If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AZ Central)   Advisors tell Rolling Stones they're too damn old   (azcentral.com) divider line 51
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

2144 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jul 2001 at 12:23 AM (13 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2001-07-26 12:31:08 AM
Duh! They are!
 
2001-07-26 12:59:26 AM
Perhaps if they offer free wheelchair service and senior citizen's discounts, they could draw a crowd.
 
2001-07-26 01:46:59 AM
Madonna and U2 are the only bands that can guarantee SRO? Not...

(if Pink Floyd ever decides to tour again I'll be there...)
 
2001-07-26 01:49:35 AM
yep. "obvious"
 
2001-07-26 02:06:23 AM
It's sad because they used to so good. There was actually a debate as to whether The Beatles or the Stones were the better band. I guess this proves it better to burn out than fade away.

Mikes right, time to watch "PULSE" again.
 
2001-07-26 03:19:08 AM
When *is* Floyd touring next?
 
2001-07-26 04:02:17 AM
This is bullshiat. Mick Jagger is actually considered one of the keenest businessman around. The relative importance of his financial advisors is mininal - it is known he has micromanages to great financial and otherwise success the Stones' machine
 
2001-07-26 04:45:05 AM
'Mick Jagger is actually considered one of the keenest businessman around.' AHAHHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAAHHHHH!!! by farking whom?!?! the institute of bedraggled old rockstars? its time for him to GIVE UP.
 
2001-07-26 05:43:45 AM
Shut up! Shut up! Shut up!

Mick Jagger rules.

The Stones rule.

That is all.
 
2001-07-26 06:02:30 AM
cop on - hes fukked. a face like a prune.
 
2001-07-26 06:22:31 AM
Isn't it like that song of theirs, 'Sympaty for the Devil', they've been around since Jebus' time.
 
2001-07-26 07:49:30 AM
i bet $50 that the Stones will still tour, and they will still sell out arenas and this "advisor" will be eating his words. They are the farking Rolling Stones. Im not a fan or anything, but they are still the Stones. They will sell out no matter what. Just like Billy farking Joel and Elton farking John and all the other shiatty old music that will still sell out no matter what.
and the notion that Madonna and U2 are the only old bands to still make money is rediculous. Peter Gabriel still sells out nationwide. Steely Dan sells out nation wide. For god sakes, Alabama still sells out nation wide!
 
2001-07-26 09:28:04 AM
Chemmie: You hit the nail on the head. They'll sell out shows. Of course no kids will be going, but they still have a monstrous fan base. Hell, if they play near me, I may go myself.
The arena will be full of old geezers (I'm 32 myself) but I'd rather have the old farts there who know what good music is than a bunch of brainwashed pop culture, teenage extacy poppin', fashion slaves there wondering why the old dudes on the stage are actually playing their instruments and not doing some overproduced, choreographed dance numbers.
 
2001-07-26 09:33:27 AM
farking boy bands bob pearlman's knob
 
2001-07-26 09:37:58 AM
Chemmie:
Better bet more than $50 if you want to make enough to actually *see* one of the shows, should they tour...
 
2001-07-26 09:57:46 AM
Madpiper: I'm only 24 myself, but dammit, I have to agree with you on this one. I'm personally embarassed to admit I'm from the US sometimes, and a lot of that is based on our complete lack of culture, including the music. Especially the music. Rap, hip-hop, bubblegum pop, yeesh. What happened to good old rock and roll corrupting the youth and angering parents? This whole thing with parents liking the same music as their kids is unnatural, I tell you...it inhibits rebellion. Damn the man!*

*ramblings of a madman
 
2001-07-26 10:04:47 AM
This article is dated July 19 1982. Why is it listed on Fark? *Sheesh*
 
2001-07-26 10:12:29 AM
Knight Ridder Newspapers
July 25, 2001 05:45:00

I don't see 1982 there. I do see, however, a very poorly named journalistic group... I am not about to take anything to heart that has been distributed by guys who think David Hasslehoff in a peach polo shirt is cool.

If they had've called themselves KITT Newspapers...

