man, that artwork is awful...

.

This whole thing is very lame. Prince is doing almost the exact same thing he's been doing for the past while and has pasted "Rally 4 Peace" on top. What's disheartening about this is that Prince's "business as usual" really seems optimized for maximum profits and minimum commitment.

.

There's a party at Paisley Park, it seems to be the same as usual. $30 cover.

.

There's a show with short notice, expensive tickets, and (free?) promotion via local news stations.

.

The only functional difference between this show and other recent shows is that a "portion" of the proceeds go to charity. I dunno, I can't really criticize him on this because I don't know what he gives behind the scenes, but having an undisclosed amount of ticket sales go to charity always struck me as being the "cost-effective" way for a musician to boost his/her reputation.

.

I don't live in Baltimore, I don't know what Baltimore needs, but I don't think a Prince concert is particularly helpful. It's helpful for Prince's reputation, maybe, if he doesn't get too much backlash from people like me who think this show is laaaaaaaame.

.

I strongly suspect the reason we haven't heard the Baltimore song is because Prince hasn't worked out a way to monetize it yet (ie. make that Tidal deal happen). But he made sure that we knew he wrote the song. How does this help anyone at all except Prince? It's not like Prince is the guy shining a light on the situation in Baltimore, the people of Baltimore didn't need Prince's help to make themselves heard. I guess it's important for as many people as possible to show solidarity, but there are ways to do that that seem less self-serving...

fusk said:

man, that artwork is awful...

Huh. I rather like it. When I first saw the AOA cover I said you could practically draw Prince using nothing but circles these days. And there it is. What don't you like about it?

I love the artwork, too.

fusk said:

man, that artwork is awful...

.

This whole thing is very lame. Prince is doing almost the exact same thing he's been doing for the past while and has pasted "Rally 4 Peace" on top. What's disheartening about this is that Prince's "business as usual" really seems optimized for maximum profits and minimum commitment.

.

There's a party at Paisley Park, it seems to be the same as usual. $30 cover.

.

There's a show with short notice, expensive tickets, and (free?) promotion via local news stations.

.

The only functional difference between this show and other recent shows is that a "portion" of the proceeds go to charity. I dunno, I can't really criticize him on this because I don't know what he gives behind the scenes, but having an undisclosed amount of ticket sales go to charity always struck me as being the "cost-effective" way for a musician to boost his/her reputation.

.

I don't live in Baltimore, I don't know what Baltimore needs, but I don't think a Prince concert is particularly helpful. It's helpful for Prince's reputation, maybe, if he doesn't get too much backlash from people like me who think this show is laaaaaaaame.

.

I strongly suspect the reason we haven't heard the Baltimore song is because Prince hasn't worked out a way to monetize it yet (ie. make that Tidal deal happen). But he made sure that we knew he wrote the song. How does this help anyone at all except Prince? It's not like Prince is the guy shining a light on the situation in Baltimore, the people of Baltimore didn't need Prince's help to make themselves heard. I guess it's important for as many people as possible to show solidarity, but there are ways to do that that seem less self-serving...

I totally agree with you. Now there's tweets stating "Let's help Prince come up with a list of his most politically-charged songs 2 be played at the Peace Rally on Sunday." That just screams that no actual planning has really gone into this, at all.

it looks amateur to me in a way that really gets under my skin. As a teenager I might have made it and thought it was soooo cooool. As an adult, even thinking about that scenario makes me cringe with embarassment.

my hatred of the artwork is definitely a personal issue. If you guys like it, that's fine. I'll just be over here working out my neuroses...

Rolling Stone has an article about the concert. I was reading the comments section. The funniest one was this..."Have you ever been to a Prince concert? It's a bunch of middle aged white and asian housewives drinking Bud Light reliving their youth."

here is the article: http://www.rollingstone.c...e-20150506

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

$22.00 is not high. For the ones who say they sold out of those. At least set aside specially priced tickets for the underprivileged people. Give him some credit for that.

I agree $22 is not high at all. A hot dog at the concert will probably cost that much. However, to say that Prince set aside specially priced tickets for the underprivileged people is pushing it. When people went to buy tickets online, I don't think there was a selection that said "if you're poor, get your tickets here".

