The official $92.05 is Too much Thread

hopethatuchoke · March 2010

SolarWorld wrote:

stranger34 wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Another perspective...
Do you not think Pearl Jam deserves it?

I think they do. What are there, 6-7 billion people on the planet? Five guys out of that 7 billion come together and you see them maybe once a year, pay each of those guys Five dollars an hour to make the most beautiful music on the planet. geesh. I guess i'm just a sheep for actually appreciating something that is amazing and not bitching about a 5-10 dollar difference between that and a depeche mode show. It's just silly.

Wonderful, but this has nothing to do with PJ betraying their own stated principles and many of their fans blindly defending them baselessly

STFU! Why do you hold these guys up on some flawless pedestal? Its so naive its not even funny. I'm not "defending" Pearl Jam, but they have a right to make whatever living they want. If they want to make sure their kid's kid's future is financially secure its their goddamn right to. If they want to make sure they pay their crew well its their goddamn right to. If they know they are one of the greatest rock bands to ever form they have a goddamn right to charge accordingly. They don't owe you anything. I love how people call us sheep for being realists. Grow up, Gen X "stick it to the man" has, you should too.

Why do you hold them on some godly pedestal? We are the realists.

stranger34 · March 2010

SolarWorld wrote:

stranger34 wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Another perspective...
Do you not think Pearl Jam deserves it?

I think they do. What are there, 6-7 billion people on the planet? Five guys out of that 7 billion come together and you see them maybe once a year, pay each of those guys Five dollars an hour to make the most beautiful music on the planet. geesh. I guess i'm just a sheep for actually appreciating something that is amazing and not bitching about a 5-10 dollar difference between that and a depeche mode show. It's just silly.

Wonderful, but this has nothing to do with PJ betraying their own stated principles and many of their fans blindly defending them baselessly

STFU! Why do you hold these guys up on some flawless pedestal? Its so naive its not even funny. I'm not "defending" Pearl Jam, but they have a right to make whatever living they want. If they want to make sure their kid's kid's future is financially secure its their goddamn right to. If they want to make sure they pay their crew well its their goddamn right to. If they know they are one of the greatest rock bands to ever form they have a goddamn right to charge accordingly. They don't owe you anything. I love how people call us sheep for being realists. Grow up, Gen X "stick it to the man" has, you should too.

Well because the band made this an issue, If Morrissey decided to go around eating Big Mac's this might be an issue with his fan base... no?

pdalowsky · March 2010

Worth every penny still.

I'll never forgive myself for paying 70 quid a few years ago to see that circus u2 put on. Put everything in perspective. That gig was shit and I really like u2s music. So sure you cab keep their 'overheads' as they totally detract from the show

Ledbetterman10 · March 2010

pdalowsky wrote:

Worth every penny still.

At the end of the day....you're right.

JD Sal · March 2010

I wish someone would actually take a look at this site which shows average concert prices over the last 12 months for just about every band / musician. The costs do not include TM fees, add on's, etc.

http://www.pollstar.com/atpDetail.aspx?SearchBy=P

Here's a list of some bands mentioned in this thread:

Green Day 44.86
Dave Matthews Band 52.99
Tool 53.75
Pearl Jam 59.34
Depeche Mode 64.29
Metallica 65.01
Neil Young 66.95
U2 93.77

Now, if you take the average of these prices, it comes out to be $62.62. Pearl Jam's average price is $59.34, so aren't their shows moderately priced when compared to similar bands?!?!

SolarWorld · March 2010

hopethatuchoke wrote:

Why do you hold them on some godly pedestal? We are the realists.

I hold them on the pedestal of they can do whatever they want with their own careers and lives after giving me a lifetime of great music. Why are you faulting these guys for trying to get what they deserve after all these years?

stranger34 · March 2010

JD Sal wrote:

I wish someone would actually take a look at this site which shows average concert prices over the last 12 months for just about every band / musician. The costs do not include TM fees, add on's, etc.

http://www.pollstar.com/atpDetail.aspx?SearchBy=P

Here's a list of some bands mentioned in this thread:

Green Day 44.86
Dave Matthews Band 52.99
Tool 53.75
Pearl Jam 59.34
Depeche Mode 64.29
Metallica 65.01
Neil Young 66.95
U2 93.77

Now, if you take the average of these prices, it comes out to be $62.62. Pearl Jam's average price is $59.34, so aren't their shows moderately priced when compared to similar bands?!?!

