Why 'Amused to Death' isn't the masterpiece Roger says it is

All discussion related specifically to Roger Waters.
Eclipse
Lord!!
Lord!!
Posts: 3594
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2003 4:30 pm
Location: your closet, listening to Genesis.

Re: Why 'Amused to Death' isn't the masterpiece Roger says it is

Post by Eclipse »

mosespa wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 6:59 pm Sorry, guys; I wasn't aware that we were talking about which made the most money for the artists; I was under the impression that we were talking about the functions of things. (After all, bands have ALWAYS made more money off of shows than off of album sales; this isn't anything new that the internet invented. Sorry to break it to you.)

So...bands who tour with no new album to promote aren't just selling out and ripping off fans by not having anything new to PROMOTE?

They just aren't spending money on ad revenue? Is that what we're saying, here?

No need to say sorry, after all you did not break anything to us :o
And you clearly did not get the idea of neither my post nor AT's one, but I won't bother explaining it again, if you did not get it by the first time.
Plus, I hope you get the idea of ZZ's post right above this one, since he makes total sense as well.
Good luck!
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11440
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Re: Why 'Amused to Death' isn't the masterpiece Roger says it is

Post by mosespa »

ZiggyZipgun wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:21 am
mosespa wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 6:59 pm (After all, bands have ALWAYS made more money off of shows than off of album sales; this isn't anything new that the internet invented. Sorry to break it to you.)
This was almost never true of Pink Floyd when Roger was involved; he said multiple times that they didn't mind that their tours lost money because they'd always make it up in album sales.
Given that nothing is 100% (not even that statement,) I think we can allow an exception in the form of a band that spent a lot of their money on film editing suites, cardboard box construction, inflatables (plural) manufacturing, etc. etc. etc.

My statement stands, whether you approve or not.
User avatar
Annoying Twit
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:26 pm

Re: Why 'Amused to Death' isn't the masterpiece Roger says it is

Post by Annoying Twit »

It's a bit off-topic for the thread, but there is an interesting discussion of this here:

https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/article ... tribution/
Record sales was undoubtedly the most important revenue stream and record labels generally considered concert tours as a way to promote a studio album, and were not really concerned whether the tour was profitable or not. Sometimes the record label even paid tour support, which would enable bands to go on tour and promote the album even though the actual tour was running with a loss.
penguinzzz
Axe
Axe
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2021 1:34 pm

Re: Why 'Amused to Death' isn't the masterpiece Roger says it is

Post by penguinzzz »

ZiggyZipgun wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 1:21 am
mosespa wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 6:59 pm (After all, bands have ALWAYS made more money off of shows than off of album sales; this isn't anything new that the internet invented. Sorry to break it to you.)
This was almost never true of Pink Floyd when Roger was involved; he said multiple times that they didn't mind that their tours lost money because they'd always make it up in album sales. He said the same thing about Pros and Cons and turned out to be very wrong. Tickets were ridiculously cheap back then; albums weren't. The mid '80s probably marked the shift for everyone, but the late '90s were when album sales revenue dried up. Plural decades ago.
I doubt PF 'lost money' once they shifted up in venue size mid-73. So not really 'almost never'.

Waters' most obvious quote about this would be to Tommy Vance in '79 - "this show (The Wall) is going to lose money, but on those tours that I’m talking about; the ’75 tour of Europe and England and the ’77 tour of England and Europe and America as well, we were making money, we made a lot of money on those tours, because we were playing big venues"