The price of concert tickets

Jeremy Bender

Platinum Member
Okay, I have a confession: I have not been to a large rock concert since the early nineties.

That being said, I can not believe the cost of tickets these days! What the hell happened to the days of $25-$30 seats to a show? C'mon $100.00 and up to see a band play for an hour? What other item has increased so steeply as a concert ticket? If bread was used as a comparison, it would now cost about twelve dollars a loaf!

The price of a general admission ticket has increased worse than a past-due balance on a high interest credit card. Maybe we're not paying for the performance but the private planes and the fleet of tour buses that are "necessary"? I really have no idea.

Does anybody here have an inside working knowledge of the concert/touring world to educate me please?
 
I'm afraid that I don't have any inside knowledge to speak of but I do have a theory. Now that artists are no longer making money on record sales, they have to get all of their earnings from touring. Also, stage lighting and backgrounds have gotten quite a bit more elaborate. Gas prices may also be a factor. I'm really just poking around in the dark here. All I know is an Aerosmith/Black Crows ticket only cost me $16 in 1990. I recall in the 80's when the Jacksons got together for their Victory tour, people thought they were out of their minds for charging $35. I just don't know what happened.
 
There are many different motivations for it, but the bottom line is, "What will the market bear?" If enough folks are willing to pay the price, then plenty of other folks will be happy to charge it.

If you think concerts are bad, look at the price of some other tickets:

The best seats for some Broadway shows now are about $200
The best seats at Yankee Stadium now are $1600. Yes, you read that correctly. $1600, for one seat for one game. They also have tickets priced at $1325, $1075, $975, $875, etc. Of course, they do have nosebleed, and way-the-hell-out-in-the-outfield bleacher seats, and so on for $14, $20 etc. too.

A few bands have figured out that they can charge those $1000 or so prices too--they usually do it with "meet 'n greet" packages.
 
my guess is that since there isn't a lot
of money made in Album Sales (due to donwloading)...
concert tickets & T-shirts are $$$$$$

p.s.s. ~ I have seen AC/DC for $4.75 in Morristown, NJ.
 
That being said, I can not believe the cost of tickets these days! What the hell happened to the days of $25-$30 seats to a show? C'mon $100.00 and up to see a band play for an hour?

Maybe we're not paying for the performance but the private planes and the fleet of tour buses that are "necessary"?

There are a lot less planes and extra busses/personnel than you might imagine, Most tours run very lean & mean, especially lately with the economy and ticket sales weaker than usual.

I'm not sure what bands play for only an hour and charge $100, but I agree that's excessive for anybody I'd want to see. As for ticket prices, they will vary for a few reasons: venue size, and the band's draw & demographic. A band playing theaters (1-3000 seats) who asks $75 for tickets, may ask only $50 if they're playing a 7500 seat shed, because they.might not be able to fill that venue at $75 (that is, it's better to have 100% capacity at $50, than 50% capacity at $75.) And an up & coming band whose audience is younger usually can't charge as much as an established band whose audience is older and more likely to afford the higher ticket.

Bermuda
 
I am going to see The Dukes of September tomorrow for 20 bucks. I have seen six concerts this summer for 10 bucks due to Live Nation promotions. Then they sell you an upgrade for 10 bucks. I saw Foreinger with Styx and Kansas, The Doobie Brothers with Chicago, Yes with Peter Frampton, CSN, Asia and now Dukes of September. My total expense was about 80 bucks. There were other shows that they had for 10 bucks that I would have gone had I gotten the tix. Truthfully, I am not going to pay the high price to see a show, and these were a fun night out with friends seeing some bands from way back in the day. If musicians can get 200-300 hundred bucks a ticket, I would rather see the promoters get the profit than the scalpers or agents who would get that price any way. And if there were someone I really wanted to see, laying down 500 bucks for a 8th row ticket at the Garden where I am sitting next to Bob Dylan, Gwenyth Paltrow or Bono is not a bad thing.
 
I'm afraid that I don't have any inside knowledge to speak of but I do have a theory. Now that artists are no longer making money on record sales, they have to get all of their earnings from touring. Also, stage lighting and backgrounds have gotten quite a bit more elaborate. Gas prices may also be a factor. I'm really just poking around in the dark here. All I know is an Aerosmith/Black Crows ticket only cost me $16 in 1990. I recall in the 80's when the Jacksons got together for their Victory tour, people thought they were out of their minds for charging $35. I just don't know what happened.

You nailed a part of it. With record sales down, and people only buying singles for 99 cents, bands have become a lot more savvy on the road, charging more for tickets, and coming up with elaborate packages (ticket + shirt+meet and greet for a price) to make up for lost revenue.

