Willie Nile At McCabe's

How early did I have to get there to get a good seat? Then again, how many people were going to show up to see a 78 year old act who never had a breakthrough hit? A full house. That was surprising. But not as surprising as Willie Nile's show. I bought that first Willie Nile album, I know who he is, but I'd never seen him until last night. Now I get it. And I don't think you can capture his act on wax. It's not that he doesn't have the songs or the voice, it's just the energy, the sheer emotion and joy of his performance, cannot be set and preserved in amber. You have to be there. Has the entire script flipped? It used to be all about getting a record deal. But now unless you're a star, you earn bupkes making records. And the truth is you didn't make much before, but at least the record company kept you alive for the length of the contract, could be up to five albums on Warner Brothers, even if you never had a hit. But today you can't even get signed if you don't have a hit that you created by yourself, online. And the goal of the record company is to blow you and said hit up. And it pushes all these buttons that don't have the same effect they used to. And if you don't make music in defined categories, they don't even want to know your name. So supposedly Willie has a band, which he took on the Rock Legends Cruise, that he performs with elsewhere, but this was a solo performance. And to tell you the truth, I think last night's show would have been hampered by a band, it would dilute the rawness which is part of Nile's appeal. He's right there with you. Nile is a late exponent of the singer/songwriter movement of the seventies, his first album came out in 1980, at the dawn of the MTV era, he was a man out of time. And speaking of time, listening to Willie I'm thinking more 1962 than 1972. Willie's songs are usually not about quiet, internal feelings, they lean more towards anthems, they have a message, and that message resonates. Just like in the folk era of the pre-Beatle world. Now ultimately those folk acts were wiped out if they didn't have hit singles, most of them were gone by 1965, if not 1964, but that feeling, the emotion, the directness, people still yearn for that. And I don't know if you can capture that in a recording, which is why SNL is live. When you're doing it without a net, without the chance of a do-over, it amps up your performance, the audience can see you walking the wire. Now I'd be lying if I said I knew Willie's repertoire. But the mark of a good songwriter is the listener can get their songs the first time through, and that's how it was last night. I caught the lyrics, they resonated. So Willie hits the stage and... He keeps strumming the guitar, there's no downtime, no air, he just keeps that pick going down, never up, to the degree where he kept ripping up picks. But that meant the fever pitch never faded. Willie would be telling stories between numbers, but this ain't "Alice's Restaurant," it's not about the patter, but the stories, the intros, do add flavor. So I'm sitting there getting it and I think the only thing standing between Willie Nile and stardom is people seeing and hearing him in performance. It's a double-edged sword, without a hit no one will come, but just trying to write singles in the form of those in the hit parade doesn't work either. Not that Nile's songs are obtuse, anything but. Most could be covered by anybody. But they're not moon in June, they've got more substance than that. So I guess you'd say Nile is a troubadour, the essence of that word, he travels from town to town, delivering his message. Not expecting a sudden conflagration, instant notice... As a matter of fact, Willie got that, a review of his show at Kenny's Castaways by Robert Palmer of the "New York Times" that got the record companies calling. And I'm sure what Palmer saw was amazing, but how long was Clive going to stay on board without a hit? So Willie still lives in a fifth floor walkup in Greenwich Village. He used to lament the climb, but now he believes it's contributing to his health. And his dad is the 19th oldest male in America, at age 108 1/2. So maybe Willie's got a long road ahead of him. But maybe not, you never know. So you keep on keepin' on. Only most don't. They go back to school, they go to work at daddy's company, after all you've got to have a roof over your head and food on the table and... Now because the means of production and distribution are readily accessible to all today, the world is littered with those who are ultimately wannabes, who would have been squeezed out of the system previously, who just aren't good enough. And I'm sitting there listening to Willie and thinking he's definitely good enough. And he's got no airs. When asked to be on the Legends Cruise...he questioned himself, is he a legend? But he went over big, has been asked back at more money, because if you see this guy... If you want to energize your affair, make it memorable, hire Willie Nile to play a few numbers. He'll wake the crowd up, get them singing along, get them believing. Not by playing a star, but by playing music. I'm not telling you to pull up his albums on Spotify. I'm telling you if Willie Nile is playing anywhere near you to go and see him. You won't be disappointed. But more than that you'll be inspired, you'll marvel, you'll say THIS IS IT! And it is. -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

30 Greatest Living American Songwriters-SiriusXM This Week

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/magazine/greatest-american-songwriters-alive.html This is a live show, call in with your take. Tune in Saturday May 16th to Faction Talk, channel 103, at 4 PM East, 1 PM West. Phone #: 844-686-5863  If you miss the episode, you can hear it on demand on the SiriusXM app. Search: Lefsetz -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

