The official $92.05 is Too much Thread

1101113151624

Comments

  • ComeToTXComeToTX Posts: 7,764
    ComeToTX wrote:
    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.

    but tickets have inflated at a huge rate since 2003, when they were affordable to everyone. they were still doing thier best to keep prices down in 2003 so it's not an acient issue.
    This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
  • A loss of values is a sad thing to see in a band. Let's hope they don't become as bad as the Who did in the 80's and on. Damn it PJ, you've lost your morals after all these years.
    Nothing but thanks for those willing to give of their soul to a stranger. And I hate to say it but The Who are overated.
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,356
    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.

    And that's fine. But it is a shift and people here refuse to see the reality of the shift.

    People can change their minds about things, but don't pretend that it is indeed a change.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,356
    coaljam wrote:
    A loss of values is a sad thing to see in a band. Let's hope they don't become as bad as the Who did in the 80's and on. Damn it PJ, you've lost your morals after all these years.

    The fact is they are a different band. It's easy to see by their actions. That's fine, they can do what they want. But why can't people here just admit it and then move on? The band no longer cares about keeping ticket prices down. They no longer care if their music is used on TV shows. They no longer think doing shows for corporate sponsers is a bad thing. It's been some pretty significant change in the last 7 years for sure.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • ComeToTXComeToTX Posts: 7,764
    coaljam wrote:
    A loss of values is a sad thing to see in a band. Let's hope they don't become as bad as the Who did in the 80's and on. Damn it PJ, you've lost your morals after all these years.

    The fact is they are a different band. It's easy to see by their actions. That's fine, they can do what they want. But why can't people here just admit it and then move on? The band no longer cares about keeping ticket prices down. They no longer care if their music is used on TV shows. They no longer think doing shows for corporate sponsers is a bad thing. It's been some pretty significant change in the last 7 years for sure.


    but haven't you heard? their families are starving!
    This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
  • coaljam wrote:
    A loss of values is a sad thing to see in a band. Let's hope they don't become as bad as the Who did in the 80's and on. Damn it PJ, you've lost your morals after all these years.

    The fact is they are a different band. It's easy to see by their actions. That's fine, they can do what they want. But why can't people here just admit it and then move on? The band no longer cares about keeping ticket prices down. They no longer care if their music is used on TV shows. They no longer think doing shows for corporate sponsers is a bad thing. It's been some pretty significant change in the last 7 years for sure.

    People on the board have trouble admiting it. Others, including myself, have trouble moving on. Their values and morals are intertwined with their music/lyrics. This change in band values has changed the way the music effects me as I no longer think I would be able to relate to anyone in the band. I know people disagree and say music is music, but I don't believe you can seperate the art from the artist.
    Nothing but thanks for those willing to give of their soul to a stranger. And I hate to say it but The Who are overated.
  • stranger34stranger34 Posts: 235
    coaljam wrote:
    coaljam wrote:
    A loss of values is a sad thing to see in a band. Let's hope they don't become as bad as the Who did in the 80's and on. Damn it PJ, you've lost your morals after all these years.

    The fact is they are a different band. It's easy to see by their actions. That's fine, they can do what they want. But why can't people here just admit it and then move on? The band no longer cares about keeping ticket prices down. They no longer care if their music is used on TV shows. They no longer think doing shows for corporate sponsers is a bad thing. It's been some pretty significant change in the last 7 years for sure.

    People on the board have trouble admiting it. Others, including myself, have trouble moving on. Their values and morals are intertwined with their music/lyrics. This change in band values has changed the way the music effects me as I no longer think I would be able to relate to anyone in the band. I know people disagree and say music is music, but I don't believe you can seperate the art from the artist.

    You just summed it up 100% for me.

    Who they WERE is so ingrained in their pre-backspacer music...

    A values change for an artist like Celine Dion who is basically a performer is one thing, but for a band like Pearl Jam - IT'S A HUGE DEAL

    and it's real, and I suppose I am still in denial.
  • stranger34stranger34 Posts: 235
    Let's put it this way. If Morrissey started going around eating Big Mac's he'd have a credibility issue with a large portion of his fanbase.

    Pearl Jam in 2010 has a credibility issue with me and probably alot of other fans who jumped on board between 98-2002... when Ed was playing Ralph Nader events and writing songs like Soon Forget and Green Disease and ticket prices affordability was an issue to the band.

