| re: Jim should sue Meat Loaf (again) | |
|
Posted by: |
Rob 10:39 pm UTC 08/17/08 |
| In reply to: | re: Jim should sue Meat Loaf (again) - Pudding 09:37 pm UTC 08/17/08 |
| What amazes me is that members of this board, who obviously know what shape Meat is in these days, continue to pay out good money to see him. I saw him on the 3 Bats tour and I can safely say I would not bother to see him again, unless I heard reliable info that his voice had improved over a long period, rather than the odd show that he seems to be able to pull out now & then. I certainly wouldn't bother to go see him and then post a shocked review on here. It's not like people haven't been warned. > > The fact that he continues to tour, with diminishing vocal > > returns, at more & more shows, means he's 'taking the > > piss' to a certain extent, and not giving value for > > money. > > Value for money...hmmm...now there's an interesting > thought. Who can say what is or isn't value for money? > > How much would you be willing to pay to see Meat Loaf? | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Jim should sue Meat Loaf (again) - Pudding 09:37 pm UTC 08/17/08 |
| Next: | re: Jim should sue Meat Loaf (again) - Macahan 03:37 pm UTC 08/18/08 |
| Thread: |
|