Very nice post Jed. I can certainly see where you're coming from, and I don't blame you. Here I go with my opinions again.... I think the reason ticket prices are so high and memberships are required is all due to file sharing. People are able to get for free what they used to have to pay for.
I think this is wrong on a lot of levels. When you can go to a website and download the newest release by whoever you chose, you cut their earning power. A single that should have sold 5 million copies, sells 500,000. Twenty years ago that never existed. If you wanted Syncronicity, you had to buy it, or record the album on tape which was not nearly as good. No band will ever sell albums like they used to because of this.
I'm no angel here, I have a ton of Police bootlegs. Stewart and Co never got a cent of that. And it does bother me. I can't for the life of me see why they wouldn't release it. It would add a few million to the coffers. The only reason I paid somebody, was because I couldn't get it on my own.
True fans will appreciate this. If you love a band.... not the single. Would you rather have everyone pay $20 for the cd, and $50 for floor seats.... Or nothing for the entire cd, and $225 for a floor seat?
Why do people complain??
38 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
by Kim on 27 Mar 2007 04:16
People complain because they need to get out more.
If you don't like it, don't spend the $. Plenty of people will. If it were any other band I'd say no way. As a Sting.com member I only paid an additional $9.99 to upgrade to get the lithograph so it wasn't bad. I absolutely was prepared to drop $100 for the membership though, as I had been burned before by not joining Sting.com before they instituted their "legacy" bulllsh*t scheme, which kept me from being eligible for the lute show in NYC.
I think the high price was meant to deter scalpers, but that's just my humble opinion. I hope the club continues but with a lower price a year from now.
If you don't like it, don't spend the $. Plenty of people will. If it were any other band I'd say no way. As a Sting.com member I only paid an additional $9.99 to upgrade to get the lithograph so it wasn't bad. I absolutely was prepared to drop $100 for the membership though, as I had been burned before by not joining Sting.com before they instituted their "legacy" bulllsh*t scheme, which kept me from being eligible for the lute show in NYC.
I think the high price was meant to deter scalpers, but that's just my humble opinion. I hope the club continues but with a lower price a year from now.
yo!!
-
Kim - Posts: 1447
- Joined: 07 Feb 2005 18:34
- Location: Walking On The Moon
by 100years on 27 Mar 2007 09:57
As with anything in a market economy, the price will be whatever the market can stand....if there was medium to low demand, the tickets would be €50 and no charge for joining a website that gets you f**k all from what I hear.
It's the age old Music V Business debate though. As far as the fans are concerned, music is supposed to be about art. But the reality is that art is a very saleable product and as artists (such as The Police) edge closer and closer to the winters of their careers, doing things for cash as opposed to for their "art" becomes probably more important.
Some promoter managed to persuade The Police to reform by offering enough money and the chance for Sting to polish his ego for a few more years as his solo career starts to freefall. The promoter knows this reunion will be a big draw so they can basically charge what they want for tickets/websites/merchandise etc because they know there's a whole bunch of people out there (as evidenced by this thread) who will pay "whatever" to see The Police.
Personally speaking I would pay "whatever" to have seen The Police back in the late 70's but paying "whatever" to see them now just seems like i'm lining the promoters pockets with money I cant afford and he can probably do without.
It must be nice for a lot of people on here to be in a financial position to pay "whatever" but the fact is, there are many many Police fans out there for which this would not be an option. This doesnt make them any "less fans" so I think this is the reason why so many people are complaining....
sorry that went on a bit...
It's the age old Music V Business debate though. As far as the fans are concerned, music is supposed to be about art. But the reality is that art is a very saleable product and as artists (such as The Police) edge closer and closer to the winters of their careers, doing things for cash as opposed to for their "art" becomes probably more important.
Some promoter managed to persuade The Police to reform by offering enough money and the chance for Sting to polish his ego for a few more years as his solo career starts to freefall. The promoter knows this reunion will be a big draw so they can basically charge what they want for tickets/websites/merchandise etc because they know there's a whole bunch of people out there (as evidenced by this thread) who will pay "whatever" to see The Police.
Personally speaking I would pay "whatever" to have seen The Police back in the late 70's but paying "whatever" to see them now just seems like i'm lining the promoters pockets with money I cant afford and he can probably do without.
