RUN FOR YOUR LIVES WORLD TOUR (2025/2026)

Nomadd said:
As usual their management is announcing big things but finally hhey don't wanna invest too much money and the final effect is not so impressive than should be.
Click to expand...

It's clearly impressive and interesting enough, given how well they've done and still (basically) sell out most of the shows in most of their major markets.

Of course they could invest more on production values, have bit of a different marketing strategy and whatnot that could/would result in growth, be it significant or not, but as it is, it's not like the Maiden machine is exactly struggling and honestly, I don't blame them (even Rod) for not optimizing their market value & viability for new/younger audiences at this point of their career. Besides, there is still a lot of young people attending shows in their biggest markets (e.g South America, Europe) and in that sense, they do attract new fans in general, albeit obviously not as much as in their heyday, and their cultural significance and status is remarkable and I agree that they're mostly (=big masses of their audience) a "legacy band" for people who grew up with their music in the 80-90's, but getting new generations on board has been one of the most prominent factors of their "second golden era" around 2008.

Besides, I personally like how they've operated outside of the Metallica & co. scale of mainstream and although undeniably smaller act, I think Iron Maiden is very good at doing their own thing and totally a world-class act in any case.

As for the scale of their show, it's true that a lot of acts have surpassed it in a way, but frankly, Maiden's "boxed" yet theatrical and pleasantly subtle (with the lights, effects and all) show approach is (in my opinion) of course a lot more impressive than e.g Metallica's stadium shows from the recent years.

I've very much enjoyed seeing these "bigger" shows by Metallica a couple of times, but honestly, just the scale of the show doesn't really make it that impressive or memorable; the stage show/production itself wasn't anything to write home about, outside it's sheer physical size. Where as dry ice effect, lights, Bruce with a trench coat, giant candles & Scribe Eddie framed by icy Seventh Son style icy drapes within a "Maiden box stage" in 2013 = win. :)

I'm biased, I know. :D I just don't see how it's even relevant that Maiden isn't growing much at this point, as their legacy & appeal seems to be mostly intact anyway and I don't see it dying out anytime soon, whether they'll continue touring for a couple of more runs or not.

Did, or will they ever maximize their market value & reach? No. Does it matter? No.

Will they still be remembered as a global phenomenon and a one of the most influential bands of all time with a legendary mascot & stunning live shows, along with the more or less truthful legend of being probably the "biggest underground band in the world"? Absolutely yes!
 
Last edited:
Randalf said:
Will they still be remembered as a global phenomenon and a one of the most influential bands of all time with a legendary mascot & stunning live shows, along with the more or less truthful legend of being probably the "biggest underground band in the world"? Absolutely yes!
Click to expand...
Point, you're obviously right with many aspects, but it's the 50th Anniversary, a proper opportunity to make things absolutely spectacular (as they promised in the press kit).
 
Randalf said:
It's clearly impressive and interesting enough, given how well they've done and still (basically) sell out most of the shows in most of their major markets.

Of course they could invest more on production values, have bit of a different marketing strategy and whatnot that could/would result in growth, be it significant or not, but as it is, it's not like the Maiden machine is exactly struggling and honestly, I don't blame them (even Rod) for not optimizing their market value & viability for new/younger audiences at this point of their career. Besides, there is still a lot of young people attending shows in their biggest markets (e.g South America, Europe) and in that sense, they do attract new fans in general, albeit obviously not as much as in their heyday, and their cultural significance and status is remarkable and I agree that they're mostly (=big masses of their audience) a "legacy band" for people who grew up with their music in the 80-90's, but getting new generations on board has been one of the most prominent factors of their "second golden era" around 2008.

Besides, I personally like how they've operated outside of the Metallica & co. scale of mainstream and although undeniably smaller act, I think Iron Maiden is very good at doing their own thing and totally a world-class act in any case.

As for the scale of their show, it's true that a lot of acts have surpassed it in a way, but frankly, Maiden's "boxed" yet theatrical and pleasantly subtle (with the lights, effects and all) show approach is (in my opinion) of course a lot more impressive than e.g Metallica's stadium shows from the recent years.

