It's really got to suck for the guys in the band to be held to standards they set for themselves 25-30 years ago. I sure as heck don't want people in my life to hold me to the same standards or beliefs I had when I was 20-25 years old. Maybe stop holding them to those standards of yesteryear or put them on a pedestal that they are above what other bands do or charge. No system they implement is going to be perfect, but the more 10C seats and the availability of every show is still pretty damn good. The premium prices is a really easy decision for most people. Either you are ok with paying it or not. It shouldn't be a two week bitch fest about the cost in my opinion because the old days aren't coming back.
Right?
They fought for their fanbase that was 16 to 26 years old primarily at the time....which btw is when you are at your poorest.
If you can't afford shows now... No one to blame but the choices you have made of your own free will. 30 years later and you haven't grown and made more money? Take a long hard look in the mirror before blaming the band. Your decisions aren't the bands fault. Plenty of things to complain about in this world and Pearl Jam ticket prices aren't one of them.
Very bad..its the second time i think im reading posts about ''life choices''..ridiculous..
not exactly ridiculous. I think the reason veteran act's can charge more is because on average they have older fans, who on average have higher amounts of disposable income. Not everyone, but on average.
It's why when we were young PJ, Nirvana, etc.. tickets were pretty cheap, but a Stones show would cost 3x as much.
It's also technically the cycle many people go through in their career. Late teen's and 20's, you figure out some education, figure out skills sets, build a career. Get into your 30's you try to make sure you own a home and start building equity. Get to your 40s and 50s and you should be in peak earning years (due to skills and experience). That's when you do a lot of retirement saving etc.. Lots of people go through that cycle, it's not really ridiculous. Yes some people get hit by the bad luck bus, but that's how it works for many people.
Like for me, the hardest tickets I ever bought were the ones for the 2000 tour. They were all US dates, FX rate was awful, it was my first year of university. I think after FX the Seattle tickets worked out to about 60cdn. That was so hard to scrape up money. a $208cdn 2024 ticket seems way less painful to me than a $60 2000 ticket.
I think saying that anyone who would feel financial strain from paying the current prices must have made poor "life choices" is a bad and condescending take. Any individual's financial circumstance is based on many factors. Not everyone has the same opportunities, priorities, or family situation. And misfortune can strike though no choice at all. If someone devotes their career to public service, teaching, etc., implying that they made a bad choice because concert tickets are less affordable is pretty insulting.
Exactly. Not everyone is driven by making the most money they can. Thankfully.
And just to add, some people have lots of money and the prices are not an issue, but it doesn’t mean they have made good life choices.
PJ: 2013: London (ON); Buffalo; 2014: Cincinnati; 2016: Sunrise, Miami, Toronto 1-2, Wrigley 2; 2018: London (UK) 1, Milan, Padova, Sea 2, Wrigley 1-2, Fenway 1-2; 2021: SHN, Ohana, Ohana Encore 1-2; 2022: LA 1-2, Phx, Oak 1-2, Fresno, Copenhagen, Hyde Park 1-2; Quebec, Ottawa, Hamilton, Toronto; MSG, Camden, Nashville, Louisville, St. Louis, OKC; 2023: St. Paul 1-2, Chicago 1-2; Fort Worth 2; Austin 1-2; 2024: Vancouver 1-2, LV 1-2, LA 1-2, Napa, Barcelona 1-2
EV Solo: 2017 Louisville and Franklin, 2018 Ohana, 2019 Innings Fest, Berlin, Düsseldorf, Dublin and Ohana; 2021 Ohana Friday (from beach) and Saturday; 2022 Earthlings Newark; 2023 Innings Fest and Benoraya 1-2.
Gutted: London 2 2018, Sacramento 2022, Noblesville 2023
It's really got to suck for the guys in the band to be held to standards they set for themselves 25-30 years ago. I sure as heck don't want people in my life to hold me to the same standards or beliefs I had when I was 20-25 years old. Maybe stop holding them to those standards of yesteryear or put them on a pedestal that they are above what other bands do or charge. No system they implement is going to be perfect, but the more 10C seats and the availability of every show is still pretty damn good. The premium prices is a really easy decision for most people. Either you are ok with paying it or not. It shouldn't be a two week bitch fest about the cost in my opinion because the old days aren't coming back.
