PDA

View Full Version : Rolling Stones to Play Coachella?



Pages : [1] 2

Ineedmorelemons
11-15-2010, 12:41 PM
http://www.hitsdailydouble.com/news/rumormill.cgi

Currently the last article on this page.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 12:48 PM
at least we will have a different audience then we had this year.

Krash_Kronic
11-15-2010, 12:48 PM
wow really?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 12:49 PM
for those not wanting to click


WILD HORSES: During his recent press junket promoting Life, Keith Richards had no definitive answer to the constant questions about the Rolling Stones’ touring plans, but something was then in the process of going down, whether he knew about it (likely) or not. We’ve just learned that the Stones team is very close to finalizing a deal that would bring them to Coachella next April. According to our sources, they’ll pick up a cool $5 million for playing the date; Paul McCartney pocketed $3.5 million for playing Coachella in 2009. This is the biggest booking coup yet for Coachella kingpin Paul Tollett, whose fest has served as a launch pad for numerous big-name tours in the past. Can you say “sold out”? (11/15a)

Gbyh2o
11-15-2010, 12:50 PM
woww, now beasties can go in the sub section!!!

weeklymix
11-15-2010, 12:52 PM
woww, now beasties can go in the sub section!!!

Your logic is scaring the children.

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:01 PM
what was the *confirmed* amount Prince was paid in 08?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:02 PM
Perez Hilton said it was 4 mil but Forbes later said it was around 2 mil.

here you go. 4.8 according to Perez
http://drownedinsound.com/news/3164178-prince-paid-4-8m-for-single-coachella-set-apparently

and here was the forbes article saying 2 mil
http://www.forbes.com/2008/08/08/concerts-festivals-music-forbeslife-cx_dr_0808travel.html

dorkfish
11-15-2010, 01:02 PM
i see

weeklymix
11-15-2010, 01:03 PM
I'd also like to add my two cents that The Rolling Stones would definitely be a great headlining act. There's nothing wrong with 60,000 people knowing the words to every song. It really made Paul McCartney that much better.

paulb
11-15-2010, 01:04 PM
no................................................ .really?

rskapcat
11-15-2010, 01:05 PM
I'd also like to add my two cents that The Rolling Stones would definitely be a great headlining act. There's nothing wrong with 60,000 people knowing the words to every song. It really made Paul McCartney that much better.

Agreed.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:06 PM
I'd also like to add my two cents that The Rolling Stones would definitely be a great headlining act. There's nothing wrong with 60,000 people knowing the words to every song. It really made Paul McCartney that much better.

This. I would love to see the Stones and was on board with this playing last year. I just feel that 5 million could've been used for other things. But hey, at least we know the audience would look alot different then this years tween-etardathon.

drowningmatt
11-15-2010, 01:07 PM
I'd like to see the Stones.

PlayaDelWes
11-15-2010, 01:08 PM
This. I would love to see the Stones and was on board with this playing last year. I just feel that 5 million could've been used for other things. But hey, at least we know the audience would look alot different then this years tween-etardathon.

I feel like last year's lineup was so much deeper because there was no $5M headliner.

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:08 PM
thanks, marco. the mystery continues.

i have mixed feelings for the Stones headlining. i saw them in '81 when i was a wee lad (and at the peak of my passion for them). i can't remember the last time i listened to an album of theirs. hmmm. the crowd sure would be, um, interesting.

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:10 PM
yeah, shooting that much of your wad on one act could be problematic. both, in terms of having enough cash for other quality acts and in the fact that GV is going to need to recoup that expenditure even more acutely = potential clusterfuckchella II

Courtney
11-15-2010, 01:11 PM
Trying not to get my hopes up here. Trying to remember this is a rumor at best.

But yeah, I would be very much in favor of the Stones at Coachella.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:11 PM
I feel like last year's lineup was so much deeper because there was no $5M headliner.

Yes but we still don't know what the 2011 line up will look like so we should hold off judgment. But I completely agree with you. I for one would watch because I would never spend the kind of $$$ the stones charge for a solo show, plus the Polo Fields beats any stadium/arena anywhere.

paulb
11-15-2010, 01:13 PM
thanks, marco. the mystery continues.

i have mixed feelings for the Stones headlining. i saw them in '81 when i was a wee lad (and at the peak of my passion for them). i can't remember the last time i listened to an album of theirs. hmmm. the crowd sure would be, um, interesting.

How old are u?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:13 PM
yeah, shooting that much of your wad on one act could be problematic. both, in terms of having enough cash for other quality acts and in the fact that GV is going to need to recoup that expenditure even more acutely = potential clusterfuckchella II

No, the stones would not be a clusterfuck. We would just have an older audience. I would like a heads up on ticket sale dates and if this is true from the promoters because this is going to sell out really quick. Which should make all of us nervous about getting tickets.

FoxeyLady
11-15-2010, 01:13 PM
When was the last time The Stones played a US festival or any festival for that matter?

PlayaDelWes
11-15-2010, 01:14 PM
I for one would watch because I would never spend the kind of $$$ the stones charge for a solo show, plus the Polo Fields beats any stadium/arena anywhere.

Exactly how I feel

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 01:14 PM
I would love this

Gribbz
11-15-2010, 01:15 PM
Not a huge fan, but I definitely support this.

concertgoer
11-15-2010, 01:16 PM
How legit is that site?

guedita
11-15-2010, 01:16 PM
at least we will have a different audience then we had this year.


I'd also like to add my two cents that The Rolling Stones would definitely be a great headlining act. There's nothing wrong with 60,000 people knowing the words to every song. It really made Paul McCartney that much better.

These. Though there goes my hopes of seeing Neil Young there this year.

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 01:17 PM
The Stones are 130 years old and they still put on a better more energetic show than most 22 year olds.

Im not a huge fan but I think they are one of those acts that you dont think you like and then you realize you love like 40 of their songs.

menikmati
11-15-2010, 01:17 PM
This on the polo field!

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1030/1072477296_c6affb393d.jpg

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:17 PM
When was the last time The Stones played a US festival or any festival for that matter?

I don't think they have ever played a modern festival. I know they did a few festival shows in the late 60s and early 70s but never Glasto or any of the major Euro festivals. Glasto tried to get them a year or 2 ago and it didn't work out.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:17 PM
The Stones are 130 years old and they still put on a better more energetic show than most 22 year olds.

Im not a huge fan but I think they are one of those acts that you dont think you like and then you realize you love like 40 of their songs.

How long are their shows? Are we in for a Cure-like 3 hour marathon?

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:18 PM
i was 15.

i only said clusterfuckchella II because of how many tix would (likely) need to be sold to make up for the expense (unless last year made GV flush, which is unlikely).

and, why would this sell out more quickly than Macca (esp if they stayed with the 3-day tix only policy...not many geezers would want to go all 3 days).

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 01:18 PM
2011 is the year that Salah gets stabbed by a Hell's Angel during Teh Stones

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:18 PM
i was 15.

i only said clusterfuckchella II because of how many tix would (likely) need to be sold to make up for the expense (unless last year made GV flush, which is unlikely).

and, why would this sell out more quickly than Macca (esp if they stayed with the 3-day tix only policy...not many geezers would want to go all 3 days).

The stones, I feel, are a much bigger draw then Macca.

concertgoer
11-15-2010, 01:19 PM
I love The Stones but I am a little concered that Goldenvoice will blow thier budget by booking them and we will get a weak middle tier of the lineup

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:19 PM
2011 is the year that Salah gets stabbed by a Hell's Angel during Teh Stones

:lool

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:19 PM
don't count him out, Cara. wink.

concertgoer
11-15-2010, 01:19 PM
How long are their shows? Are we in for a Cure-like 3 hour marathon?

