Radiohead tickets are $90 including fees

given2fly23

CantKeepmedown said:

Is it safe to assume that, on top of getting it ready to go for a concert, it's more expensive to "rent" Fenway Park as opposed to TD Garden?  Maybe not.  

I think it is, but only someone from the industry could provide actual numbers. 

Here's another article that provides some insight:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/despite_big_name_acts_izod_cen.html

JH6056

JimmyV said:

JH6056 said:

given2fly23 said:

JH6056 said:

JimmyV said:

I'm betting that if Radiohead was playing Fenway their prices would be comparable to Pearl Jam's and if Pearl was playing the TD Garden their prices would be comparable to Radiohead's. You can compare the acts but not the venues. Fenway, Wrigley, Safeco...these places are a big reason why the tickets are so expensive this year. Not the only reason, but a big one.

Wait, please explain this? Given that stadiums mean literally thousands more tickets to sell, why would the per-ticket price be MORE at a stadium instead of less?

There's a lot more to ticket prices than how much they can gross from ticket sales.  I'd imagine a baseball stadium requires MUCH more labor to convert into a concert venue than an arena, many more employees/security, higher rental fee.

That's a reasonable theory, but it is a theory unless you know it to be true. JimmyV stated it as a fact, so I'd like to understand the basis of that, because you need a lot of employees and security for a regular ballgame and tickets are nowhere near as expensive, so even if you need more for a concert, I'm still not convinced the math adds up to making it MORE expensive per ticket.

For the sake of accurate comparison, TD Garden (the main arena and where Radiohead are playing in Boston) has a seating capacity of 19,580.  Fenway Park has a concert seating capacity of 37,730.  That's almost 20,000 more tickets!!!  This is why it's curious to me that whatever the likely increase in costs is to do the show in a stadium is still so much more that the per-ticket cost is $30.00 or more more?  That's $6,000,000.00 more right there!

JimmyV please weigh in, why are stadiums more expensive for a concert per ticket than arenas (which, let's remember, also host sports events usually)? 

I don't know. All I know is that this year at Fenway the fees are out of control, and I think those are kicking back to the venue. (I could be wrong.) I posted the info below in another thread.

https://www.mlb.com/redsox/tickets/concerts

Def Leppard/Journey
$185.50 face value
$37.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$227.85

Billy Joel
$159.50 face value
$42.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$206.85

Foo Fighters (Turf seats are gone, these prices are for bowl seating)
$79 face value
$23 fee
$4.85 fee
$106.85

What venue are those shows at? Are you comparing stadium to arena, or just band to band?

JimmyV

JH6056 said:

JimmyV said:

JH6056 said:

given2fly23 said:

JH6056 said:

JimmyV said:

I'm betting that if Radiohead was playing Fenway their prices would be comparable to Pearl Jam's and if Pearl was playing the TD Garden their prices would be comparable to Radiohead's. You can compare the acts but not the venues. Fenway, Wrigley, Safeco...these places are a big reason why the tickets are so expensive this year. Not the only reason, but a big one.

Wait, please explain this? Given that stadiums mean literally thousands more tickets to sell, why would the per-ticket price be MORE at a stadium instead of less?

There's a lot more to ticket prices than how much they can gross from ticket sales.  I'd imagine a baseball stadium requires MUCH more labor to convert into a concert venue than an arena, many more employees/security, higher rental fee.

That's a reasonable theory, but it is a theory unless you know it to be true. JimmyV stated it as a fact, so I'd like to understand the basis of that, because you need a lot of employees and security for a regular ballgame and tickets are nowhere near as expensive, so even if you need more for a concert, I'm still not convinced the math adds up to making it MORE expensive per ticket.

For the sake of accurate comparison, TD Garden (the main arena and where Radiohead are playing in Boston) has a seating capacity of 19,580.  Fenway Park has a concert seating capacity of 37,730.  That's almost 20,000 more tickets!!!  This is why it's curious to me that whatever the likely increase in costs is to do the show in a stadium is still so much more that the per-ticket cost is $30.00 or more more?  That's $6,000,000.00 more right there!

JimmyV please weigh in, why are stadiums more expensive for a concert per ticket than arenas (which, let's remember, also host sports events usually)? 

I don't know. All I know is that this year at Fenway the fees are out of control, and I think those are kicking back to the venue. (I could be wrong.) I posted the info below in another thread.

https://www.mlb.com/redsox/tickets/concerts

Def Leppard/Journey
$185.50 face value
$37.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$227.85

Billy Joel
$159.50 face value
$42.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$206.85

Foo Fighters (Turf seats are gone, these prices are for bowl seating)
$79 face value
$23 fee
$4.85 fee
$106.85

What venue are those shows at? Are you comparing stadium to arena, or just band to band?

Those are all shows at Fenway this coming summer.

BSully

AmishGuy91 said:

If Radiohead is worth $90, then Pearl Jam is worth about $2000

+1

JH6056

given2fly23 said:

CantKeepmedown said:

Is it safe to assume that, on top of getting it ready to go for a concert, it's more expensive to "rent" Fenway Park as opposed to TD Garden?  Maybe not.  