Right?
They fought for their fanbase that was 16 to 26 years old primarily at the time....which btw is when you are at your poorest.
If you can't afford shows now... No one to blame but the choices you have made of your own free will. 30 years later and you haven't grown and made more money? Take a long hard look in the mirror before blaming the band. Your decisions aren't the bands fault. Plenty of things to complain about in this world and Pearl Jam ticket prices aren't one of them.
Very bad..its the second time i think im reading posts about ''life choices''..ridiculous..
not exactly ridiculous. I think the reason veteran act's can charge more is because on average they have older fans, who on average have higher amounts of disposable income. Not everyone, but on average.
It's why when we were young PJ, Nirvana, etc.. tickets were pretty cheap, but a Stones show would cost 3x as much.
It's also technically the cycle many people go through in their career. Late teen's and 20's, you figure out some education, figure out skills sets, build a career. Get into your 30's you try to make sure you own a home and start building equity. Get to your 40s and 50s and you should be in peak earning years (due to skills and experience). That's when you do a lot of retirement saving etc.. Lots of people go through that cycle, it's not really ridiculous. Yes some people get hit by the bad luck bus, but that's how it works for many people.
Like for me, the hardest tickets I ever bought were the ones for the 2000 tour. They were all US dates, FX rate was awful, it was my first year of university. I think after FX the Seattle tickets worked out to about 60cdn. That was so hard to scrape up money. a $208cdn 2024 ticket seems way less painful to me than a $60 2000 ticket.
I think saying that anyone who would feel financial strain from paying the current prices must have made poor "life choices" is a bad and condescending take. Any individual's financial circumstance is based on many factors. Not everyone has the same opportunities, priorities, or family situation. And misfortune can strike though no choice at all. If someone devotes their career to public service, teaching, etc., implying that they made a bad choice because concert tickets are less affordable is pretty insulting.
Agreed, but not only that, a lot of people who can afford such prices perfectly well may still have a problem with prices just because they are a total rip off, and/or because they care if people from all walks of life are able to attend concerts with them. I don't think those with money suddenly lose the concept of value for your dollar or fairness or accessibility for consumers.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Some great posts above and I’m thankful to see some humanity in this thread.
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
Some great posts above and I’m thankful to see some humanity in this thread.
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
You speak from my soul. The tone turned much more empathic today whereas yesterday it was cynicism all over.
Some great posts above and I’m thankful to see some humanity in this thread.
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
You speak from my soul. The tone turned much more empathic today whereas yesterday it was cynicism all over.
PS Ayn am mine was still great.
I’m here all week. Try the veal
PJ: 2013: London (ON); Buffalo; 2014: Cincinnati; 2016: Sunrise, Miami, Toronto 1-2, Wrigley 2; 2018: London (UK) 1, Milan, Padova, Sea 2, Wrigley 1-2, Fenway 1-2; 2021: SHN, Ohana, Ohana Encore 1-2; 2022: LA 1-2, Phx, Oak 1-2, Fresno, Copenhagen, Hyde Park 1-2; Quebec, Ottawa, Hamilton, Toronto; MSG, Camden, Nashville, Louisville, St. Louis, OKC; 2023: St. Paul 1-2, Chicago 1-2; Fort Worth 2; Austin 1-2; 2024: Vancouver 1-2, LV 1-2, LA 1-2, Napa, Barcelona 1-2
EV Solo: 2017 Louisville and Franklin, 2018 Ohana, 2019 Innings Fest, Berlin, Düsseldorf, Dublin and Ohana; 2021 Ohana Friday (from beach) and Saturday; 2022 Earthlings Newark; 2023 Innings Fest and Benoraya 1-2.
Gutted: London 2 2018, Sacramento 2022, Noblesville 2023
Some great posts above and I’m thankful to see some humanity in this thread.
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
Some great posts above and I’m thankful to see some humanity in this thread.
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
I don't think it's ever ok to talk about another person's financial situation without really knowing their circumstances fully. There are so many issues that can arise that forces someone's finances to be different than others. It's not all bad choices or even good choices for your financial instability or stability. Life happens and can really give you a good kick in the balls at inopportune times. Of it's also this very reason why I will spend some money to travel to a few shows because who knows how long this lasts for me or the band. So Ill take the opportunity as it presents itself and is possible.