They normally play for between 2 and 2 and a half hours

rage patton
11-15-2010, 01:20 PM
This on the polo field!

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1030/1072477296_c6affb393d.jpg

Wasn't there a whole thread dedicated to this last year? Remember that dude who said they were getting rid of the outdoor, moving the main to the outdoor and putting up a "new stage" to accomodate a Sunday headliner? I do.

menikmati
11-15-2010, 01:25 PM
Yes...it was all bullshit of course. He eventually caved and said it was Muse who was gonna headline Sunday and they were the band requiring the new big stage....what a load of crap.

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:25 PM
Wasn't there a whole thread dedicated to this last year? Remember that dude who said they were getting rid of the outdoor, moving the main to the outdoor and putting up a "new stage" to accomodate a Sunday headliner? I do.
yes, i had a lot of fun at that retard's expense.

i hope those guys don't bring that contraption...it's an abortion.

sydeprojext
11-15-2010, 01:26 PM
They played Isle of Wight in 07, their first festival in 31 years.

rage patton
11-15-2010, 01:26 PM
Also... look at the amount of balding heads in the photo. Astounding.

SoulDischarge
11-15-2010, 01:27 PM
I would very much like to see the Stones, but not enough to actually pay for a ticket for one of their shows, so I'm for this.

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 01:27 PM
I'd rather have the Stones minimal staged and scrappy.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:29 PM
I bet if they had the Hell's Angels as security this year, things would've been different.

menikmati
11-15-2010, 01:30 PM
They had Arcade Fire locked in before this year even happened.

lolwut

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:30 PM
lolwut

Quick Erik. Quick.

GeezrRckr
11-15-2010, 01:31 PM
I bet if they had the Hell's Angels as security this year things would've been different.
so how do you run security with a walker?

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
11-15-2010, 01:32 PM
I would very much like to see the Stones, but not enough to actually pay for a ticket for one of their shows, so I'm for this.

Exactly my thinking. i can't fathom paying $400 for a good seat for any concert, and certainly don't want to pay $100 for a nosebleed seat.

But to have a show like this included in something i'm already doing anyway is fantastic! i might even try to get somewhat close for a headliner for once

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:32 PM
so how do you run security with a walker?

You make a grown man crrrryyyy.

thefrush
11-15-2010, 01:33 PM
mmph. Please no.


I feel like last year's lineup was so much deeper because there was no $5M headliner.

This.


How long are their shows? Are we in for a Cure-like 3 hour marathon?

Complete with IV's and breathing machines?

menikmati
11-15-2010, 01:37 PM
Exactly my thinking. i can't fathom paying $400 for a good seat for any concert, and certainly don't want to pay $100 for a nosebleed seat.

But to have a show like this included in something i'm already doing anyway is fantastic! i might even try to get somewhat close for a headliner for once

I had rail for McCartney but gave it up right before Morrissey came on stage. Don't be like me.

sk8r408
11-15-2010, 01:39 PM
Rolling stones where going to play Coachella 2010 around this time last year also...

http://www.examiner.com/music-in-national/coachella-set-for-april-16-18-rumored-acts-include-rolling-stones-muse-pavement-faith-no-more

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:39 PM
I had rail for McCartney but gave it up right before Morrissey came on stage. Don't be like me.

You picked life Erik. Next time bring water.

sbessiso
11-15-2010, 01:46 PM
I very much welcome this, although I would've preferred to see them at the Roo

juloxx
11-15-2010, 01:46 PM
not down

paulb
11-15-2010, 01:46 PM
I saw the Stones in 2006, really good show, enjoyed it quite a bit, but I dont need to see this band 5 years older than when I last saw them.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 01:47 PM
not down

You're fine with Guns N Roses but not the Stones?

menikmati
11-15-2010, 01:49 PM
You picked life Erik. Next time bring water.

I should have stayed at the rail actually, because halfway through McCartney I almost collapsed. I felt like puking my guts out. Perhaps if I had still been at the rail, I could have had something to rest on, and maybe convince a security guard or something for a bottle of water. Instead I had to use what strength I had left and walk out of the crowd and lay down by the fence. Worst Coachella experience by far. My only reasoning for giving up the rail in the first place was that I was sort off to the left of the stage and didn't have the best viewing angle, so I figured I could move back some and more towards the right. Oh well.

sbessiso
11-15-2010, 01:49 PM
amateur^^^

Miroir Noir
11-15-2010, 01:52 PM
This would make three out of the six post-nipplegate Super Bowl halftime performers to headline a Coachella. Looking good for the Who, the Boss, and Tom Petty in years to come. ;)

heart cooks brain
11-15-2010, 01:52 PM
As long as they aren't unopposed I'm okay with this.

Gribbz
11-15-2010, 01:56 PM
I had rail for McCartney but gave it up right before Morrissey came on stage. Don't be like me.

BUT OMG YOU TOTALLY MISSED THE PRESETS!!!

tigermilkboy
11-15-2010, 01:58 PM
I don't think they have ever played a modern festival. I know they did a few festival shows in the late 60s and early 70s but never Glasto or any of the major Euro festivals. Glasto tried to get them a year or 2 ago and it didn't work out.


Played Isle Of Wight 2007

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1554214/Rolling-Stones-the-high-note-on-Isle-of-Wight.html

Mr. Dylanja
11-15-2010, 01:59 PM
This would make three out of the six post-nipplegate Super Bowl halftime performers to headline a Coachella. Looking good for the Who, the Boss, and Tom Petty in years to come. ;)


Fun fact: Tom Petty saw the Suns beat the Lakers from courtside last night.

indietron
11-15-2010, 02:00 PM
oh shut it

Miroir Noir
11-15-2010, 02:02 PM
Wouldn't know. Too busy watching the Jazz come back by 20 points in the fourth quarter every night last week.

darksideofkaos.
11-15-2010, 02:02 PM
Ok... I would shit a brick if The Stones played I mean say all you want but their music is timeless and they would put on a great show. But $5 million... I would pass.

$5 million for The Stones guarantees no cut in the number of tickets that will be sold.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 02:04 PM
Played Isle Of Wight 2007

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1554214/Rolling-Stones-the-high-note-on-Isle-of-Wight.html

Here was the setlist:
et list:

'Start Me Up'
'You Got Me Rocking'
'Rough Justice'
'Love In Vain' (with Paolo Nutini)
'Can't You Hear Me Knocking'
'Ain't Too Proud To Beg' (with Amy Winehouse)
'Tumbling Dice'
'Wanna Hold You'
'Slipping Away'
'Miss You'
'(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction'
'Honky Tonk Women'
'Sympathy For The Devil'
'Brown Sugar'
'Jumping Jack Flash'

I really hope this wouldn't be what a festival set of theirs would look like. No Gimme Shelter = Fail.

In fact the last track we should hear on the Polo Fields Sunday night, should be Gimme Shelter.

guedita
11-15-2010, 02:06 PM
don't count him out, Cara. wink.

You know nothing!

Oh, here's another reason why The Rolling Stones are a great headliner: they aren't Kanye West.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 02:07 PM
You know nothing!

Oh, here's another reason why The Rolling Stones are a great headliner: they aren't Kanye West.

well played.

Miroir Noir
11-15-2010, 02:08 PM
If this pans out, let's hope it turns out better than the last time the Stones played a California festival (or at the very least, hope that someone as talented as David and Albert Maysles are there to document the zeitgeist-defining moral chaos).

