Dark Star Orchestra – Live at Variety Playhouse

With my son in the Winter Break doldrums, I searched for a concert outing to give him a lift.  Step 1: Look at the concert calendar at my favorite Atlanta venue: Variety Playhouse.  

Dark Star Orchestra… a band that plays complete Grateful Dead concerts with the songs in the sequence in which they were first played.  This particular Saturday evening, they played the Dead’s 6/29/76 concert from the Auditorium Theatre in Chicago, IL, plus some extras.  These things matter to Dead Heads.

I’m not a Dead Head.  My son is not either.  Or his best friend, who tagged along. 

I’m familiar with about 3 or 4 of their songs, and none of those were played on 6/29/76.   Maybe if I had caught DSO on another night… because per their website, they play a different show each time they play.  And, this was their 20th show in 25 days.  That’s quite a repertoire.  Note: If you’re going to make a career as a cover band, choose someone like The Go-Go’s.  Hour and 40 minutes, and you’re done.  Pink Floyd?  Maybe two hours.  The Grateful Dead?  Hour and a half.  Then an intermission.  Then play for another hour and a half.  20 shows in 25 days?  They didn’t show it.

Did they sound like the Grateful Dead?  Likely very similar.  Did their mannerisms match those of the original band members?  I don’t know, but a chance encounter with a friend at the show suggested that they did.  Was it a good show?  Definitely.  It was sold out for a reason.

I was curious as to who would attend a Dead cover band show.  Old Dead Heads?  Or new Dead Heads?  Both, and in between.  Musically, they were entertaining.  When musicians play others’ music, presumably note for note, I guess it’s a credit to the Dead.  In any case, guitarist/singer Jeff Mattson’s solos were varied and interesting, and the other musicians (keyboards, bass, rhythm guitar, two drums, female singer) rounded out the spectrum nicely.  The band had a very relaxed pace between songs.  What was interesting is that the guitarists played the same guitars the entire show, and with minimal foot pedal gimmickry.  That’s rare these days.

One of the perils of standing about 5 hours on a concrete floor, besides an aching back, is the unexpected movement of the concert goers.  A 5’8 250 pound guy suddenly swerves in circular motions, clearing space.  A very much enraptured couple dance closely and suggestively enough to… Others suddenly bend forward to light an illicit drug.  And not just the young guys, but the mid-50’s guy who I’d peg as a fed up corporate drone, and the 60+ year old gentleman who apparently still enjoys his youth.  Then there’s the guy who, although 20 years younger, must also have a bad back because he shifts constantly from left to right, pushing others away inch by inch.  Bah, whatever.  At least I didn’t have a 6’6 inch person stand in front, and I do like to see up close.  The crowd is part of the experience, and they were experiencing just what they wanted – rock n’ roll, drugs, and at least a promise of sex later.  Parting comment here.  If a guy brings a date, and she’s at best, 5’5”, does it really make sense to take her to the floor area where she has no chance of a view?  Just asking.

I’m still not a Dead Head, but it was a fine Saturday evening.

Set list:

Tennessee Jed
Cassidy
Peggy-O
Mama Tried
Mission In The Rain
Looks Like Rain
Brown Eyed Women
Lazy Lightnin'
Supplication
Row Jimmy
The Music Never Stopped > Might As Well

Intermission

Samson And Delilah
Candyman
Playing In The Band > The Wheel > Playing In The Band Reprise
Saint Stephen > Not Fade Away > Saint Stephen > One More Saturday Night

Encore: U.S. Blues (complete 1976 show)

Extras: Easy Wind > Going Down The Road Feeling Bad

25th Work Anniversary

First grade:

Teacher:  “And what do you want to be when you grow up?”
Reese: “I don’t know.”
Teacher: “Do you want to be a fireman?  A police officer?  A doctor?”
Reese: “No, that’s far too common, silly teacher.  I want to be a Loss Control Engineer!”
Teacher: “A what?”

And for the last 25 years, that’s the question I have to answer when people ask what I do.  Today marks my 25th year with the same employer.  Strangely enough, I remember within a month of starting my job, I was sitting at the equivalent of a school desk, reading very boring introductory manuals, and being rather taken by the office decor – tan desks, green carpets, burgundy walls.  It was an open floor plan as their were no cubes “back in those days,” and I thought to myself, “I could work here forever.”

Prophetic?  Forever is a long time.  I hope to leave someday at a time of my choosing rather than some type of fatal event.  Many would say that I am an anachronism, a 21st century employee who has worked for exactly one employer since leaving college.  And statistics would prove them right.

