I have been away for a while (The radiation levels here are returning to normal... Doooh)
This event may be posted elsewhere but you know me, "Never read anything unless you have already screwed up the project"

Here is a link to a Woodstock event in Albany, NY
Spirit of the Woodstock Generation: The Photographs of Elliott Landy

There will be displayes and several mini concerts in the months to come.
Here are the dates and ticket prices:
Melanie June 25th $22
Arlo July 1st $45
John Sebastian July 23rd $22
The Band Aug 6th $22
Country Joe Aug 28th $25

I have one question, and please dont flame me into H-E-double L.
Why is Arlo charging so much more than the other performers?
As I run to crawl under a rock I really am curious...
HomerJ

Arlo might have realized that he didn't charge enough the last time. Here's a list of the top 13 paid performers at the original Woodstock:

Jimi Hendrix - $18,000
Blood Sweat & Tears - $15,000
Creedence Clearwater Revival - $10,000
Joan Baez - $10,000
The Band - $7,500
Jefferson Airplane - $7,500
Janis Joplin - $7,500
Sly & the Family Stone - $7,000
Canned Heat - $6,500
The Who - $6,250
Richie Havens - $6,000
Arlo - $5,000
CSN&Y - $5,000
Source: Jon Weiner, "Woodstock Revisited," reprinted in Wilfred A. Ferrell & Nicholas A. Salerno, Strategies in Prose, 3rd ed. (1972).

Heck, I'd rather see Arlo than any of the folks who are ahead of him on last list.

Really, $45 ain't bad for a concert these days. If the public had any taste, it would be Arlo selling out large stadiums & the Stones or Broooooose Springsteen playing in the clubs. Fortunately for us (altho' not Arlo), the public has no taste & we get to see Arlo in smaller venues. So I don't begrudge him what he wants to charge.

I noticed alot of his shows seem to be around $45 anymore. Maybe it's cuz he has more folks traveling with him & has to pay them...

He's coming to Grand Rapids, MI in August at a new (2 years old) outdoor venue on a ticket with Judy Collins. Compared to ALL the other acts coming to town (all venues), his ticket price of $40/$45 is very reasonable. I'm happy to pay it!

HomerJ pops head back out from under rock for a brief look round....
I wonder how 1969 performer prices translate into 2004 prices...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Jimi Hendrix - $18,000
Blood Sweat & Tears - $15,000
Creedence Clearwater Revival - $10,000
Joan Baez - $10,000
The Band - $7,500
Jefferson Airplane - $7,500
Janis Joplin - $7,500
Sly & the Family Stone - $7,000
Canned Heat - $6,500
The Who - $6,250
Richie Havens - $6,000
Arlo - $5,000
CSN&Y - $5,000
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know the tickets to see all those bands and more in 69 (in a three day event) was $18.
Just to see 5 of them in seperate events in 2004 is $136 as in my post.
I cant blame the performers. We need to rationalize price .vs. desires and spend our money accordingly.
I must confess, I am also guilty of supporting rising ticket prices.
Tonight I will be going to see Simon & Garfunkel for about $135 a ticket (for the mid-priced seats) in Albany.
I hear my rock calling me..
Toodles
HomerJ

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
I didnt raise and accountant for nothin'! hee hee)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please re-read...I "raised" an account! Myself, I'm the embarrassment of the family.

But I've heard Arlo thank the audience more than once for paying a bit more sometimes so that he can play for people who can't pay at all. It's part of the nice feeling you get when you're there. I think it's tacky to talk about what Arlo makes if we're all not posting what we make and how much of it we contribute.

I'm done.

<center><FONT COLOR="#000080">--- Edited 2 times, lastly by RegFaith on Jun 18, 2004 ---</FONT></center>

That last table is interesting, coz I doubt that Arlo pulls down $19,730 for a night's work these days. It wouldn't have been possible in the venues where I've seen him.

So, the issue is not the valuation of the dollar, but the devaluation of the folk singer.

There's all kindsa charts & stuff to show the dollar compared to the euro (like, who cares?) or the Dow Jones Industrial Average (whatever the hell that is----and who is this Dow Jones guy anyway?) or the deficit as a percentage of the gross domestic product. What we really need is an index to show the value of the folk singer.