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 02:09 PM
PcYNUX0g4e8

darksideofkaos.
11-15-2010, 02:09 PM
Here was the setlist:
et list:

'Start Me Up'
'You Got Me Rocking'
'Rough Justice'
'Love In Vain' (with Paolo Nutini)
'Can't You Hear Me Knocking'
'Ain't Too Proud To Beg' (with Amy Winehouse)
'Tumbling Dice'
'Wanna Hold You'
'Slipping Away'
'Miss You'
'(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction'
'Honky Tonk Women'
'Sympathy For The Devil'
'Brown Sugar'
'Jumping Jack Flash'

I really hope this wouldn't be what a festival set of theirs would look like. No Gimme Shelter = Fail.

In fact the last track we should hear on the Polo Fields Sunday night, should be Gimme Shelter.

Thats a really good setlist... Shit. It doesn't seem like it's that long though maybe an hour/hour and a half tops. I'm sure if them playing Coachella actually does come to fruition they would get a two/two and a half hour set.

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
11-15-2010, 02:15 PM
I think we'd definitely get at least 2 hours. Also, for some reason i want it to be Friday night.

obzen
11-15-2010, 02:18 PM
I'm all for it. Crushingblows.

concertgoer
11-15-2010, 02:20 PM
I would love to see it breakdown like this
Friday The Stones
Saturday Arcade Fire
Sunday Daft Punk

Miroir Noir
11-15-2010, 02:24 PM
Ultimate clusterfuckchella: f-MMlL8YAfw

Mr. Dylanja
11-15-2010, 02:26 PM
Who else loves saying, "The Stones" in their best wanker accent?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 02:28 PM
I'll give you a wanker accent sailor.

ivankay
11-15-2010, 02:46 PM
i saw them when they played the Coliseum with Guns & Roses and Living Colour. It was a fantastic show, but i doubt i'd get the same awesomeness 2o years later. Still, barring any serious conflict, i'd have to see if my doubt was wrong. One song in the right direction would be this:

dzVy-Bbn1II

Courtney
11-15-2010, 02:47 PM
Some of you seem concerned that the Stones would mean another clusterfuckchella, which I do understand, but also keep in mind that the kind of audience that the Stones would bring in would be more likely to come later in the evening, and even possibly buy a 3-day pass but then only come one of the three days.

ivankay
11-15-2010, 02:52 PM
^^^You just made me want them there with this possibility.

untzcrate
11-15-2010, 02:57 PM
No, the stones would not be a clusterfuck. We would just have an older audience. I would like a heads up on ticket sale dates and if this is true from the promoters because this is going to sell out really quick. Which should make all of us nervous about getting tickets.

I wouldn't worry about it. The tickets wouldn't sell out until the line-up got released (assuming they would be on the bill) and most of us (who are going to Coachella regardless of the line-up) will probably already have our tickets by then.

It's gonna be a good year regardless. It always is.

rage patton
11-15-2010, 03:01 PM
Paul said they ARE reducing tickets sold this year... no matter what. I don't think he is going to go back on that.

What I am afraid of is higher cost of tickets.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 03:02 PM
thickets are expensive.

noolan
11-15-2010, 03:19 PM
5 million for Rolling Stones could mean a cheap/yet popular headliner like Arcade Fire.

braundiggity
11-15-2010, 03:29 PM
I would very much like to see the Stones, but not enough to actually pay for a ticket for one of their shows, so I'm for this.

Exactly -- this is what I've loved about some of the older headliners Coachella's gotten. I think there are a lot of us out there who feel this way.

condenser
11-15-2010, 03:54 PM
Here was the setlist:
et list:

'Start Me Up'
'You Got Me Rocking'
'Rough Justice'
'Love In Vain' (with Paolo Nutini)
'Can't You Hear Me Knocking'
'Ain't Too Proud To Beg' (with Amy Winehouse)
'Tumbling Dice'
'Wanna Hold You'
'Slipping Away'
'Miss You'
'(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction'
'Honky Tonk Women'
'Sympathy For The Devil'
'Brown Sugar'
'Jumping Jack Flash'

I really hope this wouldn't be what a festival set of theirs would look like. No Gimme Shelter = Fail.

In fact the last track we should hear on the Polo Fields Sunday night, should be Gimme Shelter.

That is a remarkably short setlist- 15 songs?!

McCartney played about 35 in 2009!

Mr. Dylanja
11-15-2010, 03:59 PM
That is a remarkably short setlist- 15 songs?!

McCartney played about 35 in 2009!


You, of all people, don't like the condensed setlist?!

JustSteve
11-15-2010, 04:05 PM
i saw them when they played the Coliseum with Guns & Roses and Living Colour.

i still give my parents shit for showing up late and missing guns n roses at that show...

condenser
11-15-2010, 04:05 PM
You, of all people, don't like the condensed setlist?!

I literally started laughing when I read this.

yeahfontaine
11-15-2010, 04:05 PM
You, of all people, don't like the condensed setlist?!

:rotfl

Oh and I am all for this. I've always sworn off seeing the Stones live because I don't want my image of late 60s Stones ruined by seeing their decrepit bodies up close. But I'll waive my vow to see them on the Polo Fields. It really is time I gave up such a juvenile stance anyway. Especially when I love the shit out of them. And that setlist looks amazing.

knytt
11-15-2010, 04:36 PM
I feel like last year's lineup was so much deeper because there was no $5M headliner.

QFT

While, I'm not totally opposed to this simply because it would make seeing the Stones that much more affordable, I really fear what bands might have to be cut because of $5M.

suprefan
11-15-2010, 04:52 PM
How legit is that site?

Its a music industry website. Liek Billboard is, but just all the boring business b.s. you dont want to hear about.

ElBlueblazer
11-15-2010, 04:59 PM
PAINT IT FUCKING BLACK!!!

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 05:05 PM
QFT

While, I'm not totally opposed to this simply because it would make seeing the Stones that much more affordable, I really fear what bands might have to be cut because of $5M.

2010 had an awesome lineup but they gave us fewer bands last year even before the volcano thing happened.
All the bands that werent scheduled to play during the Gorillaz for instance.

PJandBompton
11-15-2010, 05:06 PM
You know nothing!

Oh, here's another reason why The Rolling Stones are a great headliner: they aren't Kanye West.

but Kanye has opened for them before...

i would love to see the Stones there, i would not be disappointed at all if this rumor is true.

knytt
11-15-2010, 05:11 PM
2010 had an awesome lineup but they gave us fewer bands last year even before the volcano thing happened.
All the bands that werent scheduled to play during the Gorillaz for instance.

Good point, but if the $5M number is true, I'm still a bit worried.

Kropladop
11-15-2010, 05:15 PM
This is gonna be fucking awesome, maybe for another million GV could get them to do exile in its entirety haha

jonesjupiter
11-15-2010, 05:27 PM
When was the last time The Stones played a US festival or any festival for that matter?

They played the Isle of Wight Festival in 2007 and from the footage I've seen of the show it was a great success...

I saw them in 2003 and I loved it! Can't wait to experience them with a festival audience, should be quite a treat! I doubt the crowd will change as much as everyones saying on the boards. Even the hardcore Stones fans would question forking over 300 bucks for a short festival set filled with youngsters. How was the crowd for the McCartney show? Did the audience change?

concertgoer
11-15-2010, 05:29 PM
I have seen The Stones three times and each time they were great.