I've very much enjoyed seeing these "bigger" shows by Metallica a couple of times, but honestly, just the scale of the show doesn't really make it that impressive or memorable; the stage show/production itself wasn't anything to write home about, outside it's sheer physical size. Where as dry ice effect, lights, Bruce with a trench coat, giant candles & Scribe Eddie framed by icy Seventh Son style icy drapes within a "Maiden box stage" in 2013 = win. :)

I'm biased, I know. :D I just don't see how it's even relevant that Maiden isn't growing much at this point, as their legacy & appeal seems to be mostly intact anyway and I don't see it dying out anytime soon, whether they'll continue touring for a couple of more runs or not.

Did, or will they ever maximize their market value & reach? No. Does it matter? No.

Will they still be remembered as a global phenomenon and a one of the most influential bands of all time with a legendary mascot & stunning live shows, along with the more or less truthful legend of being probably the "biggest underground band in the world"? Absolutely yes!
Click to expand...
Metallica is bigger than maiden. Maiden is better live than metallica by far. Last time i saw metallica i think 2023 when they played ride the lightning (one of my favorites) was horrible to listen. If we compare maiden to other bands live nowadays...like Gnr that play 3h but axl cant sing well 80% of the songs maiden are better than most of them. Even now.
 
Nomadd said:
--it's the 50th Anniversary, a proper opportunity to make things absolutely spectacular (as they promised in the press kit).
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree that this could've been the "Somewhere Back in Time" of this decade in terms of market appeal, media coverage and all that and hence a good opportunity to scale up the production as well.

Then again, since the basic concept of their stage show is rather impressive and works with their music so well and there will probably be some twists to it anyway, I can hardly criticize them for not burning that much more money with it, as the tickets aren't super cheap to begin with and bigger circus around it all or not, they'd still be playing mostly the same venues.

But yes, I can see what you mean!
 
Randalf said:
Yeah, I agree that this could've been the "Somewhere Back in Time" of this decade in terms of market appeal, media coverage and all that and hence a good opportunity to scale up the production as well.

Then again, since the basic concept of their stage show is rather impressive and works with their music so well and there will probably be some twists to it anyway, I can hardly criticize them for not burning that much more money with it, as the tickets aren't super cheap to begin with and bigger circus around it all or not, they'd still be playing mostly the same venues.

But yes, I can see what you mean!
Click to expand...
I think the basic concept will be the same, but much more elaborated with some new elements. With some good marketing decisions, everything should work profitably and be good for a band. Everything is in Rod's hands.
 
Flaming Blimp Crash said:
Sound-wise I thought the show was great, stage production-wise it felt like a step back from The Book of Souls and Legacy of the Beast. The 'city' curtains draping the risers looked cheap on close inspection in contrast to the video screens/lighting on the edge of the risers.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly on the Future Past stage setup too. Maybe we got a little spoiled on the more extravagant Legacy of the Beast stage show, but whichever way you look at it, Future Past visually was a step backward. That SiT-ish backdrop that stayed through a lot of the show made it feel very static and a little bland. Yes, we had two walk-on Eddies (kind of, especially if Stranger Eddie was a blink-and-you'll-miss-it event like he was during the St. Paul show), but overall the song choices and performances were the stars of this tour.
Brigantium said:
This is Maiden all over to me. Their management isn't as predatory and greedy as you might expect of a big name band. Other than hiring a 747, I think they always go slightly cheap on everything.
Click to expand...
Yep. Going cheap on producing live albums with Tony Newton vs the more expensive Kevin Shirley, ending live DVDs because they aren't profitable enough are good examples.
 
I feel expecting every tour to keep topping the previous one in spectacle and production becomes unrealistic at some point. Personally, as long as we don't go back to something like the No Prayer On The Road tour where they stripped away a lot of the more bombastic and theatrical elements, I'll be happy. I don't need "bigger, better, [drawing a blank on a third word lol]"; I just need different. Something to keep things fresh.
 
