I mean, I’m not an economist, but it seems to me that if 5000 people are willing to pay $200 bucks to see Lady Gaga, that’s what she’s worth, a million bucks a night. And if she can do that for 74 nights, then that’s what she’s worth too. What do you think she ought to be paid?
Yeah, really, so the problem’s a philosophical issue with the use of the term “worth”?
Since the news item is of a deal that involves her collecting $1 million a show, ISTM easily understood that the OP is referring to whether that is a viable investment vis-a-vis expected future value – i.e. is paying that price to put on Stefani Germanotta’s act “Lady Gaga” worth it as a MGM business decision, which is what we’ve been answering… because what else could we quantify in dollars and cents?
Like msmith537 suggests, MGM surely considered relative margins when choosing what acts to put in residence and figured that this one fit their business plan better. If they are *wrong * and the residency bombs and all lose their shirts on it, then we can say it was not worth it.
Never mind then. If we can’t understand each other, let’s leave it be.
Besides, I’d pay $200 to hear her do this.
Don’t be ridiculous. She’s a singular talent
No, she is not. She is a talent, but she is not unique or special like that. Right place, right time, right '80s artists to steal riffs from…
She’s very, very good at what she does, but she’s not, IMO, a “singular talent” unless we agree that we are all “singular talents”.
Her Joanne tour just wrapped up 4 weeks ago. The Joanne World Tour made $94,900,000 on 49 shows; that’s $1,936,734.69/show.
Now subtract all the expenses.
Now take $75,000,0000 and realize that expenses got cut by 90%.
Lady Gaga would have been a fool to turn this gig down, but she very clearly is not a fool. She’s a very smart, very talented lady with a ton of drive and a very good business sense.
So is she just going to sing Poker Face for a couple of hours each night or has she done something else since? 'Cos that’s a lot of moolah for a one hit wonder
She has released four platinum selling albums and has had over a dozen top-ten singles in the United States. That’s hardly a one-hit wonder.
Greed may be a lousy basis for running a society.
Envy is worse.
I agree with this. She is an impressive songwriter and singer. There was an earlier thread discussing why her popularity seems to have settled into a lower groove.
Hell - Poker Face isn’t even her only Billboard #1 hit - she’s had 3: Just Dance, Poker Face, and Born This Way.
While Bad Romance peaked at #2, it sold 12 million copies, making her only of only 7 artists to cross that line twice (the other being Poker Face, of course) in the digital era (Bruno Mars, Maroon 5, Kesha, Adele, Flo Rida, and Katy Perry are the other 6).
Well, that’s why Wrath ran things, even though he was youngest… 
He’s given up on the discussion, and I don’t want to prolong it. But I do believe it’s not about the word but the underlying concept of assigning value based on what the capitalist market determines is correct. That makes capitalism inherently true. It alone measures value. That inherently has philosophical implications that cannot be so easily separated from morality or anything else. It seems to me that there must always be some other sort of valuation to compare any definition of value against to prevent this.
I also don’t agree it’s clear what the OP is asking, because it’s a very sparse OP. It could just be a rhetorical question, with the answer “No, of course not.” And thus the thread was just about giving information. It could be a debate on what exactly value or worth actually is, with Gaga as a jumping off point. And, yes, it could be a question about justifying the monetary expense of paying her that much, and whether that is a sound business decision.
Hence I think GuanoLad’s response is just as valid as the ones that assume this is about whether it is a sound financial business decision.
Why are the earnings of entertainers made public, anyway?
WAG, but the casinos are publicly-owned corporations, so that pertinent shareholder information.
You’re in luck, then. After this gig, she will probably be able to afford you.
Regards,
Shodan
I suspect that MGM will make out just fine on this deal, and Lady Gaga probably welcomes the idea of not taking the act out on the road for a while. She cut the Joanne tour short recently due to chronic pain issues, so doing one show a week at the same spot probably has a lot of appeal to her right about now.
I’m not someone who you would expect to be a big fan of hers, I’m a married straight guy in my mid-50’s whose musical tastes tend more to Blues and Americana these days. Her musical style isn’t exactly in my wheelhouse, but I did go see her late last year and I gotta tell you - that woman is an undeniably enormous talent and she owns a fucking room harder than anybody I’ve ever seen. I would totally go see her again, and my wife and I might well plan a Las Vegas trip around seeing that show. We’re due to get back there in the next year or so anyway, it’s been a few years since we’ve been there.
I confess I’m not.
You’re the best Elendil’s Heir I’ve ever met; you got that. 
Upon review, the below looks like I’m a huge Gaga fan, which isn’t true. I don’t own any of her songs, and I wouldn’t travel to Vegas to see her perform. I’m just calling it like I see it.
I’m pretty sure Tom Jones started it. 
Or maybe Frank Sinatra? Sammy Davis Jr.?
I’m guessing that the million is just her salary. Usually the economics of a residency are that the house pays all expenses. But I haven’t seen the deal.
The economics of Vegas are different though. It’s mostly about the demographics and who you can bring to town. If Beyonce’s show was $1million more profitable, but drew audiences who don’t gamble, then it would be a huge loss for the hotel.
Lady Gaga’s concert with Tony Bennett made her a huge draw for the whale set. The only better choice I can think of would be Barbara Streisand.
Whether you happen to like her brand or not, Lady Gaga is an amazing talent, with a well trained voice,and the discipline to put on a great show night after night no matter what. There’s an iconic photo* of her breaking down after a show right around the time her father passed away. It’s such a statement on the professionalism required in a business where dates are scheduled months in advance, expensive technological sets are constructed and huge crowds converge all to see ONE PERSON and no substitutions are possible.
Beyond her voice she has a carefully crafted image and personna which appeals to a very broad swath of people. However you feel about the meat dress, all these years later you know what I meant when I mentioned it. Ed Sheeran on Lady Gaga.
She has the talent, the presence, the creativity and the reliability to pull this off, draw the right crowd, keep it fresh, and keep on doing it. Yeah, totally worth it.
*And of course I can’t find it now. Anybody know the one who’s got the google-fu to pull it out of the zillions of photos of her on the web?