Gribbz
11-15-2010, 05:35 PM
Here was the setlist:
et list:

'Start Me Up'
'You Got Me Rocking'
'Rough Justice'
'Love In Vain' (with Paolo Nutini)
'Can't You Hear Me Knocking'
'Ain't Too Proud To Beg' (with Amy Winehouse)
'Tumbling Dice'
'Wanna Hold You'
'Slipping Away'
'Miss You'
'(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction'
'Honky Tonk Women'
'Sympathy For The Devil'
'Brown Sugar'
'Jumping Jack Flash'

I really hope this wouldn't be what a festival set of theirs would look like. No Gimme Shelter = Fail.

In fact the last track we should hear on the Polo Fields Sunday night, should be Gimme Shelter.

Hopefully they play "Paint It, Black."

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 05:41 PM
What if White Stripes attend and Jack White jams this out with the stones....ohhhhhh shnaaaaps!
5e1_K-JDfOk

sbessiso
11-15-2010, 05:43 PM
YES^^^^

0M525KVNbC8

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
11-15-2010, 05:52 PM
They played the Isle of Wight Festival in 2007 and from the footage I've seen of the show it was a great success...

I saw them in 2003 and I loved it! Can't wait to experience them with a festival audience, should be quite a treat! I doubt the crowd will change as much as everyones saying on the boards. Even the hardcore Stones fans would question forking over 300 bucks for a short festival set filled with youngsters. How was the crowd for the McCartney show? Did the audience change?

There were definitely a lot of older, ex-hippies for both McCartney and Roger Waters, yes. For McCartney I noticed a lot of dad/younger son pairings too.

Of course single day tickets were available for both of those years.

Also, the addition of old people wearing cargo shorts and fanny packs is not unwelcome. They in no way were a deterrent to anybody's fun.

sbessiso
11-15-2010, 05:56 PM
I remember some geezers giving me the stink eye during Franz Ferdinand (-->Morrissey-->Paul Mc) cuz I was singing and dancing

jonesjupiter
11-15-2010, 06:02 PM
I remember some geezers giving me the stink eye during Franz Ferdinand (-->Morrissey-->Paul Mc) cuz I was singing and dancing

Like the towns people in Footloose?

jonesjupiter
11-15-2010, 06:04 PM
There were definitely a lot of older, ex-hippies for both McCartney and Roger Waters, yes. For McCartney I noticed a lot of dad/younger son pairings too.

Of course single day tickets were available for both of those years.

Also, the addition of old people wearing cargo shorts and fanny packs is not unwelcome. They in no way were a deterrent to anybody's fun.

Whoa cargo shorts and a fanny pack!? What were these people packing...? I doubt they would ruin my good fun, in fact I'd imagine their spaghetti boned Joe Cocker like movements would only make the show that much more enjoyable...

obzen
11-15-2010, 06:10 PM
What if White Stripes attend and Jack White jams this out with the stones...

http://archive.easymodo.net/board/cgl/img/0019/03/1244947236681.gif

Miroir Noir
11-15-2010, 06:50 PM
Jack White is like Dave Grohl II: everyone expects him to inexplicably make appearances with a dozen or so different artists.

bludevil007
11-15-2010, 06:53 PM
Wait till ticket prices go to $450 to support this. I'm still down though.

guedita
11-15-2010, 07:00 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes? And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-15-2010, 07:01 PM
you need to stop with all your logic. The boardz cannot handle.

darksideofkaos.
11-15-2010, 07:03 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes? And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

I can't handle this...

bludevil007
11-15-2010, 07:04 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes? And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

Glad I'm not balancing your checkbook -haha, jk. Prince and McCartney were expensive as well but I still loved coachella.

FoxeyLady
11-15-2010, 07:09 PM
I love the Rolling Stones, but am I the only one who thinks this looks painful?
LsD8oyRIdrc

I just hope something like Godspeed or the Avalanches are on at the same time.

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 07:20 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes? And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

Its times like these that make me ashamed of being from San Francisco.

concertgoer
11-15-2010, 07:26 PM
I love the Rolling Stones, but am I the only one who thinks this looks painful?
LsD8oyRIdrc

I just hope something like Godspeed or the Avalanches are on at the same time.

There won't be any high profile reunion acts playing during The Stones

guedita
11-15-2010, 07:34 PM
Its times like these that make me ashamed of being from San Francisco.

Aren't you the dipshit that created a thread wondering why Coachella doesn't have full blown orchestras play?

Are you trying to seriously suggest that what I've proposed is illogical? Would you care to back it up with any sort of accurate facts or probable speculation about the festival industry?

What suburb of the city were you born in? There's no way you were born and raised in the city proper and came up with a handle so dumb.

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 07:36 PM
I like to call it "Frisco" myself.

It's sort of my thing, really.

guedita
11-15-2010, 07:42 PM
Oh, here is the quote from Tollet himself I was referring to.


That pressure is not coming from them. We're setting our own pace," Tollett says. "They've been great the whole way — I'm glad they're my partner. They are not pushing to make a certain amount of money. They know that show can be up or down. We clearly want a great show, and it costs. Some years are not a great show financially, but we don't back down. We had a year recently that lost money — and I didn't cut one dollar from anything. I never would. People that paid their money, they want a certain show. It's on us if we're going to make or lose. We're not going to cut to a bad experience just because I booked it a certain way and it didn't resonate in huge numbers.

See? Look at that? The man himself acknowledges that sometimes you lose money when you throw a festival.

Source: http://www.laweekly.com/2010-08-12/music/fixing-coachella/

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 07:43 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes? And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

I see no substantial point to any of this; and if there is a substantial point, its not my fault for not understanding it because its soo poorly written, Guedita.

And, actually, I live in Los Angeles ;-)

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 07:44 PM
I like to drink a Fresca in Frisco.
Fresca
Frisco
Fresca
Frisco

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 07:45 PM
I drank a Fresca and painted a fresco in Frisco

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 07:45 PM
If you call it Frisco they'll freak out.

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 07:46 PM
A Frisco Freakout!

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 07:47 PM
PRECEDENT!

http://i.imgur.com/0p4sj.gif

guedita
11-15-2010, 07:47 PM
I see no substantial point to any of this; and if there is a substantial point, its not my fault for not understanding it because its soo poorly written, Guedita.

And, actually, I live in Los Angeles ;-)

Elaborate what is so poor about that piece of writing, if you would.

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 07:54 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

Here you you assume that it wont, which is wrong, and you mention that possibly less people will attend in '11. Also, either(or) not AND.


You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes?
And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

Here you end all three sentences with a question mark which confuses me as to your intentions with the clause. Are you being sarcastic, rhetorical, I dont know.

Truthfully I just thought you were a naive young San Franciscan who really believes Paul and GV aren't interested in a profit.

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 07:59 PM
I hope we can be friends =)

HandBanana
11-15-2010, 08:00 PM
Frisco Frenz

obzen
11-15-2010, 08:03 PM
Ha, this page.

greghead
11-15-2010, 08:20 PM
A Frisco Freakout!

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll239/greg-head/goodtimeslimanduncledoobie.jpg




Here you end all three sentences with a question mark which confuses me as to your intentions with the clause. Are you being sarcastic, rhetorical, I dont know.

You appear to be the only confused individual here; just by simply reading I understand her tone and "intentions" perfectly well. And your last sentence is terribly written, get on that.


And the Stones play a monster show, I'm psyched at the prospect of seeing them again. Hopefully we'd get some more tracks off Exile than fucking Tumbling Dice.

boarderwoozel3
11-15-2010, 08:22 PM
Exile On Main St. is so ridiculously good. The more the merrier.

greghead
11-15-2010, 08:24 PM
Agreed. They should do two sets and finish with a complete run through of Exile. I mean, Phish did it on the Polo Fields last Halloween, it only makes sense that the Stones come out and do it better.

sbessiso
11-15-2010, 08:51 PM
Funny, I had no idea I had Exile... on my computer. Listening for the first time (i know i know)

faxman75
11-15-2010, 08:52 PM
This wouldn't be a bad setlist.

