MERGED-->LOWER THE TICKET PRICES! + How does U2 justify these ticket prices?

[Reggie Thee Dog]

U2 justify it by being U2, the greatest live band of all time. The promoters know the demand is beyond high, so they give U2 (most likely) $50 million up front and some other percentage as they sell out show after show. Then the promoter fixes a price which is OK'd by the band. Vertigo prices are not extremely higher than Elevation prices, but they are higher, no doubt.

It's like gasoline, the demand is so high that gas companies can jack the price up with out (too much) flack. And like U2, the quantity is limited, so........

 

[theedge111]

Ugh, not another one of these threads.

U2 are charging under what the market is prepared to pay. Whine all you want; they are not charging as much as they could easily get away with charging.

Yep so true, i'd pay way more so i'm happy with the prices!!

 

[KUEFC09U2]

U2 justify it by being U2, the greatest live band of all time. The promoters know the demand is beyond high, so they give U2 (most likely) $50 million up front and some other percentage as they sell out show after show. Then the promoter fixes a price which is OK'd by the band. Vertigo prices are not extremely higher than Elevation prices, but they are higher, no doubt.

It's like gasoline, the demand is so high that gas companies can jack the price up with out (too much) flack. And like U2, the quantity is limited, so........

100% correct, thats the simple reason, because they are U2, we will NEVER EVER see another band like this, and the fact that people go on about ticket prices, setlists is rather sad, simple because, U2 are the last of the superbands, i mean ye you could go on about perl jam, but am sorry here in the UK they are no where near as big as the U.S. makes out, where U2 are MASSIVE everywhere, hence the fact that they are the LAST relevant super band out there,

 

[Axver]

Let's look at the facts of the matter:

1. Supply and demand. A cheap ticket means more will attempt to go, but by pricing it higher, they exclude some people through sheer cost. They have to find a balance.
2. The stage show. We don't know just how much this show costs, or at least I haven't seen anything on daily running costs, and it will only get more expensive when it hits stadiums.
3. It's a business. The objective of a business is to make a profit while providing a satisfactory good or service to the customer.
4. It's U2. People are willing to pay HEAPS to see them. The tickets are NOT at market value. People are more than willing to shell out a lot of money to see them, especially for the GAs. U2 have essentially kept tickets cheap compared to what the market is prepared to spend.

 

[the olive]

Ticket prices have out stripped inflation by a longshot. My 4th row floor Popmart ticket was $60.25 canadian. I'll pay the $175 they charge for similar seats today, HOWEVER, I am not happy about it - but what can I do?

$175 for a Lovetown show - now that would be a bargain!

 

[unosdostres14]

There is one word that describes why U2 charges so much:
Capitalism

 

[Sken]

There is one word that describes why U2 charges so much:

Best band in the world for the last 20 years.

Well, not one word. I guess the only way you could sum that up in one word is to say..............U2.

 

[Flying FuManchu]

Naw, I think capitalism fits more than the word U2.

 

[BWU2Buffs]

Ticket prices have out stripped inflation by a longshot.

Many specific items outstrip overall inflation rates by a lot -- prescription drugs, tuition, housing prices in some areas; not many threads out here on those, maybe on other boards.

IMO The prices reflect supply and demand, touring costs, and have a band imposed price lid -- dollars to donuts the promoter wanted to reach for $200 as a bae price for the best Lowers, but U2 said no even though the whole damn camp probably knew they could get it.

Plus, the best 2,000 or so seats every night are $50 -- that's way below market.

IMO the original thread question can be personalized, "how does Bono justify these prices" Well, he must have somehow, or they would not be charging them.

In the end, it's probably a bit like how an actor or star athlete justifies their contract -- "I'm worth it to the public, I have a specail skill, and people will pay gobs 'o money to see me perform this skill."

Lots of us out here have paid these gobs o money to see them play, some 6 or 7 times already this tour, how do we justify it?

Just like Bono, it's worth it.

 

[theblazer]

Hey, at least they're not charging a min of $75 a show, which I think Springsteen is doing for his solo tour. I think I paid $80 (which were first level seats I believe) to him and the E Street Band in Memphis back in 2000. No way in hell I'd pay $75 to listen to the boss play his sad sack shit on an accustic and talk about how Bush stole an election or some shit like that.

 

[shaun vox]

noel gallagher has something to say about this issue!!!!!!!

 

[Miggy D]

Paying well over 700 dollars so my mom, dad, sis and I can go to a U2 concert...I'm sorry it's too much money. I'm a fan just like the rest of you and yes, 'any price is worth it' in a hypothetical sense. But this is also the real world and I have real debts. It's too fucking much.

-Miggy D

 

[Aardvark747]

noel gallagher has something to say about this issue!!!!!!!

*shits on the new Oasis single*

 

[shaun vox]

*shits on the new Oasis single*

is the single out?

 

[Aardvark747]

is the single out?

