originally Posted by Tango

Most "serious" fans have already caught this (essentially) EXACT tour in 2003. They've been milking this cow way too long. Moooooooo. "It's a high price for their luxery", as Stevie sings it. They same cheesy comments throughout the show, too. "Spontaneity."

All I have to say is that this (2004) is the first Fleetwood Mac tour since '76 that I've skipped entirely, & that the new Fritz song is more beautiful & more exciting to me than anything Fleetwood has recorded in many a year.

[77Rumours77]

Originally Posted by dissention

Like Tango said, this cow has been milked to death. They've hit the same markets three times already. Give it up and get in the studio.

Yep, I can think of at least 10 markets that FM didnt visit in 2003/4. While they were going to Chicago, LA, About 13 shows in Ca alone. Thats pretty sad when other markets couls of sould out. See the band Boston is a little smarter becasue There tour is caller "The Over America Tour" The Cities we missed. And the ticket prices are half of what they were last year. When they played in Wichita last month over 10,000 people showed up. I know if Fleetwood Mac were to play cities they missed, and lower the prices, they could be doing it like Cher, touring since 2002. But I think this tour was a good idea.

[amber]

Originally Posted by joe

I think that to a lot of people, FM is a band that they don't need to see every year. Maybe it's because of the fact that they have established themselves as a veteran semi/oldies act that only comes around every five years or so, and plays the same hits.

.

Not like me, who wants to see them all day, every day, for YEARS!
But that's a good point - could they have avoided this by playing more new songs? I wish they had, but I don't know it would've upped the sales. However, I really think that both tours were extremely successful, considering we had just seen them a year before. In fact, i think it's amazing that they grossed what they did the second time around, personally. Really - Amazing.
Amber

[Nicks Fan]

If they had done a lengthier tour in Canada perhaps they might have fared better. The tickets for Toronto were hard to come by and Calgary sold out. As well the fact that they didn't reinvent the shows very much at all(Same songs same dialogue etc) probabaly turned Die Hard fans away.

[EveryHour]

Originally Posted by joe

I think that to a lot of people, FM is a band that they don't need to see every year.
None the less, i'm glad i saw them both years.

My feelings exactly. (Though, as has been pointed out, the two tours cannot truly be compared because the number of shows is drastically different.) Though I was over the moon about their return (Did I think there was a chance in hell after my shows last year I would be seeing them again in less than a year?! God, no!), I figured it would be too soon for caual fans to see them again. I was in line for Heart tickets last year, and a guy in line was asked if he was in line for the same. He said, "Hell, no. I'm in line for Neil Young. I already saw Heart in 1987." There seemed to be a great turnout at the two FM '04 shows I went to, though. It must've been all of the people who missed it last year. In the end, though, all I care about is that it was more for me.