The Rolling Stones 09/08/05 Milwaukee Set list :
1. Start Me Up
2. It's Only Rock 'n' Roll
3. She's So Cold
4. Tumbling Dice
5. Rough Justice
6. Waiting On A Friend (tour debut)
7. You Can't Always Get What You Want
8. All Down The Line
9. Night Time (with Buddy Guy) Band Intros
10. The Worst
11. Infamy
12. Miss You
13. Oh No, Not You Again (B-stage)
14. You Got Me Rocking (B-stage)
15. Honky Tonk Women (B-stage)
16. Sympathy For The Devil
17. Paint It Black
18. Brown Sugar
19. Jumpin' Jack Flash
20. (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction (encore)

Arcade Fire, R.E.M. The Rolling Stones

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 08:57 PM
If they didn't play Gimme Shelter i'd still be too high to be mad.

Mr. Dylanja
11-15-2010, 08:59 PM
Get your R.E.M. shit outta here, Faxino.

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 09:00 PM
The prospects of the Stones has sent me into Coachella Paralysis two months too early. Good God!

faxman75
11-15-2010, 09:08 PM
Get your R.E.M. shit outta here, Faxino.

The Rolling Stones, Kanye West, Arcade Fire...

crushing..

pachucasunrise
11-15-2010, 09:09 PM
>no Beast Of Burden
>no Gimme Shelter
>not a bad setlist
ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, hurrrrrrrrrrrr

boarderwoozel3
11-15-2010, 09:14 PM
The Rolling Stones, Kanye West, Arcade Fire...

crushing..

Wow. Unless there was a wicked Sahara lineup or undercard I'd seriously consider skipping to subsidize another jaunt across the pond.

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 09:22 PM
They would have to play Under My Thumb.

greghead
11-15-2010, 09:26 PM
Funny, I had no idea I had Exile... on my computer. Listening for the first time (i know i know)

You make me so angry.

sbessiso
11-15-2010, 09:28 PM
I switched to Beck remixes too. :)

BayAreaIsBetter
11-15-2010, 09:29 PM
I switched to Beck remixes too. :)

Hah

weeklymix
11-15-2010, 09:36 PM
But to have a show like this included in something i'm already doing anyway is fantastic! i might even try to get somewhat close for a headliner for once with weekly

Fixed mmmm.

mistakenstrangers
11-15-2010, 10:57 PM
I feel like last year's lineup was so much deeper because there was no $5M headliner.

I agree, Tollett has mentioned in interviews that he spending less on headliners and is going for more emphasis on sub-headliners.

guedita
11-15-2010, 11:35 PM
Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

Here you you assume that it wont, which is wrong, and you mention that possibly less people will attend in '11. Also, either(or) not AND.


No, here, YOU assume I am making an assumption. My statement is fairly clear, and what it is doing is asserting my opinion of the people making certain statements.


You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes?
And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

Here you end all three sentences with a question mark which confuses me as to your intentions with the clause. Are you being sarcastic, rhetorical, I dont know.

Clearly.


Truthfully I just thought you were a naive young San Franciscan who really believes Paul and GV aren't interested in a profit.

What you've failed to do in this response is back up your claim that my post was poorly written. You've done a fantastic job of demonstrating your own poor reading comprehension, however.

By the way, tell us again what part of the city you were born in

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
11-15-2010, 11:40 PM
Fixed mmmm.

Sound like sex time


Wow. Unless there was a wicked Sahara lineup or undercard I'd seriously consider skipping to subsidize another jaunt across the pond.

Do you really watch the headliners this much to care?

I am more interested in what the late night Mojave sets will be...

bludevil007
11-16-2010, 01:12 AM
I saw the stones with Pearl Jam opening a few years back - first row. It was one of the greatest shows I've ever seen (combined).

By the way, I called Paul, he told me "i lost $30 million, so i spent another 30, cuz unlike Hammer $30 million can't hurt me" - then he told me this conversation is fuckin ridiculous.

boarderwoozel3
11-16-2010, 01:18 AM
Do you really watch the headliners this much to care?

I am more interested in what the late night Mojave sets will be...

Not especially, but it starts one down that road. It's reminiscent of 2009 without the novelty, and my recent travels have put Coachella into proper perspective--lineup dependent. This hootenanny is expensive and there are bigger fish out there. It'd be a tough choice but a lineup consistent with my reaction to those headliners would definitely bring that choice into play. Seen them, done that, and as a minimum I would have to reflect on doing it again when new experiences abound.

:2c :cool:

These are always about the dance tent anyway. I'm not in for the Sia's of the world--not that there's anything wrong with that.

anywho

/my shit

The Stones are a great get assuming these talks et all go through.

idrive1life
11-16-2010, 02:01 AM
Not especially, but it starts one down that road. It's reminiscent of 2009 without the novelty, and my recent travels have put Coachella into proper perspective--lineup dependent. This hootenanny is expensive and there are bigger fish out there. It'd be a tough choice but a lineup consistent with my reaction to those headliners would definitely bring that choice into play. Seen them, done that, and as a minimum I would have to reflect on doing it again when new experiences abound.

:2c :cool:

These are always about the dance tent anyway. I'm not in for the Sia's of the world--not that there's anything wrong with that.

anywho

/my shit

The Stones are a great get assuming these talks et all go through.

This. I f'ing :pulse you Coachella but I could live and be happier somewhere else without you (like what I did in 2009).

ps

the rolling stones + arcade fire + free pass again = am definitely going

the rolling stones + arcade fire + ? = very likely at this point

+ sufjan stevens, m83, knife, club 8, asobi seksu, pet shop boys, tori amos, royskopp, mew, mnenomena, klaxons, elbow, belle & sebastian, delays, editors, kasabian ... plzkthxbyelol

and oh, for me, from now on ... usa festivals = coachella + umf +/- atp or nothing

/my :2c

Mr.Nipples
11-16-2010, 03:27 AM
APRIL 15-17TH...


PPoYzyOn44M?fs=1

Mr.Nipples
11-16-2010, 03:29 AM
When was the last time The Stones did anything relevant?


1978

concertgoer
11-16-2010, 08:19 AM
Ruh Roh
http://www.examiner.com/rolling-stones-in-national/rolling-stones-headlining-coachella-2011-rumor-not-true-says-the-band-s-rep

PlayaDelWes
11-16-2010, 08:27 AM
What else would a publicist say?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 08:37 AM
exactly. I'll believe it when the poster is out.

concertgoer
11-16-2010, 08:54 AM
What else would a publicist say?

I know but they are not a lock by any means.
January cant come soon enough

guedita
11-16-2010, 08:57 AM
"To the best of my knowledge" is publicist code for "wink, wink"

HandBanana
11-16-2010, 09:08 AM
I was gonna say. It wasnt much of an emphatic "no"

captncrzy
11-16-2010, 09:16 AM
Yeah, Bowie's publicist said the same thing.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 09:21 AM
Yeah, Bowie's publicist said the same thing.

the difference is Bowie hasn't had anything to promote for years and was never planning on touring anyways. Keith Richards was quoted in a few magazines (including The Economist) as saying a tour is planned in 2011.

