Spyke
feddit.org

Data is ugly.

Cost of merch going away from the whole pot instead of just merch earnings... Etc.

30
ramble81reply
lemmy.zip

I makes perfect sense from a P&L perspective. You have your revenues on the left and then your expenses on the right.

I guess I’m confused what makes it ugly?

25
Gladaedreply
feddit.org

Because you have 2 somewhat independent revenue streams

-1
ramble81reply
lemmy.zip

But those merch sales then get divided up among income for all of the other groups… Performers, venue, etc.

8
4amreply

Are they confused because the label for total revenue looks like it’s splitting the bar for total revenue? Merch is combining with ticket sales, but the transparency of the label box makes it look (at a quick glance) that the total revenue bar is split - it is not, in fact. Just hard to see through the white box.

2

I mean yes. You can have mercy sales not related to the actual venue, and costs of merch get paid out to manufacturers and the merch csn fund the rest of thr empire.

1

Had the same thought. But how would you then include the total revenue?

4
feddit.uk

Thought merch would be much bigger proportion of total revenue tbh.

13
lemmy.world

Love these visualizations! Looks fair enough to me, except I cannot fathom why people pay these concert fees. And shouldn't Ticket Master show a massive take? Or does Swift get around using them?

9

Venue, FOH staff, maintenance, security, policing, Venue technical staff, etc.

And everything they do requires massive electricity bills.

3
lemmy.ca

Something off about the proportions. Like 1 billion should be half the size of 2 billion.

7

Looks OK to me. It’s 1 billion to 2.5 billion. That .5 billion makes a big difference.

2

So she could cut prices in half and still make more money than a reasonable person would spend in a lifetime but she doesn't.

Greedy scum, eat the rich!

6

I like the visual, although I'm dubious about the taxes :P

3

You reached the end

How the Taylor Swift Eras Tour makes money | Spyke