The “job” has changed over the years, beyond an eventual change in responsibilities to a managing role.  But the work that I (or we) do remains very much the same, even if packaged in different means and metrics.  We’ve expanded our resources, hired better people, and vastly improved the quality and consistency of what we do.  We have demonstrable results that impact company profits.  

Those changes over the years are far more important than technological changes from mail>fax>email>cell or paper files/manuals/workshops to e-everything.  Looking back, I’m aware of these changes and expect more of them.  But, technological changes are not meaningful regarding a job experience.  They’re facilitators, and, honestly, dictation wasn’t so bad way back when. 

A 401(k) program existed when I was hired.  The notion was that it put retirement funding into the hands of individuals who, even in 1987, were expected to change jobs, possibly many times, during their career.  Funded retirement plans were already on the way out.  I look around at many others in my division, and it seems that we didn’t get the memo on that particular shift in cultural norms.  It speaks well both of my employer and the job satisfaction that comes from my occupation that many of the people I work with today have tenures as long or longer than mine, which is especially notable in a corporate culture that does not favor place-holders.  We’re measurably productive.

At 25 years also comes a natural reflection on the term “company loyalty.” I have not thought a whole lot about it, at least until the recent barrage of well wishers remarking on a quarter century in one place.  There has always been an understanding between me, myself, and I that the company would employ me for as long as it was worthwhile to do so, and I would work for them as long as I felt it was worthwhile to do so.  That’s not loyalty; that’s an agreement.  I see it as factual, though I’m sure many who have experienced the negative outcomes of that philosophy would consider it callous or worse.

I have gotten to know a lot of people - in my department, in other departments, in our Home Office, in many other offices.  I’m mindful of it almost every day when I greet people in the halls and elsewhere.  I’m wired in to the place.  Those relationships represent an organizational reach that allows me to get things done – better – faster – more constructively.  That’s at least one benefit of longevity, but not a factor in loyalty.

I know these people because of my interactions with them through the years.  I have opinions about each of them built on work experience.   The flip side of this professional judgment of others is that I’m also particularly aware of my own “brand.”  I don’t know exactly what others think of me.  To some extent, that will vary depending on the duration and frequency of personal interactions which guide or shape their conclusions about my value.  But, even a brief interaction, positive or negative, can lift or derail a career.  It wasn’t until year 15 or so that someone coached me to an awareness that others’ perceptions should not be passively allowed, but actively shaped.  Whatever my “brand” currently is, I’m confident it could purchase a passport for me to go elsewhere, but it’s not exportable itself.  It would take time to validate, if not recreate.  Still, personal evolution or related achievements are not a reason for or a consequence of company loyalty. 

Some would point towards longevity with an employer as a failure to maximize my capital potential.  Does this result from a conservative nature that is afraid to risk stepping in potentially greener grass?  Perhaps.  But, I know my lawn very, very well.  It’s not just a matter of comfort; it’s the result of investment.  There’s been a lot of seeding, watering, mowing, raking… and, of course, fertilizer.  This company has a good thing going, and I, on most days, actually enjoy my work. 

Up until I interviewed for the job, I really had no idea what this particular occupation was about, and, in fact, it would take years to fully understand it.  There’s a difference between “work” and “vocation.”  Some people are naturally led into a profession with a calling.  Most are not.  But within one’s lifespan, the “work” should add to the richness of one’s life, while necessarily affording it as well.  And what a rich job this has been.  It has offered an amazing platform to learn – people, places, businesses, industries, ideas – a career perfect for a person who enjoys absorbing and contemplating everyday experiences.  It’s a bonus that it’s a role that at the point of delivery is designed to help others from physical and financial harm.  I’ve thus neatly summed up what is an occupation loyalty, but not company loyalty.

For those who know me from work and may venture to these lines, it’s pretty obvious that I’m just tossing pebbles in a pond rather than getting to the inevitable point.   The people.  I like skipping rocks.  Patience.

Companies, like governments or other institutions, are not paper tigers.  From a transactional level, one’s opinion of any organization is informed by the value demonstrated by its people.  Internally, it’s the same.  Working with others is just as much a transaction, and employees depend upon each other for value at every point of need, else the delivery is flawed. 

