THE FIRST PIECE FROM THE PIT. THIS ONE IS FROM CLOSER TO THE ECONOMICS.

I wrote this piece as a follow-up to my previous write-up, because the conversation around live music has changed, and so have the conditions behind it. Over the past decade, I’ve watched the industry reshape itself around touring, arenas, and large-scale events, not just as a fan, but through work that’s put me close to the machinery behind it. What I felt not watching my favourite band Fontaines D.C. at Leeds Festival recently wasn’t snobbery or superiority. It was the realisation that the emotional texture of live music has shifted as the economics have shifted. The focus here is on the wider landscape, the rooms, the culture, and the industry that surrounds the music. This piece is my attempt to explain why that feeling exists, where it comes from, and how the industry’s evolution affects both artists and longtime fans.

A few years ago, I was involved in recording a video for a band that had been signed to a huge label from New York. I was taking photographs, and while I was there, I met an executive of the label; he was one of the few big players who still work with many famous artists. We talked about changes in the industry after the internet had made the old system obsolete. The UK live‑music ecosystem is shaped by global forces, especially streaming and major‑label touring strategy. Of course he was fully aware of this and wasn’t shy at all:

“If we can’t tour a band here or in the US nowadays, Rachel, no matter how talented, there’s no point in signing it.”

Streaming numbers look good on paper, but at $0.003–$0.005 per stream, they do not compensate the majority of artists for their efforts. The money and the risk that pay off in the end are in the tour. This is no secret in the music business. The numbers speak for themselves. Global recorded-music revenue grew for more than a decade to reach about $29.6 billion in 2024, of which around 69% comes from streaming (and more than 80% in the US). However, the revenue split is very unfavourable for the majority of the artists. Again, the usual per-stream payouts are $0.003–$0.005. Even independent artists sometimes report fractions of a penny. A musician needs hundreds of thousands of streams every month just to make some profit after deductions by labels or distributors. For most musicians today, live performance, merch and direct-to-fan sales generate more money than streaming.

The recorded music industry managed to recover after the fall in physical sales and downloads largely due to streaming. Paid subscriptions became the main source of value. Platforms such as Spotify have paid rights holders tens of billions over the past decade. On the surface, this looks positive. The problem is in the distribution of money. Most artists end up with only a small piece of the pie after cuts from labels or distributors. Typical deals leave the artist with 15-30% after advances and expenses. Even with relatively favourable independent deals, the per-stream rate means you need a huge number of streams to earn a living. A band can have millions of streams and still earn less in a year than from a few well-attended shows. Research and artist disclosures repeatedly show that for most working musicians, streaming is only part of the income. Live performance, merch and direct-to-fan sales do most of the job.

On the other hand, the live music industry has become much bigger since the 2020–21 shutdown. The top 100 tours globally reported record or near-record grosses throughout the 2020s, more than $9 billion in the best years, significantly higher than pre-pandemic numbers even after a slight cooling. In the UK, consumer spending on live music reached its historical peak of £6.7 billion in 2024, more than £2 billion higher than 2019. The driving force was stadiums and arenas. Labels realised it too. It’s quite easy to see that nowadays live performance is no longer just the promotional tool for recorded music; it has become the engine of growth. An act able to fill or grow into big venues creates cultural presence, merchandising, and local spikes in streams; one study reports a 42% increase in on-demand streams in the week of a performance.

COVID seems a distant memory now, but it accelerated everything. When live performances returned, demand was huge. Pollstar and Billboard Boxscore showed the top 100 worldwide tours achieving multi-billion-dollar grosses every year in the mid-2020s, with growing revenues and audiences per show. Stadiums and arenas became increasingly popular. In the UK, the spending was driven by higher ticket prices and a clear preference for large-scale events. Mainstream pop and rock dominated, while the closure of grassroots venues continued.
This view became increasingly difficult to ignore. Just look at the UK live market. Co-op Live in Manchester opened its doors in May 2024. The venue is the largest indoor arena in the country with 23,500 capacity. It sits next to the Etihad Stadium and cost £365 – £450 million to build because the industry understands that the future lies in big rooms. The same trend can be seen across the country: more arenas and stadiums on the agenda, festivals as the main big gigs, while mid-sized venues struggle with higher costs.

The new venues appeared in response to this demand. Co-op Live was built to compete with London’s O2 and attract big tours to the North. With a staggering 23,500 capacity and modern design, it shows clearly what the industry expects. The same logic explains the popularity of multi-night residencies in big cities and festivals. This helps reduce logistical costs and maximises revenue per fan. The middle tier faces higher costs, thin margins and risks. The live music economy consolidates at the top.

Labels noticed this early. When physical sales were the main source of money, live performances were the tool to promote the album. Now everything is inverted. A successful tour creates local streaming spikes, promotes an act, and builds the sustained engagement that algorithms favour. An act that can’t perform successfully at scale has limited potential. That is why the New York executive’s point of view still matters: if there is no realistic path to successful tours, signing the act is not worth the risk.

Live still feeds the recorded side. Research shows concerts create reliable spikes in local streaming numbers in the weeks after a show. Labels benefit even if they don’t take a cut of the tickets. In the era of 360 deals they often do share in live income, but even without that the picture is clear. An act that grows from clubs to theatres to arenas becomes a more valuable long-term asset.

I felt this change in myself when I recently watched Fontaines D.C., one of my favourite bands. I won’t go too into it again, but I left early (the piece is here). Not because of the music, but because the commercial machinery had already arrived: so much bigger rooms- I mean, we’re talking arenas with more production – the shift from something personal and risky to something polished and ready to be scaled. Now Fontaines themselves announce arena tours across the UK and Europe, including the AO Arena in Manchester, OVO Hydro in Glasgow and the O2 in London.

It’s logical from the economic point of view, and for the band it means real financial security and reaching people who’d never have found them otherwise, but it still leaves many longtime fans happy yet slightly gutted. Here come the higher ticket prices and the £10 pints.

This is how bands grow; we watch it all the time. Fontaines D.C., now playing huge shows, huge arenas, clearly shows how a band that used to carry an atmosphere of sharpness and danger in small rooms has had to take on bigger production, more complex staging, and a different relationship with the crowd; that’s because the bigger and wider commercial industry has finally caught on to what we did early on. The songs aren’t worse. But the setting has changed. Longtime fans feel the commercialisation. The music becomes something played for the purpose of a commercial show.

It’s not about one band only. Higher ticket prices, dynamic pricing, VIP packages and more complex visuals are the natural reaction to growing costs and the need to maximise revenue when money from recordings is unreliable for most. Fans in rich big cities can still enjoy the show. Those lower on the economic ladder, or those who prefer the older atmosphere, get priced out or emotionally alienated.

The cultural cost is clear. As the industry’s filter becomes “Can this act fill an arena or headline a major festival?”, the variety of music receiving serious investment gets smaller. The mid-level ecosystem that once allowed bands to grow over several albums has shrunk. What remains is a gap between acts that can play the big stages and everyone else.

People need to earn money to survive, and labels are businesses that work on money. Streaming created the opportunity for discovery and helped the industry recover after the collapse of physical sales, but it did not restore the old economy for artists or the companies investing in them. Live performances, especially the big stages, arenas and festivals, filled that gap. The New York executive’s view turned out to be an early warning of the new reality.

The disadvantages are the concentration of money and attention at the top, the continuing pressure on grassroots infrastructure, and a glossy atmosphere that can alienate longtime fans from the acts they once loved. The advantages are that acts able to succeed live can still have a career, and audiences keep attending shows.
When you stand in the arena watching your favourite band, you feel both gratitude that this music still reaches so many people and a sense of loss for the times when it felt much closer. That is the price of the current model. Whether it feels like progress or a necessary compromise depends on your standpoint and on whether you can tolerate the machinery behind the music you love.

RACHEL BROWN

References

IFPI. (2026). Global Music Report 2026. International Federation of the Phonographic Industry.

RIAA. (2025). Year‑End Music Industry Revenue Report. Recording Industry Association of America.

Spotify. (2026). Loud & Clear: 2026 Royalty Data Report. Spotify AB.

Duetti. (2025). Music Economics Report: Independent Artist Earnings. Duetti.

LIVE. (2024). LIVE Annual Report 2024: UK Live Music Sector Overview. LIVE.

Pollstar. (2024). Co‑op Live Economic Impact Analysis. Pollstar.

Lichfields. (2024). Economic Impact of Co‑op Live Arena. Lichfields Consultancy.

Live Nation Entertainment. (2025). Full‑Year Financial Results 2025. Live Nation Entertainment.

GigXchange. (2026). UK Live Music Yearbook 2026. GigXchange.

Music Venue Trust. (2023). Revive Live Report. Music Venue Trust.

Help Musicians UK. (2023). Musicians’ Census 2023. Help Musicians UK.

Goldman Sachs. (2025). Music in the Air: Global Music Industry Forecast 2025. Goldman Sachs Research.