The other aspect is insurance for a tour has gone up astronomically over the years.
And higher gas prices do factor in, especially on a big tour that might have 10-20 trucks, and 5 to 10 buses.

It is sick. In 1986, I paid $16 to see Rush, and this last tour was $170 + surcharges for good seats.

Even with all the higher costs associated with touring, it's hard to believe tickets have gone up by such a large margin.

The wife and I were looking at going to see Fleetwood Mac a year or two ago, and face value of a ticket was $250 each. We stayed home. I've not gone to many shows I would have liked to have because the ticket prices were just to high.

When the Police came to Los Angeles for their reunion tour, tickets started at $200. Why??

In two weeks I'm going to see Katatonia. They are coming all the way from Sweeden. Tickets are $15. Much better value.
 
Aside from ticket prices, I've often chosen to stay at home instead because so many older bands have been just doing what I consider "nostalgia tours". As I've stated here a number of times, I'm not fond of bands doing songs "just like the record", and with what I consider nostalgia tours, they're doing greatest hits setlists only, just like the records, for the umpteenth time. I have very little interest in that, but obviously it's working for many artists.
 
So...from what I gather from the responses is either it's market demand (charge high and see if they'll buy) or it's fuel, insurances and the cost of doing business.

I've always wondered who sets the prices, the promoter or the band. I imagined the band charging a flat rate fee for a show and the promoter adjusts ticket prices to cover all expenses. Or does the bands' share of earnings fluctuate from venue to venue?
Major rock bands specifically.
 
So...from what I gather from the responses is either it's market demand (charge high and see if they'll buy) or it's fuel, insurances and the cost of doing business.
I assumed we were talking about bands at the highest level here, by the way:

The things you mention are not unrelated. There are minimum prices you'd need to set to cover your costs, OR if the market wouldn't support those prices, figure out how to cut your costs (and/or increase your revenue sources--so for example, the amount of swag you have available and how much you're charging for it). Once you get past the stage of at least covering your expenses, you can see what the market will bear in terms of profits.

For huge rock bands, the band's business hierarchy (which isn't always structured the same) is ultimately deciding the ticket prices. Bands definitely do not make the same amount at every venue, even adjusted to a per capita profit. There are many different factors that make the difference, including different fees for renting the venue versus what they can feasibly charge in that market, different union fees and rules in an area (you have many different local unions you have to deal with in each market), the different travel and housing costs (if applicable) for that area, etc.--it would be laborious to make a complete list of that stuff for any possible scenario. Of course, most of the people involved are salaried, even including some band members in some situations (for example, the guys in Kiss who aren't Gene and Paul have been salaried for a long time, including Ace and Peter when they came back), but the folks on the high end of the totem pole ((other) band members, management, etc.) will see the difference.
 
Aside from ticket prices, I've often chosen to stay at home instead because so many older bands have been just doing what I consider "nostalgia tours". As I've stated here a number of times, I'm not fond of bands doing songs "just like the record", and with what I consider nostalgia tours, they're doing greatest hits setlists only, just like the records, for the umpteenth time. I have very little interest in that, but obviously it's working for many artists.

Valid point.

I stopped going to see Ozzy, because I realized no matter how many albums he comes out with, he plays pretty much the same set list ever time. He focuses most of his show on "Blizzard" with the same three Sabbath songs, a rendition of "Mama, I'm coming Home", maybe he'll play "Bark at the Moon" and the only variation is he'll insert two songs from his most current album.

There are a few other bands I've seen once, had fun, but I noticed from their live DVDs and online set lists, they don't change much from one year to the next, and it does drain any motivation I have to bother to see them another time.

Queensryche for a while were different themed tours, where they would announce up front "this tour focuses on this era of material, this is general hits tour, this tour will only be these albums" which was cool, because it was a different show every tour. But then they ran out of albums to tour behind, and it became "eh..."

What I love about Rush is no matter how many tours I've seen them on, they always manage to play at least one song I've never heard them do before, and then tends to be a lot of variety from one tour to the next, with only a few songs guaranteed to be done every time. They really don't much care if a song was a "hit" or lesser known tune. Although they almost never change songs from one night to the next.

Dream Theater takes to an extreme, and they mixed up their sets every night. You never have any idea what they'll play from one night to the next. So if you see them twice in a row, you might only see a handful of songs repeated.
 
So...from what I gather from the responses is either it's market demand (charge high and see if they'll buy) or it's fuel, insurances and the cost of doing business.

I've always wondered who sets the prices, the promoter or the band. I imagined the band charging a flat rate fee for a show and the promoter adjusts ticket prices to cover all expenses. Or does the bands' share of earnings fluctuate from venue to venue?
Major rock bands specifically.

