Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryandrake | Hacker News Reader

> The market is willing to bear these higher costs because experience are more valuable to generations today than 20+ years ago.

What does that mean?

View on HN

I assume it’s the experiences over stuff meme. Don’t know if it’s accurate or not. If it is it’s probably because stuff like electronics is probably cheaper than in the past. And urbanites just have less space to accumulate gee-gas of all sorts. On the other hand real estate tends to be more expensive at least among those people thinking about experiences.

It sure seems that things like concerts, festivals, theme parks, even movies are more expensive than e.g. 20 years ago - though I don't have inflation-adjusted data on hand. If true, people are willing to pay more for these kinds of "experiences", and I'd have to agree with parent. Although I'm not sure if it really is a generational thing.

This doesn't mean what Ticketmaster is doing is right, but they are hardly the only ones. E.g. cinemas or theme parks don't use them.

I’m specifically curious about how “experience are more valuable to generations today.” I don’t think there’s much difference between today’s generation and past generations in terms of their enjoyment of concerts, festivals, and other live events. Surely Michael Jackson fans in the 90s were as excited to see him as Taylor Swift fans are today, maybe even more so. Michael Jackson, the Stones, U2, Bruce Springsteen, heck, The Beatles: all of these acts’ had super-fans and their tickets had nearly inelastic demand. In their heydays, they could have charged any price and filled stadiums.

People in those days demanded “experiences” just as much as people today.

How do you know it’s ‘just as much’ instead of proportionally higher?

Wasn't alive in the 60s and don't have a US perspective only a UK/EU one. My parents did see the Stones in the day and I distinctly remember them struggling to decide whether they should go see them in the 00s because tickets were 100€+ (seems cheap now!). But they are not "super-fans" I guess.

I also remember festivals getting more expensive 15-ish years ago, so my friends and me often decided to go hiking instead. IDK if that's a typical case but there are alternative "experiences". With the rise of social media I could understand there's additional incentive to go to more well-known events for the photos, over smaller live-music venues. At least it seems like a lot of photos are taken.

This is all anecdotes, so makes for an unsatisfying answer. But I think it's possible (certain) "experiences are more valuable to generations today". It's at least interesting to consider.

It’s probably true that there were fewer of the eye watering ticket prices that top stars demand today in many cases. Someone told me they were actually flying from the US to Brazil to see Taylor Swift because it was cheaper than getting a local ticket. My sense is highly in-demand concerts was more of a lottery than an auction in the past.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com