The "new" economy and the new album, tour, etc...

[PowerSurge]

Its pretty simple, regardless of a bad economy or good economy...people still have money for this stuff. Fans will find a way to go see their favorite band.

 

[Strongbow]

Yes, this will be a monster recession. We have discussed previous recessions during U2 tours, namely Zoo TV w/1992 unemployment of 7.5% and Elevation 2001 unemployment of about 5.8%. Looking just at recessions, however is not giving us the whole picture. During the JT tour in 1987, unemployment was higher and more people were suffering from job losses and declines in income while the economy was growing than they were in the very mild(by historical standards) recession of 2001. JT-Zoo TV saw the savings and loans crisis and bail out, and a collapse in the real estate market. In short, people had every reason to be worried then, and still bought plenty of U2 tickets. 1987 and 2005 were similar in that the economy was pointing up, but let us remember, that the average American was not seeing real income gains nor were they particulalry satisfied w. economic conditions at these times. Just because there was no recession does not mean that the majority of people were doing well during JT and Vertigo. The numbers suggest they were not. This year, the structural economic indicators are much worse and companies have failed and lost money at a rate not seen since the great depression- and this applies to financial, manufacturing and retail equally. In addition, the 1991-92 and 2001 recessions were led by business and consumers merely reacted later(1991) and then barely adjusted their spending at all(2001). This time, the consumer side(mortgages, declining incomes) has triggered the collapse of the financial industry made inevitable by their unregulated, brain dead 'prices will rise forever binge.' Although the unemployment rate is at 6.5% and these conditions have not been reflected in the rate(we are not at 8 or 10% yet), they will be. Unemployment historically does not peak until AFTER recessions. (1975, 1983, 1992, 2003 etc)

A night with U2 costs a whole hell of a lot less than one with the Stones, Police, et al and is not alot of money in the grand scheme of things. The people who need to look out here are those who cater to more frequent entertainment expenses than world tours for popular bands: movie theatres(monthly), restaurants(weekly), coffee shops(daily), catering(corporate events-holidays, summer outings, etc).

The difference with 1987 and 1992 despite unemployment then being higher is that the average price of U2 tickets will likely be about $120 dollars in 2009 compared to just $20 dollars in 1987 and $30 dollars in 1992. 1994 saw a huge rise in ticket prices as the concert industry discovered they could charge far more for tickets than they had been doing in the past.

If U2 tickets were only $45 dollars on average next year, I would agree that the economic downturn would probably have no effect. But U2's ticket prices will likely be an average of $120. They were on average $97 dollars on the Vertigo tour in 2005.

Police tickets on average were $110, while the Rolling Stones charged an average of $130. So U2 is right there with the Police and Rolling Stones in terms of average ticket price.

 

[Strongbow]

Its pretty simple, regardless of a bad economy or good economy...people still have money for this stuff. Fans will find a way to go see their favorite band.

No one doubts that, the question is will enough of them do so for U2 to do RECORD breaking business next year.

 

[cobl04]

Doesn't have to be record breaking

 

[Moggio]

Is it a joke? No, look at the past, U2 will absolutely have no problem doing this, never have.

You obviously haven't seen U2's statistical touring history because at the prices they're charging nowadays, U2 can't even "sell out" arenas in MANY midwestern markets, like St. Louis, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, etc., let alone more than one arena show in Portland, OR or Salt Lake City.

AC/DC is selling out as we speak. Coldplay sold out this summer w/o anywhere near the fan base of U2.

That's because AC/DC & Coldplay's ticket prices are lower than U2's. And it's worth noting, that compared to their last tour in 2000/2001, AC/DC's demand is up by about double in the US and in Canada, it looks to be up by about triple. This is because AC/DC have sold so many god damn albums on this continent in the past seven years, that you actually wouldn't believe the #s if you saw them. Even though the year's not over, AC/DC just surpassed The Beatles as THE top catalogue seller of 2008. That's right, you heard right.

The more appropriate question would be to those who think U2 wont be able to sell out: Is that a joke? The burden of proof is on you guys, as they have sold out stadiums and arenas for years regardless of economic conditions.

U2 have "sold out" arenas and stadiums for decades, yes...but like I said above, there's plenty of markets where they have trouble doing so.

 

[arzcrack]

Can't imagine them bringing a stadium setup to australia/nz for three shows. They'd lose a packet.

 

[last unicorn]

Its pretty simple, regardless of a bad economy or good economy...people still have money for this stuff. Fans will find a way to go see their favorite band.

