Like everything else in our lives, gig-going has become excessively expensive, with some artist prices increasing threefold since life before lockdown. Unfortunately, we are fast approaching an age in which audiences will reflect on the music industry, which seems to consist solely of the upper class and financially blessed. Over the past five years, a pastime once enjoyed by the general population has become more and more inaccessible – a once-in-a-blue-moon splurge as opposed to a consistently experienced hobby; unless you’re the Prime Minister or a pseudo-influencer, in which case you can get tickets for free.
But determining with whom the blame lies is easier said than done. Are the artists themselves at fault, for increasing ticket prices to accommodate their luxurious lifestyles? Do we condemn the ticket company management for introducing dynamic pricing to further line their already plush pockets? Or is this just the way it is and now we all need to suck it up and work 9-hour days to hopefully, maybe, potentially be able to afford to see our favourite artists live?
Whilst it is not entirely out of the hands of an artist to determine ticket prices, it is also not wholly within their power. Before a ticket even reaches sales sites, there are a myriad of steps to be taken and things to be considered. For example, the fuel and energy behind transport, the wages of venue staff and instrument technicians, and the production required to even format a show all contribute to the final price.
Looking past the basics – the booking cost of a venue and the factor of its capacity also affects pricing – and comparing, say, Taylor Swift‘s Eras Tour prices to your local indie-rock band, the difference in cost is irrefutable. Although it may seem odd that a 1000-person-capacity venue charges half the price of an arena, when one considers the number of people paying, say, £35 vs £70, it ultimately comes down to size; the bigger the venue, the brighter the lights, the more costly the ticket. As yet another consequence of the cost of living crisis, all of these components are far more costly than they were five years ago.
After all this, once a ticket reaches the dreaded sale sites (which pose an entirely different issue), you may then be faced with hours-long online queues and dozens upon dozens of questions regarding your status as a robot.
Then, you’ve finally reached the checkout portion – enter stage left: ‘Dynamic Pricing’. Now known as a result of the catastrophic Oasis sales that saw £125 tickets become priced upwards of £300, ‘Dynamic Pricing’ is a business model that accommodates the rise and fall of a market, increasing prices where there is a high demand to increase financial capital. For massive corporations that prioritise profit, the higher the dynamically priced ticket prices, the higher the final cut. This is great for the company, and less so for the customer.
Working and saving for a £60 ticket is a potentially fruitless endeavour when that price may have tripled before you’ve remembered the three-digit code on the back of your card.
As said, all elements of ticket pricing have become more costly, but the choice to include dynamic pricing is one that lies entirely with the artist, not the company. This has been made clear and criticised by Robert Smith of The Cure who asserts that it is a decision that is “driven by greed,” not necessity or economic acclimation.
It is, of course, a difficult time to exist in the music industry and creating a legacy that provides a sustainable lifestyle is borderline impossible, especially when the main sources of income consist of live performances, album sales and online streaming. A 2021 Business Insider article found that streaming sites like Spotify pay artists around £0.0023 to £0.0039 per stream, and when it takes approximately 434 streams to reach £1, it is easier to understand why ticket prices are what they are – for smaller artists at least.
This is not to say that all the end profit lands at the feet of the performer, but well-established musicians like Taylor Swift and the Gallagher brothers often take home a decent chunk, so it would be naive to suggest that said chunk is not the further motivation for continued price increase even when it is not necessarily needed. Plus, for these well-established artists, the cost-of-living crisis excuse can only go so far. In the UK, the estimated inflation of this crisis peaked at 11.1% in 2021, which would reflect the jump in ticket prices around that time, and the continued rise in price for more independent bands.
But what it does not reflect is the obscene price increase of the artist most recently scrutinised for ticket inflation: Sam Fender. Previously labelled the ‘Voice of the North,’ Sam Fender has seen a ticket rise 348% from £18.50 in 2019 to £82.75. For fans paying less than £20 to see him at Manchester Academy, paying over triple for standing tickets at Co-Op Live must feel like a kick in the teeth, stomach, and wallet.
Such a rise feels especially brutal when it comes at the hands of a man who has built a platform talking about the effects of being Northern and working-class in an industry that is definitely not. In 2021, Fender brought attention to the wealth disparity in the North of England vs the South, and how this affects the percentage of working-class voices in the music world, stating “The kids from where I’m from don’t get the money”. However, even if they did, it’s now unlikely they’d be able to afford a Sam Fender ticket.
Despite the constantly rising costs, people are still paying these excessive prices, and it is this forced acceptance of expensive tickets that is allowing labels and artists to charge what they want. As determined by Sky News, “there’s a growing number of people that are happy to spend a large chunk of their disposable income on going to a major music event.”
Yes, Sam Fender and Oasis have received fair criticism for their obscene prices but this is from people who are buying the tickets regardless. The fact that both tours have completely sold out is evidence enough that the industry can charge what they want because there will always be someone prepared to pay for it.
The cost of live music crisis is a multi-headed beast and the river of blame runs seamlessly from consumer to organiser. Unless we want to live in a society where we can only experience live music through Radio 1’s Live Lounge, something’s got to give. But, whether that’s the will of the consumer or the levels of artist avarice is yet to be determined.
