What if Pearl Jam had defeated Ticketmaster?

Lost Poi Dog

They would've probably played the "traditional" tour stops, instead of being relegated to peripheral ones. Would this have created a larger fanbase today - that is, would there be less "casual" or "non-existent" fans as there are now? How would a court victory have changed the course of history for the band in general?

PJ Fan est. 1990

though they were right in battling them, i feel that if they had won, they would have gotten a sense of false pride and arrogance and started going after other companies. people would have thought "what are they musicians or lawyers?" believe me, i wish PJ had won, but to be honest, i don't think i would like the attitude the guys have nowadays if they had won.

.PatRiot.

I really think people put too much emphasis on the tickemaster 1995 tour thing. Starting with Vitalogy, they started making music that frankly was less appealing to the masses than their previous output. Plus they had an outward and very intense case of "I hate fame," which turned a lot of people off. Then they put out No Code with Who You Are as the first single. These things had a lot more to do with their slip into pop oblivion than anything else.

I'll rise and fall
Let me take credit for both
Jump off a cliff
Don't need your help so back off

Mr Derp

Lost Poi Dog wrote:

They would've probably played the "traditional" tour stops, instead of being relegated to peripheral ones. How would a court victory have changed the course of history for the band in general?

Are you trying to say ticketmaster sends PJ to "peripheral" venues because of what happened? Ticketmaster just handles the tickets, PJ book their own venues based on where they want to play and how many tickets they think they can fill. They've played the same venue in Philly forever and they always have done well at that "large venue" size. Upgrading would mean a stadium tour, which would suck. Sure, they have to pick and choose in certain places in the country, especially when they're not supporting a new album, but it's definitely got nothing to do with ticketmaster trying to sideline them or something.

Anyway, if they'd 'defeated' ticketmaster we'd have one less monopoly in the US which would translate into more reasonable ticket prices without the $20 "convenience/handling/bs" fee's TM gouges for. Who knows what effect it would have had on the band

Lost Poi Dog

.PatRiot. wrote:

I really think people put too much emphasis on the tickemaster 1995 tour thing. Starting with Vitalogy, they started making music that frankly was less appealing to the masses than their previous output. Plus they had an outward and very intense case of "I hate fame," which turned a lot of people off. Then they put out No Code with Who You Are as the first single. These things had a lot more to do with their slip into pop oblivion than anything else.

I'll rise and fall
Let me take credit for both
Jump off a cliff
Don't need your help so back off

Very valid points. Thanks for the well thought out, sincere response.

Lost Poi Dog

Mr Derp wrote:

Lost Poi Dog wrote:

They would've probably played the "traditional" tour stops, instead of being relegated to peripheral ones. How would a court victory have changed the course of history for the band in general?

Are you trying to say ticketmaster sends PJ to "peripheral" venues because of what happened? Ticketmaster just handles the tickets, PJ book their own venues based on where they want to play and how many tickets they think they can fill. They've played the same venue in Philly forever and they always have done well at that "large venue" size. Upgrading would mean a stadium tour, which would suck. Sure, they have to pick and choose in certain places in the country, especially when they're not supporting a new album, but it's definitely got nothing to do with ticketmaster trying to sideline them or something.

Anyway, if they'd 'defeated' ticketmaster we'd have one less monopoly in the US which would translate into more reasonable ticket prices without the $20 "convenience/handling/bs" fee's TM gouges for. Who knows what effect it would have had on the band

Actually, I was just referring to how PJ began playing alternate ("peripheral") venues during the time of the whole Ticketmaster thing - you are correct in saying that they currently play wherever they choose. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks for the response! :P

.PatRiot.

The thing that I find most interesting thinking back on the ticketmaster thing was how no other bands were willing to stick their necks out at the time to take on the giant. All the other big bands at the time just gave it lip service, but weren't willing to fight for their fans when push came to shove. They were "alternative" only to a point where it didn't risk their earnings.

Lost Poi Dog

.PatRiot. wrote:

The thing that I find most interesting thinking back on the ticketmaster thing was how no other bands were willing to stick their necks out at the time to take on the giant. All the other big bands at the time just gave it lip service, but weren't willing to fight for their fans when push came to shove. They were "alternative" only to a point where it didn't risk their earnings.

I think you hit it right on the head. Win or lose, I think that more bands/artists should have stepped up to the plate. They were all worried about the effect it would have on their careers and pocketbooks had they got involved. But I think that music fans would have embraced and been more supportive in the fight against Ticketmaster had more artists united their efforts. Not to mention it would have taken away a lot of the burden that PJ had to endure.

I think that unfortunately the public perception became that PJ wasn't doing something "cool" and should just stick to the music. A united front may have altered that train of thinking. I could be totally wrong, but that's just my take on it.