arizzzona, I have no idea how the GAs would be making it to the ticket brokers, but I suspect that some of them bought memberships like we did and as for the others, who knows?
As far as setting the ticket price, from my understanding the way it works, TNA which is a division of Clear Channel, offers U2 or which ever act they are doing a tour for, 1 set amount of money from which everyone involved with the show gets payed. I've heard a figure of $200,000,000 that gets payed to U2, but I think that was either for Elevation or Popmart. This is money U2 is able to count on, regardless of whether each show sells out or not. From this amount, U2 pays for everything: the crew salaries, the costs of staging, hotels, the rental for venues, insurance and ultimately the remainder after all expenses is divided into 5 equal amounts by the band and Paul M. Additonally, it's normal for the band and the venues they play at to split even the sales from merchandise. Paul has stated that in 1992, when U2 did not go with a single promoter guranteeing them a set amount, that it was the merchandise sales them kept them afloat, due to the expensive nature of the show.
When TNA offers this amount of money, they figure out how they can price the tour where it is still in their minds affordable to the public, yet will allow them to bring in total worldwide grosses above the $200,000,000 they are paying out to the band, so they are able to profit.I believe they set the ticket prices and submit them to U2 for approval. If TNA proposed having the best seats priced at $300 each, like TNA has done with the Rolling Stones, I think U2 would not accept that. As a result, I believe the final ticket prices are fully agreed upon by TNA and U2.
A thing I wonder is how much influence TNA has over where U2 plans to play. I know for a fact from a U2 bodyguard that as of April 2001, the plan was to take the Elevation tour to Australia and Japan in late November-December and to end the entire tour in South America in January 2002. Obviously this changed, I believe because of bad currency exchanges with these countries. As we know U2 added 2 weeks of US shows to follow the November 19th Los Angeles date that was to have been the final US show prior to going overseas. Perhaps U2 wanted to take the show overseas but TNA talked them out of it due to a grim forcast on how high they would have to set prices in those countries to make them profitable or maybe U2 themselves fully decided to stay where the big money was assured?
This is just speculation, but perhaps the increase in ticket prices this tour not only take into account inflation and higher salaries to U2's crew, but maybe they are designed to help offset the costs of taking the show to Japan and Australia this tour? In 2001, they never publicly stated that they were going beyond N America and Europe, but they have this time.
In a possibly good sign for U2 fans in S America is that TNA is already planning for the Rolling Stones to go to S America in early 2006 on their upcoming tour. The Stones also skipped S America on their last tour, so maybe TNA has figured out a financial model that will allow them to take U2 back there in early 2006.
