Oasis and the Ticketmaster Fiasco Unfolded
A week is a long time in Politics, as the infamous quote says. Some might say, it’s also a long time in the music industry. With excitement reaching fever pitch last week around the Oasis reunion an avalanche of “how to secure your ticket” chatter dominated the airwaves and social sphere. A ticketing controversy followed. Inevitable? Definitely. Avoidable? Maybe.
This week’s 52INSIGHTS takes a snapshot of the music industry - covering everything from ticketing, to streaming platforms and the impact of TikTok.
How Dynamic?
After thousands of fans in Ireland and the UK faced 400 per cent surprise price increases' for Oasis tickets after the announcement of their upcoming reunion tour, an Irish MEP has called for 'a serious investigation' into Ticketmaster's pricing system. Music lovers are calling out “in demand pricing” - a strategy of pushing up prices at times of high demand, meaning that while tickets might start out at a price below €100, their value can rise by hundreds by the time of actual purchase.
But who is responsible for dynamic pricing? Ticketmaster introduced dynamic pricing in 2022 to tackle the issue of touts, according to a report by the BBC. It claims that for concert tickets, artists or promoters are the ones responsible for the parameters around ticketing, with Ticketmaster only implementing the pricing strategy as directed by the artist/ promoter. Others say it’s a demand V’s availability - a calculation which other sectors like hospitality use to establish room rates.
Either way, fans are pushing back on spiralling costs, with young people in particular citing their immediate exclusion given unaffordable prices.
TikTok In The Music Industry
While the pricing and selling of concert ticket sales is in flux, music marketing, consumption and even composition is also being radically changed by TikTok.
TikTok was originally built on music through its predecessor, Musical.ly, an app that allowed users to create and share short lip-sync videos, laying the foundation for TikTok's integration of music into its short-form video content. The App still largely owes much of its success to music. And that success is staggering, with over 1 billion active users. No surprise then that a new symbiotic social/music ecosystem would emerge.
TikTok has revolutionised music promotion, giving new artists the ability to achieve viral success quickly. However, this success often comes at a price: some artists feel pressured to create music that fits TikTok's viral formula, which can compromise artistic creativity. Many also challenge the notion that TikTok is a sustainable long-term solution for music promotion, with many insiders acknowledging that the platform’s algorithm-driven success is unpredictable and subject to change.
Artists such as Halsey and Florence Welch have openly expressed frustration over label pressure to create content tailored to TikTok; whilst other breakthrough artists link their fast success to how the algorithm discovered and favoured them; delivering ‘overnight success’ for artists such as Tom Rosenthal and Lil Nas X. Ste McCabe (24), co-founder of The Shed Residents and social media exec at at THINKHOUSE said; “Record labels are increasingly expecting musicians to build social media buzz before releasing new tracks. This can put strain on artists to focus on digital marketing rather than the creative process. This reflects a sense among some artists that there is a growing trend of the music industry prioritising viral trends over innovation.”
And the stand off earlier this summer between Universal Music Group and TikTok (leading to a temporary removal of the UMG library of music from the App) is a wake up call for the music industry; highlighting the need to evolve beyond TikTok and explore new ways to promote artists. To innovate and find sustainable, diverse promotional channels that don't rely solely on viral platforms. The TikTok experience highlights the need for a balanced approach, combining social media engagement with traditional marketing to support artists’ long-term careers.
Alternatives
Streaming platforms such as Spotify, Apple Music and Amazon Music have played a massive role in the rapid growth of the music industry. According to the Atlanta Institute of Music and Media, In 2019 Spotify had become the first streaming platform to reach 100 million paid subscribers (626 million users and 246 million subscribers to date) with 70% of streaming services revenue going to rights holders such as record labels, distributors and music publishers. In 2022 global music streaming revenue reached over $26 billion, contributing significantly to the industry's overall growth.
The royalties artists receive from music streaming services have also been a contentious issue in the music industry, with many artists expressing dissatisfaction over the low payouts per stream. Alternative platforms have tried to emerge to battle the divide between streaming services and artists such as ASlice, an experimental community-based model for sharing DJ revenue with producers created by the DJ and producer Zak Khutoretski AKA DVS1. Unlike the major streaming platforms, which pay artists based on a pro-rata model (A common way of distributing royalties on streaming platforms), ASlice focuses on providing direct compensation to artists, particularly for their live performances. The platform allows fans attending live shows to directly tip artists, ensuring that musicians receive additional income that isn't tied to complex streaming royalty calculations or subject to the cuts taken by record labels and streaming services. But the challenge set out by ASlice met a sad ending, as it closed its doors this week - after paying over $400,000 to producers through the platform.
Last night, at a microfestival called Resonance (on Lough Derg, South West Ireland) Jeremiah Gogo, head of data A&R analytics at Virgin Music spoke about his Music framework which he calls ‘The 4 C’s’ - Creativity, Culture, Community and Commerce’. At THINKHOUSE we often talk about how important to ‘give back to culture’ and this was really what Gogo spoke about. He used Nike’s deal with Drake as an example; outlining how Drake, and his music community (a community of teens from Toronto that shaped the global music scene) shaped a new culture > that influenced Nike’s creativity > that influenced the commercial organisation of Nike = resulting in a 5b rise in Nike’s value. When creativity and culture can bring that to a brand, it’s important to ask - what is that brand giving back?
Brand Takeaways
Pricing Fairness: When it comes to pricing, young people in particular are seeking fairness. Even if prices are expensive, it’s the shared understanding that the price is worth it. If prices escalate beyond a perceived point of fairness, one that is completely exclusionary to the average music fan, young people will voice out. Similarly, in terms of the wider sustainable development of the music industry, fans, musicians, publishers should question the fair breakdown of value, so that everyone’s a winner. As a brand guardian, consider how you might show up differently to deliver an experience deemed fair.
Innovation across Platforms: Given the scale of digitally-centric music platforms, investing all your eggs (music notes) in one platform is dangerous if the Algorithm / platform moves in sharp and sudden alternative directions. Brand guardians should take heed and always be open to a multi-channel approach for continuous fan engagement, embracing an appetite to explore new and emerging channels.
Creativity, Culture, Community and Commerce: Borrowing the words of Gogo, the 4Cs is a mantra every brand guardian should consider in light of the sustainable growth of their brand and brand community. Ask the question ‘What are you giving back as a brand?’
