Rolling Stones fans received some pretty disappointing news earlier this week when it was leaked that tentative dates for a 2026 European tour had been scrapped. “It’s hard for their fans,” an unnamed spokesperson told The Sun. “but the Stones will go on stage again when they’re ready.”
Formal tour plans for 2026 had never been announced, but the trip had been in the works for some time. The Stones fan site IORR reported that a concert was planned for May 25th in Berlin’s Olympic Stadium, as well as stops in Lisbon, Rotterdam and Munich. Excited fans were already starting to make their travel plans when IORR founder Bjornulf Vik announced the bad news.+
“There is no drama, no serious problems,” he wrote, “it is simply that they were not ready to commit to more than three months of rehearsals and touring in Europe next summer.”
Unclear reasons and déjà vu
Several media outlets reported that Keith Richards ultimately made the decision to cancel the tour. There is no evidence that he has any health problems and he still appeared very agile when he jammed with Mavis Staples and Norah Jones at the Soho Sessions in New York last month. However, for reasons that have not yet been publicly explained, he is said to have no desire to go on tour.
The news was particularly hard because an almost identical situation occurred earlier this year: The Rolling Stones canceled a 2025 European stadium tour just days before the planned announcement. At this point, a detailed tour schedule had already been leaked.
However, that doesn’t mean the world’s biggest rock band has stopped. It just means we are in a new phase where their future is unclear. Here are some scenarios that you can imagine – even if the following applies: “You can’t always get what you want.”
Scenario 1: The Stones focus entirely on new music
It’s one of the rock world’s worst-kept secrets that the Stones have spent the past year working with producer Andrew Watt on a follow-up to their 2023 album Hackney Diamonds. Nothing has been officially announced, but the album is expected to be released sometime in 2026. Just a few years ago, even a single new Stones album was hard to imagine, after their studio releases plummeted after 2005’s A Bigger Bang. No one would have expected them to release two albums in a row at this point in their career. When your touring days are over, there’s nothing wrong with just continuing on in the studio. Hackney Diamonds was significantly better than anyone could reasonably expect. So why not continue?
Advantage: The completely unexpected gift of brand new songs from a band that was founded before the Cuban Missile Crisis. And if they stay true to the Hackney Diamonds formula, the songs will probably be excellent.
Disadvantage: The Stones are arguably the greatest live band in rock history. An album feels very incomplete if there is no way to hear the new songs live.
Scenario 2: A move to the Sphere in Las Vegas
We don’t know why Richards doesn’t want to tour, but it’s possible he simply doesn’t feel like spending months traveling around Europe. The Sphere in Las Vegas would allow him to stay in one place, relax between shows and play in the most innovative concert hall in the world.
Advantage: A Rolling Stones residency at the Sphere would be a major cultural event that would attract fans from all over the world – regardless of the ticket price. Many would even take out a second mortgage on their home to watch these shows, especially if there were no others.
Disadvantage: Aside from the fact that the Sphere is closely linked to Live Nation and the Stones usually work with AEG, there are other hurdles.
Acts like U2, Dead & Company, Backstreet Boys and the Eagles play dozens of shows there on consecutive evenings. This is the only way the business model is worthwhile. However, the Stones need about a four-day break between concerts, and their recent tours have only included around 14 shows. Plus, they’re not a band that focuses on visual effects. The Sphere is impressive – but not made for the Stones.
Scenario 3: The Stones take over Billy Joel’s slot at Madison Square Garden
Billy Joel ended his monthly residency at Madison Square Garden last year after a decade. The success showed that large residencies also work outside of Las Vegas. The Stones would be a perfect replacement on the MSG calendar and would not have to develop the elaborate visuals for the Sphere.
Advantage: Keith Richards spends a lot of time in Connecticut, so his monthly commute would be very convenient. No plane, no hotel – in your own bed every night. In a month he would have about 728 hours of free time and two hours of work. And those two hours would be extremely lucrative.
Disadvantage: A Billy Joel concert is very different from a Rolling Stones concert. Joel can take breaks, sit at the piano and play his hits effortlessly. The Stones need weeks of intensive rehearsals and multiple shows to really get going. This dynamic cannot be built with just one appearance per month.
Scenario 4: Mick Jagger goes solo
Paul McCartney, Roger Waters, Stevie Nicks and John Fogerty are also successful on tour without their legendary bands. Mick Jagger is the voice of the Rolling Stones and is in remarkable physical shape. He could easily tour as “Mick Jagger” and fill halls all over the world. His solo attempt in 1988 with Joe Satriani on guitar was not well received, but at the time the Stones were still fully functioning and Keith Richards was openly opposed. Today the situation would be different.
Advantage: Jagger would continue to sing “Jumpin’ Jack Flash,” “Gimme Shelter” and “Sympathy for the Devil” every night. Much like McCartney playing Beatles songs or Nicks playing Fleetwood Mac classics, the fans would come. And this isn’t about any singer – it’s about the singer of the Stones.
Disadvantage: It still wouldn’t be the Rolling Stones. It’s like suddenly switching to substitute meat after 63 years of real cheeseburgers. It just doesn’t taste the same.
Scenario 5: The Rolling Stones replace Keith Richards
That sounds heretical, but this is no longer the original line-up of the Stones. Brian Jones was fired shortly before his death in 1969, Mick Taylor left in 1974, Bill Wyman left the band in 1993, and Charlie Watts died in 2021. The band carried on each time. If Richards no longer wants to tour and agrees to a replacement like Waddy Wachtel, the Stones could continue to fill stadiums.
Advantage: The current line-up with a respectable replacement would deliver a very powerful show. Steve Jordan is a great drummer, Ron Wood has retained his guitar skills, and Jagger is a force of nature. The ideal version of the Rolling Stones no longer exists. If this is the best version possible, it’s better than no Stones at all.
Disadvantage: There has never been a Rolling Stones concert without Keith Richards. He is the heart and soul of the band. If he really is the reason for the cancellation, it was the right decision. Without Richards there are no Stones. As a wise guitarist from another great band of the sixties said: There is a time for everything.
[Anmerkung der Redaktion: Um es klar zu sagen: Niemand weiß, was die Zukunft bringt. Die Stones könnten nächstes Jahr ihr neues Album veröffentlichen, Promoauftritte spielen und im Herbst Konzerte buchen. Sie könnten bis 2027 pausieren und dann wieder auf Welttournee gehen. Niemand hat je Geld damit verdient, gegen Keith Richards zu wetten – und man sollte jetzt nicht damit anfangen.]