Vaenyr said:
I feel expecting every tour to keep topping the previous one in spectacle and production becomes unrealistic at some point. Personally, as long as we don't go back to something like the No Prayer On The Road tour where they stripped away a lot of the more bombastic and theatrical elements, I'll be happy. I don't need "bigger, better, [drawing a blank on a third word lol]"; I just need different. Something to keep things fresh.
Click to expand...
Generally, you're right. I'd like to tell if IM had more operative (oriented on media and commercial success) management, they would be even bigger in terms of recognition, respected in the music world, and popular among casual rock fans.
 
Mosh said:
You have made your thoughts on this very clear.
Click to expand...
I can't understand why the musicians have been tolerating this state throughout the decades. Rod Smallwood was good in the first, initial period of Iron Maiden's career, but when the band became even bigger, Smallwood seemed to be out of control and didn't make enough to make really good moves as the manager. He has always had problems with money, cut the band's budget, and has been focused on how to save instead of attracting more business opportunities, as a good manager should do for his clients. Just my own opinion, but in fact - most people should agree with that one.
 
Nomadd said:
I can't understand why the musicians have been tolerating this state throughout the decades. Rod Smallwood was good in the first, initial period of Iron Maiden's career, but when the band became even bigger, Smallwood seemed to be out of control and didn't make enough to make really good moves as the manager. He has always had problems with money, cut the band's budget, and has been focused on how to save instead of attracting more business opportunities, as a good manager should do for his clients. Just my own opinion, but in fact - most people should agree with that one.
Click to expand...
This doesn't make sense. Maiden are one of the most popular metal bands of all time and they make more money than most metal bands, but they are still a metal band, not a commercial hard rock band. Their music can't appeal to people that just listen to AC/DC and GnR. So, they could never make the money, these bands make. If they wanted to invest more on the show, Rod couldn't stop them anyway. It's just not needed. So, I don't agree with that opinion.
 
Prowler said:
This doesn't make sense. Maiden are one of the most popular metal bands of all time and they make more money than most metal bands, but they are still a metal band, not a commercial hard rock band. Their music can't appeal to people that just listen to AC/DC and GnR. So, they could never make the money, these bands make. If they wanted to invest more on the show, Rod couldn't stop them anyway. It's just not needed. So, I don't agree with that opinion.
Click to expand...
I think they achieved that status thanks to their perseverance, unique music style, and loyalty of their fanbase, not just the marketing strategy of their managers. And I have always been annoyed by the people (and media) who labeled many American hard rock and rock bands as "metal". No, they have never been like that, musically and aesthetically.
 
For all the comments I've made, we're still talking about a band that joined Power Trip to play for a ridiculous sum for a very particular crowd, and made absolutely no changes to their setlist which was entirely built around the most dedicated hardcore fans and skipped out on nearly every single one of their hits. I'm pretty sure if you look at the other participants' sets that they probably played it much safer and went for the crowdpleasers. Not Maiden. Fuck you.
 
Ruflux said:
For all the comments I've made, we're still talking about a band that joined Power Trip to play for a ridiculous sum for a very particular crowd, and made absolutely no changes to their setlist which was entirely built around the most dedicated hardcore fans and skipped out on nearly every single one of their hits. I'm pretty sure if you look at the other participants' sets that they probably played it much safer and went for the crowdpleasers. Not Maiden. Fuck you.
Click to expand...
Ok, but man - you shouldn't insult me anyway!!!
 
Nomadd said:
I can't understand why the musicians have been tolerating this state throughout the decades. Rod Smallwood was good in the first, initial period of Iron Maiden's career, but when the band became even bigger, Smallwood seemed to be out of control and didn't make enough to make really good moves as the manager. He has always had problems with money, cut the band's budget, and has been focused on how to save instead of attracting more business opportunities, as a good manager should do for his clients. Just my own opinion, but in fact - most people should agree with that one.
Click to expand...
You have made your thoughts on this very clear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top