It seems from reading the set list threads that Arlo is playing venues that hold about 200 people. Say the ticket price is $45. This means that the ticket revenue is $9,000 if the show is sold out. I know Arlo probably doesn't get all of it, but just for the sake of argument, if we assume that he gets all $9,000, we divide this by $19,730 & find that a folk singer is only "worth" 45.6% of what he was worth in 1969.

And now, friends, we can see why the world is so screwed up.

Our next president should be a man (or woman!) who's prepared to address the devaluation of the folk singer.

That's why I'm gonna vote for Ramblin' Jack Elliott.

actually joe, based on all the glowing posts in the main forums from the land of Oz, I'd say that the folksinger is Priceless! (and I'm way impressed!)

Very true, Arnie, it's becoming evident that the Blunder Down Under Tour may be Arlo's greatest ever. Hopefully it's being heavily bootlegged & CD's will be available at an unscrupulous independent music store in our neighborhoods. (Oops! Was I allowed to say that here?)

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Arnie:

I'd say that the folksinger is Priceless! (and I'm way impressed!)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

- Hey P P Joe, what's incorrect in your calculations is that technically the $5K in 1969 was for 3 days. Regardless of how many actual shows were done. (Remember Arlo wasn't really "there" when he performed)

Quote "Why is Arlo charging so much more than the other performers?"

Hey Homer - I have 4 words for you...Damrosh Park, New York <img src="http://www.arlo.net/ubb/smilies/looney.gif" width=15 height=15>

PS - It's good to see you here again!!! Hope all is well.

<center><FONT COLOR="#000080">--- Edited 2 times, lastly by RegFaith on Jun 17, 2004 ---</FONT></center>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RegFaith:

- Hey P P Joe, what's incorrect in your calculations is that technically the $5K in 1969 was for 3 days. Regardless of how many actual shows were done. (Remember Arlo wasn't really "there" when he performed)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I'm also an accountant, RegFaith---and as Bob Newhart used to say in his comedy monologue about his accounting career, "Of course, it's true. Why would anybody lie about that?"

I did consider that Woodstock was 3 days long. I also considered that Arlo only performed 3 songs there. So, I coulda broken it down by the day or by the song, & decided not to complicate things, specially since I was just rambling anyway & didn't know where I was going with that.

That info would skew my figures a bit, but I'm gonna vote for Jack anyways.

BTW, ya'll might be interested in seeing
the complete Woodstock set list.

<img src="http://www.arlo.net/ubb/smilies/bounce.gif" width=31 height=31>

<center><FONT COLOR="#000080">--- Edited 1 times, lastly by RegFaith on Jun 18, 2004 ---</FONT></center>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RegFaith:

Please re-read...I "raised" an account! Myself, I'm the embarrassment of the family.

But I've heard Arlo thank the audience more than once for paying a bit more sometimes so that he can play for people who can't pay at all. It's part of the nice feeling you get when you're there. I think it's tacky to talk about what Arlo makes if we're all not posting what we make and how much of it we contribute.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I'm not sure I was being tacky. With all due respect to you, I ask that you please re-read also. In my very 1st post to this topic, I said that I didn't begrudge Arlo whatever he wanted to charge.

The stuff about computing a folk singer index was just an attempt at a little humor. Very little, apparently!

The list of earnings for Woodstock is something I posted in a thread that I started here 3 years ago, in which I pointed out that a lot of money was made protesting the Viet Nam War. At that time, I also pointed out that of all the performers at Woodstock, only Arlo & Joan Baez continued to sing for causes after it was no longer fashionable. I thought at the time, & I do now, that it was fair to post that list, coz at Woodstock you had performers on stage advocating resisting the draft & taking actions that could land a guy in jail, & in doing so were making a lot of money for a day's work (or 3 days) in 1969. So it's a little different than asking any of us what our income is.

BTW, I'm a fan of all of the Woodstock performers & oppose all wars & drafts, but the facts are the facts.

You make a good point----by paying extra, we may be helping Arlo perform in front of others less fortunate that we are, & I'm all for that.

This thread will be confusing to anybody reading it. I wanna point out that while I was typing my last post & "quoting" RegFaith, she edited the post I was quoting, removing all text cept for a jumping frog.

I just don't want anybody here thinking that I quoted her & edited what she said. I've had enough damn trouble about that.