Will they sell out stadiums in the USA?

[kohoutek]

The problem for small bands is, tours aren't half as profitable as they are for bands who are huge. U2 could live off tours, so could any remotely big bands. Small bands however who can only play clubs that fit 500 people and only charge 15-20 euro for a ticket aren't gonna make much money that way

Depends upon what you call "much money". My understanding is that there are bands that get to a certain level that can play in front of crowds ranging from 300 - 500 a night, maybe 200 nights a year (hard work, no doubt, but fun), charging 15 USD/ticket, and each member pulls in a six figure income. A lot of that comes from merchandise sales of course.

Bob Pollard from Guided by Voices said in an interview, and this was several years back - I'm paraphrasing, "You'd be surprised at how much money you can make as a small, indie artist".

 

[digitize]

I never understood why some guy at Sony corporate should be raking in millions off the backs of performers any way.

Because that's how capitalism works? Would you rather live in a society where THE COLLECTIVE determines what artists create?

 

[dopper]

I don't agree with the notion that a band should be entitled to $10 million for sitting in the studio and selling copies of their "art."

I don't agree with the notion that someone working at Starbucks is entitled to free music.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

I don't think it's hurting moms and dads, or even bands that depend on 500,000 sales. It's hurting the BIG bands and the record companies. So be it.

I never understood why some guy at Sony corporate should be raking in millions off the backs of performers any way. Similarly, I think U2 and similar bands do just fine for themselves financially, particularly since they spend the time and effort touring.

I think the world would be a better place if Michael Jackson and Madonna, to name two, didn't have countless millions at their disposal to the point that they live like absolute pompous grossly wealthy priviliged f***s who forget where they came from and precisely who (the fans) put them there (see also, Posh Spice, for example).

There's enough douchebags in the world without them, no matter how good their "art" is. I have no pity for a band who sells a million albums but loses the revenue from the other 2 million that might get downloaded by someone making $8 an hour at Starbucks.

The big popular artist like U2, Madonna, The Rolling Stones make nearly 10 times as much money from touring than they do album sales. Big bands and artist are not hurt by this, the little ones get hurt.

The first bit of revenue the little unknown artist is likely to see is from when someone buys their album. Few people pay substantial money to see unknown artist in concert.

U2 did not start to actually make money beyond paying for the cost of what they were doing until late 1983. A gold record(500,000 copies sold) in the USA as well as playing to thousands of people on a theater tour, was enough to allow the members of the band to buy their first houses.

How many albums went Gold in the USA in 2008? 80 How many went platinum for 1 million sales? 25 How many went multi-platinum for 2 million or more sales over the course of 2008? 4 and none of those 4 made it to 3 million with the top selling album at 2.8 million and the other three at 2.1 million.

The number of albums that were certified Gold in 2008 was the lowest since 1968!

 

[BWU2Buffs]

Since you see fit to compare coffee downloads, then fess up that you can't download U2's new CD for free either. You can only download a digital copy of the music. I suppose if I could digitalize the flavor and aroma of Starbucks coffee, they might be pissed that I offered it for free on Kazaa, but then again, those who download my coffee wouldn't get the whole experience of Starbuck's coffee, would they now?

It's probably an incorrect assertion to claim free downloading isn't huring small bands. But on the same token it helps them by giving them exposure as well. Many people still want the CD, jewel case, etc., rather than just the music. No Doubt, for example, is giving away digital downloads of their entire collection with each ticket purchase. Why? For exposure and to sell concert tickets. That's where they make their money, as should most bands. I don't agree with the notion that a band should be entitled to $10 million for sitting in the studio and selling copies of their "art." A performing artist (like U2) should be expected to "perform" to earn the big bucks.

Wow, really? Hmm, a digital copy of U2's music is an extremely good economic substitue for the CD, or, what you seem to imply is the "real thing". Most of us trade choices at price points based on the quality of the substituted good. So, in relative terms, U2 in MP3 from LimeWire or wherever is a good to great substitute for U2 on CD from Target -- from free and MP3 to say $12 at Le Target on CD.

On the contraire, Jif Creamy to private label (Price Chopper, Publix) peanut butter creamy is, usually, a crappy economic trade even at $1 or $2 difference. The cheaper crap blows and many will pay the extra $1 for real Jif Creamy. The entire Private Label industry owes its livelihood to the concept of economic substitutes -- billions and billions of $$.