Only Taylor Swift can offer a Taylor Swift concert. She holds a monopoly on the creation and delivery of that experience. There is no substitute, and loyal fans are willing to pay for the experience. Because it is a scarce resource and the delivery is tightly controlled by a single provider, access to concerts has inelastic demand.
But inelastic demand typically pertains to necessities (utilities, prescription drugs) whereas luxury items have the most elastic demand. If TS decided to charge $5,000 per ticket I think we'd see some elasticity
Some great posts above and I’m thankful to see some humanity in this thread.
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
I don't think it's ever ok to talk about another person's financial situation without really knowing their circumstances fully. There are so many issues that can arise that forces someone's finances to be different than others. It's not all bad choices or even good choices for your financial instability or stability. Life happens and can really give you a good kick in the balls at inopportune times. Of it's also this very reason why I will spend some money to travel to a few shows because who knows how long this lasts for me or the band. So Ill take the opportunity as it presents itself and is possible.
Its really easy to spend or judge other peoples finances. Why? Because its not yours. Never a good look IMO. Whether that person is a millionaire, poor, or famous. Everyone assumes that if your are famous you are rich, yet nobody really knows.
"The band are all millionaires....they should take less". Selfish take if you ask me.
Only Taylor Swift can offer a Taylor Swift concert. She holds a monopoly on the creation and delivery of that experience. There is no substitute, and loyal fans are willing to pay for the experience. Because it is a scarce resource and the delivery is tightly controlled by a single provider, access to concerts has inelastic demand.
I saw today that Singapore paid Taylor Swift to only play Singapore and no other Southeast Asian countries.
I don’t mind paying more but I have to get a good return for the cash I put out! For instance I spent close to $2k for three days in Vegas to see U2 at the sphere! It was worth every single cent
But inelastic demand typically pertains to necessities (utilities, prescription drugs) whereas luxury items have the most elastic demand. If TS decided to charge $5,000 per ticket I think we'd see some elasticity
Yah, but we'd probably see it on gas too, if has went from $4/gallon to $400/gallon
It's that so far many items haven't pushed the price far enough to lower the demand below how many people are willing to buy tickets. I am curious to know if the concert industry will hit the wall.
Check the prices of a Broadway play. You’re easily paying $250 a ticket face value for lower level seating. And they perform a show like 8 times a week. For months or even years. When you compare it to a concert that is one or two nights only in your city every 3 years, suddenly the price of a concert ticket seems more reasonable.
1996: Randall's Island 2 1998: East Rutherford | MSG 1 & 2 2000: Cincinnati | Columbus | Jones Beach 1, 2, & 3 | Boston 1 | Camden 1 & 2 2003: Philadelphia | Uniondale | MSG 1 & 2 | Holmdel 2005: Atlantic City 1 2006: Camden 1 | East Rutherford 1 & 2 2008: Camden 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Newark (EV) 2009: Philadelphia 1, 2 & 4 2010: Newark | MSG 1 & 2 2011: Toronto 1 2013: Wrigley Field | Brooklyn 2 | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore 2015: Central Park 2016: Philadelphia 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Fenway Park 2 | MSG (TOTD) 2017: Brooklyn (RnR HOF) 2020: MSG | Asbury Park2021: Asbury Park 2022: MSG | Camden | Nashville 2024: MSG 1 & 2 (#50) | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore 2025: Raleigh
Just noticed Vancouver released some great seats. Unfortunate these don't go to 10c members.
Barrie 98, Toronto 00, Toronto 03, Buffalo 03, Toronto 05, Hamilton 05, Kitchener 05, Toronto 06 I II, Lolla 07, Vedder Toronto I II, Toronto 09, Philly Oct 30 & 31 2009, Buffalo 2010, Cleveland 2010, Toronto I II 2011, Hamilton 2011, Ottawa 2011, London 2013, Buffalo 2013, Pittsburgh 2013, FLL 2016, Miami 2016, Tor I & II 2016, Barcelona 2018, Toronto 2022, Ottawa 2022, Quebec City 2022, Hamilton 2022
Fun Fact: I paid $49 to see Taylor Swift in concert at Gillette Stadium in May of last year (the rain show, IYKYK). How? When the tickets dropped via TM on November 15th, 2022, I had 6 browsers up and somehow got in and those seats off to the side of the stage were all that was left. But for $49 (probably $70 with fees), I bought them.
