Blur

[ceetee]

Friday opening act on the Other Stage?

[stuie]

1 hour ago, scatteredscreens said:

I've sat and thought about it and I'm not paying this money for it, sure it'll be a great gig and all but I'll just wait for them to tour in 2024 at some EU fests and see them there for far cheaper.

+1 

Feeling robbed will not help me enjoy the gig. And it won’t top Glasto 2009 so fuck them. 

[Al2006]

agree the prices are high.. best outcome here is going to warm up shows, and they normally do a few of these

managed to do wolves civic hall for their first reunion and a 200-cap venue in wolves last time round at newhampton arts centre.. this makes me think I’m in the fan club from gigs gone by.. but I didn’t receive an email! Any idea how I check this or where to sign up for fan club?

here’s a pic from newhampton! completely lost it when they did this is a low.

[clasher]

1 hour ago, scatteredscreens said:

You reckon Blur are scraping by on these costs for the gig? I'm no organiser but given the prices, size of venue and the fact it's a one off shows it's clearly quite a big pay out. Being a big pay out is fine, but ripping fans off with Golden circle is just greedy. The extra effort argument does hold imo because other gigs have had 'golden circle' and just given it to first come first serve for no additional cost. So somewhere down the line has thought "we can skim a few grand off this", and it doesn't NEED to be spread across the rest of the gig tickets at all. Not saying Damon's sat there and done the calculations but the artist I'm sure could have something to say about it. Not sure why dynamic pricing is brought up, it's also a shitty practice, but just because it's more shitty doesn't mean we can't call this stuff out.

Again, I don't know how much Blur are getting, I would think it's a hefty sum. But it's not simply because they charge more for the golden circle.

Artists don't throw darts to determine the price of tickets, nor do they go "I'm gonna charge 500 quid because I'm a greedy lad". Their management doesn't to that either. They add up the costs and consider what kind of prices they can charge to still sell out (which is paramount, as you usually need 80-85% just to break even) and then distribute this between the different tiers.

The costs of the gig set the the minimum and the demand sets the maximum they can charge. Still waiting for someone to tell me at which point the payout becomes too big to be considered not ripping off the fans. Is going for the max greedy? Perhaps. Are Blur doing that? Perhaps. I don't know and likely no one here knows either.

If this is a quick sellout even at these prices (which I expect it will be), it would show they could probably charge even more, which would indicate they didn't go for the maximum prices, so maybe they aren't complete greedy bastards.

I obviously don't like how high the prices are getting and I completely understand why people are angry, annoyed and feel ripped off. The point I'm trying to get across is that just because a ticket has a higher price than someone feels like it should have, would be prepared to pay for or is substantially higher than 8 years ago in a completely different global situation, it doesn't necessarily mean the artists are greedy.  

You on the other hand (among others) seem to be annoyed with the golden circle, which is a part of a tiered ticketing system. What I don't understand is what the difference is between golden circle and general standing vs general standing and seats, for example. Different tiers, different prices, seems perfectly sensible to me, especially in huge venues. We can disagree about that, but the "extra effort" argument is still bullshit, especially if applied to the golden circle solely.

 

[Field Commander Jefferson]

So this gig brings in about £9million through ticket sales right?

[scatteredscreens]

14 minutes ago, clasher said:

Again, I don't know how much Blur are getting, I would think it's a hefty sum. But it's not simply because they charge more for the golden circle.

Artists don't throw darts to determine the price of tickets, nor do they go "I'm gonna charge 500 quid because I'm a greedy lad". Their management doesn't to that either. They add up the costs and consider what kind of prices they can charge to still sell out (which is paramount, as you usually need 80-85% just to break even) and then distribute this between the different tiers.

The costs of the gig set the the minimum and the demand sets the maximum they can charge. Still waiting for someone to tell me at which point the payout becomes too big to be considered not ripping off the fans. Is going for the max greedy? Perhaps. Are Blur doing that? Perhaps. I don't know and likely no one here knows either.

If this is a quick sellout even at these prices (which I expect it will be), it would show they could probably charge even more, which would indicate they didn't go for the maximum prices, so maybe they aren't complete greedy bastards.