    What seperated Pearl Jam from the pack imo was the authenticity and the spirt of their music and their message.

    In 2010 they strike me as just another rock band...
  • PJam82PJam82 Posts: 107
    You know, by the other token they are now selling albums for as little as 7.99 per CD on iTunes....you save at least 10$ on that these days compared to 1995.

    Are you going to complain about saving some money there?
  • stranger34 wrote:
    Let's put it this way. If Morrissey started going around eating Big Mac's he'd have a credibility issue with a large portion of his fanbase.

    Pearl Jam in 2010 has a credibility issue with me and probably alot of other fans who jumped on board between 98-2002... when Ed was playing Ralph Nader events and writing songs like Soon Forget and Green Disease and ticket prices affordability was an issue to the band.

    What seperated Pearl Jam from the pack imo was the authenticity and the spirt of their music and their message.

    In 2010 they strike me as just another rock band...

    Its so sad that I have to agree with you. Another rock band, jesus what happened to them in the last 7 years to make them lose touch?
    Nothing but thanks for those willing to give of their soul to a stranger. And I hate to say it but The Who are overated.
  • PJam82 wrote:
    You know, by the other token they are now selling albums for as little as 7.99 per CD on iTunes....you save at least 10$ on that these days compared to 1995.

    Are you going to complain about saving some money there?


    That is a standard price for old cds on itunes. Its digital music, they make a much higher profit compared to CD's.
    Nothing but thanks for those willing to give of their soul to a stranger. And I hate to say it but The Who are overated.
  • satansbedsatansbed Posts: 2,139
    where are people getting the 92.50, i just checked ticket master and it was 79 for msg and 74.50 for boston??
  • cajunkiwicajunkiwi Posts: 984
    stranger34 wrote:
    Pearl Jam is keeps their tickets lower than most

    No they don't dude and you people who say that do really sound silly. Sure they charge less than U2 and Paul McCartney and guys like that. But they charge way more than their contemporaries like, as I said earlier in the thread, Dave Matthews, Radiohead, Metallica, and Green Day. All four of those bands are just as popular as Pearl Jam....and they all charge like $30 less for tix.

    These are the only bands I can think of who charge moere than PJ for their avg ticket price WHEN TOURING ALONE:

    Billy Joel
    Paul McCartney
    Madonna (Maybe)
    Springsteen (Maybe)
    u2 (Maybe)

    Even U2 had $50 tickets on their last tour. I'm going to see DMB in Houston in September, and two tickets to that cost as much as one PJ ticket.
    And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
  • WobbieWobbie Posts: 29,941
    coaljam wrote:
    stranger34 wrote:
    In 2010 they strike me as just another rock band...

    Its so sad that I have to agree with you. Another rock band, jesus what happened to them in the last 7 years to make them lose touch?

    go see them play.........they are far from "just another rock band" :sick:

    jesus.....maybe not you guys specifically..........but people gladly pay $100+ per month for a cell phone and then then bitch about shit like this.
    If I had known then what I know now...

    Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
    VIC 07
    EV LA1 08
    Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
    Columbus 10
    EV LA 11
    Vancouver 11
    Missoula 12
    Portland 13, Spokane 13
    St. Paul 14, Denver 14
    Philly I & II, 16
    Denver 22
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    It's amazing to me that we have to put up with one of these threads every single tour.

    I guarantee you, somewhere in cyberspace, there's an old thread from 2000 bitching about $40 tickets.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • hopethatuchokehopethatuchoke Posts: 2,927
    What are you putting up with exactly? You knew the gist of this thread before opening it. It's a discussion board for opinions. Just as many people say "Don't like the prices? Don't go!!"...heed your own words and don't open the thread if you don't like it.
  • stranger34stranger34 Posts: 235
    imalive wrote:
    coaljam wrote:
    stranger34 wrote:
    In 2010 they strike me as just another rock band...

    Its so sad that I have to agree with you. Another rock band, jesus what happened to them in the last 7 years to make them lose touch?

    go see them play.........they are far from "just another rock band" :sick:

    jesus.....maybe not you guys specifically..........but people gladly pay $100+ per month for a cell phone and then then bitch about shit like this.


