Re: Mc tired of having opinion on post-John Who misconstrued

["Neil E. Weissman" <neilweissman@xxxxxxxxx>]

I do not thing the Who's next tour would be as big a draw as past years.
John is gone and this potentially will be the third straight tour with the
same setlist.  Marginal fans who saw one or both shows tours will be not as
willing to shell out money again, new or same setlist.  I hear on this list
that many"big" fans are not as willing to kick out dollars.  I will never
pay those high prices again.

No matter what many on this list think, the Who is not a big draw, at least
not what they were.  Remember that the Who did well because they played
small venues.  The larger venues remained unsold.  I saw two of the MSG 2002
and Toronto 2002 shows and there were a lot of empty seats, and cheap floor
seats to be had on the street.  If they do winter shows, they risk playing
to half-empty hockey/basketball arenas.  Then if they do not sell, they risk
having to cancel shows (remember Cleveland 2002).  Plus, look back to
1996/1997, many smaller venues were not sold out.

Plus, concert demand is lower than ever.  Case in point:  Fleetwood Mac is
touring.  I saw their two shows in Philadelphia (including last night).  I
scalped tickets for both shows.  Last May, a floor seat 25 rows off the
stage cost me $75 ($125 face).  Last night I scored 4th row center for $80
($125 face).  If the Who tour, I will take my chances and scalp day of show
for under face value for sure.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Keithjmoon70@xxxxxxx>
To: <thewho@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2003 8:25 AM
Subject: Re: Mc tired of having opinion on post-John Who misconstrued


> In a message dated 9/29/2003 1:18:51 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> Sroundtable@xxxxxxx writes:
> This having been stated, I stand by my belief that John's absence will not
be
> a significant detriment to ticket sales on an upcoming tour.  This is NOT
> because I lack respect for his abilities
> I believe you.  You're not "anti-John" nor is Scott or anyone else on the
> list that I know of.  The point is about ticket sales and the general
public that
> buys them.  It isn't anti John of you to make a statement that sales won't
be
> affected that much by his absence.  Are *we*  affected by his absence?  Of
> course!  But let's not confuse the issue.
>
> The tickets will be expensive.  Why? Because TheWho is a big draw.  AND
> because they play at smaller venues now than back in the seventies.  That
is the
> same with most bands, even current hit makers. Now concerts are at places
that
> hold less than 20 thousand, so the prices are much higher.  I used to go
to
> concerts at the Silverdome, which holds around 78,000 people! Less people
are
> attending shows in general.  This is probably due to  music being more
accessible
> through DVD's, VH1/MTV, The Internet, etc.  When I was a kid, the only way
to
> know what a band even looked like was to buy a magazine, look on the album
> covers, or by seeing them in person.  Those were the days.  If something
is
> rare, it is more precious.  That's why the tours will sell less and less
the more
> they do it.  Now if they happen to get a major hit song on their hands,
that
> will change things, but that isn't likely to happen.  Just because a song
isn't
> a hit doesn't mean it isn't a great song though.  Pete makes great songs,
so
> I am excited.
>
> Had Pete been the one who died, the band would've ended.  He's too
important
> to the show to ever replace.  I don't think anyone would refute that. So
maybe
> I will get a little anti John badge pinned on me with that statement.  But
> I'll take it off, because I'm not.
>
> Jon in Mi.