I obviously don't like how high the prices are getting and I completely understand why people are angry, annoyed and feel ripped off. The point I'm trying to get across is that just because a ticket has a higher price than someone feels like it should have, would be prepared to pay for or is substantially higher than 8 years ago in a completely different global situation, it doesn't necessarily mean the artists are greedy.  

You on the other hand (among others) seem to be annoyed with the golden circle, which is a part of a tiered ticketing system. What I don't understand is what the difference is between golden circle and general standing vs general standing and seats, for example. Different tiers, different prices, seems perfectly sensible to me, especially in huge venues. We can disagree about that, but the "extra effort" argument is still bullshit, especially if applied to the golden circle solely.

 

Why are you defending artists being greedy or not so hard? It's embarrassing 

[scatteredscreens]

16 minutes ago, clasher said:

Again, I don't know how much Blur are getting, I would think it's a hefty sum. But it's not simply because they charge more for the golden circle.

Artists don't throw darts to determine the price of tickets, nor do they go "I'm gonna charge 500 quid because I'm a greedy lad". Their management doesn't to that either. They add up the costs and consider what kind of prices they can charge to still sell out (which is paramount, as you usually need 80-85% just to break even) and then distribute this between the different tiers.

The costs of the gig set the the minimum and the demand sets the maximum they can charge. Still waiting for someone to tell me at which point the payout becomes too big to be considered not ripping off the fans. Is going for the max greedy? Perhaps. Are Blur doing that? Perhaps. I don't know and likely no one here knows either.

If this is a quick sellout even at these prices (which I expect it will be), it would show they could probably charge even more, which would indicate they didn't go for the maximum prices, so maybe they aren't complete greedy bastards.

I obviously don't like how high the prices are getting and I completely understand why people are angry, annoyed and feel ripped off. The point I'm trying to get across is that just because a ticket has a higher price than someone feels like it should have, would be prepared to pay for or is substantially higher than 8 years ago in a completely different global situation, it doesn't necessarily mean the artists are greedy.  

You on the other hand (among others) seem to be annoyed with the golden circle, which is a part of a tiered ticketing system. What I don't understand is what the difference is between golden circle and general standing vs general standing and seats, for example. Different tiers, different prices, seems perfectly sensible to me, especially in huge venues. We can disagree about that, but the "extra effort" argument is still bullshit, especially if applied to the golden circle solely.

 

I'm assuming you want a tiered system for the exact metre you are for the stage? Just because you enjoy being ripped off on a tiered system doesn't mean the rest of us can't call it out. How is it bullshit? Should we segment the crowd into tiny sections? 

[clasher]

5 minutes ago, scatteredscreens said:

Why are you defending artists being greedy or not so hard? It's embarrassing 

Oversimplification and baseless accusations annoy me, "I dislike the golden circle, therefore x is a bad guy" being a nice example.

7 minutes ago, scatteredscreens said:

I'm assuming you want a tiered system for the exact metre you are for the stage? Just because you enjoy being ripped off on a tiered system doesn't mean the rest of us can't call it out. How is it bullshit? Should we segment the crowd into tiny sections? 

You assume wrong. If you want a tierless system, go to a small enough venue. Stadiums require segmentation for safety and crowd management reasons alone. You could make all of the sections the same price, but that would mean someone in row Z paying the same as someone in front row. How is that better or fairer?

[scatteredscreens]

10 minutes ago, clasher said:

Oversimplification and baseless accusations annoy me, "I dislike the golden circle, therefore x is a bad guy" being a nice example.

You assume wrong. If you want a tierless system, go to a small enough venue. Stadiums require segmentation for safety and crowd management reasons alone. You could make all of the sections the same price, but that would mean someone in row Z paying the same as someone in front row. How is that better or fairer?

Criticism doesn't mean I think blur are bad people. Does being greedy make you bad? It's just an observation. I find your defence against me thinking one mega rich band are probably going a bit too far on the pricing on this absolutely baffling. 'baseless accusations' get a grip, I'm not accusing any of them of anything other than fleecing customers, I'm hardly thinking they've committed a crime.

 

[MrZigster]

2 hours ago, ceetee said:

Friday opening act on the Other Stage?

Now that would be cosmic.

