3 ms·
The scenario you're outlining seems to favor the consumers of art over the creators. Am I understanding you correctly? It's my opinion that tickets should be s
by SeanAnderson 4y ago
The scenario you're outlining seems to favor the consumers of art over the creators. Am I understanding you correctly?
It's my opinion that tickets should be sold for as much as the market will handle assuming the additional proceeds go directly to the artist. Any other approach is charity at cost to the artist.
- xnorswap 4y agoI think that's a very naive perspective, it encourages a romantic view of entertainment where an artist is selling their own trade themselves. That isn't the reality of the world. Maximising the profit of the entertainment "artist" is in reality maximising the profits of the rights holder which in many cases is itself a large corporation such as the NFL. Do I value the consumers of football over the NFL? Heck yes I do! It's why for instance Germany has their 50%+1 rule, to help make sure that fans rather than corporate owners benefit from the sport. Even in the case of things like solo artists, I don't want to live in a world where only the super rich can see an artist live, and everyone else has to suck it up because it maximises the money for the artist.