I have a promo in my shop - but I think it goes on general sale (in the UK at least) on 16th May.

Im just not too keen on it....not yet anyway. Maybe it'll grow on me.

 

[blueeyedgirl]

Hey, at least they're not charging a min of $75 a show, which I think Springsteen is doing for his solo tour. I think I paid $80 (which were first level seats I believe) to him and the E Street Band in Memphis back in 2000. No way in hell I'd pay $75 to listen to the boss play his sad sack shit on an accustic and talk about how Bush stole an election or some shit like that.

I'm curious to know why you like Springsteen then. His political beliefs are part and parcel of his music.

 

[greenlight7-11]

Bands like REM and Pearl Jam keep cost down by keeping the stage design simple, which is cool, I love Pearl Jam when they get on stage with only a few lights and kick ass. U2 has a special effect show that costs money, I'm sure they could keep cost down by using less stage effects, but they seem to like the big effect show and alot of fans seem to think the $165 a show is worth it.

Then how do you explain Elevation? The ticket prices were only marginally cheaper than Vertigo's and the production was far simpler/cheaper.

 

[stevec]

Bottom line is that U2 is a band AND a business, so like any business they expect to and want to make money. Be it right or wrong, for every fan who can't afford to go, there will be a 100 that can.

Demand for U2 tix ALWAYS outstrips supply, so in essence we're probably lucky that they aren't charging more as it is. That being said, we all like a bargain and whatever the product we buy, we all probably feel like we shoulda got for less in the ideal world.

Up until Elevation, we were very lucky to have been paying extremely low tix prices and I was grateful for that. But there are also other things to consider here too, such as paying the hundreds of riggers, techincians, artists, caterers, drivers and roadies - not to mention the promotional costs, the venue, the security and the transportation costs.

Even if U2 wanted to keep tix costs down as much as possible, what they can't control is how much those people ultimately charge them for their services. I think that's also something we should keep in mind.

I'm sorry for those fans who can't afford tix and can't go - I really am. However if fans have bought tix and are going, then it's reasonable to assume they can afford to, so why complain about the issue now?

Anyway, I'm willing to bet that on the night, the last thing we'll be thinking about as U2 take the stage is the ticket cost

June 21st just can't get here soon enough!!!!

 

[smileplease]

It's too much. Period. We pay because we love the band and they tour once every fours years or so. But no one can justify the prices.

I feel sorry for the US fans who do seem to pay more than us here in the UK, but we're still forking out a hundred pounds to see them in a stadium per ticket. It's shocking.

U2 are a business. They tour to make money. Yes they enjoy touring, but why do you think they hardly every go to Australia...because they'll lose money due to the weak Aussie dollar and the transportation costs. And Bono has gone on the record saying that they're not prepared to lose money.I guess

U2's vision of a 'world' tour is twice around the States and a quick jaunt through Europe. I'm not complaining becuase I live in London so we usually get spoiled, but I feel sorry for fans in Oz and other forgotten areas. Ok, so they're going next year, but it'll be the first time in eight years.

I understand the supply and demand arguments etc, and you're right. But listening to Bono preaching about thirld world debt etc etc sits slightly uneasy when there's people in the arena paying vast sums for what are often shit seats.

I guess we should enjoy it while we can...they won't tour for ever.

 

[KUEFC09U2]

It's too much. Period. We pay because we love the band and they tour once every fours years or so. But no one can justify the prices.

I feel sorry for the US fans who do seem to pay more than us here in the UK, but we're still forking out a hundred pounds to see them in a stadium per ticket. It's shocking.

U2 are a business. They tour to make money. Yes they enjoy touring, but why do you think they hardly every go to Australia...because they'll lose money due to the weak Aussie dollar and the transportation costs. And Bono has gone on the record saying that they're not prepared to lose money.I guess

U2's vision of a 'world' tour is twice around the States and a quick jaunt through Europe. I'm not complaining becuase I live in London so we usually get spoiled, but I feel sorry for fans in Oz and other forgotten areas. Ok, so they're going next year, but it'll be the first time in eight years.

I understand the supply and demand arguments etc, and you're right. But listening to Bono preaching about thirld world debt etc etc sits slightly uneasy when there's people in the arena paying vast sums for what are often shit seats.

I guess we should enjoy it while we can...they won't tour for ever.

its too much?? am sorry but did you see how much the likes of madonna and the other so called "big acts" are charging here in the UK? U2 could have easily charged more, its as simple as that

 

[stevec]

But listening to Bono preaching about thirld world debt etc etc sits slightly uneasy when there's people in the arena paying vast sums for what are often shit seats.

Well he does rather more than just preach about it. I don't think any other "celebrity" (for want of a better word) has done more for African causes, than he and Bob Geldof for example. I think that particular arguement would only be valid if he was doing nothing but preaching.

Memberships of and donations to Greenpeace or Amnesty for example, have probably been greatly increased by U2's support and involvement with them. I can't fault the man for using his position to preach, even if he is a multi-millionaire - at least he's doing something positive.