Also, didn't the bowie rumors come from random websites? This info is coming from industry sources.

tigermilkboy
11-16-2010, 09:33 AM
Seems to me nothing has been decided and it could be the Rolling Stones playing the publicity game and seeing what offers they do have. Either way GV would be nuts not to try for the Stones, despite my indifference to the Stones and paying them $5m, they would be a huge coup for any festival.
It is interesting but we will see in January if it is happening.

I'dDoItAllAgain
11-16-2010, 09:37 AM
Holly shit. Please be true.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 09:39 AM
Seems to me nothing has been decided and it could be the Rolling Stones playing the publicity game and seeing what offers they do have. Either way GV would be nuts not to try for the Stones, despite my indifference to the Stones and paying them $5m, they would be a huge coup for any festival.
It is interesting but we will see in January if it is happening.

Isn't $5 mil a drop in the ocean in terms of what the stones earn at one of their own shows?

Chromezeppelin
11-16-2010, 09:40 AM
i wonder how much 2nd and 3rd line quality we would have to sacrifice if this went down.

5 mill is a lot of money for 1 headliner.

as long as they play gimme shelter and can't you hear me knockin i'm down

or imagine them doing all of exile and all of sticky - that might be worth 5 mill

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 09:42 AM
I honestly wouldn't mind less acts if it meant longer sets from quality acts. The key words here at longer sets and quality acts.

thestripe
11-16-2010, 09:47 AM
I don't know how I'd feel about this.

NachoCat
11-16-2010, 10:07 AM
The performence the stones put on for the superbowl a few years back was horrendous.

FoxeyLady
11-16-2010, 10:08 AM
Which is why the line up is being delayed I think.

What?

El.C.Dub
11-16-2010, 10:13 AM
let's see if this actually pans out..

ShyGuy75
11-16-2010, 10:28 AM
The performence the stones put on for the superbowl a few years back was horrendous.

exactly. i don't understand how anyone would want this at coachella. the ship has long sailed for the rolling stones to sound coherent.

TomAz
11-16-2010, 10:34 AM
I really like the Rolling Stones. I really don't want them to play Coachella. The geezer factor would be (Roger Waters x Paul McCartney)^2.

Courtney
11-16-2010, 10:55 AM
I say bring on the geezer factor if it means (moderately) respectful crowds and lots of people who don't show up on the fields until 8pm or later.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 10:56 AM
I say bring on the geezer factor if it means (moderately) respectful crowds and lots of people who don't show up on the fields until 8pm or later.

Courtney wins all threads.

TomAz
11-16-2010, 10:56 AM
I say bring on the geezer factor if it means (moderately) respectful crowds and lots of people who don't show up on the fields until 8pm or later.

what if it means 60,000 Rons?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 10:57 AM
If by Rons you mean half of them get lost to the way of the festival and the other half get lost on the way to the main stage then yes.

No offense Ron.

SoulDischarge
11-16-2010, 10:59 AM
Just get Tina Turner to subheadline. Problem solved.

ShyGuy75
11-16-2010, 10:59 AM
I say bring on the geezer factor if it means (moderately) respectful crowds and lots of people who don't show up on the fields until 8pm or later.

the ship has long sailed on those coachella days also. etard jump fencing counterfeiters rule the nation now.

guedita
11-16-2010, 11:00 AM
I say bring on the geezer factor if it means (moderately) respectful crowds and lots of people who don't show up on the fields until 8pm or later.

The less hip teenagers wearing feather headdresses and running around the fields in 8 person long chains the better.

TomAz
11-16-2010, 11:07 AM
Just get Tina Turner to subheadline. Problem solved.

ahahahahahaahhahahahahahahaha

betao
11-16-2010, 11:12 AM
Im going to agree with Courtney here.

The Stones have my vote to headline.

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
11-16-2010, 11:12 AM
what if it means 60,000 Rons?

It means a LOT of comedy, that's what it means.

sbessiso
11-16-2010, 11:31 AM
It means a LOT of comedy, that's what it means.

and A LOT of good drugs. Im so down

WhyTheLongFace
11-16-2010, 11:45 AM
I'm still gonna wear my headdress and form long trains

Astrid
11-16-2010, 11:47 AM
its not my prerogative to worry about gv's finances at this juncture...i have my own to worry about. if they see fit to throw down 5mil on a headliner its probably because its in their best interest. and im not a blind faith kind of girl, i just know that every attempt is made on their behalf to put on a fucking awesome festival. theyre not going to just forget that they need money to pay other bands, come on now.

if that means i get to see the rolling stones without having to sell any internal organs to afford it, and before its too fucking late, im super down.

p.s. even though it means i can no longer pretendpretendwishdreampretend bowie will be there 2011

Drinkey McDrinkerstein
11-16-2010, 11:48 AM
I'm still gonna wear my headdress and form long trains

Different kind of train, bro

sbessiso
11-16-2010, 01:00 PM
p.s. even though it means i can no longer pretendpretendwishdreampretend bowie will be there 2011

:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

remember when there was hope?

Coachella Bound
11-16-2010, 01:01 PM
that was a good read...

obzen
11-16-2010, 01:41 PM
Ruh Roh
http://www.examiner.com/rolling-stones-in-national/rolling-stones-headlining-coachella-2011-rumor-not-true-says-the-band-s-rep

Oh, so...

























































Radiohead?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 01:44 PM
I :lool 'd

Miroir Noir
11-16-2010, 01:53 PM
The less hip teenagers wearing feather headdress and running around the fields in 8 person long chains the better.

God I couldn't agree more. The neon war paint and headdresses are so fucking annoying.

. . . although, one such train of e-tards definitely almost knocked me over during "A Day in the Life" two years ago, so nothing's guaranteed.

Gribbz
11-16-2010, 02:11 PM
.

p.s. even though it means i can no longer pretendpretendwishdreampretend bowie will be there 2011


:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

remember when there was hope?

Has anyone here actually seen David Bowie live? The only people I know of are Marco and Higgybaby... both have said he was unimpressive if I recall correctly.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 02:14 PM
Has anyone here actually seen David Bowie live? The only people I know of are Marco and Higgybaby... both said he was unimpressive if I recall correctly.

For the record, David Bowie stated in an interview with Terry Gross that he HATES performing live. He's never liked it.

captncrzy
11-16-2010, 02:16 PM
I don't see how you can call that blog an "industry insider". I could start a fucking blog and say that John Asshat, ABC Record executive, told me that the Stones are playing.

I'dDoItAllAgain
11-16-2010, 02:17 PM
You guys DARE to doubt La Bowie?

Gribbz
11-16-2010, 02:19 PM
For the record, David Bowie stated in an interview with Terry Gross that he HATES performing live. He's never liked it.

Pretty much. Apparently he's not into music at all anymore. Salah, where was this "hope" coming from?

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 02:19 PM
You guys DARE to doubt La Bowie?

I've gone so far as to MEET Bowie. I love Bowie. I've seen him do a full set and then do a few songs at a awards show. Unless he is into it then it's just ok. Not bad or amazing, just ok.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 02:25 PM
Though a friend of mine saw David Bowie at the Fillmore in Denver and he played for 3 hours and she said it was the best show she ever saw. Maybe, he is just more comfortable in a smaller setting?

drowningmatt
11-16-2010, 02:33 PM
That Fillmore show was amazing. Went in not expecting anything, and was totally blown away. Such a fun show.

Bud Luster
11-16-2010, 02:34 PM
Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards has confessed that he is “not a huge fan” of David Bowie.

Speaking in this month’s Uncut magazine, Richards said that 'Changes’, which appears on Bowie’s fourth album 'Hunky Dory’, was the only song by the artist that he could “remember”.