A recent understanding is that liking the people I work with has far less to do with my job satisfaction than I might have otherwise thought.  It certainly helps, and it does play a large role in enjoying work on a day to day basis.  But over the long term, respecting coworkers at any and every level in the organization is far more important.  An abbreviated definition of “quality outcome” is to do the right thing the right way.  We have more than our share of people who do both, consistently, and, ultimately, it is my confidence in the collective talents of so many that keeps me here.  They position me for success, or, viewed oppositely, they minimize frustrations.  It’s the type of environment in which I, and I would hope all, would want to work. 

Therefore, it saddens me when coworkers – great employees, whether “friends” or not – retire, even while I’m happy for them.  The workplace is not as it was. 

It wounds me when fine professionals leave for other opportunities.  I know that there are logical reasons for promotions, wages, relocations due to life changes, etc.  And there are certainly frustrations or pressures that motivate some to leave.  But, I want to work with the best people, and as such, it frustrates me when they choose not to remain here.  When they leave, the workplace, in some idyllic fashion, is not as it should be. 

Incoming talent matters.  It thrills me when younger minds enter and leap forward in their abilities.  I’m finally wizened to the point that I can teach things not found in e-learning, and I feel the organizational necessity of doing just that.  The workplace is always becoming.

25 years is very much a reflection on aging, and it mirrors observations through other phases of life, from school, to family, to other activities.  Like everything else, work is generational, a term which now speaks equally to what is ahead as it does to what is behind. 

It’s been a challenging and rewarding 25 years.  As in counting birthdays, the only negatives come when numbers are put to it.  It wasn’t so long ago that other coworkers had their 25th anniversaries, only, they’ve more recently celebrated 30 and 35 years.  Time flies, and I really don’t want to absorb or contemplate that just now.  I’ve got other things to do so I can go to bed and get up for work in the morning.

To all that have played a role, thank you.

A Boys Night Out, v 2.0

This the first of two posts that touch on the passing of time.  Three years ago, my concert buddy and other friends went out for an evening of middle-aged revelry, not that we were all middle-aged.  But it was the mature type of outing that involved burgers, beer, and music.  Actually, that sounds pretty good for all (legal) ages.

But it was three years ago.

The obvious (to me) implication was that it shouldn’t take as long as it seems to for people to get together and do things that they enjoy.  There are always reasons, and priorities win out.  The same day, a coworker told me his household motto:  “No regrets.”  From school grades, to hobbies, to any decisions and or their consequences, conduct yourself in a manner so that when “it” is done, there are no regrets.  The maintenance of friendships and a reasonable pursuit of amusements definitely fall within that motto.

The general plan was similar to the last, but in execution it was compressed a bit.  Atlanta traffic preempted a possible visit to Decatur CD, and musical disinterest abbreviated an otherwise opened conclusion to the evening.  Ah, but in between… the joy of beer, echoes of “Morrison’s Lament,” our own lamentations the forthcoming extinction of CDs in the next 3-5 years, recollections of The Who in concert, the diminishing skills and increasing prices of veteran rockers, favorite concerts, and kindest regards to St. Bernardus, who saw us through the evening.  Hover over the images for further descriptions.

All in all, the early exit to the show worked well, as St. Bernardus, while quite agreeable, played to a much faster pace.  And, after all, it was a work night.

A 50 lb Rifle with $40 Bullets

I enjoy occasional target shooting, with pistols or rifles.  I’ve had an interest in guns since I wandered what is now Star Fort finding civil war musket balls and otherwise roaming the woods around my neighborhood with my friends sporting Daisy BB guns.  I’ve toyed around with guns as an adult, but never gotten serious about them as far as studying ballistics, collecting, or even better shooting results.  It’s just fun to shoot, though admittedly more fun when I hit the target.

I’ve watched enough movies and TV to wonder what it might be like to shoot an AK-47 or a Tommy Gun (or, a turret on a Battleship).  Sniper rifles… well, sure, but it takes a more practiced hand, a lengthy gun range, and an accompanying budget.   I just like to shoot.  I don’t like to spend tons of money on it.

Some, however do and will. 

A related article states that this .90 caliber rifle, of which 3 were made, has a 2400 grain bullet, propelled by 240 grains of powder. As such it’s comparable to a World War I-era tank round or a 20mm cannon (think WWII fighter planes) in terms of kinetic energy.

Watching the video, I don’t know that it would be fun to shoot.  And given the careful filming involved, I’d speculate that the broad side of a barn at which they may be aiming didn’t suffer for their experience. 

Favorite feedback comment on YouTube:  “Chuck Norris has a derringer in this caliber.”

Obamacare vs. The Church

The Obama administration announced recently that it would not exempt non-profit religious organizations from meeting governmental health care requirements to provide reproductive health care services (for free) as part of their employee insurance programs.

