If Pj played the superbowl halftime show

miller8966

Would you be pissed?

cincybearcat

No. I'd be happy to be able to watch them. The term 'sell-out' is used far to frequently.

And that said...Prince was actually pretty damn good last night.

Pacomc79

no, another opportunity to see my favorite band.

angelica

I wouldn't be upset....as long as there were phallic-Stone-silhouettes to be seen! (:o)

bharQ

they should play Bushleaguer

cincybearcat

bharQ wrote:

they should play Bushleaguer

I would hope that if they played the superbowl they would actually play a good song.

soulsinging

not pissed, but i dunno if id watch.

miller8966

soulsinging wrote:

not pissed, but i dunno if id watch.

why wouldnt you watch?

Jeanwah

Sell out to corporate sponser? Can't see it happening. Although I'd like to see them...

sapperskunk

miller8966 wrote:

Would you be pissed?

I don't get this? Are you implying that if PJ played the superbowl, they would be sellouts?

Cause that would be really stupid.














Everybody knows PJ sold out years ago.

dharma69

Jeanwah wrote:

Sell out to corporate sponser? Can't see it happening. Although I'd like to see them...

Well that took all of 5 mental minutes.

And that's a truly boring statement. Boring and meritless. It always blinds me when people equate success or exposure or popular events with selling out.

Perhaps they'd play the Super Bowl because they like football.

surferdude

dharma69 wrote:

Well that took all of 5 mental minutes.

And that's a truly boring statement. Boring and meritless. It always blinds me when people equate success or exposure or popular events with selling out.

Perhaps they'd play the Super Bowl because they like football.

Much like when people equate letting music (especially new music) be used in commercials with selling out. I read where John Mellancamp laughs about people calling him a sell out. He mentions that Tom Petty makes his best album in about ten years and it maybe got played twice on radio. John Mellancamp feels he's made a good record with a good message and that he's going to do what it takes to get it out there. In the 21st century that may mean licensing a song or two to commercials in order to get some exposure so people will buy his record.

angelica

surferdude wrote:

Much like when people equate letting music (especially new music) be used in commercials with selling out. I read where John Mellancamp laughs about people calling him a sell out. He mentions that Tom Petty makes his best album in about ten years and it maybe got played twice on radio. John Mellancamp feels he's made a good record with a good message and that he's going to do what it takes to get it out there. In the 21st century that may mean licensing a song or two to commercials in order to get some exposure so people will buy his record.

I've always agreed with this mentality. All of these people want their "product" to reach the public, to varying degrees and in their own ways.

qtegirl

I would love if PJ played the superbowl...

it'll be a sign that the rest of America has realised what I've know since 1991, that PJ is the best band ever, which deserves respect and recognition!

soulsinging

miller8966 wrote:

why wouldnt you watch?

i dunno, i dont really watch the super bowl halftime show anyway most times. hell, i dont watch the super bowl either really. and id not have a burnin desire to watch ed dancing with a bunch of silicone induced cheerleaders in front of 100,000 cameras. just not my ideal vision of a live pearl jam performance. when i think of pearl jam i think of great music and a great connection with the crowd. when i think of the super bowl i think spectacle. so i dont really care to which my favorite band be a spectacle for an evening. id not be crying about them selling out, i just wouldnt care to watch. it's why i didnt watch u2 at the super bowl years ago.

sapperskunk

Hey look on the bright side. If PJ played the superbowl you'd get to pay considerably less for a pair of game tickets than you would for concert tickets.



Who'm I kidding, PJ will somehow figure out a way to jack the price up and gouge their fans.

soulsinging

surferdude wrote:

Much like when people equate letting music (especially new music) be used in commercials with selling out. I read where John Mellancamp laughs about people calling him a sell out. He mentions that Tom Petty makes his best album in about ten years and it maybe got played twice on radio. John Mellancamp feels he's made a good record with a good message and that he's going to do what it takes to get it out there. In the 21st century that may mean licensing a song or two to commercials in order to get some exposure so people will buy his record.

the difference being john mellencamp's song blows

Kat

What's with the snipey little insulting comments being thrown around? The sticky at the top of the page is not invisible.... Don't be surprised if something happens. If anyone has forgotten the Posting Guidelines they agreed to when they registered, it might be a good time to look them over again. Thank you.

Admin

soulsinging

sapperskunk wrote:

Hey look on the bright side. If PJ played the superbowl you'd get to pay considerably less for a pair of game tickets than you would for concert tickets.



Who'm I kidding, PJ will somehow figure out a way to jack the price up and gouge their fans.

oh boo frickin hoo. cry me a river. they could be charging twice what they do. ive bought a bunch of concert tickets lately... even the cheapest indie bands in a dive venue cost $25... $35 after ticketmaster gets done with it. ticket prices for concerts have gone up across the board, inflation's a bitch mr capitalist. people are gonna charge what the market costs. if im paying $35 to see tv on the radio, $50 for pearl jam isn't half bad. it could be worse, they could be the godamn who.

gabers

I'd love to see them play in any venue as long as they did it their way. No freaking beat boy dancers or kids with balloons or whatever. I cringe during most halftime shows not because of the music but the production.

sapperskunk

soulsinging wrote:

oh boo frickin hoo. cry me a river. they could be charging twice what they do. ive bought a bunch of concert tickets lately... even the cheapest indie bands in a dive venue cost $25... $35 after ticketmaster gets done with it. ticket prices for concerts have gone up across the board, inflation's a bitch mr capitalist. people are gonna charge what the market costs. if im paying $35 to see tv on the radio, $50 for pearl jam isn't half bad. it could be worse, they could be the godamn who.

Wow, sounds like I struck a chord. Take a step back from the computer, take a deep breath and relaaaaax.

Ya know, for someone who's so far on the left, you sure do put the money in the pockets of hardcore capitalists.

Yeah, ticketmaster's terrible :rolleyes: . But really, a six dollar surcharge sure doesn't seem like much when PJ charges 60 bucks a ticket.

What kind of terribly shitty indie bands are you seeing for 35 bucks? Yikes, you really should get out more.

The great rock and roll swindle continues.

Here you go genius, you should be good at doing research by now. Here's one from the desk of PJ themselves.

"Many of Pearl Jam's most loyal fans are teenagers who do not have the money to pay the $50 or more that is often charged today for tickets to a popular concert. Although, given our popularity, we could undoubtedly continue to sell-out our concerts with ticket prices at that premium level, we have made a conscious decision that we do not want to put the price of our concerts out of the reach of many of our fans. Moreover, we do not want to be responsible for teenagers, who may be influenced by peer pressure to feel that they must see Pearl Jam perform, spending more money for that concert ticket than they can really afford. All of the members of Pearl Jam remember what it is like not to have a lot of money, and we recognize that a teenager's perceived need to see his or her favorite band in concert can often be overwhelming."