I agree. It's a question what is important to you. Since I spend money on opera, concerts, theatre, travelling and such - which is all more expensive than a U2 concert which you only have so and so often - I don't see a reason to complain about the ticket prizes. Seriously, of all the people who I know like U2's music and went to one or two of their concerts, not a single one complained about the prizes or said it wasn't worth the money. It's only people who go to 10+ concerts complaining, because for them it's getting expensive. That's not the audience U2 is playing concerts for. The majority is made up of casual music fans or casual U2 fans who only go and see one show, or maybe, in some cases, two shows, not more.

 

[Mr. Millennium]

Look at it this way. Let's say U2 sell out an arena that holds 20,000 people. Obviously there wasn't only 20,000 people trying to get into that show. For every one of those 20,000 people that decide they can't afford to go on this tour, there will be others that will take their spot. The bottom line is that U2 will still sell out on this tour, most likely to the same degree as the Vertigo Tour. And if there's a few cities (midwestern ones like mentioned earlier) where U2 think there might be a problem selling out, then those cities probably won't be included on the itinerary.

 

[PowerSurge]

I agree. It's a question what is important to you. Since I spend money on opera, concerts, theatre, travelling and such - which is all more expensive than a U2 concert which you only have so and so often - I don't see a reason to complain about the ticket prizes. Seriously, of all the people who I know like U2's music and went to one or two of their concerts, not a single one complained about the prizes or said it wasn't worth the money. It's only people who go to 10+ concerts complaining, because for them it's getting expensive. That's not the audience U2 is playing concerts for. The majority is made up of casual music fans or casual U2 fans who only go and see one show, or maybe, in some cases, two shows, not more.

Well, I hate to admit this but I've gone to a minimum of 3 shows over the course of U2's last few tours, with a maximum of 5.

I don't see myself coming close to that for the next tour, but I'll go to at least ONE show thats for sure.

 

[last unicorn]

I haven't gone to many shows either.

Simply because I want to keep the magic alive.

 

[PowerSurge]

Honestly, there is such a thing as too much U2. I felt this during the Elevation tour when I saw them in 5 different cities. By the 4th and 5th city I was like "Okay, been here done that"

I've always dreamt of what it would be like to be a U2 roadie, but after that previous experience I think it would ruin the "magic" as you so succinctly put it. I love pizza, but I bet I'd be sick of it if I worked in a pizza place...know what I mean?

 

[U2387]

You obviously haven't seen U2's statistical touring history because at the prices they're charging nowadays, U2 can't even "sell out" arenas in MANY midwestern markets, like St. Louis, Kansas City, Columbus, Indianapolis, etc., let alone more than one arena show in Portland, OR or Salt Lake City.



That's because AC/DC & Coldplay's ticket prices are lower than U2's. And it's worth noting, that compared to their last tour in 2000/2001, AC/DC's demand is up by about double in the US and in Canada, it looks to be up by about triple. This is because AC/DC have sold so many god damn albums on this continent in the past seven years, that you actually wouldn't believe the #s if you saw them. Even though the year's not over, AC/DC just surpassed The Beatles as THE top catalogue seller of 2008. That's right, you heard right.



U2 have "sold out" arenas and stadiums for decades, yes...but like I said above, there's plenty of markets where they have trouble doing so.

I know they did Portland and St. Louis at the least on Vertigo, sold out. They have sold out South Bend in the past(Elevation) so why not Indianapolis? Columbus and Kansas City, you dont see too many big ticket acts going through those cities anyway- precisely because you have Cleveland, Denver and St.Louis. If U2 were to schedule shows here, they would be selling them out, again, the economy just does not factor in when we are talking such a small amount of people. 35,000 live in one medium size suburb of Portland or Kansas City alone.

Like someone already said, U2 will not schedule shows in markets where they may have trouble selling out.

I saw AC/DC just last Sunday night in Boston- sat in the lodge in Boston Garden, an arena. I paid $90 for that ticket, $95 for comparable seats at U2, so their ticket prices are not lower. Not quite sure where you are going w/AC?DC demand, of course it is up, but U2's is always at the same level pretty much. They have enough demand to sell out, mark my words. I am well aware of how many albums AC/DC has sold in the past decade even though they have not been touring, it is staggering. But they are an excellent band, so to be expected, I'd buy Black Ice over Viva La Vida!

 

[U2387]

The difference with 1987 and 1992 despite unemployment then being higher is that the average price of U2 tickets will likely be about $120 dollars in 2009 compared to just $20 dollars in 1987 and $30 dollars in 1992. 1994 saw a huge rise in ticket prices as the concert industry discovered they could charge far more for tickets than they had been doing in the past.

If U2 tickets were only $45 dollars on average next year, I would agree that the economic downturn would probably have no effect. But U2's ticket prices will likely be an average of $120. They were on average $97 dollars on the Vertigo tour in 2005.

Yes, but people still bought them, and obscene ticket prices since 1994 have not stopped the top tier acts from selling out. We have had some bad economic times since then, Elevation recession, Vertigo jobless recovery.

Police tickets on average were $110, while the Rolling Stones charged an average of $130. So U2 is right there with the Police and Rolling Stones in terms of average ticket price.

Both higher than U2 on Vertigo, and the averages are not the best indicator. Averages distort, and this is especially the case w/ U2 as they have fewer tiers of ticket prices to balance out the very high upper ends, so any number, especially the highest($160 on Vertigo) will go into the equation with more weight than it would for Stones or Police. You will never catch U2 charging $300 up to $450 for the highest priced ticket as the Stones did for a bigger bang and the Police did on their Reunion tour. Either way, $33 difference is substantial when it comes to averages. U2 is a bargain compared to other bands in their class: who else can you go and see that makes new, relevant material(is not just a touring behemoth) and charges $45 for the best seats in the entire house? No one.

 

[Moggio]

I know they did Portland and St. Louis at the least on Vertigo, sold out.

St. Louis only "sold out" in 2005 because there was no Kansas City show.

They have sold out South Bend in the past(Elevation) so why not Indianapolis?

Their prices will be too high next year for that to happen.

Columbus and Kansas City, you dont see too many big ticket acts going through those cities anyway

Is that a joke? Those two markets get plenty of shows throughout the year.

...precisely because you have Cleveland, Denver and St.Louis. If U2 were to schedule shows here, they would be selling them out, again, the economy just does not factor in when we are talking such a small amount of people. 35,000 live in one medium size suburb of Portland or Kansas City alone.

Without the help of Salt Lake City, only one of two shows would "sell out" in Denver, not both. Cleveland wouldn't "sell out", without the help of other Ohio markets. And St. Louis wouldn't have a hope in hell of "selling out" without Kansas City's help.

And...the amount of people that live in any given market doesn't necessarily make a difference in terms of demand.

Like someone already said, U2 will not schedule shows in markets where they may have trouble selling out.

Exactly right. But then why did you say U2 wouldn't have any trouble "selling out" anywhere they play?

I saw AC/DC just last Sunday night in Boston- sat in the lodge in Boston Garden, an arena. I paid $90 for that ticket, $95 for comparable seats at U2, so their ticket prices are not lower.

That's what U2's average price basically was nearly FOUR YEARS AGO. Next year, U2's average price will be around $115-$120.

Not quite sure where you are going w/AC?DC demand, of course it is up, but U2's is always at the same level pretty much. They have enough demand to sell out, mark my words.

While U2 are a larger draw than AC/DC (just about everywhere)...on their last North American tour in 2000/2001, AC/DC were averaging around $500,000 per show. But on their current North American tour this year, AC/DC are averaging about $1.2 million per show. And hence their demand has increased by about double, minus inflation. On the other hand, U2 were averaging about $1.7 million on their last North American tour in 2005. But on their next North American tour next year, as long as U2 play basically the same amount of shows as they did in 2005 and they keep the majority of shows in arenas, they'll be averaging around $2-$2.5 million per show, not $3.8 million per show (minus inflation) - which would be double. This will be the case because annually, U2's back catalogue sells less than half of what AC/DC'S back catalogue now does.

Whether U2 "sell out" their shows or not, depends on what the venue capacities and ticket prices are set at, in relation to what the gross, in any given market. But yes, there is enough demand to "sell out" all of their shows next year, IF they pick the markets they play carefully.

 

[The_acrobat]

Columbus is a weak market. In recent years, as prices have gone up, bands just aren't selling out here. The Police, Bruce Springsteen, Metallica, Dave Matthews Band and Tom Petty, usually big ticket pushers, all failed to sell out Columbus at their most recent stops here. Those are just the ones I attended. Even though U2 "technically" sold out here in 2001, it's only b/c seats behind the stage weren't sold.

The only way U2 would sell out Columbus is if it were their only Ohio show, pulling in people from all over the state. However, Cleveland is much more of a "sure thing", so they'll probably just play there instead. No biggie... 2.5 hour drive is nothing to come between me and my favorite band!

