But you have to be able to see that ticket prices across the board have inflated. Bands don't sell records like they used to anymore. In fact most people donload the music they want for free. Now the last time i checked this is their job and they make a living doing it. I also understand that they make a healthy living doing it but we also admire and adore them and follow every aspect of their lives. If the demand for the band weren't so high they wouldn't be making big money, but thats the entertainmement industry. So if you aren't really making money through your recordings where else are you going to make your money? Touring.
I feel they have done a good job of keeping ticket prices as reasonable as possible. If they are a little pricey sometimes, you just have to realize that its a sign of the times and accept it. You don't have to buy the tickets but i can't really fault people for making a living for themselves. Most of us here also work for that very same reason.
My point is if you don't get lucky through 10 Club or Ticketmaster then PJ will probably cost you more than just about anyone else.
granted, if you get 10C tickets PJ is still a very good deal. but that's a big IF...
also judging by your posts in this thread I don't think you have a great handle on this. Phish played MSG and the whole arena was sold at $50 face...
again ... average out the ticket prices ... you have ONE band that is cheaper at MSG ... they play about the same length of time as PJ when you factor in their breaks and they had no opening act ... opening acts have to get paid ...
Green Day was probably cheaper...
I go to shows at MSG all the time and I've only once paid more than what I'm paying for PJ and that was when Billy Joel set a flat face rate of like $90
you would need to have an accurate breakdown of how many seats were being offered at what price to do that...
besides most people would have trouble getting those premium seats that are expensive no matter how much they cost. Most average people get stuck with bad seats at concerts. With PJ they get bad seats at a bad price...
uhhh ... tom petty has 4 ticket prices ... all but 1 was more expensive than PJ ... i'm no mathmetician but they would have to have like very little tickets in those 3 other price ranges to average out less than PJ ...
Can someone please remind me when Tom Petty, Lady Gaga, New Kids on the block, Iron Maiden, or any of these other bands use to publicly state a need to keep ticket prices down?
Have any of them ever gotten on top of their high horse and berated other bands for charging so much?
If they have never done that, then none of them compare to Pearl Jam. Pearl Jam put themselves out their through their actions and words in the past and now they are silent as they change their actions.
The inflation rate is actually pretty low. What cost $55 in 2000 costs about $68 today.
For the win!
Actually, I think they kinda helped support my point, thanks. Things cost more now than they did in 2000. it's that simple. LEss concerts = demand is up. How hard is this for people to understand?
It doesn't support your point. Inflation would have had to have been three times what it was for your explanation to work for a 2000-vs.-2010 comparison. But the references here haven't even been to 2000-- they have been to 2003 and 2006, when the difference is even less. What cost $55 in 2003 would cost $64 today. What cost $55 in 2006 would cost $58 today.
I bought a house for my mom. [Pauses, then laughs]. I didn't! I wish I did. I'm still feeling guilty about that. I bought a new surfboard.
It's a good question. I spent the rest of it, because it's not there. But I still drive my old truck from when I worked at a gas station: a 1989 Toyota, a little thing. It still works fine.
But it wasn't just about the money we made. It was the money we chose not to make. Like keeping ticket prices low, and doing what we could in other ways to keep the live experience available to everyone.
An "elastic" good is one whose price elasticity of demand has a magnitude greater than one. Similarly, "unit elastic" and "inelastic" describe goods with price elasticity having a magnitude of one and less than one respectively.
The degree to which a demand or supply curve reacts to a change in price is the curve's elasticity. Elasticity varies among products because some products may be more essential to the consumer. Products that are necessities are more insensitive to price changes because consumers would continue buying these products despite price increases. Conversely, a price increase of a good or service that is considered less of a necessity will deter more consumers because the opportunity cost of buying the product will become too high.
A good or service is considered to be highly elastic if a slight change in price leads to a sharp change in the quantity demanded or supplied. Usually these kinds of products are readily available in the market and a person may not necessarily need them in his or her daily life. On the other hand, an inelastic good or service is one in which changes in price witness only modest changes in the quantity demanded or supplied, if any at all. These goods tend to be things that are more of a necessity to the consumer in his or her daily life.
hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
If we all agree with you, will you finally stop your little repetitive crusade?
hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
If we all agree with you, will you finally stop your little repetitive crusade?
hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
If we all agree with you, will you finally stop your little repetitive crusade?
i'm not reading thru 20+ pages of this, let me just state that i 100% agree with the OP. prices are getting ridiculous around here. as i've stated many times on here already, pj's ticket prices have rose over 50% since 2003 and that is counting inflation.