On to the coffee story, Starbucks can get a premium price point because it IS often an experience and a good cup of joe. It does compare quite favorably to the crappy cup of joe I make with my Black and Decker coffee maker and large Folgers tin. So, once in awhile I trade up to Starbucks, but mosttly I stick to the crappy B & D and usually I microwave a cup for three days after the original brew was made cuz I'm too lazy to make more crappy coffee, I can only drink one cup per day AND it saves water.

All BS aside, I don't spend the extra $4 at Starbucks often becauuse $.30 per cup of crappy B & D coffee is a darn good subsititue, and, with a decent microwave, eco-friendly.

Gwen and No Doubt are giving music away cuz they need to gain some exposure, and, arguably, the market, based on capitalism, rewards U2, Gwen as a solo act and even other bands like Jonas Brothers for playing live ANd sitting around in a studio cutting songs to vinyl or disc.

Sorry, the market does not match your world view, but that's OK -- this too, shall pass, and we can go on to the next thread and discuss the economic theories and pros and cons of the GA Lottery.

 

[bfloxng]

Wow, really? Hmm, a digital copy of U2's music is an extremely good economic substitue for the CD, or, what you seem to imply is the "real thing". Most of us trade choices at price points based on the quality of the substituted good. So, in relative terms, U2 in MP3 from LimeWire or wherever is a good to great substitute for U2 on CD from Target -- from free and MP3 to say $12 at Le Target on CD.

On the contraire, Jif Creamy to private label (Price Chopper, Publix) peanut butter creamy is, usually, a crappy economic trade even at $1 or $2 difference. The cheaper crap blows and many will pay the extra $1 for real Jif Creamy. The entire Private Label industry owes its livelihood to the concept of economic substitutes -- billions and billions of $$.

On to the coffee story, Starbucks can get a premium price point because it IS often an experience and a good cup of joe. It does compare quite favorably to the crappy cup of joe I make with my Black and Decker coffee maker and large Folgers tin. So, once in awhile I trade up to Starbucks, but mosttly I stick to the crappy B & D and usually I microwave a cup for three days after the original brew was made cuz I'm too lazy to make more crappy coffee, I can only drink one cup per day AND it saves water.

All BS aside, I don't spend the extra $4 at Starbucks often becauuse $.30 per cup of crappy B & D coffee is a darn good subsititue, and, with a decent microwave, eco-friendly.

Gwen and No Doubt are giving music away cuz they need to gain some exposure, and, arguably, the market, based on capitalism, rewards U2, Gwen as a solo act and even other bands like Jonas Brothers for playing live ANd sitting around in a studio cutting songs to vinyl or disc.

Sorry, the market does not match your world view, but that's OK -- this too, shall pass, and we can go on to the next thread and discuss the economic theories and pros and cons of the GA Lottery.

I think the market does match my world view, because the market must adjust to account for technology. I don't see the porn industry suffering from digital download technology. Quite the opposite. It is now thriving, and not because some lonely chap is buying DVDs. Digital sharing of media is the current wave and wave of the future. To complain that people still won't buy CDs is ridiculous. Artists and record labels need to get with the times and realize that there's simply not the money to be made on hard vinyl or CDs that there once was. That time has past. And as far as Sony execs making millions, I agree, it's capitalism, but so is the digital world. So Sony has to adjust or become a dinosaur. iTunes is certainly leading the way in that regard.

Any way, thanks for the econ chat. It's refreshing to see that fellow fans aren't sheep that some people on other bands' boards are. However, it is curious to me that some take one approach on distribution of music (pure capitalism and defending and artist's rights to their art), while taking the complete opposite approach to ticket distribution (everyone should be equal and shouldn't have to pay more for in demand shows or seats). It's difficult to have it both ways.

I mean, a $30 nosebleed ticket is a good economic substitute for a row 1 seat that might catch $1,000 in the free market, but I don't hear anyone touting that logic, despite the fact that the secondary market is obviously sanctioned by the promoters (and, thus, the artists).

 

[Moggio]

Even though probably 70% of the North American 360 tour shows should eventually sellout by the summer/fall, I think the fact that currently only 30% of these shows have sold out, destroys the theory by many here that all of the North American Vertigo tour shows in 2005 were undersold. In reality, compared to the markets that have been scheduled on both tours on this continent so far, only the Dallas & Houston shows were undersold in 2005...

 

[powerhour24]

I'm not going to get into an economics argument, just going to rep Price Chopper, their store brand is better than a lot of brand names!!

 

[bfloxng]

Even though by the late summer/fall, around 70% of the 360 tour's North American leg shows should eventually sellout, I think the fact that currently only 30% of these shows have sold out, destroys the theory by many here that all of the Vertigo tour North American leg shows in 2005 were heavily undersold. In reality, compared to the markets that have been scheduled on both tours on this continent so far, only the Dallas & Houston shows were undersold in 2005...

