Live Music Suffers Rare Slump

[ANF]

I always thought artists were grossly underpaid for what they did live back in the eighties. I don't mind forking out a couple hundred bucks or more to see a good act.

I'm not rich, so I do mind.

I call BS that my older brother who turns 50 this year was able to see AC/DC, Kiss, Aerosmith, Journey, Queen, Rush, REO Speedwagon, Foreigner, J. Geils Band, etc... as a teenager on a minimum wage job with no help from my parents whereas now you better have a very well-off job if you want to see that many artists. I think its wrong when people like Justin Bieber charge $200 when none of his fans can even afford that, that's probably six months babysitting right there. Those girls have to put off buying anything else and save save save just so they can see a millionaire brat. My parents bought me great seats to Michael Jackson when I was eight, four tickets cost around $100 total... Michael Jackson then was one of the hottest artists in the world and yet eight tickets of his in 1988 is the same as one to see the same seat for Gaga or Bieber now? That is wrong... MJ was by far hotter then.

$100 is the absolute max a concert should cost, and that is if you're in the best seats possible. Anything above that is pure rock star greed demanding us little people support their lifestyle.

 

[ILoveJimmyPage]

The biggest touring acts usually do charge a handful, and U2 is right up there. They're making more cash than just about anyone these days in the music biz.

 

[LG]

I've always wondered if downloading was stopped everywhere(Impossible I know, but just for arguments sake) that labels/management/artists would Lower their concert ticket prices.

Keep in mind that although the labels cry Poor nowadays, they made Billions on reselling old albums over and over again.

Somehow I think prices might drop a little but never to where they were in the 90's, I saw Pink Floyd and The Stones, and I think my tickets were around $40.00, even with inflation that doesn't get to the astronomical prices of today.

 

[runningshoes]

I'm not really too worried about it because most of the artists I like will either be retired or dead before too long.

 

[LG]

^^That's a pragmatic if cold dispassionate way of looking at it RS, but there are a lot of bands out there younger people want to see, and I think they are getting a raw deal, like ANF said it's gotten out of hand.

 

[runningshoes]

There are some bands who charge a lot. Some deserve it, some don't. I'm going to see Primus in October and it only cost me $55 through the box office. And those are very good seats.

 

[Powerage]

U2 have been clever though. Playing in the round was smart, but the pricing levels were genius. The cheapest seats cost £36 at Wembley Stadium in 2009. I had those and they were GREAT. If you wanted to pay £150, you have the band right in your face, but I was well happy with the seats I had and the band weren't ants.

There were about 4 price levels.

I paid £100 to see Aerosmith at the 02 Arena. The most I've ever paid for a single concert. Aerosmith rarely ever tour Europe or the UK, and I simply wasn't going to miss it. But it's nothing something I want to do again.

 

[LG]

There are some bands who charge a lot. Some deserve it, some don't. I'm going to see Primus in October and it only cost me $55 through the box office. And those are very good seats.

You like Primus RS...?

You make a good point, not all bands charge an arm and a leg for tickets, but I have to say there is no one on earth either dead, alive or yet to be born that I would pay $200.00 to see....simply not worth it to me anyway.

 

[runningshoes]

You like Primus RS...?

Not really, but my brother loves them. I'm taking him for his birthday.

Claypool has done very well in some bass polls I've seen online so I'd like to see what all the fuss is about.

 

[ANF]

I've always wondered if downloading was stopped everywhere(Impossible I know, but just for arguments sake) that labels/management/artists would Lower their concert ticket prices.

Keep in mind that although the labels cry Poor nowadays, they made Billions on reselling old albums over and over again.

Somehow I think prices might drop a little but never to where they were in the 90's, I saw Pink Floyd and The Stones, and I think my tickets were around $40.00, even with inflation that doesn't get to the astronomical prices of today.

Ticket prices were beginning to get out of hand even before Napster. I remember Barbra Streisand and The Eagles were both getting negative attention for the prices they were charging back in 1994. Babs was charging $350 and downloading was still five years away.

Personally I think lower tickets means bigger venues and more sellouts. Some artists (U2, Stones and Madonna are the three biggest culprits) seems to love to hold records for most $$$$ grossed per tour. U2's latest tour has made in between $500-600 million. Its become this pissing contest between certain artists over how much $$$ they can gross and I think that has sucked out the feeling of just having the privilege of seeing a favorite artist when they roll into town. If the likes of Dylan and Springsteen can keep their top seats at $100 or below, I don't see the excuse most artists have. Hell, Elton John and Lady Gaga came to the same venue here about a month from each other and Elton's top seat was about $75 less than Gaga's top seat. Elton's certainly past his day but at least he has the legacy behind him that $125 for the top seats makes more sense than for a pop starlet who many believe will be opening up for Cyndi Lauper in five years does at $200. I would go to far more concerts if the artists weren't about trying to outdo each other's $$$, granted I wouldn't have seen Lady Gaga for $40 but still, her core audience aren't people who see spending $200 as the same as going and getting a cup of coffee before work.