Thread

1. dofm · 1790058214 · focus · HN ↗

   Oh dear.

   The redeveloped Battersea Power Station is one of the most soulless, dead-eyed, wealth-obsessed places in all of London. This is a terrible place to put something like a music venue, unless your target market is the adult children of emigres with unexplained wealth, and I think it speaks to Apple’s sanitised, emotionally-distant, luxury-focussed worldview that they would consider it.

   Incredible building. Awful development. They could have donated ten million quid to the Music Venue Trust instead.

   The free U2 album looks like the work of a tastemaker by comparison.

   1. tokioyoyo · 1790059112 · focus · HN ↗

      I mean, you can say that Fred again and co. are "sanitised", "corpo music" and etc. But quite a lot of people will happily buy the tickets, and go to the concerts. The only reason I'm bringing him up, is cause Apple featured his live concert.

      Obviously Apple is in the game of making money in the end. Your local DJ that plays sets at 2am on a weekday probably won't be performing at their venue. But I wouldn't call every random friend group "adult children emigres with unexplained wealth" as a single target audience. A lot of people will spend a couple of hundred $ for a fun night out, and they don't have to be extremely rich.

      1. dofm · 1790059522 · focus · HN ↗

         > Your local DJ that plays sets at 2am on a weekday probably won't be performing at their venue.

         This is a really tone-deaf straw man caricature of what I am saying, I'm afraid.

         > But I wouldn't call every random friend group "adult children emigres with unexplained wealth" as a single target audience.

         It's a pretty solid, not even satirical summary of many of the people who live in that development. It's not really a place for Londoners.

         If I were a gambling man I would suggest to you that tickets for those events are likely to start at more than the couple of hundred dollars you are suggesting people spend without thinking. The cheapest standing tickets for the next Oasis tour (at very large music stadiums) are more than $225.

         1. tokioyoyo · 1790067984 · focus · HN ↗

            Oasis was going for more here in Tokyo for standing tickets. I know multiple people who went, despite it being way above their budgets. I’m not sure why you think $400s is something top 20% of income levels can’t afford. Keep in mind, the average age is higher than it was ever before. There are a lot of single / DINK people, who can easily shell out some money without a blink, and not have a lot of money in their savings.

            1. dofm · 1790074259 · focus · HN ↗

               > I’m not sure why you think $400s is something top 20% of income levels can’t afford

               I am not sure why I am replying to a sentence formulated like this but you surely understand I said nothing about $400, the top 20% of income levels, or even not being able to afford it?

               If you’re going to disagree with me it might be better to disagree with what I said, not a straw man you constructed for the purpose.

               I know that this is a common way to argue here on HN but it’s just weird.

               1. jrowen · 1790083591 · focus · HN ↗

                  I feel like you're overusing the strawman card to avoid engaging with their argument. I think your take is overall very pessimistic. They likely won't have acts like Oasis in that venue and the pricing will probably be premium but broadly attainable, like their products.

                  1. dofm · 1790084969 · focus · HN ↗

                     Sorry, but I'm not. It literally was not something I said or was actually representative of my argument, so I don't know how it is something you can say "I don't know why you think…"

                     Why would I respond to such a mischaracterisation except to say it was a mischaracterisation?

                     For clarity: I am not talking about affordability. I am talking about the profoundly anti-culture nature of that specific place and the people who can afford to live in it. As I said in my comment, there are other ways Apple could contribute to live music that didn't involve putting a pet music venue in such a soulless place.

                     1. jrowen · 1790113356 · focus · HN ↗

                        Why would I respond to such a mischaracterisation except to say it was a mischaracterisation?

                        It's called being charitable. Trying to understand what their point is and responding to that for the sake of advancing the conversation, rather than grinding it to a halt with pedantic quibbles over inaccuracies or poor phrasing.

                        I've never been so I can't really comment on the atmosphere of the building.

                        You made a pretty specific point and prediction about the price of tickets, which I responded to, but now you're not talking about affordability. Because the suggestion that they might not be doing the most soulless oligarchic thing ever in this place doesn't fit your doom narrative.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.