"There's always a canal or a fjord or something" -Bart
 
2001-07-26 10:24:45 AM
I don't remeber where i read this Mick Jagger quote... but here it goes "I'd rather be dead than playing Satisfaction when I'm 35"
 
2001-07-26 10:45:21 AM
Rhaokarr - yea, but it could have been. grumble...
 
2001-07-26 11:03:41 AM
Mme.: Good Tull reference.
 
2001-07-26 11:33:09 AM
Cormee: Mick Jagger went to the London School of Economics.

But the Stones were no Beatles.
 
MJC
2001-07-26 11:48:31 AM
Please tell me the Beach Boys are staying home as well.
 
2001-07-26 11:55:15 AM
Hey cormee, read a little before you bark, I mean fark

http://www.vh1.com/thewire/content/news/1437129.jhtml

Mick jagger and Keith Richard are the 3rd and 4th richest UK musicians, with 220 US$ million a piece. Probably a little more than you have, right? Paul McCartney is first, but the Beatles' songs are owned by Michael Jackson. Maybe profitable, but definetely not cool.
 
2001-07-26 12:00:48 PM
Gimme' the Stones over Rage Against the Korn Bizkit any day.
 
2001-07-26 12:05:12 PM
Thank go the Stones were no Beatles!!!!

The Beatles were Pop friggin ponies!!
The Stones were real rock and roll!!
 
2001-07-26 12:36:39 PM
3horn: Rage rocks; intelligent lyrics real anger --THAT is rock and roll not the dribble that Korn and Bizkit put out. The Stones had some great music but let's face it anything they have produced since the 80's has bit the big one. So to summarize, the Stones were much better than Korn and Bizkit but don't even come close to touching Rage (I hear they are breaking up can someone confirm this?)
 
2001-07-26 12:51:43 PM
They should buy the queens Rolls Royce and drive off into the sunset. Turn the oven off, they're DONE!!!
 
2001-07-26 01:01:18 PM
Corillon: May I direct your attention to "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band".
 
2001-07-26 01:16:27 PM
I think I should say at this point that contrary to previous statements by misguided individuals, it is actually I who is tha walrus. I also reside on a cornflake. In the sky. With diamonds. Ha!
 
2001-07-26 01:47:22 PM
Wise One: You must not be too big of a Rage fan. They broke up months ago. The lead "rapper" is off doing his own thing and the rest of the band are joining forces with Chris Cornell (ex. Soundgarden).
Rage was minldess "angry young men" bullcrap. Total political bandstanding and just plain biatching about corporate oppression. They were political for political sake and stood for nothing. They are definitely no Fugazi.
They, in turn, are sellout corporate whores because they are/were on a major label.
The musicians in the group could lay down some funky grooves though. But their "vocalist" is a complete idiot. Rage could never top the Stones. Ever. The Stones are pioneers of rock n roll and are in the hall of fame. Rage's 15 minutes have ended. Hopefully the rest of rap metal will go the same way.
 
2001-07-26 01:59:36 PM
Time can tear down a building or destroy a woman's face
 
2001-07-26 02:01:44 PM
So..are these "advisors" financial advisors or health advisors?
 
2001-07-26 02:02:34 PM
Bleh. I still don't like the Stones - I've tried, I like a couple of tunes, but not that much. My reasons, in order of importance:

1. Never really appealed to me.
2. Jagger is annoying.
3. Should've retired DECADES ago.

Redeeming factor: Keith Richards has openly admitted that he's really only written three songs - the rest are just variations on a theme. Clearly false, but still very funny.
 
2001-07-26 02:21:42 PM
Madpiper: I have been out of the country for while and hence out of touch and your right I am not much of a Rage fan but I still think that a Rock band ought to rage if they want to be considered rockers. Not to many bands qualify as ragers in my book. Rage came close with some of the stuff they produced. I disagree with you that they stood for nothing; corporate oppression is not nothing it is a very important topic and they were one of the few bands that went on about the topic. What is Fugazi?
 
