[Jyqm]

Originally Posted by mylittledemon

And none of those bands/artists sell close to what Fleetwood Mac does in terms of ticket sales.

You know who sells a hell of a lot more concert tickets than Fleetwood Mac? Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band. Over the course of the Rising tour in 2002 and 2003, they played well over a hundred shows in arenas, stadiums and baseball parks. They played 150 different songs on that tour, including every song off The Rising. Of those 150 songs, 31 were covers, and only 44 were played just once. There were staples which were played on most nights (and of the 8 songs which were performed at every show, 6 were from The Rising - the other two were "Born To Run" and "Badlands"), but the setlist changed substantially from show to show, especially if there were multiple nights in the same city.

You want stats?

In 2003, Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band played 47 shows and grossed $115.9 million. Fleetwood Mac played 71 shows, 51% more than Bruce. They grossed $69 million, 40% less than Bruce.

Granted playing the shows the way they do is "safe," but if it pulls in some new 13 year old fan who recognizes "Dreams" or "Tusk," then that's the pay off from the sacrifice.

At the prices Fleetwood Mac charges, you think they're trying to lure in new teenage fans? You think many teenagers are going to these concerts at those prices?

I honestly do not understand the desire some people have to defend the band on this level. They play the same stale setlist every night because they don't really care enough to change it up and because they (erroneously) think if they do, they'll lose concertgoers (i.e., cash). They don't do it out of generosity to casual fans, they don't do it to bring in new fans. They do it because they're greedy and lazy. End of story.