and people who say opening bands need paid, how is it that muse booked a MUCH bigger opening band (silversun pickups) and still had cheaper tickets than pearl jam?!
but all in all stranger34, i've tried many times on here but there is absolutely no reasoning with a majority of the people on this board
i'm not reading thru 20+ pages of this, let me just state that i 100% agree with the OP. prices are getting ridiculous around here. as i've stated many times on here already, pj's ticket prices have rose over 50% since 2003 and that is counting inflation.
and people who say opening bands need paid, how is it that muse booked a MUCH bigger opening band (silversun pickups) and still had cheaper tickets than pearl jam?!
but all in all stranger34, i've tried many times on here but there is absolutely no reasoning with a majority of the people on this board
23 Pages later... I learned that the hard way. A lot of people do see it though, but more don't get it. I think the people who see lots of live music know that PJ is no bargain at this point, but the people who are almost exclusively PJammers just see it as "I'll gladly pay whatever they ask... it's worth it"
Muse@the garden is a perfect example of why PJ does not need to be charging what they are...
Good thread. Although, our opinions of $92 per ticket are meaningless. If the show sells out or reaches 90 percent sellout, the price is right. If not, it's too high.
I suspect a near sellout in this case. So, the price is right and the band is trying to recover it's actual value to consumers. Then, the band takes ticket revenue and pays themselves and employees and other costs. I do not see this as dishonest or unseemly.
I did think Ed's solo show for Oracle software sales people in Hawaii at which he sang with the children of a V.P. as unseemly. That was a bit more complicated because Ed sold himself on that tour as honest if unpolished. I just felt the Oracle show should have been public knowledge. If its not public knowledge, then stop portraying the solo tour as a unique "Chris McCandless-esque" journey. This incident still stands as the biggest blow to Ed's integrity, in my mind.
In the case of the $92 ticket, the paying public is informed and has a choice. Pearl Jam has a right (and duty to its employees) to collect their actual value, which was part of the point of the above price elasticity post. Maybe the above Hawaii show provided bonuses to the solo tour staff. Fine. But, the members-only appearance on a hotel stage undermined the essence of the solo tour.
It's out there for every ticket buyer to consider: Pay $92 or don't. That's fair.
Good thread. Although, our opinions of $92 per ticket are meaningless. If the show sells out or reaches 90 percent sellout, the price is right. If not, it's too high.
I suspect a near sellout in this case. So, the price is right and the band is trying to recover it's actual value to consumers. Then, the band takes ticket revenue and pays themselves and employees and other costs. I do not see this as dishonest or unseemly.
I did think Ed's solo show for Oracle software sales people in Hawaii at which he sang with the children of a V.P. as unseemly. That was a bit more complicated because Ed sold himself on that tour as honest if unpolished. I just felt the Oracle show should have been public knowledge. If its not public knowledge, then stop portraying the solo tour as a unique "Chris McCandless-esque" journey. This incident still stands as the biggest blow to Ed's integrity, in my mind.
In the case of the $92 ticket, the paying public is informed and has a choice. Pearl Jam has a right (and duty to its employees) to collect their actual value, which was part of the point of the above price elasticity post. Maybe the above Hawaii show provided bonuses to the solo tour staff. Fine. But, the members-only appearance on a hotel stage undermined the essence of the solo tour.
It's out there for every ticket buyer to consider: Pay $92 or don't. That's fair.
ok yea from a business school case study perspective it's fine...
but when the lead singer spent a decade with his panties in a bunch about the price of concert tickets being too high and admirably fought to keep PL tix low and wore it as a badge of honor... I'm sorry but they asked to be held to a higher standard.
What you are saying is totally true and plenty of bands like Kiss and Aerosmith see it your way I'm sure.
I'm very confused as to why all of you complain so much about Pearl Jam, yet you're still reading the Pearl Jam message boards. They have done so much for their fans over the years that absolutely nobody has any right to complain whatsoever. If you could sell a house for $500,000 as opposed to $400,000, which amount of money would you take. So if they can sell out concerts for $90 (remember...some of that is venue/parking/ticketmaster charges) as opposed to selling out concerts for $60, wouldn't you charge $90?
Sorry, this post is just so ridiculous...I can't believe I'm wasting my time on it. I bought my tickets for the Virginia show and I can't wait. I saw them twice in Philly last fall and it was awesome. My wife dragged me to a Maroon 5 show once. $70 for 90 minutes of concert. Coldplay was $100 for 90 minutes of concert. Pearl Jam is $90 for 150 minutes of concert. That's a lot more concert for the money in my opinion.
