As many of us have found out, Live Nation is a closed -loop system; a corporate theme-park built to simulate the music business. They control their signed artists, they control the venues those artists play in; and they control every cent of the ticketing revenue their theme park generates. Their booking staff is impossible to develop any relationship with, as they turn over too frequently; + they have proven themselves (like most staff at HoB, to name the most identifiable LN venue chain) to be borderline-hostile to any other part of a city's scene.
What's worse is, AEG and Bravo are trying to copy their model.
To be frank, women (or any) artists are far better off not trying to engage with LN on any level if they're not already arena-level themselves. They don't seem to do much for the bands that work in their lower levels at all, promotion-wise; as almost none seem to have 'graduated' above their smaller venues to big ones.
It's better to deal with independent venues, that are more likely to care about you as their success is tied into each show they book.
It will be interesting to see how the government’s attempt to break up the r monopoly will shake out. Pearl Jam tried decades ago and people practically laughed at them. For some reason, officials outside of the industry don’t seem to take it seriously when the monopoly is in music vs something like telecom. Why?!? 🤷🏻♀️
Possibly bc they see the music business as non-essential, and don't respect 95% of the people in it. They only pretend to care about these things when they want to pander anyway.
What’s also baffling as to why they don’t promote women is just look at a few of the BIGGEST tours this year. You have Taylor Swift, Beyoncé, and Madonna. Clearly, high interest to see female artists is there. And clearly Live Nation must see those numbers. So what’s their deal?
My main guess is that it must be a record label issue as well. And we all know how they like to promote men over women artists.
All good points. I know the shows that don’t sell out right away get more promotion. Which is why I looked at all acts booked vs promos in those two venues. Again, the guys are way on top.
It’s just fair for all opening acts that they get listed.
Thea! This is so well done! Thank you for sharing. I did a piece last year on zero proof options at music venues as missed revenue, which would also increase inclusivity - and see so many parallels here. Change is always hard and takes time; but if we keep writing about the necessary changes for our entertainment and artistic industries, we’ll find more people to support the evolution. 🩵🤘💪✨
I think there's a very real disparity happening here, but as a 20+ year marketer, there is an element of nuance to consider with show round-up marketing like this specifically. Typically what's being included in those emails are shows that aren't selling well on their own. Not universal and not the only criteria, but it's a big part of which shows are included. I'd be curious to compare final ticket sale data to the percentage of inclusion for that part of it. 1,000,000% agree with you on all the points about standard practice for promoters (and headlining acts) to include their openers in all of their marketing. Really feels like a massive missing piece of the promotional puzzle. See it too often.
Thanks for reading and chiming in. I’d love to see those sales v promos stats as well. Honestly, I think a big issue with empty seats post COVID is that damn on-demand pricing algorithm. If I want to take my sister to see Ashley McBride, I pay $125 per ticket. But my friend can buy a single seat right next to us for $75. Another time, a friend turned down going to a show with me b/c to sit together was 2x as much and she couldn’t afford it and didn’t want to sit alone. Few women (and maybe men) want to see a show alone, let alone drive/park by themselves. Yet, people are financially “punished” for buying even numbers of tix. I’d be interested to see if acts with heavy female demos suffer bigger sales losses than bands with mostly male fans due to this pricing scheme…
As many of us have found out, Live Nation is a closed -loop system; a corporate theme-park built to simulate the music business. They control their signed artists, they control the venues those artists play in; and they control every cent of the ticketing revenue their theme park generates. Their booking staff is impossible to develop any relationship with, as they turn over too frequently; + they have proven themselves (like most staff at HoB, to name the most identifiable LN venue chain) to be borderline-hostile to any other part of a city's scene.
What's worse is, AEG and Bravo are trying to copy their model.
To be frank, women (or any) artists are far better off not trying to engage with LN on any level if they're not already arena-level themselves. They don't seem to do much for the bands that work in their lower levels at all, promotion-wise; as almost none seem to have 'graduated' above their smaller venues to big ones.
It's better to deal with independent venues, that are more likely to care about you as their success is tied into each show they book.
It will be interesting to see how the government’s attempt to break up the r monopoly will shake out. Pearl Jam tried decades ago and people practically laughed at them. For some reason, officials outside of the industry don’t seem to take it seriously when the monopoly is in music vs something like telecom. Why?!? 🤷🏻♀️
Possibly bc they see the music business as non-essential, and don't respect 95% of the people in it. They only pretend to care about these things when they want to pander anyway.
What’s also baffling as to why they don’t promote women is just look at a few of the BIGGEST tours this year. You have Taylor Swift, Beyoncé, and Madonna. Clearly, high interest to see female artists is there. And clearly Live Nation must see those numbers. So what’s their deal?
My main guess is that it must be a record label issue as well. And we all know how they like to promote men over women artists.
All good points. I know the shows that don’t sell out right away get more promotion. Which is why I looked at all acts booked vs promos in those two venues. Again, the guys are way on top.
It’s just fair for all opening acts that they get listed.
Thea! This is so well done! Thank you for sharing. I did a piece last year on zero proof options at music venues as missed revenue, which would also increase inclusivity - and see so many parallels here. Change is always hard and takes time; but if we keep writing about the necessary changes for our entertainment and artistic industries, we’ll find more people to support the evolution. 🩵🤘💪✨
I’d love to see a link to your piece!
For Sure: https://oncue.substack.com/p/who-does-it-serve
I think there's a very real disparity happening here, but as a 20+ year marketer, there is an element of nuance to consider with show round-up marketing like this specifically. Typically what's being included in those emails are shows that aren't selling well on their own. Not universal and not the only criteria, but it's a big part of which shows are included. I'd be curious to compare final ticket sale data to the percentage of inclusion for that part of it. 1,000,000% agree with you on all the points about standard practice for promoters (and headlining acts) to include their openers in all of their marketing. Really feels like a massive missing piece of the promotional puzzle. See it too often.
Thanks for reading and chiming in. I’d love to see those sales v promos stats as well. Honestly, I think a big issue with empty seats post COVID is that damn on-demand pricing algorithm. If I want to take my sister to see Ashley McBride, I pay $125 per ticket. But my friend can buy a single seat right next to us for $75. Another time, a friend turned down going to a show with me b/c to sit together was 2x as much and she couldn’t afford it and didn’t want to sit alone. Few women (and maybe men) want to see a show alone, let alone drive/park by themselves. Yet, people are financially “punished” for buying even numbers of tix. I’d be interested to see if acts with heavy female demos suffer bigger sales losses than bands with mostly male fans due to this pricing scheme…