I think it is, but only someone from the industry could provide actual numbers. 

Here's another article that provides some insight:

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/despite_big_name_acts_izod_cen.html

Those are really interesting articles, thank you for posting them.  I still think what's happening at Izod is also happening at Giants Stadium (or whatever it's called now, literally like right next door to the Meadowlands). 

I still have the same questions, but now these articles make me ask another question: Whatever the increase in profit is (assuming there is one) for the stadium shows, who gets what of that profit?  What are the costs differences, and what are the allocation of revenue differences? 

If no one here knows, I'll probably see people in early March who can answer this, so I'll report back if I find out more.  I can't remember the last time I ran into this infamous NYC promoter, but he's the kind of guy who you could ask a question like this and not only would you get the honest answer, it would be COLORFUL as heck, he always had the most amazing stories to go with it!  But I don't live in NYC anymore and rarely run into him, probably been about 6 or 7 yrs since I've seen him out:

 https://pagesix.com/2016/08/22/rock-n-roll-royalty-celebrates-ron-delseners-80th-birthday/  

JimmyV

I think Billy Joel and Elton John are similar enough acts to each other to serve as an interesting comparison. Elton is playing TD Garden while Billy Joel is playing Fenway Park. Notice the difference in ticket price and the fees attached.

Elton John at TD Garden:

$145 face value

$25.30 fee

$4.50 fee

$4.25 fee
$179.05

Billy Joel at Fenway:

$159.50 face value
$42.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$206.85

whoyouare72

You get what you pay for...

JH6056

JimmyV said:

JH6056 said:

JimmyV said:

JH6056 said:

given2fly23 said:

JH6056 said:

JimmyV said:

I'm betting that if Radiohead was playing Fenway their prices would be comparable to Pearl Jam's and if Pearl was playing the TD Garden their prices would be comparable to Radiohead's. You can compare the acts but not the venues. Fenway, Wrigley, Safeco...these places are a big reason why the tickets are so expensive this year. Not the only reason, but a big one.

Wait, please explain this? Given that stadiums mean literally thousands more tickets to sell, why would the per-ticket price be MORE at a stadium instead of less?

There's a lot more to ticket prices than how much they can gross from ticket sales.  I'd imagine a baseball stadium requires MUCH more labor to convert into a concert venue than an arena, many more employees/security, higher rental fee.

That's a reasonable theory, but it is a theory unless you know it to be true. JimmyV stated it as a fact, so I'd like to understand the basis of that, because you need a lot of employees and security for a regular ballgame and tickets are nowhere near as expensive, so even if you need more for a concert, I'm still not convinced the math adds up to making it MORE expensive per ticket.

For the sake of accurate comparison, TD Garden (the main arena and where Radiohead are playing in Boston) has a seating capacity of 19,580.  Fenway Park has a concert seating capacity of 37,730.  That's almost 20,000 more tickets!!!  This is why it's curious to me that whatever the likely increase in costs is to do the show in a stadium is still so much more that the per-ticket cost is $30.00 or more more?  That's $6,000,000.00 more right there!

JimmyV please weigh in, why are stadiums more expensive for a concert per ticket than arenas (which, let's remember, also host sports events usually)? 

I don't know. All I know is that this year at Fenway the fees are out of control, and I think those are kicking back to the venue. (I could be wrong.) I posted the info below in another thread.

https://www.mlb.com/redsox/tickets/concerts

Def Leppard/Journey
$185.50 face value
$37.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$227.85

Billy Joel
$159.50 face value
$42.50 fee
$4.85 fee
$206.85

Foo Fighters (Turf seats are gone, these prices are for bowl seating)
$79 face value
$23 fee
$4.85 fee
$106.85

What venue are those shows at? Are you comparing stadium to arena, or just band to band?

Those are all shows at Fenway this coming summer.

The differences from band to band aren't quite as mysterious.  Differences in production costs for the type of show alone are definitely going to result in differences in ticket prices  (i.e. Katy Perry-type staging, special effects & tons of people on stage and in crew) compared to the Foo Fighters who usually keep it pretty basic and straighforward). 

But somewhat comparable bands you'd think would have similar prices so it's interesting... Radiohead usually has an interesting combo of state of the art equipment and effects but still keep it fairly stripped down, if that makes sense.  And no backup dancers LOL!  PJ also has a pretty simple stage set up usually, so that does seem comparable.  Neither band does full on long tours anymore, although Radiohead plays far less often than PJ in the last 10 yrs, right?

So still seems like a fair comparison to ask why the difference in ticket prices, although without knowing intimate details of their contracts (per the articles Given2Fly posted) we'll probably never really know.  The whole fanclub-only seats definitely adds an interesting wrinkle too... a wrinkle I'm grateful for for the most part!

RoleModelsinBlood31

Verified fan was a joke. In the future pay more to get more tix for 10c but VF was a wasted cost tacked onto our price.

given2fly23

JH6056 said:

Those are really interesting articles, thank you for posting them.  I still think what's happening at Izod is also happening at Giants Stadium (or whatever it's called now, literally like right next door to the Meadowlands).  