More Blue Dot Fever

1 Concerts are now a luxury item. The heyday of classic rock is over, when boomers and gen-X'ers went to multiple shows a year, sometimes a month, for under ten dollars. Now you don't go to a show on a whim, it's a splurge. As for the economics of the country, I point you to this story in today's "New York Times": "Consumers Spent More in April Despite High Gas Prices - Retail sales rose 0.5 percent despite higher prices for gas, food and other goods. But there are signs consumers are under some strain." https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/14/business/retail-sales-consumer-spending-april.html So if you're pointing to the general financial situation of the country for a decline in ticket sales, that doesn't fly. Then again, if concerts are luxury goods... That market is hazy. Luxury goods sales have been down for two reasons, higher prices and the collapse of the market in China. Then again, Burberry's sales are up, but they were way down previously. But LVMH just sold off Marc Jacobs, trying to wrest control of a portfolio that became so large as to be unmanageable, at least in the eyes of investors. So... This is not the way the concert business was perceived in the past. Acts started in clubs, then graduated to theatres and ultimately to arenas, assuming they had success. And success was driven by the efforts of the record company promoting your tunes and the quality of your live show and its connection with fans. But now, successful acts start in arenas. Are Olivia Dean tickets so hot because she's such a great performer? No, she's barely worked in America, and sales are based on the records. But let's go back to the club level. Clubs are challenged, and one of the main problems is attendees don't want to consume alcohol. Is this a change in mores, or price? I point you to this article in the "Wall Street Journal": "Drinks Are So Expensive That Grown-Ups Are Pregaming Like They Did in College - Americans are turning to the tradition to stretch their dollars—and their buzz" https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/drinks-are-so-expensive-that-grown-ups-are-pregaming-like-they-did-in-college-825aab34 The alcohol tastes the same whether you consume it at home or in the club, arguably the drink is superior at home, where you can pour more alcohol to mixer. So why not tank up before you go? But you can't see the band at home. Twenty five years have taught us that video broadcasts of concerts are not a significant business, in other words, you've got to be there. It's all about being there, but where do you have to be? 2 In addition to rising costs, for both performer and ticket-buyer, the concert business now resembles the country at large, especially on the internet, where winner takes all. Today people just don't consume the talent that comes to their market, they'd rather travel to experience those acts they really want to see. You see the internet allows for a million voices, but in a competitive marketplace, where everything sits right alongside another, a few stand out, and they get all the dollars. No one has been able to compete with Google or Amazon yet. Sure, you can search on Bing or DuckDuckGo, but very few people do. And when you buy from Amazon...you trust the company and delivery is fast and cheap and... Do you really need something almost as good from a less known competitor? That's how it is in music, even if you could save a buck or two, do you want to see any but the best acts? But what are the best acts? That world has changed too. MTV created a monoculture in the eighties. If you were on MTV, everybody knew your name around the world, there was demand. So if you were one of the few acts that reached that pinnacle, whose videos were shown, you would sell tickets. How many? That's another question. But once again, forty years ago you started small and cheap to test the waters, now you go full bore. And if there is demand, if people click with the act, there's no price that is too high for a ticket. But the ubiquity of the pre-internet era has been lost. Legacy media keeps trumpeting acts in the Spotify Top 50 that ultimately have a small footprint, most people don't know them. Then again, there are a hundred million more people in America than there were fifty years ago, and the buildings are not getting any bigger. So when you sell out arenas you believe demand is massive and wide, when this is oftentimes untrue. Whereas in the past... Forget the classic rock acts, Coldplay had video hits before that paradigm died twenty-odd years ago. They haven't had a universal tune since, but they sell out stadiums all over the world, it's nearly unfathomable. Then there are hitmakers du jour who are hot and sell a lot of tickets and there's this misimpression that demand is deep and wide and they move to larger buildings and find out the demand is not there. And, in a hit-based market, hits matter. In the album era of yore, you built fans over multiple LPs and tours. Sure, fans wanted to hear the hits, but they wanted more than that. And those acts can still sell tickets today. Whereas most of the Spotify Top 50...if there are no more hits ticket sales drop off. 3 So it's a business. And at the club level, it's challenged. We keep hearing in the U.K. and U.S. that clubs must be saved. But when was the last time a band made it on a purely live basis, from demand in clubs all the way to arenas? Of course there are exceptions, but the average punter does not want to go to a club to see a developing act. They'd rather pay much more to see a hit act which they are desirous of seeing. And record companies don't subsidize club tours like they used to, they're not convinced these sell records/streams, which is how they make their money. If you start small, you may stay small. Now as we start moving up the food chain, and the truth is the definition of these venues has changed, what were once called theatres are now called clubs, but... Those who can sell a thousand tickets give or take, usually their recording income is small, so they depend upon the road. And therefore they return to markets much more frequently than they used to, they need the money. And none of these shows are cheap, even if they're not exorbitantly expensive, but at what point do you say you've seen the act enough at these prices? And when you get to the arena level... No one goes who isn't into the act. No one goes on a whim. So there's always demand. People want to go to shows. But live music? That used to be a staple of society, ubiquitous. But to a great degree it's been replaced by records. People would rather hear the hits than wannabes doing inferior covers or playing unknown originals. So the concept of going to the bar/club