 

[U2387]

St. Louis only "sold out" in 2005 because there was no Kansas City show.



Their prices will be too high next year for that to happen.



Is that a joke? Those two markets get plenty of shows throughout the year.



Without the help of Salt Lake City, only one of two shows would "sell out" in Denver, not both. Cleveland wouldn't "sell out", without the help of other Ohio markets. And St. Louis wouldn't have a hope in hell of "selling out" without Kansas City's help.

And...the amount of people that live in any given market doesn't necessarily make a difference in terms of demand.



Exactly right. But then why did you say U2 wouldn't have any trouble "selling out" anywhere they play?



That's what U2's average price basically was nearly FOUR YEARS AGO. Next year, U2's average price will be around $115-$120.



While U2 are a larger draw than AC/DC (just about everywhere)...on their last North American tour in 2000/2001, AC/DC were averaging around $500,000 per show. But on their current North American tour this year, AC/DC are averaging about $1.2 million per show. And hence their demand has increased by about double, minus inflation. On the other hand, U2 were averaging about $1.7 million on their last North American tour in 2005. But on their next North American tour next year, as long as U2 play basically the same amount of shows as they did in 2005 and they keep the majority of shows in arenas, they'll be averaging around $2-$2.5 million per show, not $3.8 million per show (minus inflation) - which would be double. This will be the case because annually, U2's back catalogue sells less than half of what AC/DC'S back catalogue now does.

Whether U2 "sell out" their shows or not, depends on what the venue capacities and ticket prices are set at, in relation to what the gross, in any given market. But yes, there is enough demand to "sell out" all of their shows next year, IF they pick the markets they play carefully.

Whether other markets helped or not,(nothing wrong w/that) Salt Lake, Denver, Portland all sold out, that was my point. You disputed that they could sell out these cities, I responded that they had indeed sold them out on Vertigo. That was the original discussion, my original point: they sell out wherever they play. That they do not choose to play in certain areas goes w/o saying, that is a sound business decision that any band will make.

I said that not too many big acts come through Columbus or Kansas City- maybe not true, but U2 generally chooses to hit bigger markets like St. Louis or Cleveland understanding that they can do better here. That does not make them unable to sell out or less viable, it makes them smarter business people. They are going where the people will come.

I would like to know how you are so sure U2 will not be able to sell out a city like South Bend w/modestly higher ticket prices. They have sold out comparable sized cities in the past. Remember Joshua Tree? How about Zoo TV Lakeland? People are acting like U2 are raising ticket prices by 300 or 400% and that is going to kill demand next tour. $97 to $110 is really not much more than keeping up w/the modest pace of inflation since 2005/06. Even this, plus energy costs are declining, so this recession may be making the cost of a 2009 tour cheaper as we speak.

As for AC/DC, ticket prices being $90 this yr vs $95 for comparable on Vertigo, remember, 2005 was not all that long ago! That $95 goes up a little when we bring it to today's dollars, but not enough to constitute a big difference in ticket prices. Plus, I have no problem paying $95 or $115 for a lodge seat when I can snap up GA the next night for $45 or $55. U2's pricing is different in this regard, but in my opinion, better. I love the Police, I love AC/DC, but do you think I would consider buying best seats in the house, right down front for upwards of $200? U2's ticket prices are still comparably the best as they are the only super group to keep top prices reasonable while at the same time, offering the best for the least amount of money.

AC/DC demand has doubled, U2's most likely will not. Does not change anything w/ regards to selling out shows. Possible explanation for doubling of AC/DC demand: Stiff Upper Lip was almost AC/DC's Pop- alot of hardcore fans like my brother were not liking the blues direction, felt they had missed the spot w/ this album, and Brian Johnson's voice was in tough shape for that tour. Black Ice was a much better album, better promoted, Brian in much better shape, etc. Alot of anticipation from 2001 to now. AC/DC leaves the spotlight after tours, U2(or at least Bono and the Edge) stay in the spotlight. Just a difference in styles, I guess. Equally plausible that U2 had released a half assed album in 2001 then not come back for 7 years and seen their demand double. Who knows.

 

[shart1780]

To tell the truth concerts are about the last thing I'm worried about.

 

[Moggio]

Whether other markets helped or not,(nothing wrong w/that) Salt Lake, Denver, Portland all sold out, that was my point. You disputed that they could sell out these cities, I responded that they had indeed sold them out on Vertigo. That was the original discussion, my original point: they sell out wherever they play. That they do not choose to play in certain areas goes w/o saying, that is a sound business decision that any band will make.