Would you not also agree that vegas was undersold as well?

 

[digitize]

Even though by the late summer/fall, around 70% of the 360 tour's North American leg shows should eventually sellout, I think the fact that currently only 30% of these shows have sold out, destroys the theory by many here that all of the Vertigo tour North American leg shows in 2005 were heavily undersold. In reality, compared to the markets that have been scheduled on both tours on this continent so far, only the Dallas & Houston shows were undersold in 2005...

You don't understand the definition of 'sales records', do you? Or Dallas, Texas selling close to 80,000 tickets in six hours?

 

[bfloxng]

I'm not going to get into an economics argument, just going to rep Price Chopper, their store brand is better than a lot of brand names!!

Agreed! (or so I've been told)

 

[BWU2Buffs]

I think the market does match my world view, because the market must adjust to account for technology. I don't see the porn industry suffering from digital download technology. Quite the opposite. It is now thriving, and not because some lonely chap is buying DVDs.

Ironic choice of industry for your argument -- the porn guys were the first ones to secure credit cards online, oddly, without online porn a long time ago, Amazon and iTunes would still be ideas because consumers would be afraid to give out card data online. While I have no idea if online porn is a thriving market, there is plenty of free online and email porn too AND there are many reasons why an industry thrives beyond file sharing.

However, it is curious to me that some take one approach on distribution of music (pure capitalism and defending and artist's rights to their art), while taking the complete opposite approach to ticket distribution (everyone should be equal and shouldn't have to pay more for in demand shows or seats). It's difficult to have it both ways.

Agreed, but this is where economics and public relations crash together -- U2 could not charge true market value for tickets, they'd be skwered in the court of public opinion.

I mean, a $30 nosebleed ticket is a good economic substitute for a row 1 seat that might catch $1,000 in the free market, but I don't hear anyone touting that logic, despite the fact that the secondary market is obviously sanctioned by the promoters (and, thus, the artists).

Do you watch Saturday Night Live? Bitch, pleeeze! A $30 bleeder is not a good sub for a $55 GA or a $95 bleacher seat. If it were, the $30 bleeders would sell out first and that's why the Row 1 seat gets $1,000 after market and the bleeder gets $40. This also explains why nobody is touting that particular logic.

Your final comment smells more of conspiracy theory than fact, but I would not know -- it's a huge stretch IMO to suggest that anyone from U2 or any other big band is in bed with secondary market types. I would think they understand why it exists, but that's about all.

 

[Moggio]

You don't understand the definition of 'sales records', do you?

You sure as hell don't.

Or Dallas, Texas selling close to 80,000 tickets in six hours?

That's complete BS - there's GREAT seats left.

 

[bfloxng]

Agreed, but this is where economics and public relations crash together -- U2 could not charge true market value for tickets, they'd be skwered in the court of public opinion.

Really? They could simply auction the best seats (like Coldplay did last tour) and give a "portion" to charity like they did with Red Zone.

Do you watch Saturday Night Live? Bitch, pleeeze! A $30 bleeder is not a good sub for a $55 GA or a $95 bleacher seat. If it were, the $30 bleeders would sell out first and that's why the Row 1 seat gets $1,000 after market and the bleeder gets $40. This also explains why nobody is touting that particular logic.

I do: Bitch may be the new black, but black is the new President, bitch.
I never said a $30 bleeder is a substitute for a $55 GA, but bear in mind that about 1/2 of GAs are ultimately redeemed by fans who purchased on the secondary market for more than face value.

Your final comment smells more of conspiracy theory than fact, but I would not know -- it's a huge stretch IMO to suggest that anyone from U2 or any other big band is in bed with secondary market types. I would think they understand why it exists, but that's about all.

I never claimed U2 is in bed with the secondary market, but they certainly do nothing to prohibit and, at the very least, implicitly sanction it by having FIVE 'presales' (Horizon, Breathe, Boots, the bundle, and venue) which sold out the majotiy of seats, of which about a third end up on the secondary market. In turn, they get the sellout or very close thereto and pass the 'market' on to the brokers, who make money or lose money but in the end distribute the tickets.

With this tour, U2 depends on speculators who overbuy tickets thinking they can turn the tickets over for a profit or, at the very least, for face (or trade them). This takes a good portion of tickets off the market temporarily and creates artificial demand. Why else would anyone have purchased 4, 6, 8, or 10 $250 tickets to Chicago 2 (for example) and be willing to sell them TWO WEEKS LATER (and five months before the show) for face value (or less)?