It must be nice for a lot of people on here to be in a financial position to pay "whatever" but the fact is, there are many many Police fans out there for which this would not be an option. This doesnt make them any "less fans" so I think this is the reason why so many people are complaining....
sorry that went on a bit...
- 100years
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 05 Jan 2007 15:25
- Location: Dublin, Ireland
by Philip on 27 Mar 2007 10:10
100years, i am with you at 100 %
i tried to say the same, because I know there is always a way to make art prior to money. But, here, i think S, AS and SC are too detached from the real impact they will have. They don't want to control the whole thing, and let it be controled by managers... who want a big % of the €€ sorry $$$.
The major desapointment, for me, is that they schould have 1st done a new record, and then do a tour.
Here there is an histerical sell of tickets, without knowing exactly what they will play. Today, it's inapropriate. As you say, 100 € now, without garantie of what one will get, is not fair. I think
it's like buying a Mercedes, just because of the legendary star on the motor hood. the motor could be totally crape... you will buy it anyway.
i tried to say the same, because I know there is always a way to make art prior to money. But, here, i think S, AS and SC are too detached from the real impact they will have. They don't want to control the whole thing, and let it be controled by managers... who want a big % of the €€ sorry $$$.
The major desapointment, for me, is that they schould have 1st done a new record, and then do a tour.
Here there is an histerical sell of tickets, without knowing exactly what they will play. Today, it's inapropriate. As you say, 100 € now, without garantie of what one will get, is not fair. I think
it's like buying a Mercedes, just because of the legendary star on the motor hood. the motor could be totally crape... you will buy it anyway.
- Philip
- Posts: 576
- Joined: 31 Oct 2005 21:01
- Location: the Sexy French Republic
by sockii on 27 Mar 2007 12:13
>I think the reason ticket prices are so high and memberships are
>required is all due to file sharing. People are able to get for free what
> they used to have to pay for.
That is certainly the argument that is offen made; I just wonder sometimes how true it really is, though. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Sometimes it seems like a chicken-and-the-egg debate to me: which came first? Did rising prices result from rampant downloading, or did downloading become so rampant because prices were already on the rise? (I remember being a teenager in the 80s, long before file sharing, lamenting when album prices hit and passed $10...)
I'm not an angel; I'll confess to having downloaded music. But I can't afford to shell out $20 for a cd by an artist to only find out there's only one song on the entire album I like. If I end up not liking something I've downloaded, I delete it. If I do like what I hear, however, quite often soon I find I've bought all the band's cds, dvds, paid to see them in concert, bought the t-shirts...that one "free" download may have now resulted in hundreds of dollars of merchandise sales that I never would have spent if I hadn't had the chance to listen to the band's music before. (Of course, then that circles back to the argument that if downloading wasn't so rampant, I could have afforded all of that merchandise for a lot less, and round and around it goes.)
And like it or not, the technology of filesharing is like the genie that can't be put back in the bottle; it's here to stay and the industry--and artists--need to find ways to accept it and come up with alternatives, not alienate the music-listening public further. Offering exclusives through websites and fan clubs seem to be one way to approach this, and certainly a less alienating way than hiding spyware on cds that can muck up an honest buyer's computer system! What a way THAT was to DISCOURAGE more people from actually buying music legally!
>I'm no angel here, I have a ton of Police bootlegs. Stewart and Co
>never got a cent of that. And it does bother me.
See, I've never been bothered by owning bootlegs - and I've got literally thousands of them of different bands. Because again, owning and listening to bootlegs never stopped me from buying a legal release or going to a concert by an artist I liked. In my experience it's only the most dedicated fans who bother with bootlegs as most casual music fans don't want to deal with the often inferior sound quality of bootlegs - nor feel the need to, say, have every single show of a particular tour. Release one official tour cd and most fans are happy. And also, again, trading bootlegs has sometimes opened my ears up to new artists I wouldn't have been interested in before, and suddenly I'm buying their regular releases. Bands that encourage and allow taping and trading - not for profit, of course - do a lot to build goodwill and loyalty in their fanbase.
>True fans will appreciate this.
Ah...I'm not going to start on my issues with the label of "true fan". That's such a slippery slope to start down. Let's just say one person's definition of a true fan can be entirely different from the next, and flame wars often result when people decide to start labelling each other a true fan or not. So I'm going to stay completely out of that one.
