In the wake of Oasis announcing their highly anticipated reunion tour, a familiar outcry has emerged: fans are furious about ticket prices. Playing out repeatedly in the music industry, this scenario highlights a curious economic paradox. Why do people readily accept market-driven prices for most goods and services yet bristle at the idea when it comes to concert tickets?
The Oasis Controversy
The iconic Britpop band Oasis recently announced their reunion tour, sending fans into a frenzy. However, the excitement quickly turned to outrage as ticket prices were revealed. Many longtime fans found themselves priced out, unable to afford the steep costs of seeing their favorite band. This situation is far from unique, with similar controversies surrounding ticket prices for artists like Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen, and others in recent years.
The Market Acceptance Paradox
In most areas of our lives, we accept - often without question - that market forces set prices. We understand that the latest smartphone costs hundreds of dollars, that housing prices in desirable areas are sky-high, and that a cup of artisanal coffee might set us back $5 or more. Yet many people feel that market-driven pricing is unfair or unethical regarding concert tickets. Why?
Emotional Connection and Cultural Significance
One key factor is people's emotional connection with music and live performances. Concerts are not just services being purchased; they're experiences that hold deep personal and cultural significance. Fans often feel a sense of loyalty and connection to artists, and high ticket prices can betray that relationship.
The Tradition of Accessibility
Historically, concerts have been seen as relatively accessible events. The idea that music should be for everyone, regardless of economic status, is deeply ingrained in many cultures. When prices rise dramatically, it challenges this tradition and can feel like a form of cultural exclusion.
Fear of Exploitation
There's also a concern about exploitation. While we might accept that a luxury car manufacturer is profit-driven, we often expect musicians (who are seen as artists rather than just businesspeople) to prioritize their art and fans over maximizing profits. High ticket prices can be perceived as artists or promoters taking advantage of fans' devotion.
The Visibility of Secondary Markets
The existence of a thriving secondary market for tickets, often at vastly inflated prices, adds to the frustration. Seeing tickets being resold many times at their face value makes fans feel that they're being unfairly shut out of an opportunity to see their favorite artists.
Limited Supply and High Demand
Unlike many other goods, the supply of concert tickets is inherently limited. There are only so many seats in a venue, and famous artists might only perform in a given location once every few years. This scarcity, combined with high demand, naturally drives up prices, but it also increases the sense of unfairness among fans who miss out.
Questioning Market-Based Pricing Beyond Concerts
The outrage over concert ticket prices raises a broader question: Should we accept market-based pricing for other essential goods and services? Take housing, for instance. Fans argue that music should be accessible to all, and many say safe, adequate housing is a fundamental human right. Yet, in most parts of the world, housing is subject to the same market forces that drive up concert ticket prices.
In many cities, skyrocketing rent and property values have led to gentrification, displacement, and a growing housing crisis. The emotional distress caused by being priced out of one's neighborhood can be far more severe than missing a concert. So why do we generally accept this as "just the way things are" when it comes to housing but rebel against it for concert tickets?
This discrepancy highlights the inconsistency in our acceptance of market-based pricing. It prompts us to consider whether our economic system truly serves society's best interests when applied to essential needs like housing, healthcare, or education.
Perhaps the outrage over concert tickets is not misplaced but rather a canary in the coal mine – a visceral reminder of the broader inequities created by unchecked market forces. It may be time to critically examine our acceptance of market-based pricing across all sectors of society, not just in the entertainment industry.
The Path Forward
As the Oasis ticket controversy shows, there's no easy solution to this paradox. Artists and promoters argue that market-based pricing helps combat scalping and ensures ticket value goes to those creating the event rather than resellers. Some have experimented with strategies like tiered pricing, fan pre-sales, or requiring identification matching the original ticket purchase.
However, these approaches don't fully address the underlying tension between market economics and the cultural significance of live music. As long as people view concerts as more than just another consumer good, debates over fair pricing are likely to continue.
Ultimately, the ticket price paradox reflects broader questions about the place of art and culture in a market-driven society. It challenges us to consider where we draw the line between treating cultural experiences as commodities and preserving them as accessible, shared social goods.