No. This was your original quote on this issue:

U2 is indeed one of a few bands that does not in the least bit have to worry about selling out any market. Even 2 nights in Portland or Salt Lake(think they did 1 in those places for Vertigo), 18K each night, you will be able to find 36,000 people in those small metro areas that would love to and can afford to see U2.

And we both know you're wrong.

I said that not too many big acts come through Columbus or Kansas City- maybe not true, but U2 generally chooses to hit bigger markets like St. Louis or Cleveland understanding that they can do better here. That does not make them unable to sell out or less viable, it makes them smarter business people. They are going where the people will come.

You said these above things AFTER what you had initially said.

I would like to know how you are so sure U2 will not be able to sell out a city like South Bend w/modestly higher ticket prices.

I never said U2 would or wouldn't "sell out" South Bend because it's basically right next to Chicago. I believe they could "sell out" South Bend if they play the Joyce Center (11,500). I'm talking about markets like, Memphis, New Orleans, Kansas City, St. Louis, Columbus, Indianapolis, etc.

They have sold out comparable sized cities in the past. Remember Joshua Tree? How about Zoo TV Lakeland?

So what? That doesn't necessarily mean that they can now, especially at the prices they're charging.

People are acting like U2 are raising ticket prices by 300 or 400% and that is going to kill demand next tour. $97 to $110 is really not much more than keeping up w/the modest pace of inflation since 2005/06. Even this, plus energy costs are declining, so this recession may be making the cost of a 2009 tour cheaper as we speak.

Yes, but the point is that many midwestern markets won't be able to have "sell out" shows with those prices.

As for AC/DC, ticket prices being $90 this yr vs $95 for comparable on Vertigo, remember, 2005 was not all that long ago! That $95 goes up a little when we bring it to today's dollars, but not enough to constitute a big difference in ticket prices.

Their prices will not just increase with inflation. There'll be an increase on top of that too - as always.

Plus, I have no problem paying $95 or $115 for a lodge seat when I can snap up GA the next night for $45 or $55. U2's pricing is different in this regard, but in my opinion, better. I love the Police, I love AC/DC, but do you think I would consider buying best seats in the house, right down front for upwards of $200? U2's ticket prices are still comparably the best as they are the only super group to keep top prices reasonable while at the same time, offering the best for the least amount of money.

These "best seats" for "$45-$55" on U2's past two tours were only available on the floor and hence only comprised of around 10% of the capacity of arenas. You make it sound like their top tier prices ($135-$165) didn't exist. And U2's top tier price next year will be $200. You call that "reasonable"?

AC/DC demand has doubled, U2's most likely will not. Does not change anything w/ regards to selling out shows.

Whether shows will "sell out" or not depend on factors I've already gone over.

Possible explanation for doubling of AC/DC demand: Stiff Upper Lip was almost AC/DC's Pop- alot of hardcore fans like my brother were not liking the blues direction, felt they had missed the spot w/ this album, and Brian Johnson's voice was in tough shape for that tour. Black Ice was a much better album, better promoted, Brian in much better shape, etc. Alot of anticipation from 2001 to now. AC/DC leaves the spotlight after tours, U2(or at least Bono and the Edge) stay in the spotlight. Just a difference in styles, I guess. Equally plausible that U2 had released a half assed album in 2001 then not come back for 7 years and seen their demand double. Who knows.

It's not just AC/DC'S latest album sales that contribute to their demand - it's primarily their back catalogue sales - which again have surpassed the Beatles this year.

 

[SoCalMusicLover]

We're still in the 4th inning of this "depression."

I don't think the majority of the public realizes exactly how bad things are, or will get.

Once GM and/or Ford and/or Chrysler go down, that's when things will get more interesting. It's a matter of when, not if.

 

[The_acrobat]

U2 needs to put their tickets on sale NOW if they want to sell them out by next year.

 

[Mr. Millennium]

U2 needs to put their tickets on sale NOW if they want to sell them out by next year.

No, they don't. I understand things are bad for alot of people. But, as I've said before, for every person who cannot afford to go to a show on the new tour, there will be someone to take their place. There should be no questions as to whether or not U2 will have a successful 2009 tour because they will.

A more important question is the ticket prices. Will the new tour's ticket prices increase because it has been four years since the last tour? Or will U2 acknowledge the current financial situation and keep ticket prices the same, or lower them, as compared to the last tour? Regardless, they will still sell out pretty much everywhere.