    I've seen them play 10+ times... There's something missing that used to be there up until about 05. Still a great great rock show for sure, maybe the best, but something's amiss...
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    What are you putting up with exactly? You knew the gist of this thread before opening it. It's a discussion board for opinions. Just as many people say "Don't like the prices? Don't go!!"...heed your own words and don't open the thread if you don't like it.

    Alright, fine. Good point.

    But, fuck, it's exhausting.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    stranger34 wrote:
    I've seen them play 10+ times... There's something missing that used to be there up until about 05. Still a great great rock show for sure, maybe the best, but something's amiss...

    Guess it's all a matter of taste ... or venue ... or whatever ... but about five of the best six shows I've been to have all been post-Avocado. For whatever it's worth.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • BF25394BF25394 Posts: 4,361
    JR140627 wrote:
    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?

    Bad analogy. Most people selling their homes do not have complete financial security. The analogy is to the athlete who turns down an $80 million contract in favor of a $90 million contract. He has every right to choose the bigger contract, but he opens himself up to accusations of greed, since the lesser contract provides a lifetime of financial security. If the athlete had been publicly outspoken about not being in it for the money, then he also opens himself up to accusations of hypocrisy.
    I gather speed from you fucking with me.
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Posts: 10,217
    coaljam wrote:
    coaljam wrote:
    A loss of values is a sad thing to see in a band. Let's hope they don't become as bad as the Who did in the 80's and on. Damn it PJ, you've lost your morals after all these years.

    The fact is they are a different band. It's easy to see by their actions. That's fine, they can do what they want. But why can't people here just admit it and then move on? The band no longer cares about keeping ticket prices down. They no longer care if their music is used on TV shows. They no longer think doing shows for corporate sponsers is a bad thing. It's been some pretty significant change in the last 7 years for sure.

    People on the board have trouble admiting it. Others, including myself, have trouble moving on. Their values and morals are intertwined with their music/lyrics. This change in band values has changed the way the music effects me as I no longer think I would be able to relate to anyone in the band. I know people disagree and say music is music, but I don't believe you can seperate the art from the artist.

    I think around the riot act time, I had trouble admitting that I saw them changing. But I'm still happy, even though my favorite records/era are No Code and Yield.

    I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but I really like when people put it in perspective. Seriously, how many other meaningless things do we pay $75-90 for all the time. Good point = cell phone, cableTV, ect. again, for a 2 1/2 hour concert, we are paying each member of the band 5 bucks an hour!!! (and that's including BOOM!) haha :D

    we are all going to keep on diagreeing it seems like, but, I for one, am happy about ANY chance I get to see the greatest rock band in the world for these prices.

    No offense either, but seriously, if any of you really think they are just another band, why are you here? I'm really just trying to understand.. :?
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    BF25394 wrote:
    JR140627 wrote:
    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?

    Bad analogy. Most people selling their homes do not have complete financial security. The analogy is to the athlete who turns down an $80 million contract in favor of a $90 million contract. He has every right to choose the bigger contract, but he opens himself up to accusations of greed, since the lesser contract provides a lifetime of financial security. If the athlete had been publicly outspoken about not being in it for the money, then he also opens himself up to accusations of hypocrisy.

    What if the athlete used to be outspoken, but now hasn't uttered a word about it in 15 fucking years?
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • JonnyPistachioJonnyPistachio Posts: 10,217
    BF25394 wrote:
    JR140627 wrote:
    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?

    Bad analogy. Most people selling their homes do not have complete financial security. The analogy is to the athlete who turns down an $80 million contract in favor of a $90 million contract. He has every right to choose the bigger contract, but he opens himself up to accusations of greed, since the lesser contract provides a lifetime of financial security. If the athlete had been publicly outspoken about not being in it for the money, then he also opens himself up to accusations of hypocrisy.

    Sorry, but I think yours is a bad analogy as well. That althlete is not a business and probably only has concerns for his profit and his agents %. My point throughout this thread is that we don't know what other expenses the band has these days, but it's evident that it is far more than any athlete or the business that surrounds him/her.