LittlePurpleYoda said:

lezama said:

Regardless of recent charts, Prince is still one of the worlds biggest touring acts, and that's regardless of how many angry orgers there are in the world. And as others have mentioned, there are far better ways of making money than one off shows very randomly when he could be making more than 10 times the money with a full tour.

.

As with a few other high ticket performances he's played on a one off basis in conjunction with Van Jones's Rebuild the Dream --Chicago, New Orleans-- his motivation for the shows was actually political, not because he needed the attention or money, but because he was helping Van raise money for the YesWeCode project.

.

And regarding yourspeculations about motives, I'm all for being skeptical when things don't add up, and certainly in the past there've been things with Prince where there was motive to be skeptical, but in each case you don't go from wild speculation to skepticism, you go from a sound analysis of facts and from THERE one should feel free to speculate if the facts don't add up. That way you don't start saying things that make you look completely silly and misinformed.

"Regardless of recent charts, Prince is still one of the worlds biggest touring acts, and that's regardless of how many angry orgers there are in the world."

The same can be said of Jimmy Buffett.

"And as others have mentioned, there are far better ways of making money than one off shows very randomly when he could be making more than 10 times the money with a full tour."

Unfortunately, what can be said of Jimmy Buffett here, cannot be said of Prince, unless he's opened a massively successful chain of restaurants & resorts I haven't heard about? Nope? Didn't think so. Just a string of one-off concerts. And as some have pointed out, they haven't been as successful in recent years as you want to think.

"And regarding yourspeculations about motives, I'm all for being skeptical when things don't add up, and certainly in the past there've been things with Prince where there was motive to be skeptical, but in each case you don't go from wild speculation to skepticism, you go from a sound analysis of facts and from THERE one should feel free to speculate if the facts don't add up. That way you don't start saying things that make you look completely silly and misinformed."

Look at the ticket prices. Who is the audience? Affluent white people & the drug kingpins of Baltimore? What sort of cause is Prince trying to rally?

Jimmy Buffett concerts are announced well in advance, as are 99% of every other major artist in the world. You're comparing apples to oranges. Compare Prince to someone else who does this particular concert strategy.

.

Regarding the audience, there are two different strategies one could focus on.. one that focuses on giving something experiential to the neglected populations of west baltimore, another that focuses on giving financial resources to community organizations serving that population. To reach either of those goals you have to chose different strategies, trying to combine the two just dilutes the results of both.

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

3rdeyedude said:

Rolling Stone has an article about the concert. I was reading the comments section. The funniest one was this..."Have you ever been to a Prince concert? It's a bunch of middle aged white and asian housewives drinking Bud Light reliving their youth."

here is the article: http://www.rollingstone.c...e-20150506

Except that this is not true at all. At least it wasn't the last time I saw him play (Musicology Tour).

fusk said:

man, that artwork is awful...

.

This whole thing is very lame. Prince is doing almost the exact same thing he's been doing for the past while and has pasted "Rally 4 Peace" on top. What's disheartening about this is that Prince's "business as usual" really seems optimized for maximum profits and minimum commitment.

.

There's a party at Paisley Park, it seems to be the same as usual. $30 cover.

.

There's a show with short notice, expensive tickets, and (free?) promotion via local news stations.

.

The only functional difference between this show and other recent shows is that a "portion" of the proceeds go to charity. I dunno, I can't really criticize him on this because I don't know what he gives behind the scenes, but having an undisclosed amount of ticket sales go to charity always struck me as being the "cost-effective" way for a musician to boost his/her reputation.

.

I don't live in Baltimore, I don't know what Baltimore needs, but I don't think a Prince concert is particularly helpful. It's helpful for Prince's reputation, maybe, if he doesn't get too much backlash from people like me who think this show is laaaaaaaame.

.

I strongly suspect the reason we haven't heard the Baltimore song is because Prince hasn't worked out a way to monetize it yet (ie. make that Tidal deal happen). But he made sure that we knew he wrote the song. How does this help anyone at all except Prince? It's not like Prince is the guy shining a light on the situation in Baltimore, the people of Baltimore didn't need Prince's help to make themselves heard. I guess it's important for as many people as possible to show solidarity, but there are ways to do that that seem less self-serving...

When causes work with celebrities its a two way affair, the causes seek the celebrities audience to raise attention to their issues, the celebrity seeks to help (if its a cause he/she is sympathetic to) and in turn wins because it demonstrates to that same audience that they care about something they might care about as well. Literally everything ANYONE does has a give and take. One sided altruism sounds idyllic and nice but it doesn't exist. Anywhere. People can take that and become cynical, or they can take it and realize that people do what they do because they feel its appropriate in any given moment. We all seek attention, we all want something in return when we give, etc etc. This is life... Just let those who want to give something for this do so. Being cynical and doing nothing but cheerleading in front of a tv or the internet is a lot less meaningful than all the people who are least trying to do something, even if their efforts are far from perfect.

how can they sell tix to a show where u dont know exactyl who is on the bill besides him?

lezama said:

When causes work with celebrities its a two way affair, the causes seek the celebrities audience to raise attention to their issues, the celebrity seeks to help (if its a cause he/she is sympathetic to) and in turn wins because it demonstrates to that same audience that they care about something they might care about as well. Literally everything ANYONE does has a give and take. One sided altruism sounds idyllic and nice but it doesn't exist. Anywhere. People can take that and become cynical, or they can take it and realize that people do what they do because they feel its appropriate in any given moment. We all seek attention, we all want something in return when we give, etc etc. This is life... Just let those who want to give something for this do so. Being cynical and doing nothing but cheerleading in front of a tv or the internet is a lot less meaningful than all the people who are least trying to do something, even if their efforts are far from perfect.

.

first off, saying "when causes work with celebrities" suggests that someone from Baltimore approached Prince to play a show. I think the phrase "when celebrities support a cause" is more accurate. (By the way, that's a fun thought experiment: suppose some community leader or charity called on Prince to help Baltimore. What do you suppose the community leader would ask for? Would it be a song nobody could listen to? Or a concert with more $500 tickets than $20 tickets?)

.

Anyway. I understand there's always that two way street when it comes to being generous in public. As you said it always benefits both parties. My personal way of judging these things is to ask "who does this benefit more?" In my judgment, this benefits Prince waaaay more than the city of Baltimore. Baltimore benefits too, it's true, and I think Prince actually cares about the issues, but in my estimation the two way street you're talking about has much more traffic going towards Prince.

.

Again, it's Prince helping out Prince-style. It isn't what anyone asked for. So I'm kind of suspicious of how beneficial this concert will be.

3rdeyedude said:

herb4 said:

fusk said:

lezama said:

When causes work with celebrities its a two way affair, the causes seek the celebrities audience to raise attention to their issues, the celebrity seeks to help (if its a cause he/she is sympathetic to) and in turn wins because it demonstrates to that same audience that they care about something they might care about as well. Literally everything ANYONE does has a give and take. One sided altruism sounds idyllic and nice but it doesn't exist. Anywhere. People can take that and become cynical, or they can take it and realize that people do what they do because they feel its appropriate in any given moment. We all seek attention, we all want something in return when we give, etc etc. This is life... Just let those who want to give something for this do so. Being cynical and doing nothing but cheerleading in front of a tv or the internet is a lot less meaningful than all the people who are least trying to do something, even if their efforts are far from perfect.

.

first off, saying "when causes work with celebrities" suggests that someone from Baltimore approached Prince to play a show. I think the phrase "when celebrities support a cause" is more accurate. (By the way, that's a fun thought experiment: suppose some community leader or charity called on Prince to help Baltimore. What do you suppose the community leader would ask for? Would it be a song nobody could listen to? Or a concert with more $500 tickets than $20 tickets?)

.

Anyway. I understand there's always that two way street when it comes to being generous in public. As you said it always benefits both parties. My personal way of judging these things is to ask "who does this benefit more?" In my judgment, this benefits Prince waaaay more than the city of Baltimore. Baltimore benefits too, it's true, and I think Prince actually cares about the issues, but in my estimation the two way street you're talking about has much more traffic going towards Prince.

.

Again, it's Prince helping out Prince-style. It isn't what anyone asked for. So I'm kind of suspicious of how beneficial this concert will be.

