Steve and Karen decide to attend the same concert when they are each given given free tickets to it. We know t?
C is correct. Both S and K have to give up their next best things which are assumed differently. A and D are not correct, because the price of the ticket is not what they have to give up to go to the concert. They have to give up such as the other concerts, or movies or studying. B is not correct, because what they have seen is not what they have to give up.
How much do concert t-shirts cost on average?
Around $20 for a tee-shirt. Other items between $5-$40.
Sunk Costs and Decision making?
Think about it this way, the ticket has a value attached to it, and that value is NOT $50 dollars It is NOT $50 dollars because the ticket is nonrefundable, nonexchangeable, and nontransferable. This means that the only value found in the ticket now is that of gaining entry to the play. If she would rather go to the concert with Steven than go to the play then she should go to the concert with Steven, since she can't sell the ticket anyway. The money is gone. If she chooses otherwise then she has been incorrectly influenced by a sunk cost, so A) is your correct answer. This should help you with future questions of this nature.
Sunk Costs & Decision Making?
Jason has plans to go to a movie and already has a $10 nonrefundable, non-exchangeable, non-transferable ticket. Now Crystal, whom Jason has wanted to date for a long time, asks him to a party. Jason would prefer to go to a party and forgo the movie, but he doesnt want to waste the $10 he spent on the movie ticket. From the perspective of a economist, if Jason decides to go to the movie, he has just: * Made an optimal choice * Correctly ignored a sunk cost * Incorrectly allowed a sunk cost to affect his decision And yes I know the definition of a sunk costs are costs that have already been incurred as a result of past decisions. But I still cant decide on an answer? If someone knows the correct answer, 10 points for you and helping me pass econ :)
How much influence do bands have on the cost of concert tickets?
The performer and their management put together a plan for a tour that includes expenditures and potential profits...their profit margin includes their guarantee (paid as a deposit, to ensure they appear) and anything upto the total amount of maximum ticket sales, minus venue and promoter expenses. Depending on expected draw, performers will work in different markets (ie, 500capacity-5000cap-50,000cap). The amounts per event are more of a model, I mean, this is a speculative venture (hence, guarantees). There is some wiggle room when booking, a tour stop on a Monday might cost 10-25% less than a Friday, depending on market (major city vs burg).The other aspect when determining that gross profit point, from artist standpoint, is relative ticket cost. If pop artist A is averaging $25 general admission, why would pop artist B charge $5...or $75? They do not want to price themselves out the market. But the artist knows damn well what they are charging, and why. *When pearl jam went to war with ticket master...they were fighting over ticket agency taking $3 on top of their $30 tickets ...at first, the fight began because pearl jam wanted to determine ticket agency's cut. That same summer, green day worked with ticketmaster to do a $8 summer tour. And i hate both acts.
How much does a classic rock band get paid for a concert?
It really depends on circumstance. If part of a tour, costs can be kept down by number of dates/promoters taking on the shows. Most bands and their management have two prices, touring (negotiable) and corporate (not as negotiable and a lot more $$$).Many of the previous posts are correct. There are guarantees for the bands that are cut and dried - the band shows up, they get paid. There are other negotiated rates as well. If the venue sells over a certain number of tickets, the band may be entitled to a bigger cut. If it’s a sell out - there’s a bonus. Pollstar is normally a good measure of what bands are making, but that’s gross on ticket sales.Merch sales used to go to the band only, but some venues have included that into the contract to reduce their payout.If you’re seeing a band at a state fair, or up here at the Calgary Stampede, the band is making corporate rate. Bon Jovi played the Stampede a few years ago and made almost 4 times their touring rate for one gig!Then there’s the Casino rate…if you are seeing your favourite Classic Rock band at a Casino, they may be making a flat rate with the Casino for a series of shows at Casinos run by that company. That rate falls somewhere between touring and corporate rate, but the band is paid a guarantee for a number of shows, although they can take a bit of a hit when they find out they have to get to a little out of the way casino in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada as a part of the deal. Often these deals will carry an exclusivity clause that the band will not take another gig in that region or area for 6 months to a year after the date, or there’s a penalty.Remember also, that the rate that a band makes also has to pay their crew, sound and lighting guys (if the venue isn’t providing S&L) and rental on the gear. Management takes their cut….etc, etc, etc…You can safely assume that the band will take anywhere between 30 to 45% of the gross ticket sale value (if they are the headliner or only act) and merch. Opening acts would take maybe 5 - 10% of door (if signed) and merch. So if you’re going to the show, buy the opening act’s merch - it’s sometimes the only that ensures the band can eat.
What was the price for a concert ticket in the 60's?
Average ticket price in the mid to late 60’s was between $2.50 and $6.00 depending on the group and seating location. In today’s dollars those tickets prices should run $20-$25. Prices have soared for concerts. Average now is $100-$200.