It's really got to suck for the guys in the band to be held to standards they set for themselves 25-30 years ago. I sure as heck don't want people in my life to hold me to the same standards or beliefs I had when I was 20-25 years old. Maybe stop holding them to those standards of yesteryear or put them on a pedestal that they are above what other bands do or charge. No system they implement is going to be perfect, but the more 10C seats and the availability of every show is still pretty damn good. The premium prices is a really easy decision for most people. Either you are ok with paying it or not. It shouldn't be a two week bitch fest about the cost in my opinion because the old days aren't coming back.
Right?
They fought for their fanbase that was 16 to 26 years old primarily at the time....which btw is when you are at your poorest.
If you can't afford shows now... No one to blame but the choices you have made of your own free will. 30 years later and you haven't grown and made more money? Take a long hard look in the mirror before blaming the band. Your decisions aren't the bands fault. Plenty of things to complain about in this world and Pearl Jam ticket prices aren't one of them.
Very bad..its the second time i think im reading posts about ''life choices''..ridiculous..
not exactly ridiculous. I think the reason veteran act's can charge more is because on average they have older fans, who on average have higher amounts of disposable income. Not everyone, but on average.
It's why when we were young PJ, Nirvana, etc.. tickets were pretty cheap, but a Stones show would cost 3x as much.
It's also technically the cycle many people go through in their career. Late teen's and 20's, you figure out some education, figure out skills sets, build a career. Get into your 30's you try to make sure you own a home and start building equity. Get to your 40s and 50s and you should be in peak earning years (due to skills and experience). That's when you do a lot of retirement saving etc.. Lots of people go through that cycle, it's not really ridiculous. Yes some people get hit by the bad luck bus, but that's how it works for many people.
Like for me, the hardest tickets I ever bought were the ones for the 2000 tour. They were all US dates, FX rate was awful, it was my first year of university. I think after FX the Seattle tickets worked out to about 60cdn. That was so hard to scrape up money. a $208cdn 2024 ticket seems way less painful to me than a $60 2000 ticket.
I think saying that anyone who would feel financial strain from paying the current prices must have made poor "life choices" is a bad and condescending take. Any individual's financial circumstance is based on many factors. Not everyone has the same opportunities, priorities, or family situation. And misfortune can strike though no choice at all. If someone devotes their career to public service, teaching, etc., implying that they made a bad choice because concert tickets are less affordable is pretty insulting.
Agreed, but not only that, a lot of people who can afford such prices perfectly well may still have a problem with prices just because they are a total rip off, and/or because they care if people from all walks of life are able to attend concerts with them. I don't think those with money suddenly lose the concept of value for your dollar or fairness or accessibility for consumers.
For the win. Would be a perfect close to this thread.
I'm not here to carry water for the band and I'll happily call them out when I disagree with them. That said, Pearl Jam ticket prices have long been kept artificially low relative to what they could be charging. What the band charges has frequently been been multiples less than what comparable acts were asking for for their seats, particularly in the best locations. As for the PJ Premium seats, those are a small portion of the seats available so to act like that is the price for all tickets is disingenuous. PJ Premium seats are also a concession in order for the band to even get 10 club seats in todays day and age. Imagine if the folks here had to pay market price and didn't have the opportunity for 10c drawings like 99% of other musical acts?
Yes. Things have changed. Yes the band has softened its stance on dealing with the devil (ticketmaster). Is it a perfect system? No. That doesn't mean we don't have it better than fans of most bands when it comes to ticket prices. Would you rather be paying $1,300 on stubhub before fees to get an obstructed view balcony seat to Taylor Swift?
Just looked on ticketmaster for Springsteen tickets at the end of the month. They just added some face value seats near the stage. $400 a pop before fees. Not resale, not platinum. The ones behind the stage are $199 before $50 in fees. I'd never pay either to see anyone, esp acts I've seen at least 10 times. So, yes, PJ is charging a lot, but at least they aren't charing Bruce prices.
