The cover of the March 2002 edition of Time magazine pictures a brazenly assured Paul David Hewson in full defiance mode along with the headline question: “Can Bono save the world?”.
Time isn’t adverse to a bit of tongue-in-cheek humour but one must assume that the magazine’s writers and editors were genuinely positing whether the U2 frontman could indeed pave the way to the eradication of extreme poverty while also progressing other social justice issues around the planet. He was, after all, the world’s biggest rock star of that era.
A similar if somewhat less dramatic question in recent days has been whether the Oasis Live ’25 tour announced last week – with Liam and Noel Gallagher performing together for the first time in 16 years – can, just maybe, help save the UK economy.
It’s no secret that the live music industry has had a difficult time of it since Covid, with the sector’s smaller venues in particular peril as the cost of everything from artists’ fees and beer through to electricity and staff wages has soared. According to the Music Venue Trust only 11 of the 34 grassroots venues on the first Oasis UK tour in 1994 still exist, the other 23 having closed.
One of those still on the go is Glasgow’s Cathouse, where my colleague Scott boasts about having spent the princely sum of £6.30 to see the band perform in June 1994.
Ticket prices for the upcoming tour have soared with a standard admission reportedly jumping in some cases to as much as £355 under the “dynamic pricing” mechanism operated by Ticketmaster, in which the cost for performances deemed “in demand” can be higher than initially advertised. The use of surge pricing by the band’s promoters – SJM Concerts, MCD, and DF Concerts & Events – has led to accusations of price gouging and promises of a government review by UK Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy.
With so much money washing about, and in the wake of the “Swift effect” earlier this year, it is understandable that speculation has turned to the potential economic impact of the reunion of the long-warring Gallagher brothers. According to calculations by Billboard, they are expected to perform to approximately 1.3 million people across the 17-show run which includes three nights at Edinburgh’s 67,000-capacity Murrayfield Stadium.
READ MORE: Oasis reunion will give ‘supersonic’ economic boost to UK, say business groups
Based on an average ticket price of £150 the tour could gross around £200 million in ticket sales alone. Throw in the VIP packages, merchandise, sponsorship and so forth and that figure will at least double.
The scope of the tour will be on par with that of the UK and Ireland leg of Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour which spanned 18 sold out shows in front of approximately 1.2 million people. It is estimated to have boosted UK spending by nearly £1 billion with the benefits washing over into the hospitality and travel sectors.
“These kinds of events generate massive amounts of money, not just for the band and promoters from ticket sales, but for a whole range of third parties,” says Paul Haywood-Schiefer, senior manager for business advisory firm Blick Rothenberg. “There will be huge sums of money spent on merchandise, travel, hotels, bars and restaurants, as well as creating jobs which are all linked directly to these gigs.
“With the reunion gigs being hosted at stadiums located in Cardiff, Manchester, London, Edinburgh and Dublin it won’t just be the national economy benefitting. Fans from around the globe will descend on those cities, bringing new money into the local economies as well.”
In 2023, 19.2 million “music tourists” – defined as someone who travels outside their hometown or city for a gig, or those visiting from overseas – attended live concerts and festivals in the UK. That was up 33% on the previous year, generating an estimated £8bn.
Those are big numbers and are certainly to be welcomed but in a prolonged period of constrained consumer finances the question that should be asked is how much of this is additional spending, versus money being diverted from elsewhere?
Expectations that shopkeepers would benefit from Taylor Swift’s three concerts in Edinburgh in June proved wide of the mark according to figures from the Scottish Retail Consortium, with deputy head Ewan MacDonald-Russell saying that consumers “appeared to focus on experiences ahead of shopping”. Some have suggested that the high price of tickets and accommodation during these mega events is leaving little spare cash to spend on items other than food and drink.
Indeed, it has been reported that a Holiday Inn Express room next August for the first two nights of the Oasis performances at Murrayfield will cost £1,300 due to anticipated demand. This has raised concerns about the budgetary impact for performers and audiences at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, which is taking place at the same time.
READ MORE: Taylor Swift, TRNSMT help boost economy as fans travel
In any event, economists have warned not to read too much into the fierce fight that broke out on Saturday when Oasis tickets went up for sale.
Fans may be willing to spend whatever it takes to attend the reunion tour, but in many cases this will result in them cutting back elsewhere on things such as shopping, eating out, or other leisure activities. The only significant amount of “new money” coming in will be from those travelling from abroad, though Oasis have suggested via social media that plans are underway to take the tour “to other continents outside of Europe later next year”.
It’s also worth noting that despite the blockbuster spending on tickets, travel and accommodation for the Taylor Swift concerts that took place in June, official GDP data for the UK has shown that arts, entertainment and recreation output crept up by a mere 0.1% compared to the previous month.
“You’re more likely to see a feel-good factor rather than a significant increase in GDP” from the Oasis tour, according to economist Modupe Adegbembo of Jeffries: “Any boost to consumer sentiment, even if it is a strong one, it’s likely to be limited if it isn’t also supported by an improving macro outlook.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel