The official $92.05 is Too much Thread

ThrowUrArmsAroundMe

While I don't necessarily have a problem with it...

Just saw Phish is touring, and they're keeping their price at 50 a ticket.

Drum Machine89

ThrowUrArmsAroundMe wrote:

While I don't necessarily have a problem with it...

Just saw Phish is touring, and they're keeping their price at 50 a ticket.

Lucky Phish fans! :x

stranger34

Got home and found some more stubs:

09 Bob Weir $35
09 Gaslight Anthem $22
09 Depeche Mode $49.50 (MSG)
09 The Honorary Title $13
09 Brand New $29.50
09 Phish $50 (MSG)
07 The National $20
09 John Doe and Exene $18
10 Ray Davies (The Kinks) $44
09 NIN/Jane's Addiction $38
09 Son Volt $32
09 AFI $41.50

Bathgate66

Face it
times are changing
The time with 10,000 Vitalogy Health Club members and postcard concert tickets is a thing of the past.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

stranger34 wrote:

Got home and found some more stubs:


09 NIN/Jane's Addiction $38

thats a steal right there

stranger34

MrSmith wrote:

SolarWorld wrote:

MrSmith wrote:

you're crazy. i dont know why you keep bringing up this insane "incresed cost of doing business" crap. yeah, they've increased, no they havent increased that much. do you follow any other bands? it simply doesnt cost that much to put on a show as basic as PJ's. they charge because they can. not saying thats wrong but please stop pretending they are somehow forced into it.

Health insurance where I work doubled at the end of last year. The materials my business uses has seen an increase of 15% over the past year. Grow up. If you REALLY think they are trying to stick it to you every year they tour why the fuck are you spending time here? With your logic they obviously don't give a flying fuck about you. Why are you here if Pearl Jam are such jerks for increasing their ticket prices 10+ percent? Get lost!

i dont know if they are trying to stick it to me or not. but to say its because of increased cost is crazy. they are getting larger profits. whether you think thats good or bad is up to you, but its not cost thats driving this.

Thats 100 % true. Back when gas was going through the roof people were saying it was that. It is 100% not due to the cost of doing business

PJ at MSG will bring in $600,000 more than Phish... hmm...

stranger34

Cosmo wrote:

stranger34 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

I also believe it is more expensive to run a carbon neutral tour.

LOL you people are too much

...
So... what you are saying is... i'm wrong, carbon neutral tour are the same costs regular, non-carbon neutral tours... right?
If that's the case, then why doesn't everyone run carbon neutral tours?

I'm sure it does cost more, but I doubt PJ had to increase their prices so drastically to make it work for them

stranger34

BF25394 wrote:

elliot rosewater wrote:

2. Venting complaints on an internet message board will accomplish nothing. If you want to do something about a perceived injustice, really take action. It'll make you feel a lot better if you try to change things rather than complain about it

Well, you're dead wrong about that. We've seen the band respond more than once to concerns raised here on its fan club message board. It happened this week after the MSG presale fiasco. It happened last fall after the ticket mixup in Seattle. In both instances, concrete actions were taken in response to the complaints to rectify the situation.

very good point. They are pretty responsive to this forum. Didn't the my city of ruins for haiti thing start here too?

stranger34

Poncier wrote:

stranger34 wrote:

Prob the only show I'll go to that will cost this much in 2010 will be if the Eagles and Fleetwood Mac tour together... I don't even think Sting solo costs this much.

Think again...
http://www.ticketmaster.com/search?tm_l ... ch&q=sting

Top regular tcket prices for Stink are in the $150-160 range depending on venue, unless of course you want to be in the first 15 rows in which case you have to purchase his "VIP package" which is over $300 per ticket (varies again, but averages around $330)

As for the Eagles and Fleetwood Mac...please...the Eadles were the first band to charge over $100 for a rcok concert ticket on their "Hell Freezes Over" tour, which was what 15 years ago...since then they'v only gone higher, capped out around $250 last time, Mac is similar, and you can guarantee you won't see good seats for the 2 together for less than 2 bills face.

The $92.05 is not the face, its with all the fees, face is what $74.50...Sting's $159.50 ticket at Concord CA becomes $185.50...double PJ (and he adds no fees to the $334.50 for first 15 rows, what a saint).

Face for MSG was about $75

You are only playing with the high end Sting ticket... Maybe that would be fair if everyone in the 10C were going to get a premium ticket. I have a feeling there will be plenty of 10 clubbers sitting in the 400s for 92.50. You can get crappy Sting tickets cheaper than that. I just saw that SPAC low end Sting for $72 face.

So once again I challenge you to find a band out there that's not a a spectacle act like a madonna that I can't see cheaper than Pearl Jam. Until that eagles/mac combo comes out with the cheapest seats being $90-$100 face you are going to have a hard time finding ANY band charging more than Pearl Jam for the WORST seats in the house...

stranger34

Bathgate66 wrote:

Face it
times are changing
The time with 10,000 Vitalogy Health Club members and postcard concert tickets is a thing of the past.

so too, apparently, are affordable concerts, real tours, and good studio albums

igotid88

doesn't it also have to do with how many shows you're playing? A lot of the bands mentioned are touring year round.

Cosmo

stranger34 wrote:

I'm sure it does cost more, but I doubt PJ had to increase their prices so drastically to make it work for them

...
I don't know... I don't know if it cost more or what the difference is.
But, what I do know is this... touring is a big thing. There are several big rigs required to tote around the sound and lighting... and a couple of 3 busses to haul the production crew of roadies and techs from city to city, accross this nation. That's not including the diesel generators at the venues, car services to and from venues, hotels and airports or plane trips for the band, their families that decide to come along and their management and staff.
That's a lot of carbon to offset, don't you think? I think so. Much more than my one car driving back and forth to work.
Enough to impact ticket prices? My guess is, 'Yup'. By how much? I have no idea.

stranger34

igotid88 wrote:

doesn't it also have to do with how many shows you're playing? A lot of the bands mentioned are touring year round.

I should apply that when I teach tennis. Since I'm cutting back from 10 lessons a week to 5 I'll charge double.

jordan k

I wonder who will complain about the 92 bucks when they win the lottery?

stranger34

UncleNeil wrote:

stranger34 wrote:

AFI and Green Day are touring together this year

Guaranteed the ticket will be AT LEAST $20 cheaper than PJ

What is an AFI and are you comparing Green Day to Pearl Jam? Cmon

An AFI is a band that still stands for something

Ys I'm comparing Green Day to Pearl Jam. I don't personally like Green Day, but for the sake of this argument their ticket prices (cheaper than PJ Shocker!) do matter

stranger34

jordan k wrote:

I wonder who will complain about the 92 bucks when they win the lottery?

The people paying 92 bucks aren't entered into the lottery...

crazygeo

The official $92.05 is Too much Thread

Not really...
But I do understand for some of you..
the way I look at it is:

1. Pearl jam is the best of the best
2. Elton John is 200+, Springsteen 150+...what till 2015..wow bitchin when PJ will be $140
3. As long as they are and play the way they do...it's a STEAL to me
4. You can't compare...Grenn Day, Foo Fighters or even Soundgarden to Pearl Jam LIVE
enuff said'

jordan k

stranger34 wrote:

jordan k wrote:

I wonder who will complain about the 92 bucks when they win the lottery?

The people paying 92 bucks aren't entered into the lottery...

Ahh I stand corrected my bad!

stranger34

crazygeo wrote:

The official $92.05 is Too much Thread

Not really...
But I do understand for some of you..
the way I look at it is:

1. Pearl jam is the best of the best
2. Elton John is 200+, Springsteen 150+...what till 2015..wow bitchin when PJ will be $140
3. As long as they are and play the way they do...it's a STEAL to me
4. You can't compare...Grenn Day, Foo Fighters or even Soundgarden to Pearl Jam LIVE
enuff said'

1. Subjective
2. Is it a mental block with you people that you keep neglecting to show the low range ticket on other acts. You can routinely get tickets to see Bruce for less than $150 per ticket
3. $92.50 for the 400s at MSG is not a steal. Last time my friend saw them from the last row and he couldn't even make out that corduroy was playing
4. Maybe not, but those bands didn't come out with a jihad against ticket prices and then turn around and start charging more than anyone else around.

Bathgate66

Its ceratinly not " cheap"
but if you wanna play,
then you gotta pay.

I only really go crazy for PJ and Springsteen,
they both have that connection with their fanbases .

The way that I feel at and after the show ,
I dont mind paying whatever amount gets me in,
as long as I can ( almost ) afford it.