>Would you rather have everyone pay $20 for the cd, and $50 for floor
>seats.... Or nothing for the entire cd, and $225 for a floor seat?
I still don't think downloading can be blamed entirely for the inflation of ticket prices. Don't forget the corporate issues at work...sponsorship has been going strong for decades, before downloading was a problem, and sponsors grab blocks of tickets for themselves. Stadiums have mostly all been bought by large corporations, too (all our big parks here in Philly have been renamed after one bank or another)...don't think that part of that deal didn't involve those corporations getting huge blocks of giveaway tickets to every show and event. The less tickets actually for true "sale" instead of corporate giveaway, the higher prices are going to be for consumers as well. Sports ticket prices are becoming just as inflated as concert prices these days, aren't they? And there's no "downloading" freeloafers to blame for that...
I'm just saying...it's a complicated web of causes and effects that I really don't think can be traced back to one single fault: downloaders.
>required is all due to file sharing. People are able to get for free what
> they used to have to pay for.
That is certainly the argument that is offen made; I just wonder sometimes how true it really is, though. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Sometimes it seems like a chicken-and-the-egg debate to me: which came first? Did rising prices result from rampant downloading, or did downloading become so rampant because prices were already on the rise? (I remember being a teenager in the 80s, long before file sharing, lamenting when album prices hit and passed $10...)
I'm not an angel; I'll confess to having downloaded music. But I can't afford to shell out $20 for a cd by an artist to only find out there's only one song on the entire album I like. If I end up not liking something I've downloaded, I delete it. If I do like what I hear, however, quite often soon I find I've bought all the band's cds, dvds, paid to see them in concert, bought the t-shirts...that one "free" download may have now resulted in hundreds of dollars of merchandise sales that I never would have spent if I hadn't had the chance to listen to the band's music before. (Of course, then that circles back to the argument that if downloading wasn't so rampant, I could have afforded all of that merchandise for a lot less, and round and around it goes.)
And like it or not, the technology of filesharing is like the genie that can't be put back in the bottle; it's here to stay and the industry--and artists--need to find ways to accept it and come up with alternatives, not alienate the music-listening public further. Offering exclusives through websites and fan clubs seem to be one way to approach this, and certainly a less alienating way than hiding spyware on cds that can muck up an honest buyer's computer system! What a way THAT was to DISCOURAGE more people from actually buying music legally!
>I'm no angel here, I have a ton of Police bootlegs. Stewart and Co
>never got a cent of that. And it does bother me.
See, I've never been bothered by owning bootlegs - and I've got literally thousands of them of different bands. Because again, owning and listening to bootlegs never stopped me from buying a legal release or going to a concert by an artist I liked. In my experience it's only the most dedicated fans who bother with bootlegs as most casual music fans don't want to deal with the often inferior sound quality of bootlegs - nor feel the need to, say, have every single show of a particular tour. Release one official tour cd and most fans are happy. And also, again, trading bootlegs has sometimes opened my ears up to new artists I wouldn't have been interested in before, and suddenly I'm buying their regular releases. Bands that encourage and allow taping and trading - not for profit, of course - do a lot to build goodwill and loyalty in their fanbase.
>True fans will appreciate this.
Ah...I'm not going to start on my issues with the label of "true fan". That's such a slippery slope to start down. Let's just say one person's definition of a true fan can be entirely different from the next, and flame wars often result when people decide to start labelling each other a true fan or not. So I'm going to stay completely out of that one.
>Would you rather have everyone pay $20 for the cd, and $50 for floor
>seats.... Or nothing for the entire cd, and $225 for a floor seat?
I still don't think downloading can be blamed entirely for the inflation of ticket prices. Don't forget the corporate issues at work...sponsorship has been going strong for decades, before downloading was a problem, and sponsors grab blocks of tickets for themselves. Stadiums have mostly all been bought by large corporations, too (all our big parks here in Philly have been renamed after one bank or another)...don't think that part of that deal didn't involve those corporations getting huge blocks of giveaway tickets to every show and event. The less tickets actually for true "sale" instead of corporate giveaway, the higher prices are going to be for consumers as well. Sports ticket prices are becoming just as inflated as concert prices these days, aren't they? And there's no "downloading" freeloafers to blame for that...
I'm just saying...it's a complicated web of causes and effects that I really don't think can be traced back to one single fault: downloaders.