From what I've read, it's a bit of a mix. The band (or more specifically their management) sets the price, and income does fluctuate from night to night, although there is often a minimal guarantee to the band members.

But other times, the promoter will offer a big name band a guarantee of $Xmillion for a tour, and then after that, it's up to the promoter to make back that money, plus. I've also seen it at the club level, where a booking agent will offer a fixed rate for a night, and it's up to the agent to make back that money off the ticket price, although that's on a one night basis, not a whole tour.
 
You nailed a part of it. With record sales down, and people only buying singles for 99 cents, bands have become a lot more savvy on the road, charging more for tickets, and coming up with elaborate packages (ticket + shirt+meet and greet for a price) to make up for lost revenue.

The other aspect is insurance for a tour has gone up astronomically over the years.
And higher gas prices do factor in, especially on a big tour that might have 10-20 trucks, and 5 to 10 buses.

It is sick. In 1986, I paid $16 to see Rush, and this last tour was $170 + surcharges for good seats.

Even with all the higher costs associated with touring, it's hard to believe tickets have gone up by such a large margin.

The wife and I were looking at going to see Fleetwood Mac a year or two ago, and face value of a ticket was $250 each. We stayed home. I've not gone to many shows I would have liked to have because the ticket prices were just to high.

When the Police came to Los Angeles for their reunion tour, tickets started at $200. Why??

In two weeks I'm going to see Katatonia. They are coming all the way from Sweden. Tickets are $15. Much better value.


I was looking at an old NY Times and concert tickets were $8.50 for a concert in 1978. If you look at those old Filmore posters, the tickets are about $3.50. If you saw Rush in 1986 for $16, it would seem that ticket prices double every ten years. An average cost today is about $65.00.

About ten or so years ago I stopped going to a lot of high-end concerts because of the ticketmaster fees. When they got to be 30%, I stopped buying. On your $65.00 ticket, that's $20 -25 in fees.

Entertainment is not cheap, and living in NY it can be very costly. You might spend $170 for Fleetwood Mac; but if you go to see a well-known artist at the Blue Note its $50 a set plus minimum. If you stay for both sets, like I do since I am traveling 2 hours, you're going to spend the same $170. Ironically, CSN charged $300 a few years back when they were at the Garden. I saw them for $10. Everyone's got their price. :D
 
In October I will be going to see Styx in a small venue and my seat 9 rows back is 79.00. That same price to see Ringo in July was at the back of the same theater. I can't afford to see many for sure.
 
Kidding myself, I looked into Roger Waters tickets... cheapest I could find was $116 for nose bleeds. Was the same scenario when I looked into Fleetwood Mac tix. I have to side with the notion that possible attendee's of these shows are middle aged folks who have the cash to throw down on this type of event - promoters and organizers know this and take full advantage.
 
my guess is that since there isn't a lot
of money made in Album Sales (due to donwloading)...
concert tickets & T-shirts are $$$$$$

p.s.s. ~ I have seen AC/DC for $4.75 in Morristown, NJ.

I just spent $80 on t-shirts for Crosby, Stills and Nash and Tom Petty. Now THAT'S highway robbery. What was I thinking?
 
What happens when prices are high and expectations aren't met:
Guns N' Roses began their set almost an hour late ... "The sound of booing echoed through the arena," recalled a fan, "but it was suddenly drowned out as the lights went down." Yet many of the band's critics were persistent. "We want Slash!" they yelled, referring to the band's former guitarist. The boos went on. And plastic bottles were thrown at the stage.

Twenty minutes into the set, Rose gave an ultimatum. "Here's the deal," he said. "One more bottle and we go home. It's up to you. We would like to stay. We want to stay. We want to have some fun." But some fans weren't impressed. The bottling continued. Rose walked off.

After that, the house lights went up and down, with promoters and security sending mixed messages about whether the concert would continue. "We're trying hard to get Axl to come back on stage," an organiser announced. "I will ask you to refrain from throwing items. I promise you a great show, but you need to be calm." The gig's promoters later issued a statement, saying they "prevented [Axl] from leaving the venue". At 11:20 pm – about an hour after they had left the stage – Guns N' Roses returned and completed their set.

The concert was apparently pretty good. Or at least, everyone but Axl was pretty good. "Guns rocked Dublin last night, but we could've done without the Rose," explained a fan. But this was of little consolation to those who had already left the O2, thinking the concert over; public transport had stopped for the night and ticket-holders were reportedly barred from re-entering the arena.
Full article in today's The Guardian.

