smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Donmand@aol.com |
| Subject | Re: 25 over-rated bands or artists |
| Date | Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:09:12 EST |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (1.6 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
So the ROLLING STONES are over-rated...huh?!
The STONES just finished up a 2 year Tour. Grossed $$500 million dollars at
the gate and played to 1.5 million fans! ...and they're all in their 60's
except Ronnie Wood. A 45 year recording and performing career! ! ! The Highest
Tour $$gross$$ in music history!
Let's hear all the lame bands that are better then the STONES! All their
careers have lasted about 45 minutes and they play for and earn pennies. They
couldn't follow Mick around the stage for 10 minutes...and they would be
winded! Couldn't carry Keith's guitar or play a riff that was memorable.
Who are all these great bands that really matter? Their guitars and drums
will be collecting dust and they'll be Walmart greeter's when they're in their
50's. Go figure.
Don
In a message dated 11/25/2007 6:07:50 P.M. Central Standard Time,
audities-owner@smoe.org writes:
This looks more like "Bands that personally piss me off and get too much
press ink." Are Bruce, the Stones, Tom Waits or Elvis Presley really
"overrated in the same way as The Killer and Lily Allen? Just what do you mean by
"overrated"?
Ron Katcher <ronkatcher@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dave Matthews
----- Original Message -----
From: "AssociationWorks"
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 12:26 PM
Subject: 25 over-rated bands or artists
> Rolling Stones
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.