Fun Fact: I saw Bruce at Gillette last August for around $55 (before fees) in the 300s. Fun concert, my first time seeing him and although rain was in the forecast, it held off thankfully.
It's really got to suck for the guys in the band to be held to standards they set for themselves 25-30 years ago. I sure as heck don't want people in my life to hold me to the same standards or beliefs I had when I was 20-25 years old. Maybe stop holding them to those standards of yesteryear or put them on a pedestal that they are above what other bands do or charge. No system they implement is going to be perfect, but the more 10C seats and the availability of every show is still pretty damn good. The premium prices is a really easy decision for most people. Either you are ok with paying it or not. It shouldn't be a two week bitch fest about the cost in my opinion because the old days aren't coming back.
Right?
They fought for their fanbase that was 16 to 26 years old primarily at the time....which btw is when you are at your poorest.
If you can't afford shows now... No one to blame but the choices you have made of your own free will. 30 years later and you haven't grown and made more money? Take a long hard look in the mirror before blaming the band. Your decisions aren't the bands fault. Plenty of things to complain about in this world and Pearl Jam ticket prices aren't one of them.
Very bad..its the second time i think im reading posts about ''life choices''..ridiculous..
not exactly ridiculous. I think the reason veteran act's can charge more is because on average they have older fans, who on average have higher amounts of disposable income. Not everyone, but on average.
It's why when we were young PJ, Nirvana, etc.. tickets were pretty cheap, but a Stones show would cost 3x as much.
It's also technically the cycle many people go through in their career. Late teen's and 20's, you figure out some education, figure out skills sets, build a career. Get into your 30's you try to make sure you own a home and start building equity. Get to your 40s and 50s and you should be in peak earning years (due to skills and experience). That's when you do a lot of retirement saving etc.. Lots of people go through that cycle, it's not really ridiculous. Yes some people get hit by the bad luck bus, but that's how it works for many people.
Like for me, the hardest tickets I ever bought were the ones for the 2000 tour. They were all US dates, FX rate was awful, it was my first year of university. I think after FX the Seattle tickets worked out to about 60cdn. That was so hard to scrape up money. a $208cdn 2024 ticket seems way less painful to me than a $60 2000 ticket.
I think saying that anyone who would feel financial strain from paying the current prices must have made poor "life choices" is a bad and condescending take. Any individual's financial circumstance is based on many factors. Not everyone has the same opportunities, priorities, or family situation. And misfortune can strike though no choice at all. If someone devotes their career to public service, teaching, etc., implying that they made a bad choice because concert tickets are less affordable is pretty insulting.
Agreed, but not only that, a lot of people who can afford such prices perfectly well may still have a problem with prices just because they are a total rip off, and/or because they care if people from all walks of life are able to attend concerts with them. I don't think those with money suddenly lose the concept of value for your dollar or fairness or accessibility for consumers.
These threads can continue on into infinity because there are people who don’t consider it a ripoff and people who need more value for their money. No side is right or wrong. PJ could release spreadsheets of the tour financial data which showed an itemized breakdown of where every dollar went and there would still be an argument about what should have cost less and who should be paid less.
I personally don’t care if Jeff could buy the entire state of Montana and turn it into a buffalo habitat with the earnings from this tour alone because I will always want the product they’re selling for as long as they sell it. But there’s no point in trying to convince someone to change their stance because it’s your right to feel whatever way you want and it’s also your right to voice your displeasure about it. Questioning people’s life choices for not wanting to spend $185 and attacking the character of the band over ticket prices as if you personally know them and have all the facts are equally bad looks though.
Check the prices of a Broadway play. You’re easily paying $250 a ticket face value for lower level seating. And they perform a show like 8 times a week. For months or even years. When you compare it to a concert that is one or two nights only in your city every 3 years, suddenly the price of a concert ticket seems more reasonable.
If the alternative is listen to a PJ album in the morning then cycle down to the pub for a few drinks with mates in the sun then home to watch Glastonbury on the telly vs £160 ticket plus £25 train then long queues, crap food plus crap £8 beers to watch an ant sized Stone Gossard play through a crap stadium sound system then I will see you at the Dog and Duck. I love PJ and have been a fan for 30+ years but sh1t venue and sh1t price swings the balance.