I am not suggesting that U2 promotes the secondary market, but they definitely need it for this tour, because it's impossible to gauge market price for each venue accurately and, moreover, they could hardly have drastic price differences based on venue without jeopardizing their credibility (Imagine Giants Stadium GAs being $95 while Scott Stadium GAs are $45? Note that the market would have supported such a price disparity). They sanction it by keeping prices at a level where if the sellout isn't a creature of pure fan demand, it's a creature of 'market' demand.

If U2 wished not to sanction the secondary market, the best 10% of seats would be auctioned via ticketmaster (again, like Coldplay did) and the GAs (or even simply the ellipse GAs) would be will call day of show (similar to what Springsteen did, where you showed up day of show, got your two tickets and they placed two wristbands on you and your guest so you couldn't sell the tix).

From U2's perspective, a majority of fans will get their GAs for face. Those who don't will get them in the secondary market at a markup (e.g. NYC) or a discount (e.g., Scott Stadium and I suspect Phoenix, as was the case in 2005). But ultimately, it'll be their fans in the pit (even if there's a couple of d-bag wannabe VIPs like Alyssa Milano trolling the pit in Honolulu).

 

[bonoschild2009]

Can any concert ever technically sell out with the secondary market as it is? I would think that it would be impossible....

 

[digitize]

You sure as hell don't.



That's complete BS - there's GREAT seats left.

1) Rhetoric with no explanation for teh winzorz!

2) The only decent seats left are singles. If you want a pair of tickets, you have to go to the nosebleeds - GA is sold out, too.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Even though probably 70% of the North American 360 tour shows should eventually sellout by the summer/fall, I think the fact that currently only 30% of these shows have sold out, destroys the theory by many here that all of the North American Vertigo tour shows in 2005 were undersold. In reality, compared to the markets that have been scheduled on both tours on this continent so far, only the Dallas & Houston shows were undersold in 2005...

1. 2005 was a different time in terms of economics, so a straight by the numbers comparison cannot be done without adjusting for the impact of the worst recession in North America since the 1930s.

2. But, even if one does not adjust for that, it should be clear to most people by now that it appears the band may have indeed underplayed several area's of the United States and Canada on Vertigo. Clearly the band could have booked a full stadium tour back then despite the claims by others saying that was not possible.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

That's complete BS - there's GREAT seats left.

If your trying to buy TWO or more tickets, the best that one can get are $95 dollar tickets 20 rows up on the top level(4th level) of the stadium. If you think those are great seats, then I guess every seat in the stadium is a great seat.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Will see who's predictions were correct for those "weaker markets" this fall.



Dopper attendance predictions for the U2 360 in North America:

Phoenix 35,000
Las Vegas 33,000
Tampa 28,000
Raleigh 25,000
Atlanta 36,000
Dallas 34,000
Norman 22,000
Houston 32,000
Charlottesville 29,000
D.C. 55,000



Moggio predictions for U2 360 in North America:

City/Venue/Capacity/Tickets Sold/Gross/Average Ticket Price

October

1 Charlottesville, VA - Scott Stadium (62,000/31,000/$2 million/$65)
3 Raleigh - Carter Finley Stadium (57,000/31,000/$2 million/$65)
12 Dallas - Cowboys Stadium (80,000/28,000/$1.8 million/$65)
14 Houston - Reliant Stadium (70,000/31,000/$2 million/$65)
19 Norman, OK (Oklahoma City area) - University Memorial Stadium (82,000/31,000/$2 million/$65)




Maoilbheannacht predictions for U2 360 tour in North America:

City/Venue/Capacity/Tickets Sold/Gross/Average Ticket Price

October

1 Charlottesville, VA - Scott Stadium (62,000/55,000/$5.4 million/$97.70)
3 Raleigh - Carter Finley Stadium (57,000/45,000/$3.6 million/$80)
12 Dallas - Cowboys Stadium (80,000/55,000/$5.4 million/$97.70)
14 Houston - Reliant Stadium (70,000/45,000/$4.3 million/$95)
19 Norman, OK (Oklahoma City area) - University Memorial Stadium (82,000/50,000/$4 million/$80)

 

[bfloxng]

1. 2005 was a different time in terms of economics, so a straight by the numbers comparison cannot be done without adjusting for the impact of the worst recession in North America since the 1930s.

2. But, even if one does not adjust for that, it should be clear to most people by now that it appears the band may have indeed underplayed several area's of the United States and Canada on Vertigo. Clearly the band could have booked a full stadium tour back then despite the claims by others saying that was not possible.