to hear a new band... The demand is just not there like it was in the old days. 4 So, as I've said previously, there's a seemingly unlimited demand, at high prices, for desirable acts. And then you've got the problem that perceived value is so high that tickets, although expensive, are UNDERPRICED! But if you look at concerts like luxury goods... They're even more exotic than luxury goods, because when the show is over all you've got is your memories, you still don't have your designer handbag. This is not like yesteryear, where an act could be regionally successful, sell tickets somewhere and almost none in another place. If you've made it to the arena level, the internet has spread word across the nation, business is either strong, or weak. And all the metrics of yore are useless. Past history is helpful, but not definitive. The marketplace can change just that fast. And it has always been fluid, but if you built an act up over time, via multiple albums and tours, you didn't expect demand to evaporate, it could decline, but not go to zero. But today, was the act just the flash of the moment? And was the moment more press-driven than music-driven, was there momentary mania? And then there are the acts whose fan base is rabid, but narrow. Like BTS and the rest of the KPop acts. Their fans are diehard, but seemingly everybody else shrugs. And for all the people dying to get into the Eras show, there are those who wouldn't attend a Taylor Swift show even if it was free. And sure, there have always been people who don't like certain acts, but the big acts had much more mindshare, you'd heard their hits, now sometimes people reject acts based on image, they've never even heard the music. 5 So how much demand is out there? Well I ask you, other than recent hitmakers, how many acts have a history, a long career of success? We can point to Justin Bieber, Lady Gaga. But if we cast the net wider we oftentimes find acts had a moment, and is that enough to sustain demand? Probably not, not in these venues at these prices. Nobody used to balk at the price of concert tickets. They weren't that expensive, they were not a luxury good. But now, desirable show prices are stratospheric, you really have to ask yourself if it's worth it. And the truth is it's worth a lot to many people. 6 So, what do we know... Is there really blue dot fever? Well, it's hard to calculate demand, so many shows go up, the marketplace is muddied with multiple offers. So on sale demand might be high, but if you don't go clean immediately, there's a good chance tickets will sell close to the date, or not. In between, there will be a trickle. But it appears that the economy might not be having an effect on people's spending. Unless you consider concerts a luxury good. And you can't buy a Rolex at retail, the market is that hot, like it is for today's superstars, but the rest of the high-priced wares... They're a stretch financially, and many people do not want to make that stretch. Furthermore, how important is it to have a luxury good? The ace in the hole for concerts is they're a unique experience, one and done, which come with bragging rights, but they are not the only experience that delivers this. So, the economy's effect on ticket demand...it's murky. But it's clear that demand is sky high, driving ticket prices up, for an ever fewer number of acts. And people have unlimited cash available to see these acts, but they may only want to see these acts. And as far as building new acts that sustain, that become legacy acts, that's become harder than ever to do. If for no other reason than it's harder than ever to reach people in the marketplace, never mind on a regular basis. Now in the old days, prior to the blue dot availability on Ticketmaster, the public had no information. We can now judge ticket demand just like we can judge the demand for recordings via the statistics on Spotify. This is the information era, and we're not going back to a more opaque world. As for cancellations, acts have always lied/made excuses when tickets don't sell. It's just that when this happens now, especially to more than one act, word of these cancellations can spread online and gain traction. So... 7 The concert business has changed. Ticket prices are never coming down, because of the demand. As for lowering them for shows that aren't doing boffo at the b.o...do you really want to spend hours listening to an act you don't love, who might only have one track you know? No. So there's a peak. How many acts are at that peak and what is the exact demand. And then there's the issue of ticket price. If the demand is there, which it is for many acts, the issue in pricing is not how to make it lower, but how do you make it high enough to squeeze out the secondary market, because despite all the consumer complaints, fans end up going, just to be in the building. You need to ignore the bitching. People bitch about the price of cars, but once they've spent north of 50k, most people will testify how much they love their automobile. So the bottom of the market is ever more hollow. And there are wannabe superstars who are playing bigger buildings than they should and pricing tickets too high. But then there are acts that could play seemingly ad infinitum. Look at Harry Styles and Madison Square Garden. He's doing thirty shows, with some tickets priced as low as fifty bucks. But it's easy to spend four digits in the secondary market. And, once again, this is for THIRTY SHOWS! The acts of yore never did thirty show residencies. Demand was not there. There were other acts of an equal status touring and the act would probably come to your neighborhood if you wanted to see them anyway. But how many Harry Styles's are there? People are traveling from across the country, across the world to go... Forget ticket prices, they may just be a fraction of the overall spend. They need to be in the building just that much. Doesn't matter that you don't need to be in the building, that you don't want to pay those prices, enough people do. But when you go down the food chain, many people do not. And the irony is when you go down far enough, tickets are not very price sensitive, people just don't want to go. They see it as an off brand show, not a must-go. It's the difference between a BMW or Mercedes and a Cadillac. Remember when Cadillac ruled the road? No more, the German cars were always better but now everybody knows and would rather spend more for something that's a better driving experience that will impress people. Doesn't matter what Cadillac constructs, it's too late, they've squandered the company's good will. It's the same with acts, assuming they had any good will to begin with. -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

