Just The Ticket

Richard Kramer:

Welcome to Bubble Trouble, conversations between the independent analyst, Richard Kramer, that's me, and the economist and author, Will Page, that's the other guy. This is what we do, layout for you some inconvenient truths about how business and financial markets really work. We started this podcast when markets were reaching their most irrational peaks during lockdown, and we continue and even hurdle towards our hundredth episode with tech stocks in volatile state and banks, large and small, in turmoil.

Our audience keeps growing as the economy keeps slowing. And this week, we're picking up on our own Will Page's presentation at the famous BBC Broadcasting House where he made an appearance on the flagship art show, Front Row, to talk about the kerfuffle over ticketing. Just The Ticket, coming up next on Bubble Trouble.

Will, welcome back. You were on the inimitable BBC Front Row show a couple of weeks ago talking about something that I found fascinating. You laid out this set of cure shows in the US where the band really wanted to keep ticket prices low, but when fans ended up seeing what their low ticket prices were delivering, the end price was super high. So just as a start here, can you talk me through the sausage factory? What gets stuffed into those ticket prices? Who gets paid for what, and why are the numbers that we see on those ticket prices at the end so eye-wateringly high?

Will Page:

Well, it's a great question, Richard. Let me just break it down into two lenses as you might want. We can look at it from what the consumer sees when they go into the process of buying a concert ticket and then what the creator gets paid once those monies are divvied up.

So we start with the consumer, you're going to see a face value of a ticket. That's the obvious part. The less obvious part is the layers of cream that go on top of that milk. That is the facilities fee, the service charge, and the order processing fee. And that is at the heart of a lot of the tension in ticketing just now. The fact that you have these three layers of cream on top of that milk, which take the price from what you believe was going to be X, let's say $75, all the way up to Y, which could be up to a hundred dollars by the time you make that credit card payment.

And there's a lot of work going on politically right now in the States to campaign for all-in ticket pricing, giving a fairer ticket price, much like what we discussed with airlines, where you know what you're paying for by the time you go in and that price that you went in with is what you paid for when you come out.

Now, that's what the consumer sees. When we flip it to what the creator gets paid, the actual inner workings of supply chain keeping this really simple here. The artist takes the lion share of that face value. They'll have to pay the promoter who takes on the risk of putting the show, maybe that's 10%. The lion share of that 90% is going to go out to the artist and they're going to get paid immediately after the show is done. Then all those layers of cream I talked about, the biggest winner of those fee structures is the actual venue.

It's not Ticketmaster, it's not the credit card company, it's the venue. And the venue is charging for the cost of putting on the show. And there's a lot of costs involved there because you've got the person in the bright collared jacket checking your ticket as you're coming in to make sure you are who you say you are. You've got the health and safety, you've got insurance, which is often overlooked when you're putting on concerts as well.

Now, just to wrap this up, so we've got this kind of complicated situation where the consumer sees a face value and layers of cream added on top in the process. That can be solved through policy. But on the payouts, it's worth just remembering who's setting the price. The artist sets the price for the face value of the ticket. It's the venue largely that's setting the price of the booking fee.

So the Ticketmaster role is really quite passive here. They get a lot of mud thrown at them. The real cost of setting the tickets is sitting with the artist and the venue, and that's really important understanding these dynamics as well.

Richard Kramer:

And I guess that's why, number one, the Rolling Stones tour all the time because they're getting most of the money. And number two, that's why the US, they call it the Land of the Fee where there are just so many layers of fees layered on top of what the artist gets that it's very hard to disaggregate them all and certainly for the average consumer to understand just how many mouths need to be fed from these ticket prices.

Will Page:

Right. And going back to all-in ticket pricing, would that solve the issue? Is your problem the actual cost of these fees or is it, I don't want to be disrespectful here, is it the visibility of these fees, the fact that you thought it was going to be X, then it turned out to be Y and then finally by the time you get to the checkout, it's Z. How about we just say, the cost is going to cost Z the first place?

Richard Kramer:

And again, I think there is a transparency issue without doubt. But on top of that, there is the issue of resale and profiteering and the fact that you can't seem to be able to buy the tickets for face value anymore. That seems to be a game that's rigged in the favor of those who've figured out the technology to buy them instantly the moment they go on sale and then resell them for those markups.

And I think the frustrating thing for a lot of fans is availability of tickets as well as this transparency issue you mentioned.

Will Page:

So I'll give you the solution, and I'll give you the hurdle of getting there. And The Cure was an advocate of the solution as was Taylor Swift, but The Cure went for a verified fan model. Now, if I wanted to take you to a recurring event like sports, let's say I wanted to take you to see Arsenal play. I go to the ticket exchange because I'm a verified Arsenal Red member and I can buy those tickets for face value for nothing more than face value, for nothing less than face value. There's no profiteering or arbitrage here and it's verified, it's me that purchased it. The ticket comes onto my phone, I can transfer that ticket to your phone and we have no problems at all.

Now I want to stress, sport is now used to this. You want to go to see football, rugby, I think Wimbledon, you will have this verified fan position of buying tickets and it is a solution. Super safe, no bots, no touts, problem solved. That should work for music and then to the credit of Cure, that's what they were trying to do. They had to have a verified system where you became a fan club member of The Cure to enter the ticketing platform to purchase those tickets.

The problem though with music is that acts on impulse. You just mentioned Loyle Carner. If I told you that Loyle Carner was playing at Tottenham Court Road at the venue here at Tottenham Court Road tonight, I said, "Richard, let's go." And you said, "Absolutely. And in fact, I'll get a bunch of my friends come along with me." If that act of impulse is then presented with the hurdle of, "Oh God, we have to do this verified fan. In fact, all five of us have to do this verified fan before we can get the tickets. You know what? I might just watch an Netflix instead."

So the verified fan, safe, secure ticketing platform that we've seen grow in sports works because it's a recurring event, works because people commit to that recurring event. Music is much more spontaneous, music's much more free. Maybe we'll go and see Loyle Carner at different venue and that involves a different verified fan system.

So it is a solution. What we need though is to navigate this verified fan and make it more scalable, less friction-like for fans to really adopt at scale.

Richard Kramer:

But surely, just to wrap up this part one and to put a fine point on it, if we adopted this system for a certain cutoff of either venue size or advanced notice because all that summer touring and festival schedule is already set right now. We kind of know all the big concerts in the summer, they're already on sale today. Wouldn't you have a clear cutoff, not the little venue that's putting someone on at a coffee house type, cabaret type place next Wednesday, but the places that know in advance their schedule? Wouldn't they have verified fans systems in place? And isn't it worth it for a fan who's going to see two or three or five shows a year to sign up for that?

Will Page:

You would hope. But there's fragmentation in the market. A verified fan of let's say, Twickenham's Rugby Stadium knows that they're going to get five or six international games a season and that's worth the hassle of joining. Verified fan for, let's say, a festival where my friend from Philadelphia flies in for it and hasn't registered so I can't transfer the ticket, creates all sorts of issues. So it's just that spontaneity that goes with live music that doesn't go with sport creates a friction with verified fan and live music. That doesn't necessarily happen with sport, but it's clearly the solution.

And before we go to the break, just take a think about what else could happen in ticketing to kind of bring it up to speed. Like what about biometrics, how used are we using our phones for paying for stuff, recognizes our face and then makes a payment? I haven't seen biometrics in our concert ticketing either, so I'm quietly confident we know where the solution is and that technology is going to help us get it there a lot faster than we've seen in the past.

Richard Kramer:

Well, as we move to the break, I want to come back in the second part and talk about some of those technology solutions that might help out and get your understanding or reflections on what can make this system cleaner, better and more transparent. We'll be back in a minute with Will Page on talking about Just The Ticket and part two of Bubble Trouble.

We're back for part two of Bubble Trouble talking with the rockconomist and my podcast co-host, Will Page, about ticketing and just why these ticketing fees are so confusing. So let's go down the rabbit hole a little bit here, Will, and think about unbundling these ticketing fees and just how you value unique versus repeatable content. I mean, we know you get all the music you want for a 10 on a month. There's only one red letter date in the calendar when your favorite artist comes to town. And we're not talking necessarily London here, lots of other cities.

If the artist tours there at all, it'll be that day you've circled on your calendar, you're willing to pay anything to see that artist. How do you make sure that what those desperate fans want to pay or willing to pay is not inflated over the odds by middlemen?

Will Page:

So somewhere along my answer, I'm going to raise the controversial words of dynamic pricing here. But it's interesting, if you draw a demand curve, a very simple demand curve, how do you extract all the value out the demand curve? Now, if I sit on a plane next to you, I know that, "Hey, I'm sitting on a plane flight to New York with Richard Kramer." There's very little chance we paid the same price for the same ticket, and it's the same 7 hours, 48 minutes journey to New York. The product is the same, the prices are different.

If I go to the West End Theatre and happen to be sitting next to you, I know there's a very strong chance that we paid different prices for our ticket. Maybe I got mine from some West End last minute seller, maybe you booked yours years in advance. Fine, but I'm not offended by the fact that we're paying different prices for travel or paying different prices for theater.

In live music, there's this very cultural thing that we should all pay the same. That is, we're all going to the Roundhouse and we're all going to go and pay 50 quid a ticket. And I find that interesting. People who are rich, people who are poor pay the same, people who are at the front and people standing at the back by the bar pay the same. So I will use the word communism, it's flat pricing. It is a culture that we have in live music that's less prevalent at other events or other forms of perishable goods.

That's changing. And you've seen at one extreme, the get-in price for a concert ticket in America at least has been $34-ish for the past 20 years. That is the worst seat in the house, behind that pillar with restricted views, hasn't really changed in 20, 22 years. So if you really are rubbing coins together, trying to make them breed, you can still go to the show. You're just going to stand behind a pillar, fine.

At the front end. The VIP's-

Richard Kramer:

It's gone way up.

Will Page:

The meet and greets that you're going to get with the band beforehand, the deluxe packaging, the eating before the show, all that sort of thing has gone way up. So you have seen capitalism venture communism on that front. So you're seeing much more disparity in terms of ticket prices. What was the famous John Lennon quote when he did the variety performance with the Queen in audience? He said, "For the people at the back, stamp your feet. For the people at front, shake your ..."

You're seeing that same thing happen here now with difference in prices. Now that's all fine now. So that is rational economics, capturing the value under the demand curve. Cheap seats stay cheap, expensive seats get more and more expensive because more and more people want to see shows. Dynamic pricing is the kicker. Now you vented your anger about why Viagogo is selling Loyle Carner tickets at 2, 3, 4 times a prize.

What dynamic pricing is essentially asking, take a leaf out of the airline ticking playbook is why can't Loyle Carner charge 2, 3, 4 times that price if you're willing to pay it? That's controversial because firstly, Loyle, you're being greedy. Your concert isn't worth that, but are you willing to pay it? Secondly, well someone else is like it's a stock, if you don't buy it, someone else will. And why is that money going to Viagogo and not Loyle Carner? And that takes the ticking debate into quite an uncomfortable zone.

Richard Kramer:

Well, but one of the great icons of working class heroism, Bruce Springsteen, has decided that if you're going to buy a ticket, you're going to buy it from Bruce Springsteen. And if there's 50,000 people that want to see him play a small theater but only a thousand seats, it's going to be maybe not 50 times as expensive, but he's going to play in front of an audience instead of working class sea of workers or firemen or whatever, he's going to play in front of an audience of hedge fund billionaires-

Will Page:

Shaking jewelry.

Richard Kramer:

And shaking their jewelry. And that's going to be okay with him because he will get that money as opposed to a bunch of intermediaries who bought his tickets because they had some clever technology and were able to resell them and took that role of selling them to the highest bidder. Now is that going to catch on in the music world? Are all of the top tier artists going to say, "You know what, all that surplus value, I would like to capture it myself. I don't want to leave it on the table for a bunch of sleazy middlemen."

Will Page:

I think not. I think there's, if you apply a little bit of game theory here, not to get too wonky on the terminology, but just there's finite games and there's infinite games. So if there's a finite game, that is a one-off, that is the last tour. Do you remember the Kiss, the last farewell tour for Kiss was done-

Richard Kramer:

Which last farewell tour? Which one of the many last farewell tours they've done?

Will Page:

I'm counting 17 farewell tours since they declared it was their last one. That was my last count at least, least. But yeah, if it is a finite game where it is your last tour, maybe you just want to gauge the market and take all your chips to the casino and cash out big time. But if you want to repeat the tour, I think the negative backlash to dynamic pricing might make you think again, and I'll give you a very interesting example about this.

If we go way back to 2009, one of your favorite bands, Richard, a band by the name of Take That, which I know-

Richard Kramer:

That wasn't one of favorites. What are you talking about, Will?

Will Page:

I've seen you running with our T-shirts, man. Gary Barlow-

Richard Kramer:

Oh, gosh. Perish the thought.

Will Page:

All right. So Take That did a tour of the UK in 2009 where they did stadiums galore. In fact, they did 1.2 million tickets, which is a large slice of the British population want to see Take That. Ticket price? A flat 55 pounds. In 2009, that was cheap in absolute and relative terms.