Some of the same arguments are in line with why we should not tax the ultra wealthy. My income has increased tenfold over the last 20 years, but that is not the same as ten million turning to 100 million and on and on.
Pearl Jam have shifted from a band somewhat sticking by the principles they preach (Green Disease, Soon Forget etc) to old rich dudes who larp as liberals while not living in the trenches of reality.
Check the prices of a Broadway play. You’re easily paying $250 a ticket face value for lower level seating. And they perform a show like 8 times a week. For months or even years. When you compare it to a concert that is one or two nights only in your city every 3 years, suddenly the price of a concert ticket seems more reasonable.
If the alternative is listen to a PJ album in the morning then cycle down to the pub for a few drinks with mates in the sun then home to watch Glastonbury on the telly vs £160 ticket plus £25 train then long queues, crap food plus crap £8 beers to watch an ant sized Stone Gossard play through a crap stadium sound system then I will see you at the Dog and Duck. I love PJ and have been a fan for 30+ years but sh1t venue and sh1t price swings the balance.
I certainly respect your take and it definitely has to make sense financially for people. I realize the Euro tour was a big sticker shock to fans in those countries. I’m not happy about the price creeping ever upward either. But I’ve never regretted going to a Pearl Jam show… even if it wasn’t an optimal experience (Wrigley with the rain or SHN with the festival setup). And it’s usually a fantastic experience. Seeing them 4 or 5 times in a tour can get pricey, but they don’t tour every year. So if you divide the total cost by 3, it makes it a more reasonable expense in my mind and more comparable to seeing a band once or twice on a yearly basis.
1996: Randall's Island 2 1998: East Rutherford | MSG 1 & 2 2000: Cincinnati | Columbus | Jones Beach 1, 2, & 3 | Boston 1 | Camden 1 & 2 2003: Philadelphia | Uniondale | MSG 1 & 2 | Holmdel 2005: Atlantic City 1 2006: Camden 1 | East Rutherford 1 & 2 2008: Camden 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Newark (EV) 2009: Philadelphia 1, 2 & 4 2010: Newark | MSG 1 & 2 2011: Toronto 1 2013: Wrigley Field | Brooklyn 2 | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore 2015: Central Park 2016: Philadelphia 1 & 2 | MSG 1 & 2 | Fenway Park 2 | MSG (TOTD) 2017: Brooklyn (RnR HOF) 2020: MSG | Asbury Park2021: Asbury Park 2022: MSG | Camden | Nashville 2024: MSG 1 & 2 (#50) | Philadelphia 1 & 2 | Baltimore 2025: Raleigh
Jeff turns 61 this weekend. Matt is already 61. How many more chances will we get? Almost everything costs more than it used to, it sucks. But some things are worth splurging on. If you had asked me in 2016 if I would have ever seen Petty or Soundgarden again I would have said “of course”, and I would have been wrong. So if I have to pay $18 more for MSG this year than I paid for Indy last year, I’m at peace with that. Especially considering that the tix are a drop in the bucket for getting to/staying in NYC & Indy from Syracuse.
This isn’t gonna last forever. And I doubt we’re gonna get advance notice when it ends. So I’m gonna act accordingly.
Comments
Gutted: London 2 2018, Sacramento 2022, Noblesville 2023
Can I also add that although people’s income may grow as they get older, so do their financial responsibilities. Whether it’s mortgages/rent, kids, care for elderly parents or something else, it’s certainly not a given that people have way more disposable income.
Gutted: London 2 2018, Sacramento 2022, Noblesville 2023
Concert Tickets
"The band are all millionaires....they should take less". Selfish take if you ask me.
It's that so far many items haven't pushed the price far enough to lower the demand below how many people are willing to buy tickets. I am curious to know if the concert industry will hit the wall.
2003: 4/29 Albany, 5/2 Buffalo, 7/9 MSG 2 2006: 5/12 Albany, 6/3 East Rutherford 2
2008: 6/27 Hartford 2009: 10/27 Philadelphia 1 2010: 5/15 Hartford, 5/21 MSG 2
2013: 10/15 Worcester 1, 10/25 Hartford 2014: 10/1 Cincinnati
2018: 9/2 Fenway 1
2024: 9/3 MSG 1, 9/4 MSG 2 , 9/15 Fenway 1, 9/17 Fenway 2