This does seem a comeuppance for those Catholics who supported Obamacare’s passage, as the provisions do away with “conscience exemptions” in favor of a governmental mandate for contraceptives.

But, does this surprise anyone?  Rather than hide behind code phrases and innocuous sound bite terminology, I’ll try to put various positions plainly, then chime in with an opinion.

Pro-choice:  What? I said contraceptives, so why are we starting here?  Bear with me.

These are folks who vocally and stridently favor a woman’s right to abort their fetus at any time before birth as well as a far greater silent majority who believe it should be left to an individual’s choice to abort.  They object to any type of government ban and resist government intrusion of any type (parental or father consent, required pre-counseling, etc.) between making a decision and obtaining service.  Others would point to 20th century history of the dangers of women seeking illegal abortions and oppose a return to that possibility.

Many add that they personally would never have an abortion themselves, but, presumably, a “what if” mentality demands that options be kept open.  This is consistent with a Libertarian “less is more” regulatory aversion which warms to “liberty” as the ability to do as we please as long as no one else is harmed.  This societal free-will is as American as apple pie.

There is likely another subset whose opinions are primarily influenced by world population trends, the societal cost of unwanted children, or other observational poses about what is best for others.

Pro-life:  These, largely for faith based reasons, hold that a fetus is a human being, with intrinsic value ordained by their Creator of choice, and entitled to life regardless of the circumstances or impact upon the mother.  They believe “abortion” is an opiate of word choice, and prefer to use plainer language such as “killing” and “murder.”  One could, and many do, argue for killing a fetus in specific cases of rape or life endangerment to the mother while pregnant, but these are diversionary tactics that attempt to demolish a mountain by poking at an ant hill, statistically speaking.  I think that most would agree that the mountain has much more to do with convenience than a moral or medical need.

A subset here is a smaller group of people who don’t subscribe to a particular faith, but who have an appreciation for life should be cherished and protected.

Side note: Outside of the neatly opposed forces, are those who are actually close to the subject matter, who either suffer from a great guilt or who seek forgiveness, whether from a deity or societal approval.  They rarely get a chance to speak, hurt greatly, and should they reach out, they’re subject to manipulation (see Norma McCorvey in Roe vs. Wade).  They deserve far more compassion than those of us who sit on either side venting opinions in any format.  They’re not the point here.

Background: The sides thus delineated, abortion is not specifically required by Obamacare.  “Reproductive health care” in its “full range” is, including contraceptives that are used to prevent pregnancy and “emergency contraceptives” which are used to abort(kill) a fetus in the days and weeks after conception – essentially morning after pills.

And both sides want their 5 minutes on Fox News or CNN.

I heard on the radio this afternoon a Catholic woman who fervently supported the new regulation, herself a member of the same Catholic church that would define killing a fetus as putting one’s soul in jeopardy and require ex-communication from the Church.  Her argument was essentially that the Church has not evolved with societal needs or, particularly, women’s needs.  Her position (not to be misconstrued with a belief, as one might have in the Church’s teachings) is that the free access to contraceptives of both sorts (pre and post conception) is needed by women, particularly poor women, and that, overall, the societal benefit of Obamacare is consistent with the Church’s mission to help the needy.  It is, in fact, almost the same argument that Sister Carol Keehan, President and CEO of the Catholic Health Association, used to rally support when Obamacare was struggling for passage.  Ah, but there would always be an exception for faith based organizations…

Anyone who has paid any attention to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act knows that the end goal is nationalized health care.  It just couldn’t be done in a single step.  Create governmental insurance options, require people to participate, make them less expensive than privately purchased plans through the use of taxpayer subsidies, and everyone, whether an employer or mandated individual, will eventually buy in.  And a national plan can’t be effectively administered based on exceptions based on one’s race, gender, sexual preference, country of origin, political party, faith, or lack of same.  One size must fit all until end-of-life strategies sort themselves out into a dataset that calculates the cost vs. the value of life.

It’s here, and public rumbling or political fumbling aside, it’s here to stay.

Opinion: Everyone believes in a God, even if they do not.  One’s idea of God may be a creationist, all powerful force that does or does not seek a relationship with the individual.  It may be Mother Earth, whose blessings are abundant and whose needs must be held highest.  It could be that dazzling little bit of light caught in a crystal hanging by the window that binds one to some sense of spirituality beyond the physical plane.  Or, disavowing any such related notion, it’s No God (or No Apparent God) which allows for a delightful cosmic accident with no ultimate accountabilities and a working philosophy of being a God to oneself. 