    And you're right, unfortunately that anytime someone who makes a lot of money asks for more, they will have to endure accusations of greed. However, we will never know how much more money PJ will personally make. Personally,I think they are making waaay more per show, but not much more overall. they probably just wanted to maintain a consistent income with less shows.
    Pick up my debut novel here on amazon: Jonny Bails Floatin (in paperback) (also available on Kindle for $2.99)
  • i just wonder what it was that changed. and it wasnt a gradual thing, it seemed to happen pretty quickly. all of the sudden Ed wasnt angry anymore, they mellowed out, and so on. i was pretty shocked last year when Ed barely said anything political at shows. dont get me wrong, I LOVE THAT, i just wonder what it was. they must have found some really good weed.
  • stranger34stranger34 Posts: 235
    MrSmith wrote:
    i just wonder what it was that changed. and it wasnt a gradual thing, it seemed to happen pretty quickly. all of the sudden Ed wasnt angry anymore, they mellowed out, and so on. i was pretty shocked last year when Ed barely said anything political at shows. dont get me wrong, I LOVE THAT, i just wonder what it was. they must have found some really good weed.

    It happened very quickly. 06 was still old PJ. I think it started in 08 and was complete by 09. No clue what it was.
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    MrSmith wrote:
    i just wonder what it was that changed. and it wasnt a gradual thing, it seemed to happen pretty quickly. all of the sudden Ed wasnt angry anymore, they mellowed out, and so on. i was pretty shocked last year when Ed barely said anything political at shows. dont get me wrong, I LOVE THAT, i just wonder what it was. they must have found some really good weed.

    People tend to mellow when they grow up, get married and have kids. Kids tend to put things into perspective for you.

    Frankly, if this band were still angry about everything and pissed off about everything all the time ... I probably would have jumped ship a long time ago. The one thing I'm forever thankful for is that this band has matured with me ... I feel like we've been in the same space, dealing with the same issues and emotions, with each succcessive album.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    stranger34 wrote:
    MrSmith wrote:
    i just wonder what it was that changed. and it wasnt a gradual thing, it seemed to happen pretty quickly. all of the sudden Ed wasnt angry anymore, they mellowed out, and so on. i was pretty shocked last year when Ed barely said anything political at shows. dont get me wrong, I LOVE THAT, i just wonder what it was. they must have found some really good weed.

    It happened very quickly. 06 was still old PJ. I think it started in 08 and was complete by 09. No clue what it was.

    Nah. The band I saw in '06 was the same band I saw in '08 was the same band I saw in '09.

    If there's a line of delination between "old PJ" and "new PJ" (whatever the hell that means), it was drawn before '06.
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    I still don't know what you people are lamenting. Last I saw them was at ACL and they blew the fucking roof off that place. Even the old Austin hipsters, who hate every band they've heard of, left impressed.

    I don't know what has changed, if anything. I just know that every time I see these dudes, they blow the roof off.

    Are people just pissed because Ed seems happy? Would you rather he offed himself in 1994? What the hell is the matter with you people?
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • edited March 2010
    MrSmith wrote:
    i just wonder what it was that changed. and it wasnt a gradual thing, it seemed to happen pretty quickly. all of the sudden Ed wasnt angry anymore, they mellowed out, and so on. i was pretty shocked last year when Ed barely said anything political at shows. dont get me wrong, I LOVE THAT, i just wonder what it was. they must have found some really good weed.

    People tend to mellow when they grow up, get married and have kids. Kids tend to put things into perspective for you.

    .

    i dont know about that. maybe he just heard "shut up and sing" one too many times.
    Post edited by LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun on
  • cajunkiwicajunkiwi Posts: 984
    stranger34 wrote:
    I've seen them play 10+ times... There's something missing that used to be there up until about 05. Still a great great rock show for sure, maybe the best, but something's amiss...

    Guess it's all a matter of taste ... or venue ... or whatever ... but about five of the best six shows I've been to have all been post-Avocado. For whatever it's worth.

    I hope you're right, bro. I haven't seen them live in 12 years, and I'm counting down the 39 days until I see them rock Jazz Fest. I'm in the camp of people who definitely don't like Backspacer (comfortably my least-favorite PJ album), but then I think back to 12 years ago... I wasn't a huge fan of Yield, and then I was 15 feet away from Mike when they played DTE. Safe to say I've never looked at the song the same way since. I hope I'm equally as pleasantly surprised by the Backspacer songs live.
    And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
This discussion has been closed.