"It's all pose. It's all fucking posing. It's nothing to do with music He knows it too,” Richards said.

“I can't think of anything else he's done that would make my hair stand up."

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 02:38 PM
Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards has confessed that he is “not a huge fan” of David Bowie.

Speaking in this month’s Uncut magazine, Richards said that 'Changes’, which appears on Bowie’s fourth album 'Hunky Dory’, was the only song by the artist that he could “remember”.

"It's all pose. It's all fucking posing. It's nothing to do with music He knows it too,” Richards said.

“I can't think of anything else he's done that would make my hair stand up."

I was going to say that Keith is pretty static on his listening taste but I forgot that he loved Nirvana.

Coachella Bound
11-16-2010, 02:39 PM
Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards has confessed that he is “not a huge fan” of David Bowie.

Speaking in this month’s Uncut magazine, Richards said that 'Changes’, which appears on Bowie’s fourth album 'Hunky Dory’, was the only song by the artist that he could “remember”.

"It's all pose. It's all fucking posing. It's nothing to do with music He knows it too,” Richards said.

“I can't think of anything else he's done that would make my hair stand up."

hahaha wasnt the entire Rolling Stones "persona" created to be the anti Beatles...??? fucking douche.... he's just mad Bowie made dance music cool.

TeamCoachellaHellYeah
11-16-2010, 02:42 PM
Nah, Keith invented trash talking in the music biz. Oasis were always trying to be Keith but they never had the talent that Keith did. As far as I'm concerned, Keith Richards can talk and say whatever his wants because his band did a lot. Granted, everything after 1978 is shit but they did ALOT of stuff before 1978.

sbessiso
11-16-2010, 02:43 PM
Pretty much. Apparently he's not into music at all anymore. Salah, where was this "hope" coming from?

I dunno. There used to at least be rumors! Not even that anymore

El.C.Dub
11-16-2010, 03:09 PM
i find it hard to believe that keith richards doesn't like ziggy stardust.

obzen
11-16-2010, 03:16 PM
I think the shit-talking has more to do with the fact that Keith Richards enjoys being a Richard.

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 03:54 PM
Curious to see how many Stones fans buy weekend tickets and only attend the one evening. Though I'm still skeptical this will happen. It could be very cool, but if it's "just another show" like 2005/6 with little in the way of guests it could be boring. If Wyman/Taylor make cameos it would be off the hook.

Is Altamont the only US festival they've ever played? I count SARSTOCK in Toronto back in 2003 which was all day long with a stacked lineup. I'm actually friends with someone that attended Altamont.


Those of you who are yapping about how this price tag is somehow going to necessitate either a spike in ticket prices AND the same amount of attendees as '10 are delusional dimwits.

You realize that GV made a killing last year, yes? And that Paul Tollett has gone on record saying that sometimes they invest a shit ton of money into a lineup because they want to bring quality acts to please the crowds, not solely to make a profit? That in fact, there have been years where Coachella has not made a substantial profit?

I thought there's only been 2 Coachella's that lost money. The first one and 2008 because they booked Prince to goose ticket sales. Jack J and Roger W(a year after a US tour) weren't enough star power. Not sure about the 2nd Coachella or if it broke even.

Funny that someone posted the 15 song IOW 07 setlist. Here's their 29 song setlist from Knebworth 1976.


01. Satisfaction
02. Ain't Too Proud To Beg
03. If You Can't Rock Me/Get Off Of My Cloud
04. Hand Of Fate
05. Around And Around
06. Little Red Rooster
07. Stray Cat Blues
08. Hey Negrita
09. Hot Stuff
10. Fool To Cry
11. Starfucker
12. Let's Spend The Night Together
13. You Gotta Move
14. You Can't Always Get What You Want
15. Dead Flowers
16. Route 66
17. Wild Horses
18. Honky Tonk Women
19. Country Honk
20. Tumbling Dice
21. Happy
22. Nothing From Nothing(Billy Preston)
23. Outta Space(Billy Preston)
24. Midnight Rambler
25. It's Only Rock n Roll
26. Brown Sugar
27. Rip This Joint
28. Jumping Jack Flash
29. Street Fighting Man


Oh, here is the quote from Tollet himself I was referring to.

See? Look at that? The man himself acknowledges that sometimes you lose money when you throw a festival.

Source: http://www.laweekly.com/2010-08-12/music/fixing-coachella/

I think 2008 may have done OK if they didn't add Prince, but it's reputation may have suffered.


Isn't $5 mil a drop in the ocean in terms of what the stones earn at one of their own shows?

Those stadium shows on their last tour cost somewhere around $1m each in production costs. For Coachella it's their stage and the Stones order some extra lights of back drop plus their musical gear and band crew.

For the band, the festival is unlimited press mileage and would make other promoters go nuts with offers.

malcolmjamalawesome
11-16-2010, 04:09 PM
I support this.

faxman75
11-16-2010, 04:13 PM
I think 2008 may have done OK if they didn't add Prince, but it's reputation may have suffered.


lol you're high. With or without Prince 2008 was a pretty fantastic year. If Prince isn't there then Portishead headlines and I fail to see how that would have hurt Coachella's reputation.

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 06:04 PM
lol you're high. With or without Prince 2008 was a pretty fantastic year. If Prince isn't there then Portishead headlines and I fail to see how that would have hurt Coachella's reputation.

Right or wrong, PH are a one-hit wonder(one-trick pony?) to many fairly serious music fans. 3 albums in 15 years and limited touring doesn't help.

Jack/PH/Roger is not that strong a list of headliners. Especially with JJ and RW touring the area the years before.

What if they drew 20,000 fewer people that prince probably brought?

El.C.Dub
11-16-2010, 06:10 PM
prince was announced within two weeks of the festival if i remember correctly. i highly doubt he had that much of an influence on ticket sales. maybe he? did who knows? my tickets for '08 were bought the first day i could and i loved the initial lineup. prince was but a mere cherry on top of a perfectly delicious cake.

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 06:29 PM
prince was announced within two weeks of the festival if i remember correctly. i highly doubt he had that much of an influence on ticket sales. maybe he? did who knows? my tickets for '08 were bought the first day i could and i loved the initial lineup. prince was but a mere cherry on top of a perfectly delicious cake.

http://www.starpulse.com/news/index.php/2008/04/10/prince_getting_4_million_for_payday_for_

Sluggish ticket sales were rumoured at the time of Prince's addition. No respected promoter throws around a couple mill on 2 weeks notice for the hell of it.

Also notice that they never made day-by-day breakdown posters for 2008 after Prince got added. Just a list of names thrown on the page with headliners at the top.

Mr. Dylanja
11-16-2010, 06:31 PM
Honest question: do you guys think this much speculation goes into any other festival in the world?

rage patton
11-16-2010, 06:33 PM
Honest question: do you guys think this much speculation goes into any other festival in the world?

No. I really don't.

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 06:51 PM
No. I really don't.

What's the Glastonbury forum like?

I'm sure very very few festival forum have fans tlaking 12 months of the year.

TickleMeElmo
11-16-2010, 07:05 PM
Is there an official Glastonbury forum? I don't think there is but they might just use efestivals or something like that. But yeah Glastonbury and Bonnaroo are the only festivals that talk as much as us or at least close as us. Oh and maybe that soulless Lollapalooza forum too.

noolan
11-16-2010, 07:06 PM
What's the Glastonbury forum like?

I'm sure very very few festival forum have fans tlaking 12 months of the year.

The 2011 headliner speculation thread on inforoo is on pg 127, at 30 posts a page, so they may have this site beat.