Can someone please remind me when Tom Petty, Lady Gaga, New Kids on the block, Iron Maiden, or any of these other bands use to publicly state a need to keep ticket prices down?
Have any of them ever gotten on top of their high horse and berated other bands for charging so much?
If they have never done that, then none of them compare to Pearl Jam. Pearl Jam put themselves out there through their actions and words in the past and now they are silent as they change their actions.
If you hate something, don't you do it too
When does the statute of limitations run out on the whole Ticketmaster thing? Or if you believe one thing in 1995, you have to believe the same thing for the rest of your life?
You should see all the dumbass shit I supported in 1995. People grow up. They get less strident. Their values change.
So what? Just think about all the money these guys saved you back in the day and be happy.
everybody wants the most they can possibly get
for the least they could possibly do
Can someone please remind me when Tom Petty, Lady Gaga, New Kids on the block, Iron Maiden, or any of these other bands use to publicly state a need to keep ticket prices down?
Have any of them ever gotten on top of their high horse and berated other bands for charging so much?
If they have never done that, then none of them compare to Pearl Jam. Pearl Jam put themselves out there through their actions and words in the past and now they are silent as they change their actions.
If you hate something, don't you do it too
When does the statute of limitations run out on the whole Ticketmaster thing? Or if you believe one thing in 1995, you have to believe the same thing for the rest of your life?
You should see all the dumbass shit I supported in 1995. People grow up. They get less strident. Their values change.
So what? Just think about all the money these guys saved you back in the day and be happy.
I look at it in a similar way....I mean, who here still makes what they did in 1995 and has refused a slight pay increase every few years since then? I doubt oh...ANYONE.
Can someone please remind me when Tom Petty, Lady Gaga, New Kids on the block, Iron Maiden, or any of these other bands use to publicly state a need to keep ticket prices down?
Have any of them ever gotten on top of their high horse and berated other bands for charging so much?
If they have never done that, then none of them compare to Pearl Jam. Pearl Jam put themselves out there through their actions and words in the past and now they are silent as they change their actions.
If you hate something, don't you do it too
When does the statute of limitations run out on the whole Ticketmaster thing? Or if you believe one thing in 1995, you have to believe the same thing for the rest of your life?
You should see all the dumbass shit I supported in 1995. People grow up. They get less strident. Their values change.
So what? Just think about all the money these guys saved you back in the day and be happy.
I look at it in a similar way....I mean, who here still makes what they did in 1995 and has refused a slight pay increase every few years since then? I doubt oh...ANYONE.
it was more than just a slight pay increase, but anyway there is nothing wrong with changing your mind. i just better not hear Eddie bitching about it anymore. but i dont think he has.
but all in all stranger34, i've tried many times on here but there is absolutely no reasoning with a majority of the people on this board
the same could be said of you guys ...
compare them with any other bands and/or comparable evenings out ... they will always be on the low end of the scale ... sure, there is phish, radiohead and whatever number of bands but there is a shitload of other bands that charge way more ... compare them to hockey, basketball tickets ... heck baseball tickets ... i wonder what the average ticket price of a yankee game is ...
the fact of the matter is that they have kept their prices low ... just not low enough for you guys apparently ...
and cincy - the point of comparing them to those bands is to simply point out that they are low ...
It doesn't support your point. Inflation would have had to have been three times what it was for your explanation to work for a 2000-vs.-2010 comparison. But the references here haven't even been to 2000-- they have been to 2003 and 2006, when the difference is even less. What cost $55 in 2003 would cost $64 today. What cost $55 in 2006 would cost $58 today.
yes it does. I wasnt counting every penny. Dont look at it so literally... the point is that things cost more now than they did 10 yrs ago. period.
DATE CITY VENUE 10C PRESALE PRICE/PAIR
Nov 14 Perth Member's Equity Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 17 Adelaide Adelaide Cricket Ground Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 20 Melbourne Ettihad Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 22 Sydney Sydney Football Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 25 Brisbane QSAC Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 27 Auckland, NZ Mt Smart Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $186.00 USD
Nov 29 Christchurch, NZ Jade Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $186.00 USD
they had to buy a lot of shrimps for the barbie for that tour though!
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Can someone please remind me when Tom Petty, Lady Gaga, New Kids on the block, Iron Maiden, or any of these other bands use to publicly state a need to keep ticket prices down?
