The Concert Business

[EddMarkStarr]

The first live music concert I remember attending was Roberta Flack in 1970 at the Norfolk Little Theater, sponsored by the local black-owned radio station.
Tickets were cheap because bands used live concerts to promote record sales, where the real money was.

Music fans today face a situation that should be a crime.

 

[rareboy]

Yup.

We grew up in an era where live performances were relatively affordable and accessible. And bands didn't travel with 1000 roadies and 20 trucks full of equipment and pyrotechnics.

 

[EddMarkStarr]

In the world of entertainment, live performances offer too many opportunities for greed from venue owners, event promoters, ticket providers; and any other scammers with an angle ready to exploit. Each time I think governments will coordinate their oversight of live concerts, turns out to be just my imagination.

 

[rareboy]

Why would governments get involved in the oversight of concerts?

They could legislate more criminal penalties for fraud and price fixing...but I suspect for the latter, there is a feeling that it is up to the consumers to decide.

 

[unloadonme]

I was recently asked if I was interested in going to see a particular play in London. Tickets were priced between £150 and £200. I declined, partly because I wasn't interested in the subject, but partly also because of the price. Even for the West End, £200 for a theatre ticket seems excessive. If people were simply to stay away from overpriced theatres, concerts and whatever, prices would have to come down. No need for government regulation.

 

[rareboy]

From FB:

In 1995, Pearl Jam canceled their tour due to a dispute with Ticketmaster, which began in 1992 with two free concerts in Seattle. Ticketmaster charged a fee of one dollar per ticket, which Pearl Jam found unacceptable. The band decided to distribute the tickets themselves.

In 1993, they set a maximum price of $18 for their concerts, despite promoters suggesting triple the price. They also reduced the price of their T-shirts, giving up $2 million in revenue.

In 1994, Pearl Jam declared that they would only play at venues that respected the maximum price of $18 and fees of less than $1.80. This led to a conflict with Ticketmaster, whose "service charge" ranged from $4 to $8. The band refused to give in, and because Ticketmaster controlled most of the concert venues, the 1994 summer tour was canceled, resulting in a loss of $3 million.

After the release of Vitalogy in 1994, Pearl Jam announced a summer tour only at venues not affiliated with Ticketmaster, organizing everything themselves.

 

[EddMarkStarr]

The first concert where I paid on my own was Bonnie Raitt at the Chrysler Concert Hall in Norfolk, Virginia, in 1975.

 

[rareboy]

My first was Jethro Tull at the Gardens in Toronto when I was in high school.

 

[Ontariobear]

Three Dog NIght with April Wine opening at the CNE in Toronto, also high school.

 

[NotHardUp1]

Why would governments get involved in the oversight of concerts?

They could legislate more criminal penalties for fraud and price fixing...but I suspect for the latter, there is a feeling that it is up to the consumers to decide.

Yes, there are already laws against scalping in many places, but barely enforced. If they wanted to set up sting operations and farm them out to private bounty hunters on commissions, they could do pretty well.

But, they don't.

On the other hand, oversight may not be the best course. Promotion would be more apt.

The government already promotes the arts, including concerts, for many groups. I remember the City of Albuquerque having an art tax and levying it on new contruction. New commercial buildings had to allocate 1% of costs to art, and if they declined, pay it in to the fund for the city to expend on art elsewhere.

Cities already tax the hell out of hotels. If concerts are going to be so expensive, then tax the hell out of Ticketmaster, and redirect the funds to providing free concerts for the public, with a certain level of participation required if an artist or group performs in the city/county/state. Win/Win. The performers still get rich. The ones happily paying $200 a head now pay $220, and the poor get a shot at some good shows.

I've never wanted to go to any pop concert in my entire life. Just never followed pop artists.

 

[Nude_Dude]

Music fans today face a situation that should be a crime.

Not REALLY
I was too young to attend, but when The Beatles toured Australia they came with a small van full of 40-watt amps, no stage set, no light show
- and played a 20-minute set, which past the first few rows, nobody heard.
Tickets were $3.70 ($62.95 adjusted for inflation)

Fast forward four decades, I got to attend one of the performances of Roger Warters 'In The Flesh' tour in Melbourne
From memory, the ticket price was around $190.00
In real terms, this was close to three times the cost of a Beatles ticket
It came with a specially constructed massive stage
An incredible light show, that was a performance, in itself.
A multi-thousand-watt surround sound system, with huge speakers attached to and suspended from the ceiling.
An entire Jumbo full of touring equipment I believe, which sounds about accurate.
Not to mention a performance that went from five to six times the length of The Beatles' concert

I've no doubt, comparing the two, you'd have to agree the latter was better value as "bang for your buck"

 

[EddMarkStarr]

There's a special magic that happens when you see a favorite performer live in concert. But the world has changed and everything is a money grab now. It wouldn't surprise me if live concerts become a thing of the past, with fans viewing their favorite artists via video monitors, exclusively.

 

[Kahaih]

. . . .It wouldn't surprise me if live concerts become a thing of the past, with fans viewing their favorite artists via video monitors, exclusively.

Be sure to count their fingers.