Not to say this isn't an economic downturn, but I'm not so sure that's really playing into this. People still have money for entertainment and are spending it. In any event, while U2 may have underplayed arenas in 2005, that's clearly because of the limited capacity compared to stadiums. However, I don't think they could have booked that many more shows (obviously, they could play nightly in NYC, Vegas, LA, Chicago and probably sell out for months). look at venues like Detroit, Phoenix, Denver, where they played two shows, and recall that a ton of tickets were left on the secondary market for far below face. If they did the same venues now that they did in 2005, I think you'd have the same if not greater demand. Most people in Buffalo/Cleveland/Pittsburgh, for example, aren't traveling 100+ miles to see U2, even though they'd gladly see them at home. I'd bet a good 40% of people who bought tickets last tour won't be seeing the band this year.

 

[Maoilbheannacht]

Not to say this isn't an economic downturn, but I'm not so sure that's really playing into this. People still have money for entertainment and are spending it. in any event, while U2 may have underplayed arenas in 2005, that's clearly because of the limited capacity compared to stadiums. If they did the same venues now that they did in 2005, you'd have the same if not greater demand. Most people in Buffalo/Cleveland/Pittsburgh, for example aren't traveling 100+ miles to see U2, even though they'd gladly see them at home. I'd bet a good 40% of people who bought tickets last tour won't be seeing the band this year.

In terms of the people traveling that might be true. It would be interesting if someone would conduct scientific poll of where people were coming from outside the venue before the show, so we could get an idea of just how many people really do travel 100+ miles to see U2.

 

[bfloxng]

In terms of the people traveling that might be true. It would be interesting if someone would conduct scientific poll of where people were coming from outside the venue before the show, so we could get an idea of just how many people really do travel 100+ miles to see U2.

Agreed

 

[mosquito]

Does anybody know how many tickets have been sold so far for the following concerts?

Boston 2
Charlottesville
Raleigh
Atlanta
Tampa
Houston
Norman
Phoenix


Thank you.

 

[roy keane]

I'd respect your opinion more if you stopped posting with that ridiculous font.

 

[nikoli]

Maoilbheannacht predictions for U2 360 tour in North America:
City/Venue/Capacity/Tickets Sold/Gross/Average Ticket Price
October
1 Charlottesville, VA - Scott Stadium (62,000/55,000/$5.4 million/$97.70)
3 Raleigh - Carter Finley Stadium (57,000/45,000/$3.6 million/$80)
12 Dallas - Cowboys Stadium (80,000/55,000/$5.4 million/$97.70)
14 Houston - Reliant Stadium (70,000/45,000/$4.3 million/$95)
19 Norman, OK (Oklahoma City area) - University Memorial Stadium (82,000/50,000/$4 million/$80)

nah. Houston and Dallas will be sold out by the time the concert is. I think yours is a lowball estimate (and the others is even worse!). I'd say 65K minimum, and sell outs extremely likely for these two venues. Norman, Raleigh and Charlottesville: 90% capacity each (at least).

 

[dopper]

nah. Houston and Dallas will be sold out by the time the concert is. I think yours is a lowball estimate (and the others is even worse!). I'd say 65K minimum, and sell outs extremely likely for these two venues. Norman, Raleigh and Charlottesville: 90% capacity each (at least).

I find it amusing the number of Monday morning quarterbacks around here. None of us really have any idea how many tickets have been sold so far except for maybe those cited in the Live Nation press releases. I would think if the other markets had sold 60-80K tickets already, Live Nation would be tooting their horns. There's no doubt RIM (Blackberry) has held back tickets for employees, business partners, and ticket giveaway contests.

 

[Moggio]

1) Rhetoric with no explanation for teh winzorz!

Look who's talking.

2) The only decent seats left are singles. If you want a pair of tickets, you have to go to the nosebleeds - GA is sold out, too.

Like I said, there's GREAT seats left.




---------------------------------------------------


You guys are hilarious. The amount of excuses on this forum as to why NLOTH isn't selling worth a shit and why many of the shows on this tour aren't sold out is HUGELY funny. Keep it up...it's VERY entertaining...

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

No, hilarious is typing your posts in the most annoying font possible in some sad cry for attention.

I am guessing in your mind that the reason NLOTH isn't selling "worth shit" is because it sucks?

try something new troll...

 

[BVS]

I'd respect your opinion more if you stopped posting with that ridiculous font.

That and if he tried using facts...

 

[U2Fanatic4ever]

No, hilarious is typing your posts in the most annoying font possible in some sad cry for attention.

I am guessing in your mind that the reason NLOTH isn't selling "worth shit" is because it sucks?

try something new troll...