TJT
Active topics
  3. Originally posted by deanallison:[..]

    I would have thought E&I cost more than JT17 to put on, I might be wrong but even though it was an arena show there was certainly enough equipment used in E&I for a stadium show. E&I grossed about $125million. The vertigo tour shows in Australia/New Zealand/ japan Hawaii brought in nearly half of that and that was 13 years ago the tickets will be more expensive now so I would say with confidence they’ll gross $60-$70 million this time at least. Half the amount of E&I in only a few weeks compared to 4 and a half months touring E&I (that’s not including the break they took from North America to Europe either).
    That Vertigo leg also took over a month and there's a lot of travelling involved. The grossing is not the problem, but it's the costs that makes it less profitable or in some cases not even profitable at all. In the 80's they choose an indoor tour in Australia over a stadium tour, while there was enough demand to do stadium shows over there. I don't think U2 is about making money as fast as possible. They just want to play to their fans, sometimes they choose stadiums over arena's and sometimes they choose arena's over stadiums. Indoor shows usually have more shows in one city, so the logistics are a lot easier. Anyway, I think you reasoning might be a bit too simple and doesn't take everything into account.


  4. Screw Oceania, Asia, and Hawaii, we need more stadium shows in Kansas City, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh.

    Anyways, looking forward to the upcoming announcements!
  5. Still doubtful about this whole tour ... last time I protested suddenly there was a wave of expected announcements and additional new info .. yet still ZERO is to be confirmed !

    + can we please start using the tiny little word ‘if’ when discussing this fanciful tour .... like what basis has anyone in here have for talking like this tour has been officially announced ??
  6. Originally posted by trainfanjacob8:[..]


    Screw Oceania, Asia, and Hawaii, we need more stadium shows in Kansas City, St. Louis, and Pittsburgh.

    Anyways, looking forward to the upcoming announcements!
    U will more likely get it before we do ! Lol
  7. Originally posted by Ricku2:[..]
    That Vertigo leg also took over a month and there's a lot of travelling involved. The grossing is not the problem, but it's the costs that makes it less profitable or in some cases not even profitable at all. In the 80's they choose an indoor tour in Australia over a stadium tour, while there was enough demand to do stadium shows over there. I don't think U2 is about making money as fast as possible. They just want to play to their fans, sometimes they choose stadiums over arena's and sometimes they choose arena's over stadiums. Indoor shows usually have more shows in one city, so the logistics are a lot easier. Anyway, I think you reasoning might be a bit too simple and doesn't take everything into account.
    Well it took barely over a month for the vertigo shows and that was with a bit of a gap for Hawaii which wouldn’t be necessary this time you’d imagine. I still think it would be unrealistic to say the costs to play a dozen shows roughly would come anywhere near the $60-$70million mark when they are using a stage they already own. I know there’s other costs, big costs but $60 million dollars worth? Nowhere near they’ll make a fortune of this tour. I’m not saying that’s the reason they’re doing it btw but I think even if the main reason is to please there fans in Australia etc it still has to be done whilst making a profit, they wouldn’t do it at a loss or close to break even either.
  8. Originally posted by deanallison:[..]
    Well it took barely over a month for the vertigo shows and that was with a bit of a gap for Hawaii which wouldn’t be necessary this time you’d imagine. I still think it would be unrealistic to say the costs to play a dozen shows roughly would come anywhere near the $60-$70million mark when they are using a stage they already own. I know there’s other costs, big costs but $60 million dollars worth? Nowhere near they’ll make a fortune of this tour. I’m not saying that’s the reason they’re doing it btw but I think even if the main reason is to please there fans in Australia etc it still has to be done whilst making a profit, they wouldn’t do it at a loss or close to break even either.
    I'm sure they can make it profitable as well, but I don't think it will be that significant. It's a big operation, for maybe just 10-15 shows, it might not be that easy to just get all the right people in for just one month, logistically it's a big challenge... and probably there will be more issues to deal with.. I think there's a reason why it always seems a bit hard to get an Australian tour scheduled.
  9. Will we see a Russia concert in the future?