Quote:
Just some basic math man.
Paul McGuiness stated:
“The overhead is about $750,000 daily, whether we play or not. That’s just to have the crew on payroll, to rent the trucks, all that."
Anyhow - Given how the tour lasted for about 760 days overheads alone would have added up to about 570 Million. Now add everything else such as building the stage, TEMP workers and all other variable costs (which are not part of that estimate) you can easily see the costs of it going up to 700 million. Now given it has grossed about 740 million...I'd be surprised it has broken even.
|
Yeah, those 750,000 account for all costs while being on the road. They do not apply for the 308 day gap between Leg 2 and Leg 3. The three claws reportedly costed them about $25 million each, add another $20 million for the basic stage and the video and sound systems. So we're dealing with roughly $95 million of fixed production costs. You should do your maths again based on these factors. Rest assured that Live Nation and U2 knew exactly what they were doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilsSon
Right. Let's leave it at that. That statement alone almost made me spill my coffee laughing. Not worth wasting time on a discussion with someone who is quite as short-sighted (to not say something else) and write that, given everything else that was posted in this topic
|
In some individual markets they could probably pull something like that off. I’m thinking about NJ, London, maybe also Australia. But a world tour with a stage like 360 would in no way be feasible. Just consider three striking examples (that list could be endless):
Sao Paulo
U2 2011
Estadio do Morumbi
269,492
$32,754.065
3 shows
BJ 2013
Estadio do Morumbi
63,198
$5,695,137
Barcelona
U2 2009
Camp Nou
182,055
$19,825,467
2 shows
BJ 2011
Estadio Olimpico
39,992
$3,021,325
Brussels
U2 2010
Koning Boudewijn Stadium
144,338
$15,074,746
2 shows
BJ 2008
Koning Boudewijn Stadium
31,041
$2,517,796
Do you really think they could have had figures like U2 in these venues with a similar stage production? Just to get this straight, you characterize Bon Jovi as some down to earth band who do not care to play in the big league, having no intention to be remembered as one of the biggest bands ever and thus they deliberately refuse to do mega tours on mega stages like the Rolling Stones and U2 but, of course, could do so if they wanted to (supported by the outrageous assumption that such tours do not make that much money anyway). I’m not sure who is short-sighted here