2001-07-26 02:33:57 PM
Wise One:
It just seemed like Rage lashed out at too many things with no discernable focus in any direction. At least the lyricist did some research on what he ranted about.
I am looking forward to the new band with Cornell as frontman. They are supposed to be taking a new direction. Ought to be really cool.
Fugazi is a Wash. DC punk band that has been around for a long time. If you want real good polit-rock, give them a listen. Woodenhorse is another polit-punk band. (Although their lead singer Skott Cowgill is an arsehole. I grew up with him)
Anyway, rock is almost dead. (Major label stuff is anyway) There is a huge, thriving underground and that's where rock will live on.
 
2001-07-26 02:38:39 PM
Madpiper:
Thanks for the tip; I'll give 'em a listen and let you know what I think.
 
2001-07-26 02:41:32 PM
Wise One: I hope you like punk. I don't care much for it myself (unless it's oldschool stuff like Angry Samoans, Dead Kennedys and The Misfits)
 
2001-07-26 03:28:07 PM
Who cares? If they still sound good (which they do, actually) what does it matter what they look like? It's just the typical American stance, that if someone isn't up to par with socital standards of actractivness, doesn't mean they can't tour, make money, and still be talented.

To be quite honest, I'm surprised Keith can still play talk, much less play guitar.

By the way if the Stones and Beatles were in a fight, the Stones would win. Duh.
 
2001-07-26 03:52:26 PM
It's not like they are getting back together after 20 years for some money grabbing reunion tour bs. 'Never was a great fan or anything, but wouldn't tune out either. The Stones HAVE been around a long time - must be some reason -hey, maybe it's that they're good at what they do - and appreciated for it. They'll be done when THEY decide they are done. They have my respect.

Big question - put on your Carnac fez and divine what current bands might have this kind of staying power (re: talent + dedication to the art of Rock)?

I remember asking my daughter this question about twelve years ago - her answer - Guns and Roses.
 
2001-07-26 04:04:02 PM
Axel was lately seen under a truck.
 
2001-07-26 04:18:47 PM
Kiss needs the same advisors..........
 
2001-07-26 05:03:12 PM
Guns N Roses would still be around (making great music hopefully) if Axl wasn't such an ass, so much of an ass that all his original bandmates had to leave the band.

And Mick could kick Paul's ass because Paul is a hippy and Mick is a street fighting man. Don't let his skinny arms fool you.
 
2001-07-26 05:53:20 PM
I think Paul could buy Mick, couldn't he?
 
2001-07-26 07:07:17 PM
madpiper: sounds like you know what you're on about...

just listening to 'Give Me Convenience...'and smiling to myself as I rememeber that formative period of my life..

as for underground rock n roll, yep, the real thing is around, just gotta find it as for some reason it ain't as easy to market as bubblegum pop. haha. and thank fark for that.
current good Rn R include the Hellacopters- from Sweden and damn cool...
also fav current US band at the moment ..the White Stripes
any farkers seen them play?
the big 3 killed my baby...
 
2001-07-26 10:18:34 PM
all i can say is mick jagger is a real rockstar. these little pussies nowadays won't last 30-35 years like the stones. they are the stones and they will sell out shows.
mick jagger, david bowie and paul are three of the wealthiest people in the world. these guys paid their dues and they deserve everything they have. listen to exile on main street, noone will write songs like this ever again.
besides all of us will be 54 at some time are we supposed to go die somewhere.
 
2001-07-26 11:45:27 PM
'Come on, come on dowwnn, Sweet Virginiaaaaa
Come on come on dowwwn yeah youuuuuuu
Come on come downnn
you go it in yaaaaaa aaaaaah aaah
got to scrape that shiat right off your shoe'

ONE MORE TIME!
 
2001-07-26 11:46:59 PM
curses.
typing too fast really farks the impact of what one tries to say.
you'll have to imagine that I included the extra 'on' and a 't' that would clarify things a bit.
 
2001-07-27 02:57:41 AM
The Stones should start acting like fathers and grandfathers
GROW UP !!!!!

saw mick on the cover of rolling stone
"what an uncool looking old fark he is"
 
2001-07-27 03:28:41 AM
I love the stones, I can't believe they're still doing it after all these years....Fred, and Barney.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report