And as for shit seats, I wonder if that's more to do with the particular venue than the band? To be fair to you though, I'm not sure exactly how that works, i.e, how much say the band have in seating or its location in the arena/stadium. Any Interferencers have an idea about that?

Put simply, why would any band in their right mind run a tour at a loss, simply to owe money at the end of it? With the exception of supermarkets who fight it out for customers by lowering prices, pretty much every kind of goods and services go up in price without fail every year.

It's just the way of things I'm afraid - A newspaper, tin of beans, car or a house isn't manufactured for 'x' amount, then sold for that same price. Everything you buy has a profit margin attached to it and a concert ticket is exactly the same.

Sad but true I'm afraid.

 

[smileplease]

My wife and I paid ninety quid each to see Madonna play Earls Court.

A shit load of money, granted, but we had decent seats in an arena. I'm paying one hundred to see the band in a stadium.

It's too much. You're right, they could have charged more, hell they could charge 500 per ticket and they'd probably still sell out arenas, but it doesn't mkake it right.

Remember, we're all biased becuase we're big time fans, on a band messageboard.

But most people would say it's too much. Sadly, it's the way the music industry is going.

Of course, Bono does a great job raising awareness of just causes, but come on folks, we all deep down know these are very very expensive tickets.

 

[KUEFC09U2]

My wife and I paid ninety quid each to see Madonna play Earls Court.

A shit load of money, granted, but we had decent seats in an arena. I'm paying one hundred to see the band in a stadium.

It's too much. You're right, they could have charged more, hell they could charge 500 per ticket and they'd probably still sell out arenas, but it doesn't mkake it right.

Remember, we're all biased becuase we're big time fans, on a band messageboard.

But most people would say it's too much. Sadly, it's the way the music industry is going.

Of course, Bono does a great job raising awareness of just causes, but come on folks, we all deep down know these are very very expensive tickets.

yes your paying to see them in a stadium which in turn if going to a much bigger production than the one there doing in the arena, and you can look through willies tour diaries to see that, and paying £90 to see someone who dosent play ANY instruments? who is basically a cabaret singer, thats all i class people like madonna as, cabaret singers

 

[stevec]

Wonder if they'd be up for a worthy charity gig -

The Financially Challenged Fans of U2 Awareness Concert?

LOL

 

[innominata8]

a 50 millon dollar stage production will lift ticket prices pretty damn quick. i heard they have already collected 350 million in ticket sales...

i'm not sure if the $350 million is an accurate number, but regardless they've taken in quite a bit of cash in ticket sales. i like the idea of having a nice production and all, but does a band really need to make $300 million on a tour? and yeah, i realize that there are promoters, managers, etc...that all need to be paid, but clearly the boys are making a CRAZY amount of cash on this tour... i'm just not entirely convinced that ticket prices need to be as high as they are.

 

[innominata8]

its too much?? am sorry but did you see how much the likes of madonna and the other so called "big acts" are charging here in the UK? U2 could have easily charged more, its as simple as that

lol...just because madonna does something it hardly makes it ok

 

[KUEFC09U2]

lol...just because madonna does something it hardly makes it ok

am not just talking about madonna, i was using her as an example, rolling stones, elton john etc, all have higher tickets prices

 

[cmb737]

am not just talking about madonna, i was using her as an example, rolling stones, elton john etc, all have higher tickets prices

Elton John's highest ticket averages about $120 to $125 and that is for floor seating as in an assigned seat on the floor or lower level seats. Long shot from the $183 dollar UPPER DECK seats people are buying in Las Vegas.

 

[ImOuttaControl]

I say this every time: Just because they CAN charge as much as they do, does that automatically mean they should? Just because the Stones, Madonna, Elton John all have ticket prices by no means justifies it. Thats the basic "if all your friends jumped off the bridge, would you also?" I mean, when you're already filthy rich like U2, how much more filthy rich do you need to be? The best way U2 can thank it's fans for their support is for U2 to not take the fans to the bank at every turn.

I already have a feeling that this tour might be the last I'll watch..at this rate if they tour again tickets will be 200 bucks, which I think would be ridiculous for 2 hours of entertainment.

 

[STING2]

i'm not sure if the $350 million is an accurate number, but regardless they've taken in quite a bit of cash in ticket sales. i like the idea of having a nice production and all, but does a band really need to make $300 million on a tour? and yeah, i realize that there are promoters, managers, etc...that all need to be paid, but clearly the boys are making a CRAZY amount of cash on this tour... i'm just not entirely convinced that ticket prices need to be as high as they are.

This is a business. The band have always charged their tickets based on their market value. Name any business including your own if you have one and its all the same. How many business's do you know are willing to not make as much profit as possible? A second thing is that if U2 did reduce ticket prices, the band would simply be giving more money to scalpers as the profit margin for scalpers would be even greater.