GEN
Active topics
  1. Arenas are great but i can never get standing tickets even when i joined fanclub, yet days before the show they appear for sale after spent hundreds on seating tickets
  2. Originally posted by f1schu111:Arenas are great but i can never get standing tickets even when i joined fanclub, yet days before the show they appear for sale after spent hundreds on seating tickets
    Something to take away then. There are always tickets, for any U2 show. Just need to be patient sometimes
  3. Stadiums, they don't have to tour as long, they get more inventive.
  4. Makes me think of Vertigo. They played 10 shows in NYC!!! 6 in Chicago and LA. 7 in Boston. They could’ve done a stadium leg in Fall 2005 and saved themselves a lot of work, and for more money!
  5. Originally posted by podiumboy:[..]
    Makes me think of Vertigo. They played 10 shows in NYC!!! 6 in Chicago and LA. 7 in Boston. They could’ve done a stadium leg in Fall 2005 and saved themselves a lot of work, and for more money!
    I remember Adam saying stadium tours are shorter but arenas are easier
  6. Hopefully stadiums. It would be great to do a 90’s tour with Achtung baby Zooropa and pop.
  7. Stadium doors are the best
  8. Hope they go quiet for a while let the dust settle then come back in 2/3 years with an arena tour,like Vertigo with a European outdoor leg for the summer.


  9. The just need to tour Australia like they did with Lovetown and they do in Europe and North America. For e+i they did about 25 arena shows over 2-2.5 months in each region. That's easy to replicate here and they would only have to set up and relocate 5 times. Agree though, it'll be stadiums.
  10. I'd think it would be the opposite. They need to perform 3-4 arena shows to fill as many seats as one stadium show. If they want to get anywhere near close to meeting demand an arena tour involves far more shows, over a far longer period.

    That's got to be tougher on them all physically, & tougher on Bono's voice.
  11. If, as expected, it's quite a long wait for the next tour, you'd think demand would have increased. So a stadium tour should be possible. Delivering Live Nation (I suppose they'll still be around) & the band more money in a shorter time.

    I guess if demand doesn't recover, then an arena tour would be the safest option in some markets.

    I would prefer to see an arena tour.
  12. Originally posted by ddarroch:[..]
    I'd think it would be the opposite. They need to perform 3-4 arena shows to fill as many seats as one stadium show. If they want to get anywhere near close to meeting demand an arena tour involves far more shows, over a far longer period.

    That's got to be tougher on them all physically, & tougher on Bono's voice.
    An arena show is a controlled environment. Whereas a stadium, you never know what can happen. And unfortunately for U2, they encounter rain more often than not. And at 60+ years old, performing in freezing temperatures while being drenched with water isn’t exactly ideal. Stage distance doesn’t matter. But if you’ve been following the past several years, it’s pretty evident Bono isn’t as jumpy around the stage probably due to health.

    With all that said, I find their stadium shows to be superior. Better energy, visuals, and getting tickets is easier. Also for whatever odd reason, (Joe, cough) their sound outdoors is better than indoors. Maybe it’s time to get a second younger soundguy to help out.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.