Have any of them ever gotten on top of their high horse and berated other bands for charging so much?
If they have never done that, then none of them compare to Pearl Jam. Pearl Jam put themselves out there through their actions and words in the past and now they are silent as they change their actions.
If you hate something, don't you do it too
When does the statute of limitations run out on the whole Ticketmaster thing? Or if you believe one thing in 1995, you have to believe the same thing for the rest of your life?
You should see all the dumbass shit I supported in 1995. People grow up. They get less strident. Their values change.
So what? Just think about all the money these guys saved you back in the day and be happy.
I go to shows at MSG all the time and I've only once paid more than what I'm paying for PJ and that was when Billy Joel set a flat face rate of like $90
If you're so upset about the price of PJ tix, why did you end up getting them? Were they given to you?
Can someone please remind me when Tom Petty, Lady Gaga, New Kids on the block, Iron Maiden, or any of these other bands use to publicly state a need to keep ticket prices down?
Have any of them ever gotten on top of their high horse and berated other bands for charging so much?
If they have never done that, then none of them compare to Pearl Jam. Pearl Jam put themselves out there through their actions and words in the past and now they are silent as they change their actions.
If you hate something, don't you do it too
When does the statute of limitations run out on the whole Ticketmaster thing? Or if you believe one thing in 1995, you have to believe the same thing for the rest of your life?
You should see all the dumbass shit I supported in 1995. People grow up. They get less strident. Their values change.
So what? Just think about all the money these guys saved you back in the day and be happy.
very good point.
we're not talking about '95 though. we're talking about 2003.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
Comments
But you have to be able to see that ticket prices across the board have inflated. Bands don't sell records like they used to anymore. In fact most people donload the music they want for free. Now the last time i checked this is their job and they make a living doing it. I also understand that they make a healthy living doing it but we also admire and adore them and follow every aspect of their lives. If the demand for the band weren't so high they wouldn't be making big money, but thats the entertainmement industry. So if you aren't really making money through your recordings where else are you going to make your money? Touring.
I feel they have done a good job of keeping ticket prices as reasonable as possible. If they are a little pricey sometimes, you just have to realize that its a sign of the times and accept it. You don't have to buy the tickets but i can't really fault people for making a living for themselves. Most of us here also work for that very same reason.
Green Day was probably cheaper...
I go to shows at MSG all the time and I've only once paid more than what I'm paying for PJ and that was when Billy Joel set a flat face rate of like $90
uhhh ... tom petty has 4 ticket prices ... all but 1 was more expensive than PJ ... i'm no mathmetician but they would have to have like very little tickets in those 3 other price ranges to average out less than PJ ...
this post is spot on!
It doesn't support your point. Inflation would have had to have been three times what it was for your explanation to work for a 2000-vs.-2010 comparison. But the references here haven't even been to 2000-- they have been to 2003 and 2006, when the difference is even less. What cost $55 in 2003 would cost $64 today. What cost $55 in 2006 would cost $58 today.
I bought a house for my mom. [Pauses, then laughs]. I didn't! I wish I did. I'm still feeling guilty about that. I bought a new surfboard.
It's a good question. I spent the rest of it, because it's not there. But I still drive my old truck from when I worked at a gas station: a 1989 Toyota, a little thing. It still works fine.
But it wasn't just about the money we made. It was the money we chose not to make. Like keeping ticket prices low, and doing what we could in other ways to keep the live experience available to everyone.
The degree to which a demand or supply curve reacts to a change in price is the curve's elasticity. Elasticity varies among products because some products may be more essential to the consumer. Products that are necessities are more insensitive to price changes because consumers would continue buying these products despite price increases. Conversely, a price increase of a good or service that is considered less of a necessity will deter more consumers because the opportunity cost of buying the product will become too high.
A good or service is considered to be highly elastic if a slight change in price leads to a sharp change in the quantity demanded or supplied. Usually these kinds of products are readily available in the market and a person may not necessarily need them in his or her daily life. On the other hand, an inelastic good or service is one in which changes in price witness only modest changes in the quantity demanded or supplied, if any at all. These goods tend to be things that are more of a necessity to the consumer in his or her daily life.