Tucker Carlson

This guy could be president. Whoa, whoa, WHOA, don't shoot the messenger! You know I'm scrounging for podcasts that are interesting, I don't like happy talk/joke talk between two hosts, and true crime has been overdone, but searching the Apple Podcasts app I came across this "New York Times" interview with Tucker Carlson... https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/what-does-tucker-carlson-really-believe-i-went-to-maine/id1200361736?i=1000765759854 Or watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tpMkUCvqrs Now I remember Tucker back in his bowtie days on CNN, before he was so self-satisfied. He got airtime before Jon Stewart got "Crossfire" canceled, by speaking the truth, that it was akin to pro wrestling and hurting America. Now I'd like to tell you Jon Stewart could be president, and he'd be better than most of the Democratic candidates, he skewers the deserving every Monday night on Comedy Central, but Stewart skews negative, as do most Democrats. They'll tell you how f*cked up things are, but they don't focus too much on the positive, proffer solutions. Also, I'm sick and tired of celebrities being elected to office. Irrelevant of how you feel about Spencer Pratt, what ability, never mind history, does he have regarding public governance? Why are we putting unskilled people in skilled jobs? Now I'm listening to Tucker on this podcast and... The first thing I notice is how informed and balanced the host is, Lulu Garcia-Navarro, who I was not familiar with. One thing you've got to give the "Times" credit for is pushing aside oldsters and giving younger people a chance. And she was not histrionic, she was not auguring for argument, nor theatre, and therefore the tone was different from most of the political interviews we're exposed to, not that she pulled her punches, she brought up all the criticisms of Carlson, but not in a gotcha way. As for Carlson... He spoke slowly and... This guy is smart. That's one thing about Trump and his cabinet, these are not the best and the brightest. Furthermore, Carlson is seasoned, he can hit the ball back and forth over the net, he knows how to debate. And he's so skilled, he knows how to deflect when confronted with something that makes him look bad, he doesn't become outraged and deny it, rather he says it's a distraction from the real issue, which always comes down to economics. Ain't that the truth. James Carville famously said it was the economy, stupid, and it still is. But what we get most is talk about trans women in sports and race and...those are significant issues, but are they as important as economics? That's Carlson's position, which he keeps hammering. That irrelevant of color or creed, everybody wants to be able to put food on the table, ensure a good future for their children. It ain't difficult. But somehow the political class strays from this main target and focuses on the penumbra again and again and again. And then Lulu asks Tucker about his son, who left his job with J.D. Vance, wanting to know if he was pushed or he jumped, implying it was the former. Carlson says he does not know, that she should ask his son, that to the degree he knows his son jumped, however... Carlson says he believes in an America where the status and power of the parents do not affect the trajectory of the children. BINGO! Everybody wants equal opportunity. We're sick of the lucky sperm club getting a leg up from the get-go. As for race... An issue, but should it supersede putting food on the table? As for interviewing Nick Fuentes... How much influence does Fuentes have, and Carlson says Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee are worse. Now Carlson has been excoriated for interviewing Fuentes, but he says he interviews all kinds of people, should his guests be limited by philosophy? Like I said, Carlson has a way of deflecting the criticism and... He says he's not running for president, but who is? Good luck finding someone who is passionate about J.D. Vance...who has flip-flopped from being against Trump to now doing his dirty work and even criticizing the Pope re theology. Marco Rubio? Didn't Trump call him "Little Marco" before giving him a cabinet job? Rubio is not seen as a force of nature, he's perceived today as a technocrat who is eager for more responsibility/power. As for Ted Cruz... Carlson eviscerates him, but one thing is for sure, he is unlikable. Like Carlson himself? When I first contemplated writing this, TikTok fed me this clip from SNL's Weekend Update, Tucker Carlson on the Met Gala: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZRyEMYC7q8 They nailed Carlson. This was as good as the vintage stuff from the seventies. Does everybody have Carlson's number? But he was the king of Fox, eclipsing everybody else. Driving the conversation. But he became too big for his britches and Murdoch fired him. But that's the thing about Carlson, while occasionally self-deprecating, it's evident he thinks he's smarter than the rest of us. But one thing is for sure, he's got experience in the swamp. And it is a swamp, seemingly everybody not involved in politics is disillusioned with it. Now I don't agree with Carlson on his anti-Israel and isolationist views, and his anti-vax position is looney-tunes, but are we looking for someone who speaks plain English to the people? No, let me change that, is someone who speaks truth appealing to the people? Carlson is a better Trump. Trump identified a disillusioned public, it's just that he's a nincompoop, or as John Mulaney said, a horse in the hospital. I'm in a unique position in that I hear from both sides constantly. Which it seems very few do. They're baked into their positions and only hang with those who agree with them. Whereas every day I turn on my computer and I've got right wingers going wild on me and oftentimes left wingers too. I'm stunned when I read the news or watch the commentariat on TV and it's clear to me they've got no idea what the public thinks, because they don't interact with the public. And it is not as simple as reporting on it, you've got to LIVE IT! And you live it online, an entire world that the legacy media and oldsters have contempt for. As for Carlson's excommunication from Fox and his present footprint... Well, a lot has changed since Tucker was fired from Fox in 2023. There has been ongoing flattening of the media landscape, the legacy media means less, people get their information from podcasts and... In other words, the world Tucker Carlson was exiled to became the main show, instead of the sideshow. And legacy media can't stop reporting on him, as evidenced by this "New York Times" interview. Carlson's actual reach isn't de minimis, but it's far from huge, yet it's the external outlets amplifying him and his message that keep him up front, as part of the discourse. Now if you've made it this far, you're probably laughing. But I'm telling you, if you listen to/watch this interview your perspective will be changed. What Carlson is saying is what most people want, a focus on economics and a separating of the wheat from the chaff, delineating what is truly important from what is not. Furthermore, despite complimenting Trump's personality and saying he likes J.D. Vance, Carlson can align with some left wing/Democratic positions. So just see this as a heads-up. If Carlson runs for president, and I think he will, he's testing the waters at least, despite what he says, either he will run away with the Republican nomination or be voteless. That's what we learned about Kamala Harris, in the debates/primaries back in 2020. She came across as inauthentic, and didn't win any delegates. But Biden said he was going to pick a woman as VP and chose her. God, couldn't he just pick a woman without saying he was going to, it undercuts the effort, singles women out as being less than as opposed to equal. Not that I want to get into identity politics... Then again, we've gone too deep into identity politics and... Who is the Democratic candidate? Newsom could win if he wasn't from California, but he is. Other than Gavin? And get Carlson on the debate stage and he'll eat up his competitors, anybody other than Newsom, because not only is he educated on the issues, he can be calm and measured, and is unafraid of alienating people, he calls 'em the way he sees 'em, which almost no politician does. I would have written none of this if I hadn't listened to this interview. Please do so, it will open your eyes. -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