Moreover, it invites us to extend this critical lens to other areas of life. Should we accept market-based pricing for housing, healthcare, or education with the same resignation we often show towards other goods? Or should we strive for a system prioritizing accessibility and equity, even if it means departing from pure market principles?
While discussing market forces and scarcity, it's crucial to acknowledge a modern phenomenon that often defies traditional economic logic: branding. In the case of concert tickets, particularly for iconic bands like Oasis, branding plays a significant role in pricing dynamics.
Oasis isn't just selling concert tickets; they're selling an experience, a piece of cultural history, and a connection to the brand they've built over decades. This branding effect allows them to charge prices far beyond what the basic economics of supply and demand might dictate.
Consider this: the actual cost of putting on a concert, when broken down per attendee, is likely far less than the ticket price. Yet fans are willing to pay premium prices not just for the music, but for the entire branded experience. It's reminiscent of how other branded products command high prices:
Religious icons/objects, which cost almost nothing to make, can fetch thousands of dollars when marketed to its adherents.
iPhones, costing perhaps $150 to produce, retail for $1500 largely due to the Apple brand's perceived value.
In the case of Oasis concert tickets, fans aren't just paying for a few hours of live music. They're paying for nostalgia, for the status of attending a high-profile event, and for a connection to the Oasis brand that has been carefully cultivated over years.
This branding effect creates a hybrid economic model where traditional market forces of supply and demand intersect with the emotional and cultural value created by branding. It explains why fans might simultaneously complain about high ticket prices and still be willing to pay them – the perceived value extends far beyond the tangible aspects of the concert itself.
Understanding this branding factor adds another layer to our analysis of concert ticket pricing. It suggests that the solution to more equitable access isn't just about adjusting supply or regulating prices, but also about grappling with the intangible, emotional value that branding creates in our cultural experiences.
A Global Perspective: Beyond Oasis and Western Markets
While our discussion has centered on Oasis and Western concert markets, it's crucial to recognize that high ticket prices and the power of branding in music are global phenomena.
Take, for instance, the K-pop industry in South Korea. Groups like BTS and BLACKPINK command ticket prices comparable to Western superstars, despite operating in a very different cultural context. The K-pop industry is known for its highly managed approach to artist development and branding, with entertainment companies holding auditions, selecting performers, and carefully crafting their images. This corporate approach to artistry has not deterred fans; if anything, it has created a product that generates immense demand and justifies premium pricing in the eyes of consumers.
Similarly, we can look at recent tours by global superstars like Taylor Swift. Her "Eras Tour" has broken records for ticket sales and revenue, with some resale tickets reaching astronomical prices. This demonstrates how a carefully cultivated brand can create demand that seems to defy traditional market logic.
The Artist's Role and Industry Dynamics
It's tempting to lay the blame for high ticket prices solely at the feet of faceless corporations or greedy promoters. However, the reality is more complex. Artists, especially those at the top of their field, often have significant input into ticket pricing strategies.
While many artists express a desire to make their shows accessible to fans, they also operate within an industry ecosystem that includes managers, agents, promoters, and venues, all of whom have a stake in maximizing revenue. The result is a complex negotiation between various stakeholders, with the artist's brand value often being the key factor that drives prices upward.
This raises questions about artist responsibility. Could top-tier performers choose to make their shows more accessible by accepting lower fees? Certainly. But this would require swimming against a strong current of industry norms and expectations.
Income Inequality in Entertainment
The issue of concert ticket pricing is part of a broader conversation about income inequality in the entertainment industry. Top performers can command fees that dwarf the annual salaries of highly educated professionals in other fields. This disparity is often justified by the unique value these artists bring - their ability to fill stadiums and generate millions in revenue.
However, this justification doesn't make the inequality any less stark. It's a reflection of how our society values different forms of labor and expertise, and how powerful the forces of branding and celebrity can be in shaping these values.
For Oasis fans and concertgoers everywhere, this debate hits close to home and the wallet. But perhaps it's also an opportunity to spark a larger conversation about the role of market forces in shaping our society and whether alternatives exist that could create a more equitable and accessible world for all.
If you want to read more on this, check out our article on the difference between markets and capitalism.
I couldn't agree more 👍👍👍
Good points. But — legacy artists aside — if fans want cheaper tickets they should buy the bloody albums.
But no, people cough up for a new phone and balk at paying for art.