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
If we all agree with you, will you finally stop your little repetitive crusade?
no
Good stuff.
and people who say opening bands need paid, how is it that muse booked a MUCH bigger opening band (silversun pickups) and still had cheaper tickets than pearl jam?!
but all in all stranger34, i've tried many times on here but there is absolutely no reasoning with a majority of the people on this board
23 Pages later... I learned that the hard way. A lot of people do see it though, but more don't get it. I think the people who see lots of live music know that PJ is no bargain at this point, but the people who are almost exclusively PJammers just see it as "I'll gladly pay whatever they ask... it's worth it"
Muse@the garden is a perfect example of why PJ does not need to be charging what they are...
I suspect a near sellout in this case. So, the price is right and the band is trying to recover it's actual value to consumers. Then, the band takes ticket revenue and pays themselves and employees and other costs. I do not see this as dishonest or unseemly.
I did think Ed's solo show for Oracle software sales people in Hawaii at which he sang with the children of a V.P. as unseemly. That was a bit more complicated because Ed sold himself on that tour as honest if unpolished. I just felt the Oracle show should have been public knowledge. If its not public knowledge, then stop portraying the solo tour as a unique "Chris McCandless-esque" journey. This incident still stands as the biggest blow to Ed's integrity, in my mind.
In the case of the $92 ticket, the paying public is informed and has a choice. Pearl Jam has a right (and duty to its employees) to collect their actual value, which was part of the point of the above price elasticity post. Maybe the above Hawaii show provided bonuses to the solo tour staff. Fine. But, the members-only appearance on a hotel stage undermined the essence of the solo tour.
It's out there for every ticket buyer to consider: Pay $92 or don't. That's fair.
read rolling stone's article on TM's prices here:
http://ivys2cents.blogspot.com/2009/08/ ... ckets.html
ok yea from a business school case study perspective it's fine...
but when the lead singer spent a decade with his panties in a bunch about the price of concert tickets being too high and admirably fought to keep PL tix low and wore it as a badge of honor... I'm sorry but they asked to be held to a higher standard.
What you are saying is totally true and plenty of bands like Kiss and Aerosmith see it your way I'm sure.
Sorry, this post is just so ridiculous...I can't believe I'm wasting my time on it. I bought my tickets for the Virginia show and I can't wait. I saw them twice in Philly last fall and it was awesome. My wife dragged me to a Maroon 5 show once. $70 for 90 minutes of concert. Coldplay was $100 for 90 minutes of concert. Pearl Jam is $90 for 150 minutes of concert. That's a lot more concert for the money in my opinion.
When does the statute of limitations run out on the whole Ticketmaster thing? Or if you believe one thing in 1995, you have to believe the same thing for the rest of your life?
You should see all the dumbass shit I supported in 1995. People grow up. They get less strident. Their values change.
So what? Just think about all the money these guys saved you back in the day and be happy.
for the least they could possibly do
I didn't even know he was a fan.
I look at it in a similar way....I mean, who here still makes what they did in 1995 and has refused a slight pay increase every few years since then? I doubt oh...ANYONE.
http://pearljam.com/news/australia-and- ... nformation
DATE CITY VENUE 10C PRESALE PRICE/PAIR
Nov 14 Perth Member's Equity Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 17 Adelaide Adelaide Cricket Ground Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 20 Melbourne Ettihad Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 22 Sydney Sydney Football Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 25 Brisbane QSAC Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $239.00 USD
Nov 27 Auckland, NZ Mt Smart Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $186.00 USD
Nov 29 Christchurch, NZ Jade Stadium Aug-7 @ 8am (NSW time) $186.00 USD
I wave to all my Friends... Yeah!
the same could be said of you guys ...
compare them with any other bands and/or comparable evenings out ... they will always be on the low end of the scale ... sure, there is phish, radiohead and whatever number of bands but there is a shitload of other bands that charge way more ... compare them to hockey, basketball tickets ... heck baseball tickets ... i wonder what the average ticket price of a yankee game is ...
the fact of the matter is that they have kept their prices low ... just not low enough for you guys apparently ...
and cincy - the point of comparing them to those bands is to simply point out that they are low ...
yes it does. I wasnt counting every penny. Dont look at it so literally... the point is that things cost more now than they did 10 yrs ago. period.
they had to buy a lot of shrimps for the barbie for that tour though!
very good point.
If you're so upset about the price of PJ tix, why did you end up getting them? Were they given to you?
For PJ? Not too long ago!? relatively speaking to what? I guess if you think dinosaurs roamed the planet not too long ago.
we're not talking about '95 though. we're talking about 2003.
Why are we talking about 2003? Pearl Jam made their stand against high ticket prices in the early 90s ... not the early 00s.
2003 is irrelevant to that discussion.
for the least they could possibly do