Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, downzy said:

Look, for years artist would charge “fair” prices for their tickets and scalpers would sell them at inflated prices because that’s ultimately what the market will bear.  Artists have decided to be their own scalpers since they figure they should make the most money from their performances rather than an independent scalper.

It is what it is. 

Is it crazy for the average Joe like myself. Yep. Makes zero sense. But I don’t have fuck you money. It’s the same reason I don’t get too upset at not being able to afford to have GNR play my birthday party, when other people can and have.  

If the market will bear $2k seats in Vegas, then so be it. 

If not, well, be prepared to see some pretty hefty  price cutting closer to the date. 

We’ve seen this at many GNR concerts as well as last year’s Locked and Loaded Box set. 

Guns N’ Roses is a business first and foremost. This should be apparent to anyone paying attention the last twenty years. Not ideal for us fans, but as I said before, it is what it is. 

It's a band that had 3 albums worth listening to. And not one since 1991. But those are legendary. The gigs wouldn't sell any more or less if they made any new music.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

now the people who really want to see the show will have to pay high-roller ticket prices. It's blatant gouging.

Only for people in Vegas.  For anyone else there are other shows.  I'd love to see them, but not at that price.  I'm fine with that.

3 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

But these 'small venue in Vegas' prices take it to a new extreme for the band.

Yeah, they're next level pricing.  No argument there.  But what if they can sell out at those prices?  Plus, I have to think there will be discounting if they misjudged ticket demand, so I wouldn't say all hope is lost.

3 hours ago, Gordon Comstock said:

it's basically all about the novelty of saying 'I saw Axl [and Slash and Duff] in a small venue in Vegas' or just having something to do while you're in town

Bingo.  They're banking on enough people (well, 4000 per show in fact) to pay sky high prices for the caché.  With all the high rollers who play $5k a hand at blackjack, what's $1k for a ticket?  It sucks for everyone else, but this is the business of Guns N' Roses.  And it's been a business first and foremost for a very long time.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moreblack said:

The gigs wouldn't sell any more or less if they made any new music.

Maybe not the shows in Vegas.  People paying $1k-$2k per ticket aren't interested in new material (unless they have another massive hit in them).  

But as a whole, new material would certainly bring out a lot more people who saw them in '16 and '17 and want to hear what a new Guns N' Roses album would sound like.  I don't have any doubts about that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, moreblack said:

It's a band that had 3 albums worth listening to. And not one since 1991. But those are legendary. The gigs wouldn't sell any more or less if they made any new music.

Just curious, wich UIY album is not worth listening to???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, downzy said:

With all the high rollers who play $5k a hand at blackjack, what's $1k for a ticket?

Must say, it is a great comparsion - people spend thousands in Vegas just for fun, why do they should be bothered by the price on one of the biggest show acts in the world? And it has nothing to do with band's intention to rob ordinary fans.It goes not like "well, our fans can pay whatever high price for the show, let's put it as high as possible" rather than "well, it seems there are many wealthy people around, they are eager to spend money, so let's put appropriate price for them". And once more, suppose band or even management doesn't fully aware of all this stuff. They get their payment for the show and the rest is sponsor's duties. So, basically it's not Fernando or Axl who says "let's put sky rocket price here and extremely low here". Well, not Rose for sure - he is too busy drinking beer.  

Edited by nikothebellic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Im surpised with the amount for vegas tickets it isnt a sit down dinner and drinks affair like some of the dinosaur bands are doing where they have dinner and ticket deals. You had a table close to the stage with dinner and drinks while watching the band.

Edited by Sydney Fan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is they have tracks from old which they could easy add too this & drop other tracks even that would make a lot of difference 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, RussTCB said:

You know what memory of my own makes me the most mad when I think about how much concert pricing has changed? I saw Pink Floyd on The Division Bell Tour two nights in a row. I paid $35 (face value) for each night. I got seats right about the 50 yard line for the first night and 4th row center for the second night. Now, someone could say "Yeah, but that was 1994 and that's 25 years ago already!" but I disagree. Take a look at these examples. This is the show they put on every single night. It's WAY more of a production than GN'R is presenting now, yet Floyd was able to turn a massive profit on that tour at $35 a ticket:

 

 

 

 

It's different now. Yeah tickets are really overpriced but someone like GnR would literally never be able to survive with 35$. The whole production cost is astronomical these days. 

Muse Drones tour had tickets around 40-80€ and it was literally sold out in the whole europe and they only broke even in the end. Then they went on a festival tour with nothing except like guitars to actually make money :lol:

Around 100$ should be more than enough tho

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suprise, suprise!

I honestly couldn't care any less about more gigs at this point.

I skipped the 2 Toronto shows in 2017 because of stupid prices, and Axl's terrible vocals.

Things have to change in order for me to het excited for GN'R again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, downzy said:

Maybe not the shows in Vegas.  People paying $1k-$2k per ticket aren't interested in new material (unless they have another massive hit in them).  

