We all know that Michael Jackson’s super-duper major comeback tour was planned to kick off on July 13th and last through March 6th, it’s already been hyped to death but now there’s nothing left to hype but…his death. And unlike John Entwistle, they can’t slap together a lookalike and go on with the show as planned.
So, how much money was lost, both invested and potential revenue? Was it a big enough loss to affect the DJIA or anything?
The concert promoters have undoubtedly lost a fortune, but the economy as a whole? This will make almost no difference.
Suppose the most popular restaurant in Austin closed down. This restaurant has always done huge business. So, does the Austin economy collapse? Of course not! People don’t take the money they WOULD have spent at that restaurant and burn it or flush it down the toilet. They spend it on something else! Maybe they eat at a different restaurant, or maybe they start taking cooking lessons and buying their own ingredients. Either way, they eventually spend that money somewhere in Austin, and the economy as a whole doesn’t suffer.
People who WOULD have gone to a Michael Jackson concert and bought a Michael Jackson t-shirt are not going to put that money under the mattress. They’ll spend it on some other form of entertainment. The economy won’t plummet as a result.
They can, however, put together a tribute concert in its place. Depending on how many acts they get that are of similar magnitude to Jackson’s drawing power, it could end up making the promoters even more money.
I’d also say it helped the economy. The extra record sales, the cable news channels are having great ratings, (though the time was already sold, it can be made up in other ways).
As for his concert, there is insurance to cover that, if it ever was serious. Jackson was known for not showing up to concert dates, so that would have to be bought eventually. Even such stars like Liza Minnelli who are much, much worse at cancelling out at the last minute that Jackson ever was, can get insurance so Jackson should’ve been able to get it.
Just saw on the news that music sales are up 50% since Friday and 60% of it is Michael Jackson stuff. That is likely helping the economy in a very minor way.
I would agree with you. His death is a net gain, for the reasons you cite.
I do disagree with the insurance things though. The presence of insurance doesn’t eliminate the losses, only who bore the risk of the losses and who will pay for the losses. To the extent the insurance companies lost money, it still affects the economy. (no matter how small)
You could theoretically discuss a work-loss economic impact, like the numbers they always pull out of their asses for people calling in sick for Star Wars movies and big sporting events. I know I was the only one trying to get any damned work done Thursday night in my department in the library.
The loss of ticket revenue is probably insignificant compared to the tourism revenues that will be lost - plane tickets, cab fares, hotel rooms, restaurant meals, etc. Especially for concerts this big, people often travel quite a distance.
I doubt they’ve lost very much, actually. If they were far enough along to have contributed significant capital, they would have had a big insurance policy in place. Big name performance tours are always insured in case the performer should get sick, break his neck, go crazy, get abducted by aliens, or die.
I heard this morning (news on public radio) that the concert promoter was only able to get insurance for the first 10 shows, out of 50. There were doubts about Jackson’s health holding out for a tour that long. Ouch, that’s going to hurt.
I doubt the concerts will lose a cent in ticket revenue. There is insurance, but more importantly, nearly all those who have tickets are either going to hold on to them as souvenirs or sell them on eBay.