Lake Effect

https://www.amazon.com/Lake-Effect-Cynthia-DAprix-Sweeney/dp/0063377683 I couldn't figure out if this was lowbrow... Now I don't have to read highbrow literature, but sometimes you're reading a book and you realize it's only written for plot, to appeal to a certain demographic, usually women, who sustain the fiction field, and I've gotten halfway through books and realized I've wasted my time and I didn't want to do this once again. But one thing was for sure, this is the kind of book I like. One about people, their lives, their stories. Ultimately, that's all that matters. So I decided to do research. I found out Cynthia D'Aprix Sweeney had written two best sellers before this, one "The Nest," which rang a bell, but I wasn't sure if it was the book or the TV show and... I was scouring the Amazon page. Read enough books and you know what to look for. First, the star rating...anything under four and you should be wary, sometimes it's just too difficult or too intellectual for the average reader, but the star system is rarely wrong. And "Lake Effect" had four and a half stars, which means some people REALLY liked it. Assuming the book is worthy, it's got four stars, maybe three and a half. But if it's got four and a half, it's worth taking notice. Then again, that just means people liked the book, not that it's good. So then you scroll down the page and look for the reviews... If there are none, or they're from non-literary publications, I'm wary. And in this case, you got quotes... The blurbs other writers and personalities deliver to help author friends and I just ignore them. But going down the page further I did see reviews from "People" and "Real Simple"... They indicate lowbrow. But, "Lake Effect" was an Amazon "Editors' pick," and that's a high bar, dreck is not anointed this way. And as I've said before, I read these reviews and reserve these books on Libby and I can never remember what inspired me to get them from the library when they finally arrive weeks later. But doing one more Google before I wrote this, my inspiration came up, a March 4th review in the "New York Times": "Cynthia D’Aprix Sweeney’s new novel, 'Lake Effect,' is the latest in a specific contemporary subgenre: 'Four Adult Siblings Reconvene to Rehash Their Privileged but Fraught Adolescence.'" https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/04/books/review/cynthia-daprix-sweeney-lake-effect.html That's my kind of book, families, their interactions as the years go by... So after learning that "Lake Effect" was an Amazon "Editors' pick" I decided to continue reading it. And I couldn't put it down. It called out to me. I looked forward to the end of the day when I could spend time reading it. And I'm angry that it's over. And I wouldn't call it literature, but I wouldn't call it lowbrow either. And I'm slightly wary of recommending it, because men statistically prefer nonfiction and if a book involves feelings... Then again, despite all the stories about aggressive men, the truth is most guys are not like this. Most are normal, average, wouldn't hurt a flea. Then again, they may not look like an Adonis and they may not have the gumption to even approach you... And that thing about women wanting bad guys, there's some truth to that. But all this is to say that I know there are some men who will dig "Lake Effect," but I'm not sure which ones. Now unlike the vaunted literature of today's book business, "Lake Effect" is not laden with description, a lot happens and it is very readable. It never gets bogged down. And it's unpredictable. Most books, movies and TV show are. If for no other reason than they want you to feel good, warm after experiencing them, so you'll tell others about them. Maybe you've read the news about the unproduced Larry David screenplay: "After 43 Years, an Unproduced Larry David Script Surfaces Online" https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/08/arts/larry-david-prognosis-negative.html It wasn't produced, the agency notes said: "'The basic problem, it was stated, was that the main character, Leo, is not at all likable.'" Ultimately tropes in the screenplay were used to great success in "Seinfeld" and "Curb Your Enthusiasm," but the truth is Hollywood and publishers don't want to risk offending you, making you feel bad, they want you to feel GOOD! Not that you'll feel bad after finishing "Lake Effect," it's just that the characters don't always do what you'd expect them to, and not everybody is redeemed. And that's one of the reasons the book is so good. Just when you think someone is going to wake up and make the conventional right choice, they don't. And this unpredictability is what keeps you turning pages. Life doesn't work out like it does in movies. Nor books. But you find it hard to accept when yours doesn't. You're doing the right thing, making good choices, and then you know an action will or has hurt someone and how do you metabolize that? Do you go with your gut first, or do you do what's right? And how long do you hold a grudge? These are everyday questions and they're in this book. Just another family. This might not be your story, but you know these people, you've come across them, they could be your best friends. I really enjoyed the experience of reading "Lake Effect." I don't know enough of Cynthia D’Aprix Sweeney’s background and appeal to tell you whether she's endorsed or derided. That's a factor in many people's choices of what entertainment they consume. And I thought of digging deeper to get a read, and I started that Google and came across the "New York Times" review and... It's extremely difficult to get a book reviewed in the "New York Times." There are so many and room for so few. They usually just review what is extremely notable, whether it be good or bad, books by famous writers or even celebrities, and those which deserve notice. So since it was reviewed by the "Times"...a review I did not read, because these reviews are not for readers, but for the industry and other writers, they're oftentimes literary works in themselves, and they reveal plot points not even thinking about the reading experience...I'm gonna come down on the side of this book is worth the time. Assuming this kind of book appeals to you. Because it certainly does to me. -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