I still have the same questions, but now these articles make me ask another question: Whatever the increase in profit is (assuming there is one) for the stadium shows, who gets what of that profit?  What are the costs differences, and what are the allocation of revenue differences? 

If no one here knows, I'll probably see people in early March who can answer this, so I'll report back if I find out more.  I can't remember the last time I ran into this infamous NYC promoter, but he's the kind of guy who you could ask a question like this and not only would you get the honest answer, it would be COLORFUL as heck, he always had the most amazing stories to go with it!  But I don't live in NYC anymore and rarely run into him, probably been about 6 or 7 yrs since I've seen him out:

 https://pagesix.com/2016/08/22/rock-n-roll-royalty-celebrates-ron-delseners-80th-birthday/  

Yeah, I agree.  My point in posting them was just that a lot of people see ticket prices and immediately blame the band, but my understanding after 23 years of concerts and watching the industry evolve (just a fan, not in the industry) is that a band has very little say in ticket prices.  They basically want to show up, play, get their check, and move on to the next city.  It's the promoter who is looking to maximize their profits.  If a concert is a wheel, the band is more a spoke, IMO, than the hub.

Would be great to get an answer from him!

Lerxst1992

SVRDhand13 said:

PJ and Radiohead are my two favorite bands. Radiohead plays about 45 minutes to an hour less per show compared to PJ. 

Well, Ed does much more talking than Thom.

Lerxst1992

given2fly23 said:

I don't think Radiohead is on the same level as Pearl Jam (in terms of popularity) in the U.S.

Pearl Jam Wrigley 2018 - $123/ticket
Radiohead United Center 2018 - $107/ticket

Expensive but of course all will sell out.  As a fan of both, I'm thrilled, but I don't know why casual fans pay these prices just to go talk/get drunk/browse their phone during the show.

PJ probably has more US fans but globally imo it's Radiohead. They play everywhere to huge crowds.

Both bands sell tickets way under the price  comparable bands do.

This has led to an enormously loyal fanbase for both, but also has led to tremendous demand for tickets.

Radiohead has three msg dates scheduled for this summer, and I'm expecting a fourth one to be added. Tickets will be impossible to get on TM, and based on their last tour, resellers will be getting $300 for nosebleeds.

lolobugg

Radiohead played Israel.

Pearl Jam will not.

rummy

given2fly23 said:

I don't think Radiohead is on the same level as Pearl Jam (in terms of popularity) in the U.S.

Pearl Jam Wrigley 2018 - $123/ticket
Radiohead United Center 2018 - $107/ticket

Expensive but of course all will sell out.  As a fan of both, I'm thrilled, but I don't know why casual fans pay these prices just to go talk/get drunk/browse their phone during the show.

I dunno... both pretty big around here. Tickets are going to be tough to get this weekend.

SVRDhand13

Lerxst1992 said:

SVRDhand13 said:

PJ and Radiohead are my two favorite bands. Radiohead plays about 45 minutes to an hour less per show compared to PJ. 

Well, Ed does much more talking than Thom.

It’s part of the show. Plus it’s only about 15 minutes worth. 

whendricks

The ticket prices blow, don't get how a fan can be ok with triple figures being the norm and rattling off excuses for the artists. I have averaged between 25-30 concerts a year for nearly 20 years and with the rapid price increase over the past 2-3 years, the number is either going down or the quality of artist I see to hit the # will. 

CantKeepmedown

Not all are like that, though.  Was able to see War on Drugs, MMJ, Wilco, and QOTSA in the last year, all for under $60  Granted, they were in venues that held at most 5,000 people.  

pjl44

whendricks said:

The ticket prices blow, don't get how a fan can be ok with triple figures being the norm and rattling off excuses for the artists. I have averaged between 25-30 concerts a year for nearly 20 years and with the rapid price increase over the past 2-3 years, the number is either going down or the quality of artist I see to hit the # will. 

I see 60-70 shows and 90% are in venues with less than 1,000 capacity. Have a wide variety of bands you like, keep on top of new music, and you'll have every bit as much fun without breaking the bank. I rarely go to arena/amphitheater shows because of price and the challenge of getting good seats. That said, I will pay $100 for Pearl Jam all day. 

tino_11

SVRDhand13 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

SVRDhand13 said:

PJ and Radiohead are my two favorite bands. Radiohead plays about 45 minutes to an hour less per show compared to PJ. 

Well, Ed does much more talking than Thom.

It’s part of the show. Plus it’s only about 15 minutes worth. 

Plus Ed talking is usually a great part of the show!

Ticket are selling out for PJ in literally seconds in US and Europe so you can't really argue their overpriced. PJ didn't tour at all last year, and it's been four years since they last toured Europe, so that's plenty enough time for most people on here to save to catch a show.

If you feel that you don't get your money's worth at that price from a PJ show, go see another band.

JimmyV

Agreed, Pearl Jam tickets are expensive but we can't argue they are overpriced given how quickly and consistently they sell out.