-
sockii - Posts: 4888
- Joined: 05 May 2005 02:05
- Location: Mercy Street
by Divemistress of the Dark on 27 Mar 2007 15:31
Just some more $.02 in an interesting thread...
I think some of it is the way the music business in general works these days. There are a great many independent bands on tiny labels that most people will never hear, because Clear Channel, plus one or two other conglomerates, now own most radio stations and are in cahoots with Viacom (all the MTV stations) and the major music labels to control what gets played. (Google the words "Eliot Spitzer" and "payola" to see what I'm talking about). So thousands of worthy acts labor in obscurity for decades, while a paltry handful of bands get built up...and what ends up happening is the "name" performers are huge and can charge hundreds of dollars for tickets, while the vast majority of artists - who aren't famous - are lucky if they can fill small ballrooms for $15 per head.
I saw a band for $20 this past weekend that just blew my socks off. (Hoodoo Gurus, Perth, Australia.) If there were any justice in this world, they'd be selling out stadiums worldwide as well, while some other high profile acts I could name (not The Police) would be begging for change on the street corner. But, since a.) they're not American and b.) they're not on the Clear Channel list of approved acts, I got in the front row without any trouble at all. Now, as a huge music fan, this is great for me, but I suspect it's pretty frustrating for a band that's been putting out terrific albums for nearly three decades.
For the record, I think The Police is something of an exception to this situation. They built their reputation back in the day when most big-label output wasn't terrible, and before record stations went pay to play. So, yes, they can charge big bucks for front row tickets, but in my world they've at least earned their legions of fans. You'd think the music industry would learn something from this, and from the fact that other monster sellers are bands that built reputations back in the days before payola: Elton John, Billy Joel, U2, REM, Bruce Springsteen, The Rolling Stones.
Maybe I'm just rationalizing somehow, but I think it's terrific The Police are at least letting people in the building for $50. It appears there are plenty of tix on Ebay and Stubhub, so folks aren't forced into paying the $100 (and fan club members have strict restrictions on how many tickets they can buy, which frees up more tix for folks who don't want to pony up the hundred clams). They're also playing A LOT of dates, which appears to me to tie into something of a spirit of democracy, as well.
You know what though? This is the *only* band I would pay this kind of money and go to a stadium to see. Mostly I'm a fan of smaller independent bands on indie labels, for one reason: The music is better. I think most of what you hear on Clear Channel stations has been test-marketed to the point of turning it into musical wallpaper. Of course there are exceptions (Foo Fighters, Green Day, I even like the most recent John Mellencamp single). But for the most part, for inventiveness and innovation, you can't beat outfits like YepRoc Records, Matador Records, or any number of other fantastic indie labels you see over at PitchforkMedia.com, or on Myspace, or which are sold at music stores that aren't also arms of the Big Media octopus. (To find one near you, go to www.cimsmusic.com.)
Thank heavens for the Internet and now satellite radio, which have provided some alternatives. For the record, I've been doing my part to help stop the corporations from controlling what you see and hear on the Internet as well (www.savetheinternet.com for more info.)
But more specifically? You'll notice Stewart's own personal site isn't being run by Clear Channel, but by actual fans, and I think that's just great. It's also why I spend A LOT more time here than on TPT.com.
I think some of it is the way the music business in general works these days. There are a great many independent bands on tiny labels that most people will never hear, because Clear Channel, plus one or two other conglomerates, now own most radio stations and are in cahoots with Viacom (all the MTV stations) and the major music labels to control what gets played. (Google the words "Eliot Spitzer" and "payola" to see what I'm talking about). So thousands of worthy acts labor in obscurity for decades, while a paltry handful of bands get built up...and what ends up happening is the "name" performers are huge and can charge hundreds of dollars for tickets, while the vast majority of artists - who aren't famous - are lucky if they can fill small ballrooms for $15 per head.
I saw a band for $20 this past weekend that just blew my socks off. (Hoodoo Gurus, Perth, Australia.) If there were any justice in this world, they'd be selling out stadiums worldwide as well, while some other high profile acts I could name (not The Police) would be begging for change on the street corner. But, since a.) they're not American and b.) they're not on the Clear Channel list of approved acts, I got in the front row without any trouble at all. Now, as a huge music fan, this is great for me, but I suspect it's pretty frustrating for a band that's been putting out terrific albums for nearly three decades.