But as a whole, new material would certainly bring out a lot more people who saw them in '16 and '17 and want to hear what a new Guns N' Roses album would sound like.  I don't have any doubts about that.  

I generally disagree with this statement. The level of one’s disposable income isn’t going to indicate whether they love GNR or are rabid for new music.  I am sure there are plenty of GnR fans who bought the cheapest seats on NITL just to hear the hits and didn’t give a fuck about Coma or CD songs

Axl and co should either release new music or give this reunion shtick a break. Definitely tarnishing the name and brand of a tour that  was quite special for many of us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many things I want but can't bring myself to pay for because I don't think the price matches its value to me. That is just how it is for me and you and everybody. Fortunately in this case, I can just buy tickets for any of the other shows instead and avoid the LV gigs. Problem solved. (In my case I won't attend any of the shows.)

But then this might not be enough for some. They especially want to attend the LV shows. Because they are more attractive. Smaller venue. Maybe something new or special to be played. More exclusive due to being, uhm, exclusive. Bragging rights from shelling out so much money. And you can bet everyone attending will praise the shows. So hiking the prices creates a market in itself. People want to be there. People want to be able to pay ridiculous amounts of money for something that is likely more or less an identical product as they could get for much less. 

Is this wrong? I don't think so. Someone has to cater to that particular market segment of concert goers with more money than sense. And as long as the band also provide shows with more moderately priced tickets I find it hard to criticise them.

I feel too bad for those in LV who won't afford the tickets and can't travel elsewhere, but then again that isn't really much different from fans living in cities where the band isn't playing and who can't or won't travel to see them elsewhere.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fans seem split between those who are content and actually endorse neoliberal corporate practices and are happy to fall back on a ''tough luck/that is life'' argument, and those who can never be quite content with Reagan and Thatcher. All I know is, I'm glad I don't really go to rock concerts any longer - for reasons including but not exclusive to the pricing; I'm glad I saw all these big bands when they were all commies charging £15 per ticket  haha. I got ''my fill'' early on, including two ''biggies'' in The Stones and Aerosmith.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, acor said:

Just curious, wich UIY album is not worth listening to???

Geez. Both are worth listening to, it's CD that's not worth listening to, hence the 'since 91'. Just think a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Geez. Both are worth listening to, it's CD that's not worth listening to, hence the 'since 91'. Just think a bit.

But till 91 GnR had 4 albums...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Geez. Both are worth listening to, it's CD that's not worth listening to, hence the 'since 91'. Just think a bit.

Its about personal taste. CD is not to everybody's liking especially in the GNR fan world...you get the 'Its not Slash!' Not its Buckethead playing rings round him. I like CD, mostly because it sounds fresh to me and its not just meat & potatoes rock n roll. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, acor said:

But till 91 GnR had 4 albums...

Nope. Three albums. And a few EPs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, zigzagbigbag said:

Nope. Three albums. And a few EPs. 

LLAS, AfD, Lies, UYI I & II, "TSI?", SFTD, OMG, CD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last time around, LV residence marked a begining of new era, will it do the same trick again?

ie. I don't need new cd, just give us old members for fuck sake, the ones who will do justice to Paris '92, Rio '91, Beunos Aires '93, Saskaton '93...not this silly money grab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Sosso said:

LLAS, AfD, Lies, UYI I & II, "TSI?", SFTD, OMG, CD

 

Dude, are you serious? You do know what an album is, don’t you?  

 

Edited by zigzagbigbag
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, zigzagbigbag said:

LLAS = album?!

Dude, are you serious? You do know what an album is, don’t you?  

 

Albums, Singles and EPs.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sosso said:

Albums, Singles and EPs.

You are missing the point. Please do read the post I was referring to. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, acor said:

But till 91 GnR had 4 albums...

Nope. They had 3 albums. One could argue, they even had only 2 albums if you look at UYI as 1 album split on 2 discs. GNR lies was 2 EPs put together on 1 disc.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, downzy said:

Maybe not the shows in Vegas.  People paying $1k-$2k per ticket aren't interested in new material (unless they have another massive hit in them).  

But as a whole, new material would certainly bring out a lot more people who saw them in '16 and '17 and want to hear what a new Guns N' Roses album would sound like.  I don't have any doubts about that.  

I don't see the needle moving any higher than that stadium tour they just did. New music wouldn't make a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, nikothebellic said:

And once more, suppose band or even management doesn't fully aware of all this stuff. They get their payment for the show and the rest is sponsor's duties. So, basically it's not Fernando or Axl who says "let's put sky rocket price here and extremely low here"

Well, to a certain extent.  You're right that generally artists these days negotiate upfront performance payment(s) and the promoter recoups through ticket sales.

But artists aren't dumb.  They know their upfront fee will reflect the price of tickets.  A $1 million pay day will require a much lower ticket price than a $5 million pay day.  

So while you're technically right that the artist isn't in charge of ticket prices, it's not as though they don't have a hand it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×