does tour sponsorship really lower ticket prices? if so, which would you rather have?

It's supposed to because it lowers the band's touring expenses.
The thing is if i can only catch one show the price, as it is today, isn't all that relevant at the end of the day. As for multiple shows some people said the ticket is the lower expense anyway compared to traveling and accommodation so it matters even less. That's a hell of a point in my opinion.
It's all very relative.

Mine makes a good point about the fan side of the issue.

On the PJ side of it, I think their convictions are often meant for good but latently result in less than preferable outcomes. If the band could make the same amount of money per night as they are now AND charge their fans $25 less/ ticket, in exchange for some bud light banners we've seen so many times we don't even see them, what's the harm?

still, I leave those decisions to the band, and I respect their integrity, even when it isn't the most thought through integrity.

always good to see you in chat Ceebs.

I say get as much sponsorship as possible and keep the ticket price as low as possible while letting the band make a decent buck for their endeavours.

I think the artistic integrity thing is bullshit. No one craps on the band when they accept free guitars and then put a line in their album credits that the band uses Gibson and Fender guitars. It's not like Stone and Mike sandblast logos of their guitars.

A line on the ticket saying "A night with Pearl Jam brought to you by Miller Beer" would not hampper my enjoyment of the evening. Hell I'd be okay with a two minute commercial aired on the screens between acts like they do at movies. I don't care. Just let the influx in sponsorship money be reflected in ticket prices and places played (i.e. play the south).

Just accept the money and don't complaining about the price of eggs on tuor.

That was a good point on Ed's side but it was misinterpreted. Relatively the tickets and CDs in the US(in EU is different because CDs here cost more) are not that expencive or didn't get that higher compared to everything else. That 7$ for eggs he was talking about is like 2 beers here, and not particularly good ones either.
As long as PJ's fan base will be spending so much money on t-shirts, posters, and multiple shows tickets and infamous numbers for vinyl on e-bay (remember Jeff posted a message about Benaroya on e-bay) they know it's not a real life problem for most.
I'm not defending the band or anything here I'm just saying there isn't realistic ground for complaining here giving the standards the fan base set for itself. I doubt they just make prices up.
What would piss me off would be going to the 55-200$ range for tickets depending on the seat and most bands of PJs stature went for it enthusiastically. With or without sponsorship.

i miss Alessiana and SLH

tell me about it

paraphrasing they are not comfortable promoting sponsored products. It's PJ so i guess it makes sense.

where'd they go?

probably just busy with their real jobs, they're both scientists, right?

or annoyed with PJ male fandom

or obssessed with some other lead singer that Ed can't hold a light too...

1)pretty much...officially
2)unofficially

thing is, sponsorship is more than just a couple of banners. It involves restrictions, rules and constraints (see the Lollapalooza A&T fiasco..a good example..Ed and the band piss some people off with political comments and brands might not want to be associated with those.)
It's a slippery slope..

They couldn't get a non-profit to sponsor them or something? I don't even know if that's feasible or ever done, just a thought.

a non-profit probably can't afford it in the 1st place

Yeah, I thought of that too, but maybe there's a big one out there...I just don't have a business mind.

moveon.org


plenty of PACs who wouldn't fear association with Vedder's politics... it's seem fitting too to have that kind endorsement/meeting of the minds... lots of brochures in the lobby, registering to vote, pamphlets about local social services, petitions, etc...


good point though about sponsors' constraints

at least Ed hasn't voluntarily yet put a muzzle over his mouth

Interesting question. If it demonstrably led to lower ticket prices i'd deal with it. If they were pocketing the difference I'd be okay with it


I do see a difference between Pearl Jam--brought to you by Miller Lite and accepting guitar sponserships, etc if they actually prefer to use the brands in question. And if not at least it is related to the music in a more immediate way

I'd have a problem with that insofar as that's not what the PAC's money should really be going for. Or rather it may be a good use of their money but Pearl Jam probably shouldn't take it