For the record, I think The Police is something of an exception to this situation. They built their reputation back in the day when most big-label output wasn't terrible, and before record stations went pay to play. So, yes, they can charge big bucks for front row tickets, but in my world they've at least earned their legions of fans. You'd think the music industry would learn something from this, and from the fact that other monster sellers are bands that built reputations back in the days before payola: Elton John, Billy Joel, U2, REM, Bruce Springsteen, The Rolling Stones.
Maybe I'm just rationalizing somehow, but I think it's terrific The Police are at least letting people in the building for $50. It appears there are plenty of tix on Ebay and Stubhub, so folks aren't forced into paying the $100 (and fan club members have strict restrictions on how many tickets they can buy, which frees up more tix for folks who don't want to pony up the hundred clams). They're also playing A LOT of dates, which appears to me to tie into something of a spirit of democracy, as well.
You know what though? This is the *only* band I would pay this kind of money and go to a stadium to see. Mostly I'm a fan of smaller independent bands on indie labels, for one reason: The music is better. I think most of what you hear on Clear Channel stations has been test-marketed to the point of turning it into musical wallpaper. Of course there are exceptions (Foo Fighters, Green Day, I even like the most recent John Mellencamp single). But for the most part, for inventiveness and innovation, you can't beat outfits like YepRoc Records, Matador Records, or any number of other fantastic indie labels you see over at PitchforkMedia.com, or on Myspace, or which are sold at music stores that aren't also arms of the Big Media octopus. (To find one near you, go to www.cimsmusic.com.)
Thank heavens for the Internet and now satellite radio, which have provided some alternatives. For the record, I've been doing my part to help stop the corporations from controlling what you see and hear on the Internet as well (www.savetheinternet.com for more info.)
But more specifically? You'll notice Stewart's own personal site isn't being run by Clear Channel, but by actual fans, and I think that's just great. It's also why I spend A LOT more time here than on TPT.com.
On Google - site:stewartcopeland.net "your keyword here" - thanks DM!!
-
Divemistress of the Dark - Posts: 7873
- Joined: 12 Jul 2006 14:10
- Location: Nashville, TN
by 100years on 27 Mar 2007 16:07
[quote="Divemistress of the Dark"]
Maybe I'm just rationalizing somehow, but I think it's terrific The Police are at least letting people in the building for $50.
[/quote]
Maybe in the States, but the cheapest tickets for any of the UK shows were £40...approx $80 and these are for tickets probably so far back or so high up in the indoor arenas that they are a waste of money.
I think the ticket prices are high but then I expected them to be...it's the $100 website membership fee that i think is such a blantant exploitation of fans and is the most objectionable.
Maybe I'm just rationalizing somehow, but I think it's terrific The Police are at least letting people in the building for $50.
[/quote]
Maybe in the States, but the cheapest tickets for any of the UK shows were £40...approx $80 and these are for tickets probably so far back or so high up in the indoor arenas that they are a waste of money.
I think the ticket prices are high but then I expected them to be...it's the $100 website membership fee that i think is such a blantant exploitation of fans and is the most objectionable.
- 100years
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 05 Jan 2007 15:25
- Location: Dublin, Ireland
by nathanarizona on 27 Mar 2007 16:22
On a related note...(sorry for the link)
http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news ... main_x.htm
Article is a few years old but still very timely. I'm relating it in this thread because of what it hints at in the end: live shows are where the money is more than ever. You can't download being there.
As for the membership fees, again, it all goes back to what the market will bare. In this case they've proven to be correct in assuming people will pay 100 bucks to join. It it what it is.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news ... main_x.htm
Article is a few years old but still very timely. I'm relating it in this thread because of what it hints at in the end: live shows are where the money is more than ever. You can't download being there.
As for the membership fees, again, it all goes back to what the market will bare. In this case they've proven to be correct in assuming people will pay 100 bucks to join. It it what it is.
'Cause it won't satiate your growing appetite
-
nathanarizona - Posts: 126
- Joined: 08 Feb 2007 23:59
- Location: Texas
by PhilippeC on 27 Mar 2007 16:43
I checked out some other on-line fan clubs to see if the prices policy was the same.
Well, it is for the Rolling Stones. But if you pay 100$ for the subscription, you'll receive an exclusive DVD. And there are more extras.
