$10 ticket tour. PJ mentioned.

BF25394

Spiritual_Chaos wrote:

In what way is Tom Petty and Pearl Jam comparable?

I mena, you should compare Pealr Jam to acts from their generation... or are PJ alerady old farts like Rolling Stones, The Who, Springsteen etc that can have overprices because theiur demographic was young in the 70s and now go and see a show like it's a museum exibihition...

The thing to keep in mind here is that the rapid rate of increase in PJ ticket prices over the last 7-10 years portends $500 tickets a few years down the road.

BF25394

Spiritual_Chaos wrote:

Just because you can afford them (Still) is not an argument for them being as expensive.

Its like Eddie said: The Haves have not a clue

Yes-- these complaints are not necessarily out of selfishness. I can afford the tickets; what concerns me is that many other folks cannot. The band has presented itself as a champion of these folks.

By way of analogy, I have access to clean drinking water. That doesn't preclude me from raising awareness that hundreds of millions of other people do not have access to clean drinking water.

Cosmo

My take...
Seeing a Pearl Jam concert... to me... it's a want, not a need.

BF25394

baldoallornone wrote:

BF25394 wrote:

baldoallornone wrote:

If you want a reason for the bump in prices as I'm sure you know from seeing the news but not from experience, the US economy is fucked. No one has a lot of money and everything is high priced.

No, it isn't. Inflation has been very low for the last several years. In 2009, the Consumer Price Index fell for the first time in over 50 years.

Well my point is people have a hard time affording anything these days. I didn't want to get into a symantic conversation on the financial status of the country. Just trying to say many of us don't have money to spend freely now, it's kind of the way the US is right now.

If it's different for you or those that you know, good for you...consider yourself blessed.

It's not semantics. The whole point is that you have it backwards. Times are tough. It's totally out of sync with the times for ticket prices to be increasing astronomically. It perpetuates the exact haves/have-nots divide that has been a central theme of the band's work. "The haves have not a [motherfucking] clue..." The reference to blackouts weaving their way through the city in that song is to companies like Enron manipulating the power grid in the early part of the decade to gouge consumers. I mean, this is the band that wrote "Green Disease," for Pete's sake.

"Where they have more/Still they take more"

"We can scream out our doors/Behind the wall a fat man snores"

It's life imitating art imitating life.

BF25394

Cosmo wrote:

My take...
Seeing a Pearl Jam concert... to me... it's a want, not a need.

Absolutely true, but it has no bearing on whether or not it's hypocritical (and short-sighted) of the band to charge what it does.

baldoallornone

Well my point is people have a hard time affording anything these days. I didn't want to get into a symantic conversation on the financial status of the country. Just trying to say many of us don't have money to spend freely now, it's kind of the way the US is right now.

If it's different for you or those that you know, good for you...consider yourself blessed.[/quote]

It's not semantics. The whole point is that you have it backwards. Times are tough. It's totally out of sync with the times for ticket prices to be increasing astronomically. It perpetuates the exact haves/have-nots divide that has been a central theme of the band's work. "The haves have not a [motherfucking] clue..." The reference to blackouts weaving their way through the city in that song is to companies like Enron manipulating the power grid in the early part of the decade to gouge consumers. I mean, this is the band that wrote "Green Disease," for Pete's sake.

"Where they have more/Still they take more"

"We can scream out our doors/Behind the wall a fat man snores"

It's life imitating art imitating life.[/quote]

Dude I don't have it backwards at all. Industries are still trying to clear their overhead and make a profit and the fact that less people are buying does not make prices go down. The tickets are also not increasing astronomically.

I will have to agree to disagree and move on from this one.

Cosmo

BF25394 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

My take...
Seeing a Pearl Jam concert... to me... it's a want, not a need.

Absolutely true, but it has no bearing on whether or not it's hypocritical (and short-sighted) of the band to charge what it does.

...
I don't know what it costs to put on a live show. I mean, I don't know what it costs to pay all of the administrative, stage, lighting and crew members, what the venues charge, if the big rigs that haul all that crap around are owned, leased or contracted, if the bus drivers are leased, how many hotel rooms are needed to the band, family and crew are needed or what the cost of promotions are. I don't know how much it costs to put on a gig.
If I knew that... i can give a better assessment of whether the ticktes are too expensive or not.
...
Since i don't know... i can only go on what i DO know... can I afford to go? Yes or No?
In this case, No. I cannot afford the airfare, hotel and ground trasnportation to go to any of the gigs without incurring a debt I am not willing to take. I WANT to go... but, I don't need to go.
...
That's my point.

Spiritual_Chaos

i can only go on what i DO know...

You also know that bands that are similiar to PJ, has similar costs when it comes to touring put on similiar kind of shows but to a lower ticketprice.

Cosmo

Spiritual_Chaos wrote:

i can only go on what i DO know...

You also know that bands that are similiar to PJ, has similar costs when it comes to touring put on similiar kind of shows but to a lower ticketprice.

...
You mean... like Radiohead? Foo Fighters?
I know Radiohead hasn't been here for a while... and their tickets were tough to get. But, I can find out about the Foo Fighters. Their costs are probably close... although... i don't think they pay the carbon offset. But, yeah... I'll check with them... if I remember.

Cosmo

Here is something that may be of interest:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4896262.stm

"In a paper he wrote with Princeton graduate student Marie Connolly, he says concerts are now a much bigger source of income for major-league stars than CD sales.
"Only four of the top 35 income-earners made more money from recordings than live concerts," the paper says. "For the top 35 artists as a whole, income from touring exceeded income from record sales by a ratio of 7.5 to one in 2002."

"Professor Krueger says this tendency was spotted by David Bowie, who told the New York Times in 2002 that "music itself is going to become like running water or electricity".
Bowie has advised his fellow performers: "You'd better be prepared for doing a lot of touring, because that's really the only unique situation that's going to be left."

BF25394

baldoallornone wrote:

Industries are still trying to clear their overhead and make a profit and the fact that less people are buying does not make prices go down.

That's actually exactly how it works. The Consumer Price Index went down in 2009 as unemployment went up. Lower wages and income translate to weaker demand, which depresses prices. That's what you have backwards.

baldoallornone wrote:

The tickets are also not increasing astronomically.

But they are. A Ten Club ticket pair was $83.00 in 2003. It should be $97.00 in 2010 accounting for inflation, but it's more than $170.00. That is an astronomical increase.

Interestingly enough, I just bought a ticket today for Thom Yorke's band, Atoms For Peace, at the Santa Barbara Bowl. It had a $46.00 base price, and a total price of $66.95 including Ticketmaster fees.

When Pearl Jam played the Santa Barbara Bowl in 2006-- four years ago-- Ten Club tickets were $84.50 each without even factoring in Ticketmaster.

I guarantee you that Thom Yorke is not losing money on this show. The bottom line is that Pearl Jam is making a choice to charge what it is charging. That's its prerogative, but the choice is not being forced on them by economic conditions. They would make money if the tickets were $48.50 each (in keeping with inflation). They will make more at $85.00 each.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

maybe they really do need the money. wouldnt be the first time a band blew all their cash.

doompony

Electric Feel wrote:

doompony wrote:

someone made an excellent point about how much money is spent on a night out.

for the price of a pearl jam ticket i'd be able to pay for a taxi into the city, one or two drinks, and a taxi home again.

Oh. That's horseshit.

no it's not. it costs 40 bucks to get to the city (i live 15 minutes away) in a taxi here and drinks cost 10 bucks each. thats a hundred bucks. you want my receipts?

dosdedosmisamigos

A few points I feel inclined to add as I have read through the ticket price topics on this board:

o If I was a member of PJ, I would be pretty pissed right now since all of my financial advisors are on here spilling the beans on how loaded I am. Why is it assumed that everyone in the band is completely set for life? I know all of my investments and retirement accounts were nearly cut in half last year....are the members that smart that they were stuffing their mattresses? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE unless you are a member of the band, are an accountant/financial planner for the band, or have an ATM receipt that was left after a member of the band made a transaction which shows the current account balance to be in the billions - do not make this assumption.

o For all the economists who keep pulling the “consumer price index” or “government inflation statistics” please just stop – that’s silly. Those are indices for the entire economy and are not a constant for everything. Have your healthcare costs gone up at that rate? How about gas/diesel prices? I wish!!! Not all goods and services inflate at a constant rate and to make statements on the assumption that they do is misguided. Perhaps the entertainment industry is outpacing “the trend” just like healthcare and oil? If someone could pull those numbers strictly for the entertainment sector and compare, now that would be compelling “evidence” for either side of this debate....

o Has anyone considered how many members are in a band? Just for arguments sake? People on here want to compare prices to a Green Day show (3 main members) and Phish (4 members I believe?) when at the end of the day for PJ everything is getting split 5 ways (or 6 if Boom gets voted a full share – I hope you do Boom). So if Green Day’s charging $45 that is $15/member, Phish at $50 would be $12.50/member, PJ at approximately $65 would be $13/member. Just saying.....

o A point that has been made by several people but which seems to be passed over, is market value. If PJ offered all their tickets for $10, do you really think you would be able to purchase them for $10? Or, since the actual value of the tickets is equal to or greater than the $60 to $75 (as proven by their ability to sell out or come close to selling out most of the places they play) they are charging, do you think you would have been able to actually get that ticket for $10? Sure you would have had a chance, but I’m betting you would have had to go through a broker/scalper and still had to pay $60-$75? Better yet, because you wanted seats up close would you have had to pay $150, $300, $500 to get up close or front row?

Thanks for reading!

Cosmo

MrSmith wrote:

maybe they really do need the money. wouldnt be the first time a band blew all their cash.

...
And things change as you get older. Maybe, being fathers and shit makes them feel more responsible for their kid's futures, than keeping ticket prices low for their fans. I know my priorities have changed since I was in my 20s... cocaine in no longer on the top of my list of 'Things to Buy'.
I'm guessing that you people with kids are thinking about their college tuition... and not going to a bunch of shows. (And I hope you aren't planning on using Pearl Jam posters as investments for your kid's education.)