No, cause those numbers get totally skewed by the fact that some of those bands charge like $200 for premium seats that the average person prob can't even get their hands on in the first place.

Very few artists have the balls to ask for more than PJ does for 400s at MSG. McCartney and Joel, maybe Simon and Garfunkel come to mind.

stranger34 · March 2010

All I'm saying is I've probably been to about 70 shows in the last 4 years and I can't think of one time I spent more than $92.05 except for when I chipped in $125 for my friend to get Brian Van Der Ark to play in his backyard.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun · March 2010

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

pdalowsky wrote:

Worth every penny still.

At the end of the day....you're right.

maybe worth it, but too rich for me. maybe if they played my town (unlikely), but that plus travel costs put it out of reach for me. i just cant see paying that much to see a band no matter how great, when there are so many great ones i could see for 30-40 bucks.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · March 2010

Stranger... then stop going to cheap shows and go see a major headliner to gain proper perspective. Don't expect Pearl Jam to be cheaper than Depeche Mode, Flock of Seagulls and the Muppets.

Your stuck on a senseless loop. You've listened to nothing. They are a quality band and are charging much less than what they could still get. Be thankful that they don't truly fleece people- cause they'd get much more if they demaded it!

JD Sal · March 2010

stranger34 wrote:

JD Sal wrote:

I wish someone would actually take a look at this site which shows average concert prices over the last 12 months for just about every band / musician. The costs do not include TM fees, add on's, etc.

http://www.pollstar.com/atpDetail.aspx?SearchBy=P

Here's a list of some bands mentioned in this thread:

Green Day 44.86
Dave Matthews Band 52.99
Tool 53.75
Pearl Jam 59.34
Depeche Mode 64.29
Metallica 65.01
Neil Young 66.95
U2 93.77

Now, if you take the average of these prices, it comes out to be $62.62. Pearl Jam's average price is $59.34, so aren't their shows moderately priced when compared to similar bands?!?!

No, cause those numbers get totally skewed by the fact that some of those bands charge like $200 for premium seats that the average person prob can't even get their hands on in the first place.

Very few artists have the balls to ask for more than PJ does for 400s at MSG. McCartney and Joel, maybe Simon and Garfunkel come to mind.

An average is an average. I think it takes major cajones to have tiered pricing and ask fans to pay several hundred dollars for premium / floor seats. Would you rather Pearl Jam did this so 400 level seats can only cost $25? They are one of the only bands that charge the same for the best seat in the house and the worst.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun · March 2010

stranger34 wrote:

No, cause those numbers get totally skewed by the fact that some of those bands charge like $200 for premium seats that the average person prob can't even get their hands on in the first place.
.

interesting, maybe the answer really is to charge hundreds for the front row seats, to help out the nosebleed sections.

ryanrunning · March 2010

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Pearl Jam is keeps their tickets lower than most

No they don't dude and you people who say that do really sound silly. Sure they charge less than U2 and Paul McCartney and guys like that. But they charge way more than their contemporaries like, as I said earlier in the thread, Dave Matthews, Radiohead, Metallica, and Green Day. All four of those bands are just as popular as Pearl Jam....and they all charge like $30 less for tix.

your wrong, i just paid 75+ fees for dave matthews at citi field

JonnyPistachio · March 2010

stranger34 wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Another perspective...
Do you not think Pearl Jam deserves it?

I think they do. What are there, 6-7 billion people on the planet? Five guys out of that 7 billion come together and you see them maybe once a year, pay each of those guys Five dollars an hour to make the most beautiful music on the planet. geesh. I guess i'm just a sheep for actually appreciating something that is amazing and not bitching about a 5-10 dollar difference between that and a depeche mode show. It's just silly.