TickleMeElmo
11-16-2010, 07:11 PM
The 2011 headliner speculation thread on inforoo is on pg 127, at 30 posts a page, so they may have this site beat.

They also have a habit of compiling most rumors/speculations/wish lists into fewer topics than us so our sheer number of topics might equal their posts.

On topic (besides the real topic here) it astounds me that the ACL forum is practically dead yet it sells out so fucking fast. Maybe they just don't have the community or diehards like we do.

Mr. Dylanja
11-16-2010, 07:13 PM
They also have a habit of getting stoned and coming up with epiphany's.

noolan
11-16-2010, 07:13 PM
They also have a habit of compiling most rumors/speculations/wish lists into fewer topics than us so our sheer number of topics might equal their posts.

Yeah, plus way more wooks.

TickleMeElmo
11-16-2010, 07:22 PM
They also have a habit of getting stoned and coming up with epiphany's.

Yet they're not allowed to talk about drugs there too. An unofficial Bonnaroo forum that bans drug talk. Rrrright.

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 07:30 PM
Bonnaroo has an anniversary coming up next year, as does Lolla. Rumours have it that they may do something above and beyond.

Bonnaroo also had a bit of a so-so lineup last year, so fan may be hungrier.

tigermilkboy
11-16-2010, 07:32 PM
Honest question: do you guys think this much speculation goes into any other festival in the world?

Glastonbury gets far more speculation because of the condensed British media. I doubt the NY Times gets involved speculating about Coachella, certainly the broadsheets like The Times, Guardian mention Glastonbury and the Red Tops (Sun, Star, Mirror) will have speculative gossip. The BBC covers the event extensively, too which would be like NBC or CBS going live to Coachella.
I would even say Roskilde gets just as much speculation in the media in Denmark.

GV must love this speculation on these pages because it is the best way of hyping the event for them.

MrAmeche
11-16-2010, 08:32 PM
Why are we looking at '76 Stones setlists here? Their '05 European tour consisted of nightly 19-song sets, including stone-cold classics like "Rough Justice" and "She Was Hot." Not to mention the band members have aged, oh, 34 years since Knebworth. No thanks.

greghead
11-16-2010, 08:42 PM
Rough Justice is hardly a classic, it was released in 2005 and is not very good.

MrAmeche
11-16-2010, 08:45 PM
Rough Justice is hardly a classic, it was released in 2005 and is not very good.
Um, that was sarcasm ...

malcolmjamalawesome
11-16-2010, 08:59 PM
Bonnaroo has an anniversary coming up next year, as does Lolla. Rumours have it that they may do something above and beyond.

Bonnaroo also had a bit of a so-so lineup last year, so fan may be hungrier.

At this point, what could really be "above and beyond" in either context

Kropladop
11-16-2010, 09:05 PM
At this point, what could really be "above and beyond" in either context

A live fight between God and Satan...duh

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 09:07 PM
Why are we looking at '76 Stones setlists here? Their '05 European tour consisted of nightly 19-song sets, including stone-cold classics like "Rough Justice" and "She Was Hot." Not to mention the band members have aged, oh, 34 years since Knebworth. No thanks.

In 2003 they only 16 songs at SARSTOCK Toronto. IOW 2007 they did 15.

Why would they do half as many songs as McCartney did at Coachella 2009? Plus his show was an hour longer.

Bumblebee
11-16-2010, 09:14 PM
At this point, what could really be "above and beyond" in either context

Bonn could some favourite bands that appeal to their core jam community.

Lolla could be bringing back some names from the 90's touring version of the festival.

In general, maybe having a slightly bigger talent budget and going for some sort of big splash. I'm sure both will greatly magnify their past histories.

MrAmeche
11-16-2010, 09:24 PM
Why would they do half as many songs as McCartney did at Coachella 2009?
Because they typically do. Macca was doing 35-song sets throughout 2009 and he did 35 songs at Coachella. The Stones most recently did 19-song sets across Europe in 2005. I suppose it's possible they'd nearly double that for a $5 million payout, but my guess is when you book the Stones' you get their typical set, take it or leave it. And if anything, festival sets tend to be shorter. With the possible exception of Prince, I can't think of any Coachella headliners who've gone beyond their usual headlining set length at Coachella.

Thisismyname
11-16-2010, 11:13 PM
Well, Prince has done like 5 hour shows before in basements for like a hundred people.

So, I wouldn't really say he has a "normal" set length.

JClemy
11-16-2010, 11:15 PM
I'm pretty excited. I would love to see the stones!

concertgoer
11-16-2010, 11:16 PM
In 2003 they only 16 songs at SARSTOCK Toronto. IOW 2007 they did 15.

Why would they do half as many songs as McCartney did at Coachella 2009? Plus his show was an hour longer.

Macca is in better shape than The Stones:)

I'dDoItAllAgain
11-17-2010, 09:04 AM
The lack of "Under my thumb" and "Paint it, black" in those setlists worries me.

PlayaDelWes
11-17-2010, 09:38 AM
The lack of "Under my thumb" and "Paint it, black" in those setlists worries me.


So yea, uh, "Under my thumb" is now stuck in my head along with various other Stones' songs, but all to the same tune as "Under my Thumb".

JustSteve
11-17-2010, 09:46 AM
I suppose it's possible they'd nearly double that for a $5 million payout, but my guess is when you book the Stones' you get their typical set, take it or leave it.

a promoter never gets to tell a band what to play or how long to play.

LooseAtTheZoo
11-17-2010, 10:22 AM
a promoter never gets to tell a band what to play or how long to play.

Even with the limitations of a set time for festivals? Isn't that basically telling them how long they can play? Or does this just apply to non-festival shows?

Educate me.

JustSteve
11-17-2010, 10:38 AM
just that they can't say "we are giving you $5 million, you have to play 3 hours for that amount".

concertgoer
11-17-2010, 10:52 AM
If The Stones play Coachella my guess is the will play their usual 2 hour and some change set

Coachella Bound
11-17-2010, 11:03 AM
Right or wrong, PH are a one-hit wonder(one-trick pony?) to many fairly serious music fans. 3 albums in 15 years and limited touring doesn't help.

Jack/PH/Roger is not that strong a list of headliners. Especially with JJ and RW touring the area the years before.

What if they drew 20,000 fewer people that prince probably brought?

of course, Prince sold some extra tickets. Wow applause to a promoter making a smart move. It gave us all the time in the world to get our tickets, you know the ones that care about some of the other things going on, not just Prince.

I saw close to 25 full sets that year, easily the most music ive seen in the four years ive been going. Its in my sig.... that one was deff all about the music.

a promoter never gets to tell a band what to play or how long to play.

i wouldnt say "never", theres several factors that go into an artists set length... mainly its the overall venue or establishments open - curfew. The promoter then has those times to work w/ what hes got.

Tupper
11-17-2010, 11:04 AM
You naysayers will change your tune. This will be a transformative experience for some of you e-tards

rage patton
11-17-2010, 11:09 AM
a promoter never gets to tell a band what to play or how long to play.

Unless, you know, you are booking them to play an album in its entirety or part of their contract is playing for a certain length. But in normal situations, you are correct.

SoulDischarge
11-17-2010, 11:11 AM
I don't think any reasonable person would expect a "transformative experience" from a paleolithic Stones set. The most you could hope for is a pretty good time with some great songs performed serviceably with a side helping of overblow spectacle.

chairmenmeow47
11-17-2010, 11:13 AM
i would never pay for a stones set on its own and i'm not a HUGE fan or anything, so i would enjoy the opportunity to see them. i don't think it would be the best or worst thing in the world.