When Fleetwood Mac are charging £125 for floor-level tickets, you can assume their audience is predominantly 50-somethings who go to one gig a year, and haven’t listened to much new music since they got married and had kids. You could see many newer, better bands for a fraction of that money.
-
Recent Comments
- dr wart hoover on What Plandampf Should Be Next?
- Michael on Talking Dolls are Privacy Risks?
- Synthetase on Talking Dolls are Privacy Risks?
- John Hunt on Eurostar Refurbishment
- Michael on Talking Dolls are Privacy Risks?
- PaulE on The Cost of Being Creative
- Synthetase on The Cost of Being Creative
- Michael on The Cost of Being Creative
- Tim Hall on The Cost of Being Creative
- Synthetase on The Cost of Being Creative
- Tim Hall on GitLab’s Database Outage Postmortem
- Synthetase on Talking Dolls are Privacy Risks?
-
Meta
I slight resent that remark. I tried to get tickets for Fleetwood Mac – and failed, then shrugged it off – but I also listen to (and make) lots of new music and go to gigs. Just because something is old does not make it worthless – I still listen to Bach and Mozart a great deal and go to concerts of their music too. Fleetwood Mac are a good band and not everything new is automatically better. There are plenty of of newer acts playing similar venes at similar prices that I am studiously avoiding.
Yes, £125 is expensive and they know that people my age can afford those sorts of prices and will pay that to see a band from their youth, and I suspect that there ARE many people who will only go to ‘old’ concerts. But I would have been happy to see them and pay for the privilege. Depite the fact that it cost 10 times what I paid to see a gig of new music last night.