Do you regret the amount of money you spent seeing U2 on SOI?

[SlyDanner]

Seems like a tricky one for a band like U2 with their history of huge touring success... their pride will guide them to want to charge as much as they can because they are business people like we all know, but they also realize if they reduce prices to a real value then they risk being perceived as desperate to fill seats and obviously don't want that.  But also they do not want any gap in the supply/demand curve because the larger that gap the more opportunity there is for scalpers to take the profit that would otherwise go into their coffers.

Not unreasonable for them to charge as much as they can.

And I still believe stadiums are a fantasy only at this point... as argued previously...

[Behind the Barricade]

The price for a seat is so high. Just hope that next leg the prices won't be like that.

It is a pretty safe bet they will be.

Agreed.  U2 and LiveNation are in the business of maximising profits and so long as they can nearly sell out their arena shows they're going to pitch for as much as they think they can get away with, because most people will pay for quality even if they grumble about it.

If they choose to play stadiums on the next legs then I hope they cut ticket prices.

People will pay if they think it is worth it and if they don't they won't...it is individual choice.

I paid £30 for a seat at the o2 (it wasn't marked up as restricted or obstructed view) and i got upgraded at the venue to the £185 (or whatever they were seats, 182 maybe)...

There is no way i would have paid that to see the show....just not worth it for a 2 and a bit hour concert to me...

I also paid £55 (i think it was, maybe 65 or something like that) on other nights to stand and that was just about value in my book..slightly pricey but i didn't baulk at it for what turned out to be decent shows.

For me a bit like the protests at premier league ticket prices i think prices should be lower but i suppose artists will try and get as much as they can.

Put it like this though if it was a case of pay for a 185 seat or not go i wouldn't go.

U2 and LiveNation got the pricing structure right because it is clear the market bore the prices with sold out or nearly sold out shows throughout the tour.

My main point being that U2 and their promoters are not going to undersell out of consideration for the good health of their fans finances.  Even if many fans grumbled about the prices enough paid up.

I am already familiar with your story about your upgrade.  Well done, lad!  I think people should always seek an upgrade as a matter of routine and should always complain if dissatisfied with a service.  I think far too many British people are reticent to do that, and that only encourages shoddy treatment in the first place.

I plumped for a £90 ticket + £10 booking fee in the Upper Tier and was generally satisfied with my seat and the view of the overall show.  I also think I was lucky in my choice of show.

[Volcanogirl]

The price for a seat is so high. Just hope that next leg the prices won't be like that.

It is a pretty safe bet they will be.

Agreed.  U2 and LiveNation are in the business of maximising profits and so long as they can nearly sell out their arena shows they're going to pitch for as much as they think they can get away with, because most people will pay for quality even if they grumble about it.

If they choose to play stadiums on the next legs then I hope they cut ticket prices.

People will pay if they think it is worth it and if they don't they won't...it is individual choice.

I paid £30 for a seat at the o2 (it wasn't marked up as restricted or obstructed view) and i got upgraded at the venue to the £185 (or whatever they were seats, 182 maybe)...

There is no way i would have paid that to see the show....just not worth it for a 2 and a bit hour concert to me...

I also paid £55 (i think it was, maybe 65 or something like that) on other nights to stand and that was just about value in my book..slightly pricey but i didn't baulk at it for what turned out to be decent shows.

For me a bit like the protests at premier league ticket prices i think prices should be lower but i suppose artists will try and get as much as they can.

Put it like this though if it was a case of pay for a 185 seat or not go i wouldn't go.

U2 and LiveNation got the pricing structure right because it is clear the market bore the prices with sold out or nearly sold out shows throughout the tour.

My main point being that U2 and their promoters are not going to undersell out of consideration for the good health of their fans finances.  Even if many fans grumbled about the prices enough paid up.

I am already familiar with your story about your upgrade.  Well done, lad!  I think people should always seek an upgrade as a matter of routine and should always complain if dissatisfied with a service.  I think far too many British people are reticent to do that, and that only encourages shoddy treatment in the first place.

I plumped for a £90 ticket + £10 booking fee in the Upper Tier and was generally satisfied with my seat and the view of the overall show.  I also think I was lucky in my choice of show.

