This is the article about ‘Dynamic pricing’, a controversial practice of concert ticket sales, in which prices skyrocket while fans hold on to their places in line. It examines the industry arguments, the impact on affordability and whether regulation might be warranted.
The Rise of Dynamic Pricing
This article opens by talking about the fans who are trying to get tickets for Green Day’s 2025 Australian tour and the Oasis reunion tour in the UK. But as fans joined the virtual queue, they were offered tickets that ranged in price depending on where you sit in the stadium – with some seats costing up to AU$500 and hundreds of pounds in Britain.
It is a principle called ‘dynamic pricing,’ widely practiced in the apparels and air travel industries). In these sectors, prices are set to capture the most profit such that it also influences consumption – thus supply of hotel rooms and plane seats is fixed but demand varies. But the article points out, there are some unique aspects to the live music business.
While the cost of accommodations and travel are inescapable until a purchase is confirmed, at least one element will remain hidden — the price of any concert ticket won’t be revealed until a consumer reaches the front of the line. Beyond that, every single concert on a major touring artist’s itinerary is much scarcer commodity, opening the door to potential exploitation of market power.
How Concert Ticket Prices Have Changed Over Time
The story traces the history of ticket pricing, reporting that it cost Aussies up to $3.70 (the equivalent today of about $63) to see The Beatles center stage in 1964 when the Fab Four were arguably hot globally at that time as Swift is now. The cost of going to a concert relative to everything else has shifted over the years alongside the economic and cultural role of live music.
For many years, record sales were the key earning model from albums (physical) as long as people needed to get information about their stars in magazine. Once the margins between you and your employer were wide enough, not so in the industry that needs to subsidise the digital devaluing of recorded music with “the live show”. One of the natural results of that is ticket prices going up and an increased war among those involved in it all to get their slice.
The piece questions whether the market will accept or push back against dynamic pricing; nevertheless, it also recognises that in the modern concert environment competition is atrophying, with a small handful of corporate promoters now controlling the sector.
Conclusion
The article ends with a look ahead on the potential implications of dynamic pricing to concerts tickets. This serves to extract every last dime out of the pockets of consumers, most concerning, however, is accessibility and equity to these all-important shared cultural touchpoints as a result. It insists that rather than using ‘true market value’ as a yardstick, policymakers should think about the wider social and cultural value of live music events, and work to ensure they are accessible for all. The rolling out of dynamic pricing towards artists like Dua Lipa implies that it can get a great deal further across the industry and no matter whether the public will embrace this or no matter if it is going to compel attention on the larger live-music program which wants attention.
