From my quick look at the source, this headline is just plain wrong. They simply multiply concert attendance by ticket price and call that Swift’s earnings. I’m assuming that other people need to be paid from those sales- like, I dunno, the production team, the dancers, the suppliers of staging, the ticket distributor, the cleanup crew, the people who make the lunch for the crew, the people who supply the ingredients for the lunch, the people who co-ordinate the vehicles that deliver the ingredients, the website design team, the stadiums themselves…
Without weighing in on the subject of TS being a billionaire, it’s just a terribly written article. Essentially just repeats the same phrases over and over about a handful of different states.
Also, where the fuck did they get an average lifespan of 47.9 years???> residents would still need to work a whopping 215 years, or 4.59 lifetimes…215 / 4.59 = 47.98My mistake. It didn’t click for me that the article is talking about working years, not lifespan. Still a shittily written article.
Believe it or not, you don’t work your whole life. If you start working at 19 and work until retirement age(67) that’s 48 years
Ticketmaster takes something like half straight off the top. Then there’s a separate venue owner much of the time, concessions, technical staff, security, medical, and finally Swift’s staff who build the stage and maintain her equipment, any other talent on stage and then, the last person to get paid is Taylor Swift.
It’s it odd how the media picks and chooses who to call out on making “too much” money.
She must be the wrong type of millionaire or something
She must be the wrong type of millionaire or something
She isn’t one at all, she’s a billionaire, and she’s definitely not a fucking victim.
If anything, it’s her fellow billionaires not getting enough shit, not her getting too much.
She is a paper billionaire. She is worth all that money if she sells the rights to all her songs, which she just remade to reclaim her rights to those songs, so she isn’t interested in selling.
She might be worth a lot, but she doesn’t have thatmuch because autonomy is worth more to her than money.
She’s not hurting, that’s for sure, but she doesn’t have money like people say.
Even if she did have the cash, she’s an artist who makes things that people love. You don’t need her art to live like you do healthcare and food so as much as I hate billionaires, she’s not anywhere near the same level of bad
And you, like, see her recording new albums and performing it live on tours, building an image etc. It is more labor than most billionaires do even though she’s well-assisted. Most fucking golfies delegate their stonks to professionals and do nothing beyound socialising with equals and hearing from serfs. In a sense, she’s a medieval noble that don’t just burn through her wealth like there’s no tommorow but also indulge herself in art that makes traction outside of her bubble, regular people resonate with her music and that itself gives her some significance. School curiculum on humanities are filled with the likes of her.
Yeah, there’s nothing abstract about how she got her wealth. We all see her do the things that make her money and it doesn’t involve fucking people over. Can’t say the same about most billionaires
And she’d probably be less uncomfortable about forteiting her wealth while securing her comfort and a way to keep creating and singing for people. At least that’s what I idelastically think about artists going rich.
Every billionaire is a paper billionaire. Like the others, she can borrow against the value of her assets.
Is she?
Yes, obviously. She owns a private jet and 8 homes (worth ~150 million), not to mention her other investments.
That’s not billions of dollars. She probably does have that in cash.
The boot being pink and glittery doesn’t make you any less of a bootlicker…
Guess I just reserve my ire for worse people. She works her ass off and produces actual stuff. Compare that to the CEOs of any billion dollar company who just try to milk every cent out of their customers they can.
I’ve never seen Taylor. Never bought any of her merch. I’ve given her nothing (maybe some portion of my Spotify sub), but I get to enjoy her music. That’s a pretty good gig where the main thing you do can be enjoyed by all almost for free and you still have that kind of money.
There are so many worse people on the planet I don’t understand hating on her at all. But you do you. I don’t have energy to hate you either. Have a good one.
It’s not about how much money you have. It’s owner class vs working class. And even in the case of owner class, I would say that when the thing you own and make money from is yourself and your own image, that’s very different from owning the fruits of other people’s labour.
Look at it realistically.
She’s not living a better life style than Frank Sinatra or Micheal Jackson did in their heyday.
I’m all for trashing Healthcare CEO billionaires, but dammit… TayTay earns her money and doesn’t intentionally kill anyone doing it.
No billionaire is an ethical billionaire
“Every billionair is bad except for the specific ones I like.”
70% of people so far who voted on my comment understood that I was being sarcastic. Not a bad hit rate, all things considered.
Capitalism is a system based on exploitation. She takes far, far, far more than her fair share, leading to others losing out.
Well, apart from the fact that she mostly doesn’t actually sing in her concerts (and when she does, it’s heavily Autotuned), and her band doesn’t actually play.
No one should be that rich. At the same time, thousands of people won’t show up to hear me sing.
I just don’t see how we can reconcile the two. People want to hear her sing and they’re willing to pay a lot for it.
The main alternative I can think of is for her to sing for free and have the government pay for the production of her shows. As popular as she is I can’t see that going over well. Putting the arts under political control leads to the unnecessary politicization of the arts.
Or, hear me out: tax the rich.
She also has a giant amount of people she pays with those earnings. Not saying she isn’t filthy rich, but she is an artist, writes most of her own words and music, and fought really hard to get compensated for it.
I respect her for all of that. She probably also does a ton of charity. What she does is not easy. Most people can’t even write a verse/chorus/verse/chorus lyric that works, let alone piano and guitar. Actually make it so other people enjoy it, and perform that shit night after night all over the world. That’s a shit ton of traveling, setting up, doing the set, tearing all of that huge production down, and moving on to the next gig.