Yeah I was speaking in general, not about this specific case when mentioning the type of benefit celebrities bring to causes/issues. Because I don't like when people say that so and so is taking advantage of x,y,z.. it goes both ways. But I like your question regarding what the community would ask for. Its a great point. If the right people were advising him on this type of thing I think the approach would likely have been much different. But Im not in favor of kicking people just because somethings not perfect or even ideal (as long as they're not hurting anyone). If I see someone trying I commend them (at the very least) for their effort.

.

You could be right, but I'll wait to see what comes of it. We still don't know much of the logistics of who's doing what and who they're working with. Prince probably doesn't even know. Last minute things like this are logistic nightmares, so I feel sorry for his PR team and Trevor and whoever else is managing things for him because its a lot of pieces to put together on such short notice, especially if you want to pull it off without any hitches.

V10LETBLUES said:

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

I totally agree with you. Now there's tweets stating "Let's help Prince come up with a list of his most politically-charged songs 2 be played at the Peace Rally on Sunday." That just screams that no actual planning has really gone into this, at all.

Lol, it's not like people plan for riot concerts, is there a protocol? Lol. How well can a spur of the moment gesture of good will towards an unexpected full blown riot be planed? C'mon, people are now going out of their way to being asses here. [Edited 5/7/15 12:10pm]

Well enough to ensure Prince's safety and finances will be secure, I'm sure. So why not regarding everything else?

tatocorcu said:

herb4 said:

Except that this is not true at all. At least it wasn't the last time I saw him play (Musicology Tour).

I saw him last year in the UK three times and it wasn't the case either. There were a lot of people my age, but there were loads, and I mean loads, of very young people as well...

Thanks for the confirmation. Every time I've seen Prince, it's been a pretty equal mixture of black and white, young and old (though MOSTLY old). I think this guy confused a Prince show with a John Cougar Mellencamp, KISS or Bruce Springsteen concert. But it's a comments section and those are almost always entirely filled with garbage.

lezama said:

Yeah I was speaking in general, not about this specific case when mentioning the type of benefit celebrities bring to causes/issues. Because I don't like when people say that so and so is taking advantage of x,y,z.. it goes both ways. But I like your question regarding what the community would ask for. Its a great point. If the right people were advising him on this type of thing I think the approach would likely have been much different. But Im not in favor of kicking people just because somethings not perfect or even ideal (as long as they're not hurting anyone). If I see someone trying I commend them (at the very least) for their effort.

.

You could be right, but I'll wait to see what comes of it. We still don't know much of the logistics of who's doing what and who they're working with. Prince probably doesn't even know. Last minute things like this are logistic nightmares, so I feel sorry for his PR team and Trevor and whoever else is managing things for him because its a lot of pieces to put together on such short notice, especially if you want to pull it off without any hitches.

.

I agree. You're a lawyer who deals with charities, right? You probably hear a bit of trash talk about people who sincerely just want to help.

.

I forget which news site i was reading (about the prince show), but there were so many comments along the lines of, 'liberals are making a martyr of a thug,' 'this is just part of the national hate campaign against police,' etc etc... a lot of stuff varying from kinda racist to blatantly racist. It put things in perspective for me a bit. At the end of the day, I would much rather have Prince get the media attention instead of those goons.

[Edited 5/7/15 13:47pm]

Given the context of the recent riots, please don't start with Lat's Go Crazy

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

7roses said:

.

Who knows?! Anyway...I think it's all about giving people a sense of participation with this, and then he'll play whatever he wants...

Some people will even claim "hey that's my choice, I said that!"

.

Here's another idea, if you were allowed to bring signs to the concert...what would your sign say?

Snap out of it!

.

luvsexy4all said:

how can they sell tix to a show where u dont know exactyl who is on the bill besides him?

The same way other shows sell tickets

herb4 said:

tatocorcu said:

herb4 said: I saw him last year in the UK three times and it wasn't the case either. There were a lot of people my age, but there were loads, and I mean loads, of very young people as well...