[clasher]

11 minutes ago, scatteredscreens said:

Criticism doesn't mean I think blur are bad people. Does being greedy make you bad? It's just an observation. I find your defence against me thinking one mega rich band are probably going a bit too far on the pricing on this absolutely baffling. 'baseless accusations' get a grip, I'm not accusing any of them of anything other than fleecing customers, I'm hardly thinking they've committed a crime.

 

[clasher]

25 minutes ago, scatteredscreens said:

me thinking one mega rich band are probably going a bit too far on the pricing on this 

You may think that, you phrased it very differently though.

25 minutes ago, scatteredscreens said:

I'm not accusing any of them of anything other than fleecing customers, I'm hardly thinking they've committed a crime.

I never mentioned crime. I did say you said what you just said you actually said.

[Ryan1984]

47 minutes ago, Suprefan said:

I think everyone is mad because they spent all their money on Pulp and would rather go see Blur instead. Hey wait, why wasnt there a whole backlash against Pulp being ''greedy''. Yeah, I guess its selective anger. Nobody just wants to stare the reality right in its face. I guess youll have to hope for a livestream with the entirety of efestivals not going to  wembley now. But the consensus is everyone wants to see their favorite band for a fiver and be in golden circle with a cheap pint in their hand. If that doesnt happen, fuck the world.

I’d also throw in Alex James’ Tory leanings not helping Blur’s cause, especially with most of the people on here. Paying for the Golden Circle is a pisstake (what happened to the art of queueing? The British showed this year how good we are at it!) but £100 for a stadium all-dayer with decent-sized supports seems the going rate.

[duke88]

8 hours ago, Al2006 said:

agree the prices are high.. best outcome here is going to warm up shows, and they normally do a few of these

managed to do wolves civic hall for their first reunion and a 200-cap venue in wolves last time round at newhampton arts centre.. this makes me think I’m in the fan club from gigs gone by.. but I didn’t receive an email! Any idea how I check this or where to sign up for fan club?

here’s a pic from newhampton! completely lost it when they did this is a low.

You must have been stood about a metre from me! What an amazing night that was.

[chazwwe]

1 hour ago, Suprefan said:

I think everyone is mad because they spent all their money on Pulp and would rather go see Blur instead. Hey wait, why wasnt there a whole backlash against Pulp being ''greedy''. Yeah, I guess its selective anger. Nobody just wants to stare the reality right in its face. I guess youll have to hope for a livestream with the entirety of efestivals not going to  wembley now. But the consensus is everyone wants to see their favorite band for a fiver and be in golden circle with a cheap pint in their hand. If that doesnt happen, fuck the world.

Pulp max price is half the price of Blurs.

That's why, stop defending this like it's a fan problem. 

[nikkic]

At those prices I’m out. 

I’ve seen them 3 times and a 4th ain’t going to be very different! 

Love them, but 100 notes for Wembley, nah. 

[sisco]

I’m in.  Always wanted to see them so if I can get a standing ticket I’ll take the opportunity.  In all honesty the ticket price doesn’t surprise me when you look at the Hyde park gig prices or most of the other Wembley shows.  Sadly we’re all going to have to get used to £100 + if you want to see these huge acts

[kingbadger]

1 hour ago, Suprefan said:

I think everyone is mad because they spent all their money on Pulp and would rather go see Blur instead. Hey wait, why wasnt there a whole backlash against Pulp being ''greedy''. 

Because Pulp tickets were a fair and reasonable price, which is literally the entire point people are making. 

[kingbadger]

1 minute ago, sisco said:

 Sadly we’re all going to have to get used to £100 + if you want to see these huge acts

And therein lies the entire problem. Because those that can afford to pay massively inflated prices can and will continue to do so, gigs become something exclusive to the upper classes. 

As long as people are happy to keep getting fleeced then no action can be taken. 

[Hugh Jass II]

11 hours ago, clasher said:

Firstly, the "no extra effort" argument simply doesn't hold. Get rid of the tiers entirely then. Where's the "extra effort" for standing tickets being more expensive than the seats far away? If anything, it should be the opposite, as you'd have more "extra effort" to provide sound and security for the seats further down.

 

This makes no sense. At any venue, regardless of size, some seats will be closer to the stage and offer better views than others. At a massive venue like Wembley where some seats are further away it makes sense for them to be cheaper.**

Splitting the standing area into sections and charging more for the front is minimal effort for maximum gain. Charging fans an extra 45 quid to get a little closer than others is fucking deplorable.

