Relating to a conversation I had this weekend…
(Fuck Barry Diller)
Some homies and I were talking this weekend about who we would be willing to pay $30 to see these days. (I think $30 is a magic number because that’s what the top-dollar tours cost when I was in high school, but the specific dollar amount is irrelevant.) We only came up with about two artists; who they were escapes me right now. (I know we did agree that if David Lee Roth toured with Van Halen, we’d go, but that’s beside the point.) Inevitably, when this topic came up, much ranting and raving about Ticketmaster ensued. Of course, we all know that Ticketmaster does us with no vaseline. The question is, why do we still pay? Is it really worth it to go see a live gig if we’re paying what usually amounts to a minimum 40% surcharge?
Consider: Wilco is my favorite national touring act right now. I’ve seen them enough times over the past few years that it’s difficult to remember to establish an accurate count, but the number is over five. They are playing on Oct. 5 here in Detroit. Tickets cost $17. That would normally be a no-brainer, right? After all, $17 is less than the cost of four beers at a show. But the problem is, the venue they’re playing at has no box office, so I’d be stuck buying tickets from Ticketmaster.
And how much does that $17 ticket cost if I go to Ticketmaster’s Web site and buy it there? That’ll be $26.45, thank you very much sir may I please have another? (For those not too quick with a calculator, that’s a 55.6% service charge—none of which is going to the venue, by the way.)
Now someone please tell me how that’s more of a “convenience” than buying the ticket at the club on one of the several odd occasions that I will actually be there hanging out between now and October? Better yet, explain to me why any of you are willing to buy a Ticketmaster ticket to another event, period. I, for one, am hereby swearing off any and all Ticketmaster events. There’s enough cool stuff to do in this world without giving my cash to this monopoly.