Thanks for the confirmation. Every time I've seen Prince, it's been a pretty equal mixture of black and white, young and old (though MOSTLY old). I think this guy confused a Prince show with a John Cougar Mellencamp, KISS or Bruce Springsteen concert. But it's a comments section and those are almost always entirely filled with garbage.

jeez people, don't take it so seriously........it is just one element of his fans and I have seen plenty of them but it is just like the guys who dress up like Prince or the women who dress like hookers............plenty of people to make fun of at a Prince concert.........lighten up

andymacfunky said:

Given the context of the recent riots, please don't start with Lat's Go Crazy

well, maybe as the final encore he could play it and then afterwards tell looters to loot the streets once more and get him some more wigs from the Korean owned black wig shops in Baltimore

fusk said:

lezama said:

Yeah I was speaking in general, not about this specific case when mentioning the type of benefit celebrities bring to causes/issues. Because I don't like when people say that so and so is taking advantage of x,y,z.. it goes both ways. But I like your question regarding what the community would ask for. Its a great point. If the right people were advising him on this type of thing I think the approach would likely have been much different. But Im not in favor of kicking people just because somethings not perfect or even ideal (as long as they're not hurting anyone). If I see someone trying I commend them (at the very least) for their effort.

.

You could be right, but I'll wait to see what comes of it. We still don't know much of the logistics of who's doing what and who they're working with. Prince probably doesn't even know. Last minute things like this are logistic nightmares, so I feel sorry for his PR team and Trevor and whoever else is managing things for him because its a lot of pieces to put together on such short notice, especially if you want to pull it off without any hitches.

.

I agree. You're a lawyer who deals with charities, right? You probably hear a bit of trash talk about people who sincerely just want to help.

.

I forget which news site i was reading (about the prince show), but there were so many comments along the lines of, 'liberals are making a martyr of a thug,' 'this is just part of the national hate campaign against police,' etc etc... a lot of stuff varying from kinda racist to blatantly racist. It put things in perspective for me a bit. At the end of the day, I would much rather have Prince get the media attention instead of those goons.

[Edited 5/7/15 13:47pm]

Yeah I hear it all in assisting donors, assisting NGO's and then just being in the industry hearing the publics perception of the activities of celebrities, corporations and others who may be characterized as "do-gooders" or "rich liberals appropriating/patronizing the poor". I work a lot with the very wealthy and with corporations, and while there are bad seeds out there who do just want the public pat on the back for being good philanthropists, I've learned you can never make that generalization. I've worked with rich people who are 10 times more genuine, more trustworthy, than some poor "community leaders" who people think are doing things for noble reasons. Ive worked with plenty of people who have been frauded by small community leaders who people thought were genuine connections to certain social issues. And Ive worked with small NGO's that have been frauded by the rich and by corporations. Both for professional reasons, but also for the sake of my own sanity, Ive learned to pay close attention, but not judge until I see things unfold. At first I didn't know what I felt about that person's "open-letter" to Prince, but on retrospect I see it as a good thing. Just as the media has an important role in holding politicians and others accountable for their actions or inactions, so too community leaders and the public in general play a role in keeping philanthropic actors and celebrities playing that role accountable for their promises and other activities. So critiques, questions, all that stuff play an important role in people double checking their thought-process. We all play a part of the same ecosystem that should be working for the betterment of our communities.

it's cool hearing your perspective! thanks for sharing!

andymacfunky said:

Given the context of the recent riots, please don't start with Lat's Go Crazy

Maybe Chaos & Disorder.. or Sly's "There's a Riot Going on"

[Edited 5/7/15 18:59pm]

fusk said:

it's cool hearing your perspective! thanks for sharing!

Anytime man..

3rdeyedude said:

herb4 said:

Thanks for the confirmation. Every time I've seen Prince, it's been a pretty equal mixture of black and white, young and old (though MOSTLY old). I think this guy confused a Prince show with a John Cougar Mellencamp, KISS or Bruce Springsteen concert. But it's a comments section and those are almost always entirely filled with garbage.

jeez people, don't take it so seriously........it is just one element of his fans and I have seen plenty of them but it is just like the guys who dress up like Prince or the women who dress like hookers............plenty of people to make fun of at a Prince concert.........lighten up

Who was being heavy in any way? Or overly serious?