Coldplay Presale Purchase Question

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:

Originally posted by sonickteam4:
(that and i just bought a house, HOYA!)

great to hear! congratulations are in order!!

:D

Have you closed? I've got a contract on a place and go to settlement June 17, but am nervous to believe I have it as I've been burned once before by a seller…

CONGRATULATIONS. I should have done it at your age; I'm an idiot (though job changes had much to do with it).

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
You're misquoting me and badly.

I'm not saying 3rd world nations are helped by raising ticket prices, I just don't see how they're hurt by it.

Because I give a lot of money to charity and now I won't have an extra $70 to give away because my Mrs. wanted to see Coldplay despite the fact that they've doubled their ticket prices, so there's one way raising ticket prices have hurt the third world.

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:

Originally posted by Bags:
And to Hoya – this "category of fans" thing makes no sense. Point is, they have a LOT of fans. Doesn't matter a toss if they're cool indie hipsters or Hootie-loving soccer moms. Both groups are willing to pay to see this show.

no, it DOES make sense … it explains why they can charge $60+ per ticket and it really isn't a huge logical leap

as one of the biggest rock bands in the US, they have a lot of casual fans who don't often go to concerts and have no qualms spending $60+ when they go to their one concert of the season or even of the year

of course their fan demographics don't really matter, but they easily explain the ticket prices.

Aha, that makes sense. Now I get what you were getting at. It's the Simon & Garfunkle phenomenon as well. I'd bet that 50% of the folks in MCI Center go to one or two concerts a year, so were willing to shell out $200.

Originally posted by vansmack:
If they were serious about helping third world nations by raising ticket prices, why not announce that $35 from every ticket goes to Make Trade Fair? Because that's not the case now is it?

Okay, Esquire – you just flipped the logic from "how does lowering ticket prices help third world countries" to "they raised ticket prices to help thirs world countries." Can't do that!

what does this look like the kosmo & ggw hour on 9:30 cable news network?

Originally posted by vansmack:
Because I give a lot of money to charity and now I won't have an extra $70 to give away because my Mrs. wanted to see Coldplay despite the fact that they've doubled their ticket prices, so there's one way raising ticket prices have hurt the third world.

That argument is negligible at best, and asinine at worst.

Originally posted by Bags:
Aha, that makes sense. Now I get what you were getting at. It's the Simon & Garfunkle phenomenon as well. I'd bet that 50% of the folks in MCI Center go to one or two concerts a year, so were willing to shell out $200.

exactly … and it's why godspeed could never get away with charging more than $25 or $30 … i do love stereotyping and perhaps get out of control with it sometimes, but this "casual rock fan" / "early adopter" distinction is a pretty strong one

if you really cared about developing nations you wouldn't refer to them with the politically incorrect term "third world"

sheesh.

look don't me go o'rielly on yer arses…

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:
… i do love stereotyping and perhaps get out of control with it sometimes, but this "casual rock fan" / "early adopter" distinction is a pretty strong one

Though I'll bet there are a lot of early adopters who go to this show. I think folks who won't are early adopters who go to a lot of shows during the year, so don't view the current Coldplay price as in line with their normal value-chain.

Okay, I know the debate has raged and may soon be over, but you have to admit, it's been a long time since we've had a real-time discussion like this. I know, ticket prices are one of those recurrent arguments, but valid points made on all sides. And no one was called a porky midget!

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:
if you really cared about developing nations you wouldn't refer to them with the politically incorrect term "third world"

Would you prefer undeveloped?

tap tap tap tap

debate? pile on is better…

Originally posted by Bags:
And no one was called a porky midget!

Shut up, you porky midget!

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
That argument is negligible at best, and asinine at worst.

We'll see when the show comes around. It will be just like U2 in the spring - late 20 to late 30 somethings early in the professional career and very, very, very ,very, very white.

They are also the prime candidates for fund raising for "intellectual issues" like debt relief and fair trade, that's why they have spokespersons that relate more to that generation than to thier parents generation.

hipster dork

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:

Originally posted by Bags:
And no one was called a porky midget!

Shut up, you porky midget!

Yeah, if only it were that easy to get me to leave this place….folks would have hurled such slang at me ages ago!

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:
if you really cared about developing nations you wouldn't refer to them with the politically incorrect term "third world"

Would you prefer undeveloped?

i frankly don't really care, but i became interested …

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World

These countries are also known as the Global South, developing countries, least developed countries and the Majority World in academic circles.

Development workers also call them the two-thirds world and The South. Some dislike the term developing countries as it implies that economic development (industrialisation) is the only way forward, while they believe it is not necessarily the most beneficial. The term Third World is also disliked as it implies the false notion that those countries are not a part of the global economic system.

The term "third world" was coined by economist Alfred Sauvy in an article in the French magazine L'Observateur of August 14, 1952. It was a deliberate reference to the "Third Estate" of the French Revolution. Tiers monde means third world in French. The term gained widespread popularity during the Cold War when many poorer nations adopted the category to describe themselves as neither being aligned with NATO or the Warsaw Pact, but instead composing a non-aligned "third world" (in this context, the term "First World" was generally understood to mean the United States and its allies in the Cold War, which would have made the East bloc the "Second World" by default; however, the latter term was very seldom actually used).

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
That argument is negligible at best, and asinine at worst.

We'll see when the show comes around. It will be just like U2 in the spring - late 20 to late 30 somethings early in the professional career and very, very, very ,very, very white.

They are also the prime candidates for fund raising for "intellectual issues" like debt relief and fair trade, that's why they have spokespersons that relate more to that generation than to thier parents generation.

Simply having 70 more dollars in your pocket is not a de facto concession that said $70 is going to charity. I'm sure virutally no one sat down and made a cognitive decision "Gee, a Coldplay ticket or starving kids? Hmmm…"

There's no way to measure this sort of thing, but I cannot honestly think the affect of Coldplay's ticket prices affects charitable giving in any real regard. I suppose we'll indict Starbucks of killing the rainforest next because they raised the prices on their Venti Frappuchinos by 25 cents, and that money could have been well spent on ecological charity.

Originally posted by Julian, faux celeb-porn CONNOISSEUR:
Simply having 70 more dollars in your pocket is not a de facto concession that said $70 is going to charity.

And neither is hiding behind the illusion that it's OK to give Chris Martin more money because I should "consider maybe he's using part of his fortune to help out charities."

That's all I was saying.

Originally posted by Bags:

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:

Originally posted by sonickteam4:
(that and i just bought a house, HOYA!)

great to hear! congratulations are in order!!

:D

Have you closed? I've got a contract on a place and go to settlement June 17, but am nervous to believe I have it as I've been burned once before by a seller…

CONGRATULATIONS. I should have done it at your age; I'm an idiot (though job changes had much to do with it).

yeah, we closed last week, moved in already.

funny, I am almost 28 and i am thinking "why didnt i do this 5 years ago!"

we had a nice seller luckily. but i have heard some bad stories.

Good luck next month!