You're Gonna Get What's Coming

https://open.spotify.com/playlist/4BK5xZ7rY5tCQEN0dRkySz?si=faa0c3c7925f4648 1 Every day I wake up with a song in my head. And I never know what it's going to be. And I'm inspired to write about it, and I know if I don't write about it just then, I'll lose the mojo. But do people want to read about old songs? And it is usually old songs. But the sting from "Tehran," the main soundtrack element, watch a few episodes and it gets baked in your brain. And when someone e-mailed me about it...I felt the connection, the commonality, and that's what we're all searching for. And the song in my head a few days back was Robert Palmer's "You're Gonna Get What's Coming." Now Robert Palmer became a star with "Addicted to Love," a very good song with an iconic video, but he had a career before that. Palmer was in Vinegar Joe, but that didn't mean much in America, not really anything. But then he put out a solo album, "Sneakin' Sally Through the Alley" in 1974 with an opening three song medley that was absolutely killer, starting off with the relatively unknown, but not by me, Little Feat classic "Sailin' Shoes," segueing into the Palmer original "Hey Julia" and ending up with Allen Toussaint’s "Sneakin' Sally Through the Alley." It's the best thing Palmer ever did. But I think I bought the second album first, "Pressure Drop," whose title song I knew in its original Toots and the Maytals version, but it was the opening cut I bought the album in the promotional bin for, "Give Me an Inch." Although I did hear it on the radio, I don't think many people did, because no one has ever mentioned it to me, and it's one of he best thing Robert ever did. Now Palmer kept making albums, but he wasn't making much headway commercially. "Some People Can Do What They Like had his version of "Man Smart (Woman Smarter)," which got some airplay, but only on FM, not Top 40. 1978's "Double Fun" had "Every Kinda People," written by Free's Andy Fraser, which got less airplay than "Man Smart (Woman Smarter)," but was heard and then... Came the fifth solo LP, which opened with Moon Martin's "Bad Case of Loving You (Doctor Doctor)" which was all over the airwaves. Moon ultimately launched a solo career on Capitol as a result of this, and those records were quite good, but to illustrate their impact, not one of them has its own Wikipedia page. And Moon Martin is gone now. As is Palmer himself. Despite the debonair look, he ingested copious amounts of substances, and ultimately they caught up with him, Robert died at 54, which is too young in anybody's book. But that previous album, the fourth, "Double Fun," ended with the Palmer original "You're Gonna Get What's Coming." Now to establish a timeline, it was not until almost eight years later that Palmer broke through with "Addicted to Love," a hit in 1986. But it was "You're Gonna Get What's Coming" that put him on the map. Because it fit the format. Was Robert Palmer an R&B crooner? A disguised rocker? In the heyday of corporate rock he lived in a no-man's land, cool, but all by himself. But "You're Gonna Get What's Coming" finally fit right alongside the rest of the tunes on the AOR format. 2 "You came upon me like a landslide Once in a while I get taken like that And I like it" Now ultimately almost ten years later, in 1996, Oasis prominently employed the word "landslide" in my favorite song of theirs, "Champagne Supernova," but at this point in the eighties, when we thought of "Landslide," we thought of the Fleetwood Mac song. And the image Robert's song conjured was completely different. "I've got a Thunderbird parked right outside Give me a minute to finish this thing And we'll light it" This is why I'm writing. Because I woke up with "You're Gonna Get What's Coming" in my brain this morning for the second time this week, which is a rare occurrence, double fun, and it's this line that stuck out. I'm walking around the house thinking they no longer write songs about cars anymore. Whereas that was a staple for DECADES! Even before Jan and Dean and the Beach Boys opined about the machines. But not anymore. Cars have been superseded. The only horsepower that seems to matter anymore is the speed of AI chips by the likes of Nvidia. No one even cares about the power of the chip in their computer, like in the late nineties, and certainly no one cares about the speed of their smartphone. And not every kid salivates about getting their license the day of their sixteenth birthday and you don't even need one, Uber will take you around town very nicely. And it won't be long before Waymo, et al, make it so you neither own nor drive an automobile, talk about the end of an era. But the truth was the Thunderbird was already passé by 1978, a bloated machine. Palmer was referencing the legendary fifties models, some with a porthole, that a shop in Culver City specialized in selling back in that era. "You're gonna get what's coming You've been asking for it two days running You're gonna get what's coming You're gonna get what's coming to you" Now what exactly is she asking for? Taken alone the chorus implies male dominance, revenge, an attitude that is frowned upon today, almost fifty years later. You've got to respect women. But is that what he's really singing about? "I hope that you're half as intrepid As you make out" Now everybody back in the sixties knew the word "intrepid," for that was name of the aircraft carrier that picked up the astronauts. Did anybody know what the word meant back then, does anybody know what it means right now? Well, the Oxford dictionary tells us: "fearless; adventurous" That's what men fantasize about. Well, I guess there are men who want their significant other to be close to mute and cook and raise babies, but certainly in the seventies many men wanted an adventure partner, someone who not only would go along for the ride, but would LEAD! I'd never heard a song use the word "intrepid" before and I can't think of one since. This usage fit with Robert's upscale image. "More often that not, I'll bet You never got what you asked for" Can I have some more? That's what Oliver asked for, never before has a boy asked for more. But the image of a powerful, desirous woman grew and then exploded in the seventies. She wants it, will she get it? "Keep on pouring until you hear me shout And turn up the sound If you want me to drive any faster" Life in the fast lane... But now no one hits the highway. Driving cross-country used to be a rite of passage, now why bother, just fly, if you leave home at all. "Caution went out when you walked in the room If it never came back it would be too soon." No limits, baby. Never mind no judgment. This was the freedom we fought for in the sixties and were reveling in in the seventies. And that freedom was emblematized by the automobile. 3 Now Bonnie Raitt had the opposite problem of Robert Palmer. She, unlike him, was known, had a place in the firmament, but had a hard time capitalizing on it. She began with two earthy albums, a feel that didn't break through big commercially that she could never recapture. From there she went smoother with John Hall and then slicker with Jerry Ragavoy, she'd left where she came from and had not found an equally strong place for her career to reside. So then Bonnie worked with Paul Rothchild, who'd started out producing folkies for Elektra, but made his name as the producer of the Doors. The first LP the two worked together on, "Home Plate," had incredible song choices, but no single, when that was becoming a thing. But the follow-up, "Sweet Forgiveness," which contained the exquisite but now forgotten "Two Lives," had a cover of Del Shannon's "Runaway" that broke bigger than anything Bonnie had done before...then again, it was a cover of a well-known number that was due for a renaissance. So Bonnie decided to shake it up once again. To work with those who dominated her homeland, Peter Asher and his Southern California troupe. Peter had worked his magic not only on Jame Taylor and Linda Ronstadt records, he'd made J.D. Souther's "Black Rose" and... "The Glow" opened with Bonnie's cover of "I Thank You," a year before ZZ Top did their version, a rock radio staple. Bonnie's got history, she cut "Love Has No Pride" on her second album, 1972's "Give It Up," a year before Linda Ronstadt did her more famous cover of the Eric Kaz/Libby Titus classic. However, the song selections on "The Glow" were not as good as the ones on the two Rothchild-produced albums, but on the second side, in the next to last position, was a cover of Robert Palmer's "You're Gonna Get What's Coming." 4 Now when I pulled up Spotify to listen to "You're Gonna Get What's Coming" earlier in the week I went for the Robert Palmer version, that was the one I thought I was singing in my head. But when it started to play, the chunky guitar, the rhythmic riff, was not what I had in my mind. The high points were there, "landslide" and "intrepid" and the chorus, but...could it be that what had become embedded in my brain was Bonnie Raitt's more streamlined cover? I mean usually the writer does the better take, but... Bonnie's version starts off with an explosive guitar by either Danny Kortchmar or Waddy Wachtel, they're both credited, I'll let you decide. And then... "You came upon me like a landslide Once in a while I get taken like that And I like it" Whoa, Robert's singing with attitude, it's a come on, verging on a sneer, he's trying to entice her, but Bonnie is ALREADY SOLD! She's leading the man. "Once in a while I get taken like that And I like it" Inherently a woman is the receiver in sex, but who is the initiator here, who is in control? Then again, when I asked Bonnie about being the lone female in a group of males, all the guys being after her, she responded WHO SAID I WASN'T GOING AFTER THEM! -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

Robert Margouleff-This Week's Podcast

Synth-wiz Robert Margouleff and his compatriot Malcolm Cecil associate produced Stevie Wonder's four album run from "Music of My Mind" to Fulfillingness' First Finale." On his own Margouleff produced Devo's landmark "Freedom of Choice" with "Whip It" and albums by Billy Preston and Oingo Boingo and David Sanborn and... https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-the-bob-lefsetz-podcast-30806836/episode/robert-margouleff-333634488?app=listen https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/robert-margouleff/id1316200737?i=1000767740777 https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/9ff4fb19-54d4-41ae-ae7a-8a6f8d3dafa8/episodes/45a1ef01-fe23-447a-91cb-17856ccb9f2a/the-bob-lefsetz-podcast-robert-margouleff https://open.spotify.com/episode/158p74gEh5UfxeNyvnLoPP?si=6ec9521edbca430f -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