For U2, it's only 40 $, and you'll receive a double-CD Live from Sidney...
For the Red Hot Chili Peppers, registrations start at 30$ and you have early access to the tickets sales...
These are just examples. I'm quite surprised TPT.com only offers a lithograph and previews of videos. I think it's a lot of money just to be sure to get tickets... if you can be sure! As they say, subscribing to TPT.com doesn't mean you'll get automatically tickets.
Anyway it's a never-ending debate. If The Police finally add more dates in France, I will subscribe to have a chance to get tickets... But with no enthusiasm at all.
Well, it is for the Rolling Stones. But if you pay 100$ for the subscription, you'll receive an exclusive DVD. And there are more extras.
For U2, it's only 40 $, and you'll receive a double-CD Live from Sidney...
For the Red Hot Chili Peppers, registrations start at 30$ and you have early access to the tickets sales...
These are just examples. I'm quite surprised TPT.com only offers a lithograph and previews of videos. I think it's a lot of money just to be sure to get tickets... if you can be sure! As they say, subscribing to TPT.com doesn't mean you'll get automatically tickets.
Anyway it's a never-ending debate. If The Police finally add more dates in France, I will subscribe to have a chance to get tickets... But with no enthusiasm at all.
- PhilippeC
- Posts: 298
- Joined: 09 Jan 2007 16:09
by GinaSuperCat on 27 Mar 2007 17:22
I think its an emotional topic and no matter how this anniversary was going to be celebrated (if there was just a re-release of material or another box set, if there was a tour, if there was a new album, any combination thereof etc.), people will react in diametrically opposed ways...I mean this reunion in effect delves twenty-five years into most people's past and that's always an tricky operation and taps into so many things that may or may not even have anything to do with the Police at all...since the reunion I have been remembering all sorts of things from the time of Synchronicity, just as my own example...tapping into that is always going to be emotional and conflicted territory..From looking at all the thousands of posts on TPT it becomes clear that this reunion is about many people reliving their youth...the stakes of that are huge, really...
But then again, just in my own observation, the preoccupation with other people "motives" is also another part of the problem: so much attention has been focused on what the band's motives and intentions are for reuniting, whether they are true (with fans at heart) or not (for various self-interests)...But this preoccupation with motivations is not unique to this reunion or even reunions in general (even though it always plays out much more exaggeratedly in these examples) but seems a general preoccupation on a broader scale...
No one will ever know what others' 'true' intentions or reasons are...same problems noted with 'true fan' above and then more...that speculation is always fraught with the inability to access others motivations and, I think more importantly, assumes that peope are really able to know and clearly understand their own in the first place...I mean, can I really provide a complete and satisfactory explanation for things I do? Not really, since some inclinations or dispositions are really not something I even recognize, even when I am trying to be as reflective as I can be...
I think that all this focus on motivation..to put it bluntly, is kind of a loser insofar as it focuses on whether the band operates with authentic motives or not...an unaccessible, murky realm and a never-resolvable proposition that just starkly divides (true/false, authentic/inauthentic, etc.)...No one would ever be satisfied wholy and completely with whatever explanation is offered for the reunion: it will probably always be incomplete since it's likely impossible to put into as soundbite the complex set of variables that lead to the reunion......its always going to sound like a "story"...and how can it not?
No matter how you go about it, there will always be flak...take the Sex Pistols, for example (sidestepping the whole orig. bassist Glen Matlock/Sid thing, for sanity's sake): for even reuniting at all some 'true' fans cried sell-out, for trying to reunite with self-relfexive irony in the "Filthy Lucre Tour" other fans cried sell-out, no matter how self-deprecatingly the humor, nothing is enough...and that's not to mention all the judging of the fans by other fans who went or did not for specified reasons...now this example is particularly difficult given the whole authenticity trip the punk ethos seems to particularly invite (the whole everyone is a poser things...I'm harder-core than thou thing, etc.)...but the point is that judging based on motivations is a never ending, never satisfying, always unanswerable game...you just don't ever win...like tic tac toe...and, from WarGames, we all know the only way to 'win' is not to play the game
I have made several defenses of the Police against the charges that they are just doing this for money, etc. but not because I think I have a handle on what their motives truly are...like I would ever presume to know that LOL...but only doing so since a lot of people seem really really really invested in this realm motivations...that's what all the complaining has (imho) really been about...