I don’t listen to her at all, but I admire the amount of effort ot takes to do it. She’s not some CEO with a laptop flying around meeting other CEOs for drinks. People like her work hard. Other acts that do that have earned thier money too. Metallica, Rolling Stones, what have you. They write and perform and bust ass far more than you and me ever will.
I wasn’t expecting that to pour out of me, i apologize. Lol
And yet, she’s still a wealth hoarding billionaire. Womp womp.
All good!
I would say busting ass doesn’t scale your success, but will agree it is a prerequisite. A lot of people with talent and work ethic don’t make it anywhere. Your force multiplier is opportunity, and that is scarce and unevenly distributed.
Grosses, right? Do I need to wade into the article to find out where the math errors and artistic license are on reporting the income for someone I don’t know, will never know, and don’t much care about?
She sings well. She presents as a decent person. She’s making a lot of money providing a non-essential service people are dumping loads of discretionary spending on, and ancillary businesses in her touring path feel some osmotic benefit.
Cool.
Can we prioritize the Galen Westons and Trumps of the world for our hate and scorn? They seem to be doing far worse on a smaller scale that needs to be smaller still.
Here is my wild take: Making that much money by performing a concert is perfectly fine. Performing a concert is work. People who went there clearly consent to that.
In my opinion, this is different to making money by investing that is meaning making money by just owning stuff.
Right - this is not passive income. She’s just massively in-demand, and can only exist in one place at a time.
How much goes to everyone else at the venue would be a different conversation.
yes let’s defend the work ethic of Taylor swift, singer who definitely didn’t famously have rich parents who essentially made her success happen
Pretty sure she has financial managers to keep her earned money working for her by investing in stocks and bonds and such.
Probably. And that is problematic. But it is a completely different criticism.
Why is that problematic? Is it because you think that that is even possible is bad? Or that her investing her money is bad.
I’m genuinely curious.
The article doesn’t really specify, but it looks like they’re pretending she keeps all the money to herself. Weird comparison.
I’ve heard she pays her people pretty well, but I’m not in that industry so idk.
I’d say her being the only person able to get anything produced during the SAG-AFTRA strikes is why she’s being targeted. She proved that meeting their demands is still profitable.
https://fortune.com/2023/09/19/how-taylor-swift-made-eras-tour-movie-during-hollywood-strike/
“Earns”, heh. Cute.
Yeah? She isn’t billing you monthly.
You don’t have to buy anything from her.
Wanna fit any other logical fallacies in your argument? 🤓
So how much money did you give to Taylor Swift?
Oof. Apparently that was a yes, Chet. Looking at their stats for the season, that’s gonna be another in a long line of squibs.
Right you are, Steve. This kid’s got more empty swings than a Chernobyl playground. At least his mama loves him, eh?
What amount of work have you put into anything that people are willing to pay you for. I guarantee it’s not as much as Swift or the few other acts like her.
Ah, yes, the BDE of “guaranteeing” something in order to insinuate power over the concept. How predictably cishet. Which daddy taught you that? The first or the one you pay? 🤷🏼♂️
Tax them or shut the fuck up about it
lol fuck you.
Deny. Defend. Depose.
What? So like… Kill the person who is making shows that people pay money to go to?
What did she do to you beside make you feel small?
I don’t feel small. All billionaires are evil. Even ones who sing well. She could show her appreciation for such massive wealth by selling her tickets for $20, or however much it takes to break even. How much additional profit does one really need after hitting that billion dollar mark?
I guess I just expect more from people who have drained the economy of that kind of cash.
Live your truth, depose them.
Not specific to TS but for me personally, I’m just fucking sick of billionaires in this day and age. When so many are struggling just to make ends meet. It’s not their fault they’re this disgustingly rich, but it doesn’t make their unbalanced existence on this planet any easier to digest.
Deny. Defend. Depose.
Having fun stomping the meaning out of a thing you just learned?
Having fun being a billionaire shill?
There are hundreds of famous billionaires. Why the focus on her?
Why focus on defending her?
Why not focus on people who are actually hurting real people?
We are. Taylor Swift and the like account for a tiny fraction of billionaire hate. Say what you mean, which apparently is “why ever criticize someone I like?”
I don’t give a fuck about Taylor.
But if you put a billionaire oil baron, a billionaire healthcare exec, a billionaire drug manufacturer, and pop star in a room - you telling me the Pop Star has the same blood on her hands as all the others?
No one is arguing with that. Just with the implication that we cannot complain about anyone but the worst culprit
Strong public perception. Swift is often portrayed as a front runner of liberated women and modern (however-manyth wave) feminism as well as “woke” (I really hate that word) lifestyle aka pluralistic and aware of socioeconomic issues, which certain people don’t like. At the same time Swift was cited as one of the “worst” private jet owners for having taken the highest number of private flights in a certain group and timeframe (citation gravely needed). She is easy to attack due to the (supposedly) high moral standard people attribute to her image. Probably comparable to Gates in this regard.
Feminism has been weaponized today and it’s very entertaining to see it play out. :)
Everyone is being turned against eachother and these celebrities are just branded in a specific way to make them likeable to the majority.
Also