As I’ve said somewhere else on this blog, my opinion is that there are those who know a God and feel a directing influence on their lives, there are those who seek the benefits of having a God without necessarily subscribing to a particular notion of the divine, and there are those who simply try not to think about it for fear of, not Hell, but the burdensome intrusion into how their lives might have to change if God were allowed into it.

Those are categories, and I cannot and would not “judge” where any specific individual lies within that framework.  On the one hand, the Bible tells me not to, and secondly, I’ve experienced enough and known enough people to understand that outward expressions can vary from overly reserved to overly demonstrative, and such books can’t be judged by their covers.  I shouldn’t judge, and I would be very poor at it anyway.

And political or social posturing aside, I have to turn to my own faith to inform what comes across as an opinion, but necessarily becomes a held belief, as to the rightness or wrongness of a thing.  If I trust in the Bible, then I understand that God ordained government.  This wasn’t done from the beginning, but rather when the Jewish people demanded a King like the surrounding Pagan nations had at the time.  God gave them one (and legitimized taxation was begot).  Government was placed with accompanying responsibilities over the people, regardless of its particular form.

In the U.S., we tend to think of “democratic” or “representative republic” terms, where the government is accountable to the people through the power of the vote.  From one system to another, it’s been shown that people can overthrow a government or gradually change one, but in Biblical terms, the government – and principally those who engage in policy and its execution – are accountable to God.  It’s one of many reasons that Christians are called upon to pray for governmental leaders, regardless of political leanings.  God’s commandments, whether on tablet or elsewhere within Holy writ, are not changeable by any established governmental authority – be it the US Government, a particular President, or even an international faith organization.

When the authorities force upon believers a command to do something that contradicts God, the right thing for a believer to do is to obey the higher authority.

So, when the government forces a faith based organization to fund an insurance program with provisions that are not reconcilable with church teachings, is that sufficient cause for disobedience?  My answer… no.

The government is not forcing anyone to use contraceptives (an issue for Catholics and some Protestants) or to kill a fetus (an issue to all Catholics and Protestants).

Assuming that every person who works for a Catholic organization would refrain from using contraceptive services afforded them in their insurance package due to their abiding faith and adherence to Church teaching (Catholic) and/or the Bible (Protestant), is forcing that organization to, in essence, subsidize a program that offers those services to others be cause for disobedience? 

Pay unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and unto God what is God’s. 

The problem, at its heart, is not a governmental one.  The greater failure belongs to those individuals who say they believe in something immutable then water it down or reinterpret it to fit their own views and priorities.   A flawed government should never be a surprise.  People are flawed.

Cirque du Superbowl

Madonna – good Superbowl halftime performance or not?  Well, she was better than the remains of The Who, moved better than the Black Eyed Peas, and looked much, much younger than the Stones (even taking Keith Richards out of the comparison). 

On the other hand, she didn’t sing as well as U2, Bruce, Tom Petty, or Paul McCartney because, well, she didn’t sing at all.  But the lip synching was really, really good, as was the agility of a 53 year old who surprisingly remains almost relevant to pop culture.  The Roman Empire with Egyptian tendency themed costumes were bright and shiny, and the lighting effects were clever as always.  But we’ve come to expect the spectacle.  It seems it gets harder to stir the imagination as such things progress.

Personally, though, I took note of two things.  Sure, the halftime announcers were long-winded, but to move the staging apparatus onto the field and have it ready to go in about 10 minutes was pretty amazing.  I’m surprised that there weren’t ruts in the ground from the practice runs. 

Despite the token appearance of Cee Lo Green and other minor celebs, there was nothing really surprising about it.   Well, except… Sketchy Andy.

In a brief demonstration of “slacklining,” he stole show, and would have even without the toga.  In a high cost production where Madonna likely had her way, this off-beat insertion was the best thing about the performance (not a concert, as there was no actual singing, but I digress…).

Which brings to mind future acts.  The major ones have all been tried, with success measured generally by one’s taste in music, but also on one’s charity in giving the benefit of the doubt to singers who are often well past their prime.

So, why not follow up with a more professional diversion than Sketchy Andy, namely Cirque du Soleil.  They’ve conquered the parking lots of major cities with their tents.  They practically own Las Vegas’ entertainment dollars.  Why not throw the challenge to them.  In 10 minutes, what could they construct that would amaze those eager to see acrobatic feats of derring-do?  And, their accompanying band plays a wide variety of music.  Unlike Madonna, they could contribute a more honest soundtrack sans vocals to the Great American Spectacle.

The Concert Price Blues

Is there a 12 bar Delta bluesman in the house?

Yes I got on my computer
Price was more than I wanted to pay
Yes I got on my computer
Price was more than I wanted to pay
If the cost wasn’t high enough
Just wait til Ticketmaster had their say

My concert calendar for 2012 is, at best, disspiriting.  This is largely due to the lack of appeal in the acts announced to date at the smaller Atlanta venues.  Big names, though are seeking my cash.

I bought tickets for Roger Waters (Pink Floyd bassist, lyricist, and co-vocalist) a couple months ago, for a show that will not occur until June.   The listed price was $79.00, which is sufficiently high.  For that, I could buy all of his solo releases on CD.  And, to boot, I’ve already seen this show in 2010, a complete rendition of Pink Floyd’s classic, The Wall.  The show had very high production values, and it doesn’t translate to a souvenir DVD.   The presentation is arena wide, and a spectacle.  In short, it’s worth $79 to see it again – it’s more of a performance than a concert.

Right, add $11.90 in Ticketmaster fees, and I’m close enough to a $100 that I originally decided to pass.  Add gas, parking fees near our less than ideal downtown arena, and possibly a meal… and even when splitting some costs with a  concert buddy, I’m looking at $115.

I seriously doubt the now notorious “1%” bother with rock concerts.  Rock concerts are largely middle class endeavors, because seats have to be filled.  And, $90 is the going rate for a balcony seat roughly opposite the stage in an arena sized to fit roughly 21,000 for a concert.  Ouch!

As I look for other opportunities through the Spring, there are other big name artists coming that for whatever reason I’ve never seen.  Van Halen.  Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers.  I would like to see them, but…  Petty – $35 for lawn tickets.  Reasonable, I guess,.  But, add  $11 in fees. Suddenly, it’s basically $50 for a lawn seat. 

There’s no end of blogs or other media who berate Ticketmaster.  I’ve been tempted, and have thrown a few sharp comments in various concert reviews.  But as someone who has, at times, looked for “secondary market” tickets as available seat selections otherwise suck, I’ve noted that for many venues, the same seats tend to be offered regularly through your friendly online ticket scalping services.  It kind of makes you think…

One of the few blogs I read periodically is The Leftsetz Letter, an “insider” music industry blog who intermixes interesting observations with redundant conclusions.  He recently confirmed what I had been thinking, and it’s worth a read to those who are interested.

Basically, Ticketmaster not only pays the venue a kickback, AND the promoter a kickback, but also the artist.  It’s a profit boost for all, and, as a side benefit, Ticketmaster takes the blame for the added profit, and, I can’t help but think, a sleight of hand to dull the pain of the original sticker price.  Nice.   He goes on to comment on “pre-sales,” which are basically a means for artists and promoters to profit where scalpers otherwise would.

Two examples recently arrived in my inbox:

Seminole Hard Rock
Hollywood, FL

Sunday, March 11, 2012 at 07:00 PM

Presale: Tue, 02.07.12 at 10:00 AM ET

($249)

• Ticket (face value $84)
• Merchandise package (messenger bag, travel mug, pin, and keychain - contents subject to change)
• Backstage/onstage tour with On Stage Photo in front of Graeme's drum kit - (Please Note: This is NOT a meet and greet with the band, just a tour of the stage area)
• Early Access to the merchandise booth

Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers 2012

Sunday, Apr 29 2012 7:30 PM
Alpharetta, Georgia - United States

Dates and times subject to change. All times local unless otherwise noted.
Prices are in US dollars only.

Premium Ticket Package ($250.00)

Qty: 01234

Each Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers Premium Ticket Package includes:

• One reserved ticket within the first 15 rows of the stage in Pit and Orch 2*
• Specially designed Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers jersey sweatshirt
• Collectible tour poster (numbered, limited)
• Exclusive tour tote bag
• Official set of Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers guitar picks
• Commemorative ticket
• Commemorative tour laminate
• Early entry into the venue for crowd-free merchandise shopping
• On-site event host

*Exact seat location available at show. Ticket is allocated based on time & date of purchase.
Package details subject to change without notice.

To be fair, $250 for seats near the front is better than what scalpers charge for major venues, often by quite a lot.  Still, for the artist, promoter or whoever wants to avoid “credit,” the rule is simple.  Add some cheap junk, target core fans, and reap the rewards yourself. 

Go ahead, take that special someone for a total of $500.  And don’t forget to budget parking fees and the meal…