But then again, just in my own observation, the preoccupation with other people "motives" is also another part of the problem: so much attention has been focused on what the band's motives and intentions are for reuniting, whether they are true (with fans at heart) or not (for various self-interests)...But this preoccupation with motivations is not unique to this reunion or even reunions in general (even though it always plays out much more exaggeratedly in these examples) but seems a general preoccupation on a broader scale...
No one will ever know what others' 'true' intentions or reasons are...same problems noted with 'true fan' above and then more...that speculation is always fraught with the inability to access others motivations and, I think more importantly, assumes that peope are really able to know and clearly understand their own in the first place...I mean, can I really provide a complete and satisfactory explanation for things I do? Not really, since some inclinations or dispositions are really not something I even recognize, even when I am trying to be as reflective as I can be...
I think that all this focus on motivation..to put it bluntly, is kind of a loser insofar as it focuses on whether the band operates with authentic motives or not...an unaccessible, murky realm and a never-resolvable proposition that just starkly divides (true/false, authentic/inauthentic, etc.)...No one would ever be satisfied wholy and completely with whatever explanation is offered for the reunion: it will probably always be incomplete since it's likely impossible to put into as soundbite the complex set of variables that lead to the reunion......its always going to sound like a "story"...and how can it not?
No matter how you go about it, there will always be flak...take the Sex Pistols, for example (sidestepping the whole orig. bassist Glen Matlock/Sid thing, for sanity's sake): for even reuniting at all some 'true' fans cried sell-out, for trying to reunite with self-relfexive irony in the "Filthy Lucre Tour" other fans cried sell-out, no matter how self-deprecatingly the humor, nothing is enough...and that's not to mention all the judging of the fans by other fans who went or did not for specified reasons...now this example is particularly difficult given the whole authenticity trip the punk ethos seems to particularly invite (the whole everyone is a poser things...I'm harder-core than thou thing, etc.)...but the point is that judging based on motivations is a never ending, never satisfying, always unanswerable game...you just don't ever win...like tic tac toe...and, from WarGames, we all know the only way to 'win' is not to play the game
I have made several defenses of the Police against the charges that they are just doing this for money, etc. but not because I think I have a handle on what their motives truly are...like I would ever presume to know that LOL...but only doing so since a lot of people seem really really really invested in this realm motivations...that's what all the complaining has (imho) really been about...
MMMMEEEEEOOOOOOWWWWWW!!!!
-
GinaSuperCat - Posts: 3174
- Joined: 31 Jan 2007 22:59
- Location: President: Special Anthony Fan Club
by adam1516 on 27 Mar 2007 18:51
I'm not sure the guys in the band have much of a say on ticket pricing or membership fees of the tour website. Even if they have, I don't have any problem paying the price for seeing the guys. People will always complain about perceived high prices.
They have a right to make money, as much as they can, so does the tour site, so does every member of this website. What's wrong with doing a job you love and being paid handsomely for doing it? Makes perfect sense to me.
They have a right to make money, as much as they can, so does the tour site, so does every member of this website. What's wrong with doing a job you love and being paid handsomely for doing it? Makes perfect sense to me.
"I saw, I conquered, I came"
- adam1516
- Posts: 35
- Joined: 27 Jan 2007 00:08
by tenstrings on 28 Mar 2007 02:02
Well, everyone has the right to change their mind...even Sting.
Better days will come.
Maybe someday, maybe tomorrow...may be.
After all, didn't Sting say "Never say never?"
:wink:
"It's no big deal."
"Making a big thing of it would have been a good idea."
(Or something like that.)
<God is laughing at you always.>
Better days will come.
Maybe someday, maybe tomorrow...may be.
After all, didn't Sting say "Never say never?"
:wink:
"It's no big deal."
"Making a big thing of it would have been a good idea."
(Or something like that.)
<God is laughing at you always.>
- tenstrings
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 13 Jul 2006 02:22
by Kim on 28 Mar 2007 02:06
[quote="100years"]As with anything in a market economy, the price will be whatever the market can stand....if there was medium to low demand, the tickets would be €50 and no charge for joining a website that gets you f**k all from what I hear.
It's the age old Music V Business debate though. As far as the fans are concerned, music is supposed to be about art. But the reality is that art is a very saleable product and as artists (such as The Police) edge closer and closer to the winters of their careers, doing things for cash as opposed to for their "art" becomes probably more important.