Wonderful, but this has nothing to do with PJ betraying their own stated principles and many of their fans blindly defending them baselessly

well, In my opinion, they are 'betraying' nobody. it is just the simple costs associated with touring in tha manner that is required for them in 2010. It is reeeeeeallly far from blindly defending them too. There have been many excellent points as to why it cost this much in 2010 as opposed to say 2002. It just sems like you are skimming past the reasonable agruments as to why they charge what they do, and focusing just on the fac tthat 15 years ago, PJ fought to keep prices low.

Haijay · March 2010

nickleshit is charging 100, i saw motley crue in jan for 100, and iron maiden is 100 in vancouver
oh ya, petty is charging 130 -150 all over the place and there are plenty of tickets left to most of his upcoming concerts. Cause, obviously, that is way fucken more than i ( or most people) would spend for him. thank you for your time.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun · March 2010

JD Sal wrote:

Would you rather Pearl Jam did this so 400 level seats can only cost $25? They are one of the only bands that charge the same for the best seat in the house and the worst.

i probably would. and if i wanted front row, i'd go fight it out at a GA show.

apparently there are plenty of trust fund babies around here that can afford to fly all over the world to see a show, so im sure they could pay.

stranger34 · March 2010

MrSmith wrote:

Ledbetterman10 wrote:

pdalowsky wrote:

Worth every penny still.

At the end of the day....you're right.

maybe worth it, but too rich for me. maybe if they payed my town (unlikely), but that plus travel costs put it out of reach for me. i just cant see paying that much to see a band no matter how great, when there are so many great ones i could see for 30-40 bucks.

Spot on. My friend who goes to a ton of concerts, I think he says he's been to over 750 in his life used to hit 3 PJ shows a tour. This time he's only doing 1. Still thinks they are the best live band going, but they are a budget buster. I buy him his MSG PJ ticket and he'll put 1 Petty, 2 Joseph Arthur shows, and a Jay Farrar on his CC and we are pretty much even

SolarWorld · March 2010

Why do people fault the band cause THEY cant afford it? Maybe it's YOUR fault you have a low paying job. You should go and post on your employers message board talking shit about they don't pay you enough to go to see Pearl Jam. It would make about as much sense as what you people are doing here.

stranger34 · March 2010

JD Sal wrote:

stranger34 wrote:

JD Sal wrote:

I wish someone would actually take a look at this site which shows average concert prices over the last 12 months for just about every band / musician. The costs do not include TM fees, add on's, etc.

http://www.pollstar.com/atpDetail.aspx?SearchBy=P

Here's a list of some bands mentioned in this thread:

Green Day 44.86
Dave Matthews Band 52.99
Tool 53.75
Pearl Jam 59.34
Depeche Mode 64.29
Metallica 65.01
Neil Young 66.95
U2 93.77

Now, if you take the average of these prices, it comes out to be $62.62. Pearl Jam's average price is $59.34, so aren't their shows moderately priced when compared to similar bands?!?!

No, cause those numbers get totally skewed by the fact that some of those bands charge like $200 for premium seats that the average person prob can't even get their hands on in the first place.

Very few artists have the balls to ask for more than PJ does for 400s at MSG. McCartney and Joel, maybe Simon and Garfunkel come to mind.

An average is an average. I think it takes major cajones to have tiered pricing and ask fans to pay several hundred dollars for premium / floor seats. Would you rather Pearl Jam did this so 400 level seats can only cost $25? They are one of the only bands that charge the same for the best seat in the house and the worst.

If 10C continues to be inept, yes I'd rather see PJ at the 400 level for $25

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun · March 2010

SolarWorld wrote:

Why do people fault the band cause THEY cant afford it? Maybe it's YOUR fault you have a low paying job. You should go and post on your employers message board talking shit about they don't pay you enough to go to see Pearl Jam. It would make about as much sense as what you people are doing here.

im not faulting them for anything, they can do whatever their money hungry hearts desire

. just saying im not going for that price. i can get more bang for my buck watching MMJ play here for half the price.

The official $92.05 is Too much Thread

Comments

Categories