 

[Chizip]

No, they don't. I understand things are bad for alot of people. But, as I've said before, for every person who cannot afford to go to a show on the new tour, there will be someone to take their place.

And you're wrong when you say that. That may be true for large markets on the coasts, but in the midwest there just won't be the demand. In St. Louis, while the Vertigo Tour was technically "sold out," anyone who went to the show saw large gaps of seats in the upper deck. For the Elevation Tour they even blocked off the sections seats behind the stage and they were still a few thousand seats short of a sellout. And those were in relatively good economic times (especially compared to right now).

This is part of the reason why I think U2 won't be coming to the US next year, since they want to do stadiums and there aren't enough US markets where they could sell those out.

 

[Mr. Millennium]

And you're wrong when you say that. That may be true for large markets on the coasts, but in the midwest there just won't be the demand. In St. Louis, while the Vertigo Tour was technically "sold out," anyone who went to the show saw large gaps of seats in the upper deck. For the Elevation Tour they even blocked off the sections seats behind the stage and they were still a few thousand seats short of a sellout. And those were in relatively good economic times (especially compared to right now).

I can see your point about the midwestern cities. However, if there are any cities that U2 feel they will not sell out, then they will not go to those cities on this tour. They are not going not tour the US because a few midwestern cities won't sellout. The demand will still be there in the major markets.

You mentioned that U2 want to tour stadiums. If U2 believe that their stadium shows will not sell out next year in the US, then they will tour an arena show. There is no way that they will skip the US.

 

[Strongbow]

In St. Louis, while the Vertigo Tour was technically "sold out," anyone who went to the show saw large gaps of seats in the upper deck. .

Do you have any pictures or video that show these "large gaps"?

Looks full in these clips:

YouTube - U2 in St.Louis 05

YouTube - U2 in St. Louis 2005


The official results reported in Billboard Boxscore show the following:

107. St. Louis, Mo. : Dec. 14, 2005 : Savvis Center : GROSS $1,839,020 : ATTENDANCE 19,923 : SHOWS 1 : SELLOUTS 1


Does the Savvis Center really hold more than 19,923 people for a concerts?


As far as playing stadiums in North America, there are at least 20 markets that could definitely handle a stadium show or multiple stadium shows.

 

[Chizip]

Do you have any pictures or video that show these "large gaps"?

Looks full in these clips:

YouTube - U2 in St.Louis 05

YouTube - U2 in St. Louis 2005


The official results reported in Billboard Boxscore show the following:

107. St. Louis, Mo. : Dec. 14, 2005 : Savvis Center : GROSS $1,839,020 : ATTENDANCE 19,923 : SHOWS 1 : SELLOUTS 1


Does the Savvis Center really hold more than 19,923 people for a concerts?


As far as playing stadiums in North America, there are at least 20 markets that could definitely handle a stadium show or multiple stadium shows.

capacity for a basketball game there is 22,612, and since lots of people stand on a floor at a concert, that means its more than that

 

[Strongbow]

capacity for a basketball game there is 22,612, and since lots of people stand on a floor at a concert, that means its more than that

Can you name any artist that has played a concert to more than 19,923 people at the Savvis Center in St. Louis?

 

[PowerSurge]

I'm sure that with the unfortunate abundance of scalpers buying up concert tixs in bulk there could still have been a "sell out" with large chunks of seats empty.

That actually happens more often then people think.

 

[last unicorn]

That's true. Some seats are just left empty and don't go on sale at all, for various reasons. I've also been to technically "sold out" stadium concerts here in Europe and there were always empty seats.

 

[PowerSurge]

That's true. Some seats are just left empty and don't go on sale at all, for various reasons. I've also been to technically "sold out" stadium concerts here in Europe and there were always empty seats.

I think that occurs more often in Stadiums probably because of how high the seating gets. I would imagine that some seats would probably be way too far from the action to warrant being sold

 

[zoopop]

Pricing is going to be interesting next tour. I don't see U2 doing arenas in the US. Playing 2-4 nights (back to backs) in major cities doesn't make sense for them at their age when they can play a stadium and draw 40,000+ every show. Some of these new stadiums are dying to host a concert production like U2. Last time U2 did a stadium show in the US (Popmart) most of the stadiums in major cities were dated & have now been replaced with facilites that are super state of the art.

With that in mind if U2 could sell $50, $75, & $125 for a stadium production they would sell a ton of tickets especially based on the Vertigo Tour. That was a hard ticket to get.

I just looked up Madonna stadium tickets and she is charging $55, $95, $165, $350(!!!!).