Indeed, they will never charge less for a good show. But when they give stadium shows maybe...

[boom boom]

I also think we will see the same prices if they continue arenas.  It will just be interesting if people are going to be willing to pay it just some year and a bit later to hear the same hits that they just heard a hear ago and if they also go with the same stage setup the average/casual fan will say I saw that a year ago.  Also remember a new album also will not help U2's cause in getting the casual fan out to the show as they have no interest in new music.  In general once a band hits a certain stage in their career as U2 are in the average fan usually does not want new music from that band but just wants to hear the songs they grew up on.  Maybe reducing the price might get some of these casual fans back out knowing that they have a new album out and consider them filler but willing to come at lower prices.  For me it is the opposite as the new songs is the main reason I still go.

[Behind the Barricade]

I reckon U2 would easily sell out or nearly sell out another 80+ arena shows with similar ticket prices if they tour again in 2017, as I expect.  But I think they'll play stadiums next time with a new stage show, and if they charge lower prices I think they'll do well.  A new album will certainly help to sell tickets, particularly if the new music is commercially successful, and this will keep hardcore fans interested, and the hits/warhorses will keep the casual concert goers satisfied.  There's certainly room for one or two rarities in their sets so I hope they work them into their next show.

[an tha]

No stadiums please.

[Behind the Barricade]

No stadiums please, we're British.

[iehomecoming]

After the relative awfulness of 360 there's no way I'm going to a stadium show again.

Popmart and ZooTV were spectacles, a band at the top of their game expertly entwining the staging to the album concept.

360 was just some flashy lights, a spinal tap structure and a band mailing in their new songs that even they felt "meh" about.

[SlyDanner]

360 was just some flashy lights, a spinal tap structure and a band mailing in their new songs that even they felt "meh" about.

I felt this way about their Vancouver show which ended their first NA leg, but the Rose Bowl show that preceded it, and then Seattle on the last leg were both outstanding.  Seattle in particular... nothing mailed in about that performance at all.

[an tha]

I saw them in Dublin and Cardiff on 360.

Dublin was abysmal....thankfully Glasvegas beforehand were excellent so at least got something out of night.

Cardiff was OK but Bono was shot vocally.

[iehomecoming]

360 was just some flashy lights, a spinal tap structure and a band mailing in their new songs that even they felt "meh" about.

I felt this way about their Vancouver show which ended their first NA leg, but the Rose Bowl show that preceded it, and then Seattle on the last leg were both outstanding.  Seattle in particular... nothing mailed in about that performance at all.

I was at the Rose Bowl show.  We obviously saw 2 different shows.

[SlyDanner]

Keep calm and carry on.

Keep Portland weird.

Keep U2 indoors.

[SlyDanner]

360 was just some flashy lights, a spinal tap structure and a band mailing in their new songs that even they felt "meh" about.

I felt this way about their Vancouver show which ended their first NA leg, but the Rose Bowl show that preceded it, and then Seattle on the last leg were both outstanding.  Seattle in particular... nothing mailed in about that performance at all.

I was at the Rose Bowl show.  We obviously saw 2 different shows.

It was not their best to be sure... and yes there were mailed in elements such as Streets which was largely terrible on the whole tour (really has been limp since 2001 to me)... but the show while not close to their best was pretty good.  Seattle blew it away...

[Behind the Barricade]

I saw them in Dublin and Cardiff on 360.

Dublin was abysmal....thankfully Glasvegas beforehand were excellent so at least got something out of night.

Cardiff was OK but Bono was shot vocally.

And yet you rewarded them for playing stadiums by paying to see them in one.  Twice.  Is it any wonder they play stadiums?

I always reward gradually but punish swiftly.

[an tha]

I saw them in Dublin and Cardiff on 360.

Dublin was abysmal....thankfully Glasvegas beforehand were excellent so at least got something out of night.

Cardiff was OK but Bono was shot vocally.

And yet you rewarded them for playing stadiums by paying to see them in one.  Twice.  Is it any wonder they play stadiums?

I always reward gradually but punish swiftly.

Saw them in cardiff in 05 and to be fair they were good...i wouldn't pay to see them in a stadium again though.