**Although over 80 sheets for top tier is still ridiculous.

[sisco]

5 minutes ago, kingbadger said:

And therein lies the entire problem. Because those that can afford to pay massively inflated prices can and will continue to do so, gigs become something exclusive to the upper classes. 

As long as people are happy to keep getting fleeced then no action can be taken. 

That’s life, things go up and there’ll always be those that can afford it.  Not many could afford the Glasto ticket, travel, car park, equipment, spends etc… We want to go so we make it work.  So we’re the problem for that too.  

Sadly unless every single person agreed to not pay the prices will never drop 

[Hugh Jass II]

2 hours ago, Suprefan said:

. But the consensus is everyone wants to see their favorite band for a fiver and be in golden circle with a cheap pint in their hand. If that doesnt happen, fuck the world.

Could you please point to a single person who has said this? Yet alone “consensus”…

You make these big, stupid generalisations a lot, but when challenged I have never seen you ever actually back a single statement up.

Pretty sure you’re just trolling now, so it’s easiest just to call you a c**t and move on.

 

[mungo57]

I'm fairly certain that if people were to wait until a week prior to the show there would be cheaper tickets on Twickets anyway in all tiers, people often can't go and have to sell the tickets quickly - I've benefitted from being able to sell quickly in the past (Gorillaz at APE this year for example during the strikes) - but I get this isn't the point.

 

I agree with Hugh Jass, the whole Golden Circle thing really grinds my gears. Thats the only reason I didn't go and see Roger Waters at Hyde Park a few years ago. Didn't fancy paying £70 or whatever it was to be standing behind the rich bastards that paid for GC. I might add that at the same series of gigs that summer the Cure played and they didn't have a Golden Circle, at least I don't remember there being one. It sold out and I didn't get a ticket but I am sure I don't remember there being a Golden Circle from when I tried to get them.

Promoters have us by the balls and they know it - in that moment of desperation when the regular standing sells out you're faced with 2 decisions, leave it and try for a seat up in the gods for the same price or pay more for GC if still available. They know 8/10 people will just pay more to make sure they get in. Not great but there's capitalism for you.

[Superscally]

9 hours ago, clasher said:

Again, I don't know how much Blur are getting, I would think it's a hefty sum. But it's not simply because they charge more for the golden circle.

Artists don't throw darts to determine the price of tickets, nor do they go "I'm gonna charge 500 quid because I'm a greedy lad". Their management doesn't to that either. They add up the costs and consider what kind of prices they can charge to still sell out (which is paramount, as you usually need 80-85% just to break even) and then distribute this between the different tiers.

The costs of the gig set the the minimum and the demand sets the maximum they can charge. Still waiting for someone to tell me at which point the payout becomes too big to be considered not ripping off the fans. Is going for the max greedy? Perhaps. Are Blur doing that? Perhaps. I don't know and likely no one here knows either.

If this is a quick sellout even at these prices (which I expect it will be), it would show they could probably charge even more, which would indicate they didn't go for the maximum prices, so maybe they aren't complete greedy bastards.

I obviously don't like how high the prices are getting and I completely understand why people are angry, annoyed and feel ripped off. The point I'm trying to get across is that just because a ticket has a higher price than someone feels like it should have, would be prepared to pay for or is substantially higher than 8 years ago in a completely different global situation, it doesn't necessarily mean the artists are greedy.  

You on the other hand (among others) seem to be annoyed with the golden circle, which is a part of a tiered ticketing system. What I don't understand is what the difference is between golden circle and general standing vs general standing and seats, for example. Different tiers, different prices, seems perfectly sensible to me, especially in huge venues. We can disagree about that, but the "extra effort" argument is still bullshit, especially if applied to the golden circle solely.

 

...because the golden circle is underpopulated and half of that is people who've gone "to be there", rather than for the band so it's dull as ditchwater and a massive buzz kill. The whole thing about standing is the sense of collective. Singing as one. You want to be at the front? Get there early. There's your stratification. Imagine Live Aid and Radio Gaga with a circle. SHITE. 

I'll take a circle for safety too, but make it busier...and before you say it...not too busy.

[Superscally]

Golden circles are the most Tory thing in the world.