Some promoter managed to persuade The Police to reform by offering enough money and the chance for Sting to polish his ego for a few more years as his solo career starts to freefall. The promoter knows this reunion will be a big draw so they can basically charge what they want for tickets/websites/merchandise etc because they know there's a whole bunch of people out there (as evidenced by this thread) who will pay "whatever" to see The Police.
Personally speaking I would pay "whatever" to have seen The Police back in the late 70's but paying "whatever" to see them now just seems like i'm lining the promoters pockets with money I cant afford and he can probably do without.
It must be nice for a lot of people on here to be in a financial position to pay "whatever" but the fact is, there are many many Police fans out there for which this would not be an option. This doesnt make them any "less fans" so I think this is the reason why so many people are complaining....
sorry that went on a bit...[/quote]
Who says we can afford it? Hubby had heart palpitations when this month's credit card bill arrived. Happy Birthday, Merry Christmas and Happy Birthday again to me, lol! I've waited 25 years for this so I'm going, come hell or high water, no matter what the cost. But, I bought mid-price seats so I could go 3 times instead of top of the line seats once. I suspect a lot of casual fans decided not to go, but I also bet there are lots of people reliving their youths through this tour and also some who will go just to say they were there, etc. As for motivation - who cares? I got tickets to see THE POLICE! We'll just see where this ride takes us.
It's the age old Music V Business debate though. As far as the fans are concerned, music is supposed to be about art. But the reality is that art is a very saleable product and as artists (such as The Police) edge closer and closer to the winters of their careers, doing things for cash as opposed to for their "art" becomes probably more important.
Some promoter managed to persuade The Police to reform by offering enough money and the chance for Sting to polish his ego for a few more years as his solo career starts to freefall. The promoter knows this reunion will be a big draw so they can basically charge what they want for tickets/websites/merchandise etc because they know there's a whole bunch of people out there (as evidenced by this thread) who will pay "whatever" to see The Police.
Personally speaking I would pay "whatever" to have seen The Police back in the late 70's but paying "whatever" to see them now just seems like i'm lining the promoters pockets with money I cant afford and he can probably do without.
It must be nice for a lot of people on here to be in a financial position to pay "whatever" but the fact is, there are many many Police fans out there for which this would not be an option. This doesnt make them any "less fans" so I think this is the reason why so many people are complaining....
sorry that went on a bit...[/quote]
Who says we can afford it? Hubby had heart palpitations when this month's credit card bill arrived. Happy Birthday, Merry Christmas and Happy Birthday again to me, lol! I've waited 25 years for this so I'm going, come hell or high water, no matter what the cost. But, I bought mid-price seats so I could go 3 times instead of top of the line seats once. I suspect a lot of casual fans decided not to go, but I also bet there are lots of people reliving their youths through this tour and also some who will go just to say they were there, etc. As for motivation - who cares? I got tickets to see THE POLICE! We'll just see where this ride takes us.
yo!!
-
Kim - Posts: 1447
- Joined: 07 Feb 2005 18:34
- Location: Walking On The Moon
by Divemistress of the Dark on 28 Mar 2007 06:26
Well, yeah, same boat. I think all this is made worse by the fact that we're waiting for the tour to begin and there's naught to do but speculate. We don't even have new fun Stewart interviews to pore over...::sigh::
It'll be interesting to see the tack things take once the reviews start pouring in from Vancouver.
It'll be interesting to see the tack things take once the reviews start pouring in from Vancouver.
On Google - site:stewartcopeland.net "your keyword here" - thanks DM!!
-
Divemistress of the Dark - Posts: 7873
- Joined: 12 Jul 2006 14:10
- Location: Nashville, TN
by theskydoctor on 03 Apr 2007 03:39
Folks complain about gas prices but they still drive. People will complain about ticket prices but will continue to go see live music. The bands know that their real fans will come no matter what so they can charge whatever they want. It's been a long time since I payed $12.50 to stand about 50 feet from Stewart on the Ghost in the Machine tour. I don't care how much they are charging. I'd find a way to get there for this!
lRLRR rLRLL
- theskydoctor
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 13 Feb 2007 01:59
- Location: Rhode Island
38 posts
• Page 2 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests