Ticket prices are consistant and fair.

GoingToLukins · March 2008

No Fear Of Falling wrote:

Rod Stewart is playing PNC Bank Arts Center.

Some orchestra seats are $500.00

FACE PRICE!!!

Give me a Pearl Jam ten club ticket @ $75 any day of the week.

No complaints here.

My mom loves Clapton the way we all love PJ, and she had to pass on buying tickets because they were $400 floor, $300 for lower level, and the $200 nosebleed tickets sold out in minutes.

PJ fans are seriously spoiled. We often don't realize how good we have it.

AmentsChick · March 2008

Poncier wrote:

For everyone assuming the tix are $74 apiece, I believe you'll find the $74 will consist of 3 components...
1. The face value of the ticket
B. Some small, reasonable 10club handling fee
Third. A "facility fee" that amphitheaters always tack on each seat

I bet the actual face value of the ticket is likely around $65, we will see later.

Poncier, you crack me up.

pjtaper · March 2008

GoingToLukins wrote:

PJ fans are seriously spoiled. We often don't realize how good we have it.

Agreed, however, announcing an entire tour all at once would make me very happy.
Red Rocks 08?

kj1nyr · March 2008

Kel Varnsen wrote:

On top of that the band probably uses the same people on each tour (roadies, managers people like that). So everytime they go on tour those people get more experience and can ask for more money.

Most of their crew has been with them for years. Plus I believe I read that they have a profit sharing plan for the crew.

And didn't they donate $2 of every ticket in the 2006 tour to charities in the local cities where they played.

The USA doesn't manufacture anything anymore because we Americans demand low prices. Maybe they should replace PJ and good ole American Rock N Roll with a Chinese band and charge less? Would you all prefer that?

<edit> Evenfrow

DPrival78 · March 2008

Stephen Flow wrote:

Gas is expensive man... come on.

It's gone up a lot in the past 2 years.

true.

and maybe if we didn't have to pay for them to lug around, set up, and run that fancy-schmancy, unnecessary lighting rig, the tickets would be a little cheaper.

bring back the 5 candles!

dontloseyourheat · March 2008

mca47 wrote:

Yep. Just on gas prices alone...see below!

For example 1998. Ticket prices were approx $30 (give or take a few bucks). Average gas prices in that year were approx $1.30 (http://zfacts.com/p/35.html)

By the time they tour this summer, you figure gas will be near $3.60+.

Doing the math in order to make the same profit they made in the 1998 tour...they should charge about $83 per ticket. They are charging about $75

So I guess we are getting a deal. Add in inflation, rising prices of EVERYTHING else...we are getting a damn good deal!

They are a band, they are a business...you can't expect them to lose money on a tour.

1998 was a full tour, this is a handful of dates. If they wanted to make the same profit, they could have added more dates.

"SHOW ME THE MONEY"

teskeinc · March 2008

Check out the prices for alot of shows on the Strip here in Vegas. You're looking at 100-175 a ticket for 1 1/2 hour Cirque du So Gay!

Elton John, Bette Midler , Barry Manilow all big names are charging way more than Pearl Jam does. Id pay 75$ a ticket to see Pearl Jam over anyone else.

Pearl Jam tickets are a bargain. Plus if you are guaranteed sweet seats through the 10 club. If you are griping at ticket prices you are really pathetic. If you don't want to pay stay home.

Kel Varnsen · March 2008

kj1nyr wrote:

Most of their crew has been with them for years. Plus I believe I read that they have a profit sharing plan for the crew.

And didn't they donate $2 of every ticket in the 2006 tour to charities in the local cities where they played.

The USA doesn't manufacture anything anymore because we Americans demand low prices. Maybe they should replace PJ and good ole American Rock N Roll with a Chinese band and charge less? Would you all prefer that?

<edit> Evenfrow

Exactly, a roadie that has been with them since 1996 who had never toured with anyone is making a lot more now than he did in 1996. Should the band cut his salary to lower ticket prices, or just fire him and hire someone with no experience?

mca47 · March 2008

dontloseyourheat wrote:

1998 was a full tour, this is a handful of dates. If they wanted to make the same profit, they could have added more dates.

"SHOW ME THE MONEY"

Sure, but their out of pocket costs would go up even more. A full tour would end up costing them MORE money per show then a smaller tour.

Yeah, $75 seems like a lot of money but when it comes down to it and considering all costs you are getting as much if not more for your money now then you did in '98!

Porchsitter · March 2008

Agreed. Prices are exactly what I expected.

pineapplesandwaves · March 2008

Ticket prices for concerts have consistently increased in the past decade. It's pretty ridiculous has much ticket prices have sky rocketed in the entertainment industry. Ten years ago, I was paying $40 to see lots of bands. Now those bands are charging $125+. The costs to tour has increased - - from gas to employee salaries to what the venues charge. Pearl Jam can't continue charging $30 forever.

Pearl Jam tickets are still significantly lower than other bands. I don't know how anyone can complain about spending $75 (TOTAL ... includes taxes, fees, etc.) for the best seats in the house. Do I miss paying $81 for a pair of tickets like I did in 2003? Of course! But, I also miss being able to fill up my car for $35.
.

Kevin Davis · March 2008

"$148 is a bargain! It's Pearl Jam, for Pete's sake!"

$148 is a bargain only if it's $148 Monopoly money. This "cost of inflation" business is a bunch of crap. How many thousand people fit into Madison Square Garden? Are you telling me that the band needs anywhere from $75 to $500 (go to Tickets.com and look at the most expensive seats - good grief) from each concertgoer in order to finance a tour and still make it worth the band members' while? It's the natural order of things, though - as Pearl Jam gets older, so also do their fans get older, and it's logical to assume that a kid who could only afford $25 for tickets in 1993 might now be a lawyer who won't bat an eye at $100. But, I'm not one of them.

As a fan, I feel like my favorite band has always gone to great lengths to make sure that *can* support them, and it disappoints me to learn that this time around, I cannot. Or maybe "will not" is the more adequate phrase. Pearl Jam are the best band in the world, but gone are the days when I can justify blowing my month's utility bill on standing in the back of an amphitheater and watching tiny specks on a stage jump around and sing my favorite songs.

smithnic · March 2008

pineapplesandwaves wrote:

Ticket prices for concerts have consistently increased in the past decade. It's pretty ridiculous has much ticket prices have sky rocketed in the entertainment industry. Ten years ago, I was paying $40 to see lots of bands. Now those bands are charging $125. The costs to tour has increased - - from gas to employee salaries to what the venues charge. Pearl Jam can't continue charging $30 forever.

Pearl Jam tickets are still significantly lower than other bands. I don't know how anyone can complain about spending $75 (TOTAL ... includes taxes, fees, etc.) for the best seats in the house. Do I miss paying $81 for a pair of tickets like I did in 2003? Of course! But, I also miss being able to fill up my car for $35.

I don't fill up my car anymore because I don't have one, but I agree with everything you said.
However it's a bad sign to see PJ tickets go for so much! That and the frequency of festivals sucks! Festivals suck! They are overpriced half sets in the terrible heat in the middle of nowhere!
The recent news of Ticketmast saying they are getting in on the scalping is bad news as well. Essentially they are going to hold back tickets to increase demand and sell them for much more than face.
It's a sad situation for concert goers. I am fastly becoming a one band concert goer, which sucks!

Urohawk · March 2008

kj1nyr wrote:

Case in point:

U2 fan club seats @ $165 each got me 6th row in a lower tier section at the far back corner of the stadium
Clapton fan club seats @ $ 125 ea got me 28th row on the floor far right side
The Who fan club seats @ $ 150 ea got me 19th row floor far right side
PJ fan club seats in 2006 @ $98 for a pair got me 2nd row floor center btwn Ed and Stone

Inflation rears it's ugly head in all markets, but I'm happy to pay PJ $148 for a pair of seats to a guaranteed awesome show.

As much as I love Pearl Jam they are not U2, Clapton, or the Who. U2 continues to have major success with albums. Clapton has done similarly well with album success in his late career and is a legend. The Who are legends. PJ is a great band who has fallen off average Americans radar. They will always be etched in rock n roll history because of the Seattle Grunge scene. They cont to do well because they have a rabid fan base and put on a great live show.

lowbudgetlush · March 2008

Poncier wrote:

For everyone assuming the tix are $74 apiece, I believe you'll find the $74 will consist of 3 components...
1. The face value of the ticket
B. Some small, reasonable 10club handling fee
Third. A "facility fee" that amphitheaters always tack on each seat

I bet the actual face value of the ticket is likely around $65, we will see later.

I agree about the other costs involved but I bet the face value for a ticket in 2006 was $50 so that still means that the ticket is $15 more. So where is that extra money going? Gas in 2006 was around 3.10/gallon. Now gas is around 3.50/gallon, so i am not buying fuel as the reason for the price increase.

As to the person who talked about clapton, u2 and some other bands charging $150/ticket: Just because they charge that much does not make it ok. Also with u2 i can see why they charge so much because of the elaborate stage setup. Where as Pearl Jam has a bare-bones set up.

redrock · March 2008

A small tour is probably more expensive pro-rata. Some of the overheads will be the same as for a larger tour but with less opportunities to cover the costs, thus higher ticket costs.

chromiam · March 2008

Urohawk wrote:

As much as I love Pearl Jam they are not U2, Clapton, or the Who. U2 continues to have major success with albums. Clapton has done similarly well with album success in his late career and is a legend. The Who are legends. PJ is a great band who has fallen off average Americans radar. They will always be etched in rock n roll history because of the Seattle Grunge scene. They cont to do well because they have a rabid fan base and put on a great live show.

I'll agree with this... hence the prices not being in the U2, The Who and Clapton range. Are the prices similar to other tours this year?? yes... are they what you have come to expect from PJ?? maybe... does the answer to both of these questions mean we should all just pay up and not say anything about it??? absolutely fucking not.

tschav · March 2008

Screw gasoline, you see how much a beer costs?

Drink 2 less beers at a concert and you can afford the $15 hike in ticket prices.

Kevin Davis · March 2008

Does anyone recall a couple of years ago when there was published that list of "demands" the band required for performing at any given venue? The luxuries they require are insane. Does anyone know if there was any legitimacy to that list?

No Fear Of Falling · March 2008

lowbudgetlush wrote:

As to the person who talked about clapton, u2 and some other bands charging $150/ticket: Just because they charge that much does not make it ok. Also with u2 i can see why they charge so much because of the elaborate stage setup. Where as Pearl Jam has a bare-bones set up.

Tool has the most elaborate stage i've ever seen. Much more elaborate then U2. Tool tickets were $50 - $60.

Just sayin..

Ticket prices are consistant and fair.

Comments

Categories