Spiritual_Chaos

The increase happend after 2003/ Riot Act. I think they felt "mortal" after Riot Act not selling as expected or "cornered" thus realising that they maybe should start trying to cash in more on tickets, having more merch, sell more records, make better deals, putting songs on Tv-shows, trying to make people being "aware" of them again etc.

Just a thought/theory.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

Spiritual_Chaos wrote:

The increase happend after 2003/ Riot Act. I think they felt "mortal" after Riot Act not selling as expected or "cornered" thus realising that they maybe should start trying to cash in more on tickets, having more merch, sell more records, make better deals, putting songs on Tv-shows, trying to make people being "aware" of them again etc.

Just a thought/theory.

they are just bizarre to me. its like they shoot themselves in the foot. they want to be bigger, but release weird singles that dont work at all. they sign a big Target deal, yet barely tour in support of Backspacer at all outside of the northeast (and price many casual fans out). they make a videos, then kinda vanish. they aren't very 'synergistic" for a business.

not that there is anything wrong with that, it just seems like bad business sense to me. but then we al assume they have one opinion on things, but im sure Ed's idea for the direction of the band contradicts others.

dosdedosmisamigos wrote:

o Has anyone considered how many members are in a band? Just for arguments sake? People on here want to compare prices to a Green Day show (3 main members) and Phish (4 members I believe?) when at the end of the day for PJ everything is getting split 5 ways (or 6 if Boom gets voted a full share – I hope you do Boom). So if Green Day’s charging $45 that is $15/member, Phish at $50 would be $12.50/member, PJ at approximately $65 would be $13/member. Just saying.....

!

heh maybe they should make some cuts. "sorry Stone, i know you formed the band, but times are tough, and we dont really need a rythm guitarist right now. Ed can handle it. but its been a pleasure working with you. oh and could you tell Boom he can take some time off on your way out? thaaaanks"

Spiritual_Chaos

heh maybe they should make some cuts. "sorry Stone, i know you formed the band, but times are tough, and we dont really need a rythm guitarist right now. but its been a pleasure working with you. oh and could you tell Boom he can take some time off on your way out?"

Maybe it''s Stone and Boom who wanted the bump - remember that Eddie gets a bigger cut out of the record sales. In 2003 maybe Stone felt that, that decision was sort of stupid cuz he can't buy as many Hip Hop records as he used to - so talked Boom into joining his quest for higher ticketprices

BF25394

dosdedosmisamigos wrote:

A few points I feel inclined to add as I have read through the ticket price topics on this board:

o If I was a member of PJ, I would be pretty pissed right now since all of my financial advisors are on here spilling the beans on how loaded I am. Why is it assumed that everyone in the band is completely set for life? I know all of my investments and retirement accounts were nearly cut in half last year....are the members that smart that they were stuffing their mattresses? PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE unless you are a member of the band, are an accountant/financial planner for the band, or have an ATM receipt that was left after a member of the band made a transaction which shows the current account balance to be in the billions - do not make this assumption.

Their income from royalties alone are enough to give them financial security. If they were hurting for money, they wouldn't be playing 20 shows a year and releasing records once every three or four years. I mean, give me a break. The S&P 500 was up more than 26 percent last year.

o For all the economists who keep pulling the “consumer price index” or “government inflation statistics” please just stop – that’s silly. Those are indices for the entire economy and are not a constant for everything. Have your healthcare costs gone up at that rate? How about gas/diesel prices? I wish!!! Not all goods and services inflate at a constant rate and to make statements on the assumption that they do is misguided. Perhaps the entertainment industry is outpacing “the trend” just like healthcare and oil? If someone could pull those numbers strictly for the entertainment sector and compare, now that would be compelling “evidence” for either side of this debate....

Here's one example: the average price for tickets sold on StubHub in 2009 decreased 16 percent from 2008. Is that specific-to-the-industry enough for you? The average price of a movie ticket was $6.03 in 2003, and $7.50 in 2009. No doubling there either.

Thanks for reading!

You're welcome!

dpmay

dosdedosmisamigos wrote:

o A point that has been made by several people but which seems to be passed over, is market value. If PJ offered all their tickets for $10, do you really think you would be able to purchase them for $10? Or, since the actual value of the tickets is equal to or greater than the $60 to $75 (as proven by their ability to sell out or come close to selling out most of the places they play) they are charging, do you think you would have been able to actually get that ticket for $10? Sure you would have had a chance, but I’m betting you would have had to go through a broker/scalper and still had to pay $60-$75? Better yet, because you wanted seats up close would you have had to pay $150, $300, $500 to get up close or front row?

Thanks for reading!

this is a good point - 10 dollar tickets could become 100 dollar tickets, with sleazy brokers taking most of the profit instead of the actual band. but of course, this still happens with more expensive tickets, doesn't it?