Sony Buys Recognition

Better Sony own these songs than the bank. But what we've learned here is all the rightsholders who sold to Hipgnosis based on Merck's involvement... I hope you had a key man clause, which you couldn't get anyway. Now the truth is most rightsholders are just interested in the money. As long as you pay them they don't care who owns the songs, until... They disapprove of a use. Or find they underpriced their wares. As for underpricing... How many times do rightsholders have to see this movie to understand that publishing rights keep going up? If you're selling because you're fearful your songs will be worth nothing tomorrow... That may be true, but know that the assessors of the value of your catalog know that too. They are not in the business of overpaying. Merck's theory was right, it's just that interest rates went up and investors were pissed and wanted out. Merck may have single-handedly driven up the price of catalogs, he might have paid a ton in a fit of mania, but the truth is copyrights have long lives... And the internet has proved a boon to the value of music and its associated rights. It's music that underpins social media, every platform has to pay to use it. YouTube, TikTok, they'd be decimated without music. And they keep creating new platforms that need to be licensed. And the truth is the new music business might be a fool's errand, very little net for expenditure, but when it comes to proven hits, those pennies keep trickling in. And giant music corporations are in the business of managing these assets. You need infrastructure. Was Hipngosis's up to snuff? Comparable to those of the major labels? Well, it's all history now. But the question arises what is going to be done with these rights. The truth is the major labels are somewhat somnambulant. They're peopled by lifers who in many cases are phone answerers, as opposed to creative thinkers beating the bushes in new ways to drive up revenue. The exception is Primary Wave, which is like a major label but without the new music costs. Yes, Primary Wave does release new music, but it's de minimis in terms of their overall business. All those roles at the record company, the product managers, the marketers... That's how Primary Wave runs its business. So if you're going to sell... Then again, Primary Wave keeps buying and buying and how many acts can its A-level team service? But now Primary Wave owns Kobalt and can do its own administration, which it lacked previously and... What we learned with Spotify is that those with the most assets dictate the terms. Well, let's just say they have inordinate power over the terms. And majors owning both recordings and songs...songwriters got screwed in these negotiations. Would it be better to have someone with a seat at the table who is song first? Well, we've got that with Primary Wave, and now BMG/Concord...which is still in the front line record business, but is heavily weighted with publishing copyrights. Independents innovate. Which is why they're needed. And consolidation works against them when it comes to power. Although they still have power in new music production, where the majors are still operating under the old paradigm. Today you start very small in many areas and nurture and see what pops. If it doesn't have a chance of getting in the Spotify Top 50 from the get-go, the majors aren't interested. Which is why they are losing overall market share. Because it's indie acts who are flourishing. But when it comes to the past... That's where the power is in the music business. Hell, think of all the acts touring for Live Nation and AEG. The acts that broke prior to 2005, when the MTV/VH1 paradigm died, are cash cows. Can you say Coldplay? Good luck trying to build a Coldplay today. So we lived through a decade of innovation in publishing, and now the era of consolidation has come upon us. Expect even more. As for the acts... The bottom line is you need someone who cares about you, who'll fight for you, who will get licenses for you. After Kobalt's computerized innovation all the major administrators have upgraded and are very good. But... Look at what is happening in visual entertainment, with Paramount scheduled to be acquiring Warner Bros. Discovery. Artists/performers are up in arms. But they don't have the piece of the puzzle that makes all the difference, OWNERSHIP! That's what it all comes down to, that's what gives you a seat at the table, and if you don't have it... Once you give up ownership, you give up power. Few performers own their recording copyrights, but many do own their publishing copyrights. And this results in a steady source of income without the creative accounting labels subject them to with recording royalties. This business was built by independents. Consolidation started when Atlantic sold to Warner, and then Elektra fifty plus years ago. And then thirty five years ago, A&M and Island joined the major folds. And then Edgar Bronfman, Jr. rolled up companies to form what is now known as Universal Music and then Capitol was decimated and then split up and sold and... What we've ended up with is a mature business. The only way you can beat it is via independence, which depends upon hits, whether it be rights from the past or new works. But the more rights the usual suspect majors gain, the worse it is for rightsholders. Sony Music is baked into a larger corporation, it doesn't have to worry about investor returns like Hipgnosis did when it was independent, it can weather storms. But if it's your rights that went from Hipgnosis to Blackstone to Sony...who exactly is looking out for you? You have no personal relationships, no one tied to the original sale. And what we know in the music business is someone with passion is more important than pure money, someone who will work your project/music is worth more than a big advance. But all these acts took the money and now have little to absolutely no power. Everybody got paid, including their advisors, and they're left with a pile of money after tax and I hope it pays dividends... Don't forget, with songs you get paid on a regular basis, this does not happen when you sell out completely. But we live in a money-based society, and everybody focuses on the buck. Isn't it interesting that the Eagles haven't sold their rights. Nor Paul McCartney or the Stones. What do they know that everybody else does not? Everything. That all you've got is your music and your image and you want to be in total control over it, because no one cares about it as much as you. -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25

Blue Dot Fever

Many shows don't sell out, who'da thunk? Yesterday everybody was complaining they couldn't get a ticket and now they're saying no one wants to go, which is it? What we've got here is the internet, where everybody reports, mostly without background knowledge, and then things are repeated as fact and... Suddenly you've got an issue where you didn't have one before! The Pussycat Dolls? In the pre-internet days, no one would assume a pop band that had been away for years with no discernible fan base would be able to sell tickets. But the Spice Girls did... God, you'd think this was rocket science. But no, it's betting, a casino! What you've got here is managers who want to sell their wares, and their wares are their acts. And then you've got talent buyers who either bite or do not. Not to mention, there's tons of FOMO. Is your competitor going to get the tour, establishing a relationship that might run forevermore? Do you want to take that risk? So especially with old acts with no tour history, everybody is making a bet, and sometimes the bet is wrong. But this doesn't only happen in music. Look at the Cybertruck, it was projected to sell 250,000 to 500,000 units when production was fully ramped up. But it actually sold 38,965 units in 2024, and only 20,000--21,000 units in 2025. Talk about a stiff! But at a much higher cost... Elon Musk and Tesla didn't know whether people would want to buy the Cybertruck until it was on offer. But he hyped the hell out of it before it came to market. Just like the music business does. Ever notice that suddenly an act is all over the news? It's usually to gain interest in new recordings, then again, you've got Taylor Swift's Eras tour... Where all the tickets in the U.S. went on sale on the same day so there would be mania, which would drive sales further. I mean the audience doesn't want to be left out. This was insurance against not going completely clean, like the previous time around. But the story became about a Ticketmaster failure... That's hysterical, it was a bot field day, what Ticketmaster said was true, but it didn't want to say no to Taylor, say that it couldn't sell all those tickets on one day, risking that another company would come and take her business. And Ticketmaster really had no idea how bad the bots would be until the tickets went on sale. There are acts that will sell out no problem, like Olivia Rodrigo. But notice how she keeps adding dates. Yup, she could announce multiple shows at once, but that risks them not selling out, which is anathema to an act. Once you're playing to empty seats, you're on the downhill slide. So fans are rabid for the few seats available, and after the announced shows sell they add extras, which were on hold...this was the plan. It's not like the promoters were shocked that there was sellout demand for the announced shows...they just didn't know how many shows she could sell! Now it used to be if someone canceled a show or a tour, few would know about it. Possibly no one other than those who had already purchased tickets. But in the internet era, word spreads like wildfire, and nothing spreads like negative news. Haters love this stuff, they want everybody to know. Never mind that a lot of shows that are announced as being sold out are not. Which is why you should be wary of buying extra tickets to scalp. You can't get rid of them, because the demand was not as great as perceived, and you can't compete with the experts, which is what we've learned with prediction markets: "Why Almost Everyone Loses—Except a Few Sharks—on Prediction Markets - A WSJ analysis shows a small number of accounts on Polymarket and Kalshi—often pros using data-driven algorithmic trading—take home most of the winnings" https://www.wsj.com/finance/investing/polymarket-kalshi-betting-profits-prediction-markets-eb23ac11 But today everybody believes they're an expert. They're privy to all this information online, of course they know how to do it. But would you let someone who watched a lot of YouTube videos set your broken leg, or install a stent? OF COURSE NOT! Then why is the average punter so convinced they know everything about the concert business? They keep on beating up promoters, but the margins are amazingly thin. And not every show is successful., but the band still has to get paid. But there are stories of acts going on the road and coming home with no money and it must be someone's fault, and the obvious targets are the promoter and ticketing company. They're stealing from the acts! But did the act have to tour at this cost? And how much demand is really there? Think about it. You're a pretty good instrumentalist. Why don't you go on the road. But you wouldn't, because you can't sell enough tickets to make it financially viable. That's where the rubber meets the road, ticket sales...are enough people big enough fans that they'll lay down all that money to see you. They might listen to your record, but go to a show? There's not only the ticket price, but the transportation, the parking, the food... In most cases, it's a big decision. And while I'm quoting the "Wall Street Journal," did you see this article? "The Boy Band Heyday May Be Over—But the ‘Man Band’ Era Has Just Begun - From the Backstreet Boys to the Jonas Brothers to Boyz II Men, adult women are paying up to see their favorite grown-up boy bands this summer" https://www.wsj.com/arts-culture/music/nkotb-the-backstreet-boys-boyz-ii-men-tour-97f915e0 Here's the nougat: "Melissa Hicks, a 46-year-old Baltimore elementary-school teacher who bought tickets to see NKOTB three times in Vegas over July 4 weekend, a cheap seat for $153, then VIP tickets for $1,910 and $1,491—plus she paid for travel." That puts the kibosh on all those stories that the rich are buying the good seats, driving up prices. This woman is a SCHOOLTEACHER! But she paid four figures to see her favorite act, and she's not the only one! The dirty little secret is it's the fans who are paying outrageous sums for tickets, they want to be inside the building just that much. Which is why ticket prices are so high. Because if they're priced so the prognosticators won't bitch, the scalpers buy the ducats and then resell them at a huge markup, with the act getting none of this money. But you've got to blame somebody, and for some reason it's always Ticketmaster. Which may not be perfect, but... In most cases fans are missing the point, as are reporters who delve into this field only occasionally. The bottom line is fans have unlimited cash for the acts they want to see. Period. And no one is forcing them to see acts they don't want to, usually the price doesn't even matter. Either you want to go or you don't. The promoter can drop the price and very few are incentivized to buy. So, will this be a good summer for the concert business? Well, what about the stock market, which keeps going up despite the war in Iran and high gas prices... And the truth is most of the value run-up is a result of AI investment, and so far return has been underwhelming, so will there be a crash? You can make your own bet, buy stock or sell it or... But that would require a modicum of expertise. But when it comes to the show, everybody's an expert! But the dirty little secret is when it comes to so many shows, NO ONE knows exactly what the demand is. You can go on a sellout arena tour and the next time around you can have trouble moving theatre tickets. So are people pinched such that they won't go to shows this summer? Or is the truth that when it comes down to desirable acts, fans will beg, borrow and steal to be there. This is the game concert promoters play. As for those who are not superstars... The truth is since recording revenue for acts that can sell a couple of thousand tickets is so low they tour constantly and come back to markets a few times a year and at what point do fans say it's not worth it? That's when price plays a factor. Post Malone selling stadiums this summer? I wouldn't have taken that bet. But a promoter did. What would you do? If it was your money? But you ask yourself the equivalent question all the time... What's it worth for you to be in the building... You might not think it's worth $200, but if you don't pay the freight, you won't be there. So you bitch and moan, but you open your wallet and go to the show. -- Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/ -- Listen to the podcast: -iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj -Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp -- http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz -- If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter, http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1 If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=unsubscribe&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25 To change your email address http://lefsetz.com/lists/?p=preferences&uid=0eecea7b60b461717065cbde887c8e25