I don't go to big gigs any more. I hate crowds and I find it's more of an experience to be close up when seeing local bands. I want to be close enough to see the sweat forming on the drummer.
 
AND can you imagine paying $100 a pop to go see any of the "pop", "HipHop" or even Stone Temple Pilots where they are lip synching...why? If an artist can't perform live then please don't...STOP supporting the phonies!

I would much rather hear a band make an occasional stumble in the music and know that it is really their playing I am hearing for my hard earned money than just another air band show. I can go to any karaoke bar for that...

That being said, concerts are $100, ball games are $50 and up (for the ability to see anything), movies are $15 to $20 a ticket...as long as people keep paying the prices there will be no stopping the increases.
 
What happens when prices are high and expectations aren't met:
Guns N' Roses began their set almost an hour late ... "The sound of booing echoed through the arena," recalled a fan, "but it was suddenly drowned out as the lights went down." Yet many of the band's critics were persistent. "We want Slash!" they yelled, referring to the band's former guitarist. The boos went on. And plastic bottles were thrown at the stage.

Twenty minutes into the set, Rose gave an ultimatum. "Here's the deal," he said. "One more bottle and we go home. It's up to you. We would like to stay. We want to stay. We want to have some fun." But some fans weren't impressed. The bottling continued. Rose walked off.

After that, the house lights went up and down, with promoters and security sending mixed messages about whether the concert would continue. "We're trying hard to get Axl to come back on stage," an organiser announced. "I will ask you to refrain from throwing items. I promise you a great show, but you need to be calm." The gig's promoters later issued a statement, saying they "prevented [Axl] from leaving the venue". At 11:20 pm – about an hour after they had left the stage – Guns N' Roses returned and completed their set.

The concert was apparently pretty good. Or at least, everyone but Axl was pretty good. "Guns rocked Dublin last night, but we could've done without the Rose," explained a fan. But this was of little consolation to those who had already left the O2, thinking the concert over; public transport had stopped for the night and ticket-holders were reportedly barred from re-entering the arena.
Full article in today's The Guardian.

I don't go to big gigs any more. I hate crowds and I find it's more of an experience to be close up when seeing local bands. I want to be close enough to see the sweat forming on the drummer.

I'm with you, Pol. I'd rather lay down $25 to see a local singer-songwriter.

GnR got bad revues here to, as also is the Dukes of September, which I am going to see tonight. It's outdoors and we're expecting a hurricane. The concert is rain or shine, so it looks like I'll be losing some money.

The bands that I have seen this summer were actually all quite good. The Doobie Brothers and Asia each played about five new tunes off their latest album. CSN did a bunch of covers for their next album, which is going to be a bunch of classic rock covers. Foreigner is really a kick ass band and although probably the band I would least want to see, they were the best band I've heard in a while.

When I was a kid, I would get my allowance of 50 cents on Sunday. All the kids would go down to the candy store where you would get 5 boxes of candy for 25 cents. Today, in some of the quickie marts you can spend 1.29 for a candy bar and $2.00 for a bottle of soda. Inflation is a crazy game.
 
Last edited:
I'm with you, Pol. I'd rather lay down $25 to see a local singer-songwriter.

GnR got bad revues here to, as also is the Dukes of September, which I am going to see tonight. It's outdoors and we're expecting a hurricane. The concert is rain or shine, so it looks like I'll be losing some money.

The bands that I have seen this summer were actually all quite good. The Doobie Brothers played about five new tunes off their latest album. CSN did a bunch of covers for their next album, which is going to be a bunch of classic rock covers. Foreigner is really a kick ass band and although probably the band I would least want to see, they were the best band I've heard in a while.

When I was a kid, I would get my allowance of 50 cents on Sunday. All the kids would go down to the candy store where you would get 5 boxes of candy for 25 cents. Today, in some of the quickie marts you can spend 1.29 for a candy bar and $2.00 for a bottle of soda. Inflation is a crazy game.

Ken, I saw Foreigner maybe 30 years ago. I remember buying their album, excited because King Crimson's ex winds player/songwriter was playing with them. You can imagine how horrified I was to hear it lol. I still went and saw them so I could see at least one King Crimson member in the flesh. They were excellent, but the music bored me. The main thing I remember from that gig was Cold Chisel playing the support; they played a brilliant version of Georgia on My Mind with Ian Moss singing. It was like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcvzGzAjmZQ

I used to be able to buy a buttered roll for 6c - unbuttered for 5c. A maggot bag (pie) was 11c. Mum would buy a pack of cigs for 33c - same pack is now $12. At least we're not like Zimbabwe where an egg costs Z$50 billion. No joke ...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top