Now, people were screaming at the promoters saying 55 pounds would take there with these diehard fans? You could put a zero on that figure, 550 pounds, and still sell out these shows. And the promoter said, "No, no, no, no, no, no, you don't understand what I'm doing. I want to make going to see Take That a biannual event every second year for over a million of the British population."

And in 2011, they did it again, 1.3 million tickets sold at 55 pounds. Nobody has performed a tour to that level. Coldplay are coming close, by the way. They did six at Wembley. They're doing four at Manchester, two in Cardiff. They're closing it on a million tickets to the British population. Don't know how many of those are repeat goers but still, Take That for me holds a record. And one of the reasons they did it was there's a fair price to make it a recurring event. So if you are a band of that stature, you might want to think about infinite games.

Richard Kramer:

But will those 55 pound tickets have been bought by a bunch of touts who then turned around and sold them for whatever the market would bear, be that 100 or 200 or 300 and therefore you had all of that surplus value taken by someone else other than the band and its promoters?

Will Page:

Well this is where the kind of the podcast really delves into deep bubble trouble territory, because what we're talking about here is scarcity. There is scarcity of all the shows that sold out, but you're only sold out if you don't add an extra date. And the case of Take That, they're adding lots of extra dates. In case of Coldplay, they started off with one night at Wembley, it turned into six. And now they've added another six stadiums on top of that.

So I don't know how expanding capacity, adding more shows, playing bigger venues, manages a situation with touts. I'm always fond of that expression of if you want build one too many houses, you collapse a property market. A tout sell for above face value, but they also self below face value if demand is not there. It's a market clearing price, it's a secondary market. It can be manipulated, I get that.

But let's not forget, Viagogo sells tickets below face value as well as significantly above face value too. So the supply side has got a lot to answer for. Did you pick a big enough venue given your fan base? Did you put on enough shows given your fan base? And have you created a problem with tout selling above face value because the answers were no and no.

Richard Kramer:

Now I want to throw out one what may seem like a radical solution and hey, this was just little of me not knowing anything about this market but coming up with it and an application of something that became very trendy a few years ago to talk about and then kind of died off. But what if you applied some sort of blockchain technology where you could see how many times the ticket was bought and resold and by whom, and therefore everybody who was a buyer, if Will Page bought those two tickets to a Loyle Carner and couldn't make it, or your daughter got sick that night, you resold it, you'd know I only had one either markup or bought it at face value.

Whereas if I was buying that ticket, I would know, hey, that was bought by professional touts incorporated and marked up 3X and then sold to ticket broker incorporated and so on. What if you made a requirement on all those tickets, because it can be done at really de minimis cost but you'd be able to see who the original buyer of that ticket was and who they resold it to and resold it to and resold it to until it ended up in your hands at this hugely inflated price?

Will Page:

Well I don't want to dismiss a good use case with blockchain on Bubble Trouble, but we've done that a few times on this show. I think the ticket exchange that you see for sports venues does exactly that. The venue can see that this person bought a season ticket and has only been to two games that season. And every other occasion, they've been selling a ticket on.

Now they could be selling it for profiteering purposes, that's not technically true because they can't really profit from transacting on the ticket exchange. They could be selling because they got a family crisis and they can't go see matches anymore. But you can trace the source of ticket and the transfers that's been happening with that ticket.

Another solution, if you look at Ireland's, I think outlawed profiteering from tickets where you can only sell for 10% above the face value you purchased it for. Now I presume that's Irish government saying, "All right, there's some hassle costs in buying and selling tickets, so you can recover some of that with a 10% uplift, but that's your ceiling. That's your law."

Now could we apply something like that here? Maybe. Would that prevent ticketing platforms going offshore and outside the jurisdiction of the law? Possibly. There's a bit of whack-a-mole here, but I reiterate, A, at the very basis verified fan is encouraging, and B, the scale of what you mentioned blockchain. I mentioned face ID, these types of technological solutions got to be able to get this market cleaned up once and for all.

Richard Kramer:

That sounds like an imminently sensible idea. And while you don't want to play whack-a-mole and say how many times can you mark it up by 10% and can you sell it to yourself 10 times to double the price or-

Will Page:

Are you talking about a wash trade there by any chance?

Richard Kramer:

I could be. You could be back to our NFTs, not for me. Or you could be ... I think the offshore venue is another crazy idea because could you buy a ticket for Wembley Stadium from Dubai or Gibraltar or something? Seems a little daft. But honestly, having a system whereby you could limit the markup and you could say if you weren't one of those who immediately was on the site at 10 o'clock and one was the lucky ones that refreshed your browser and got through, then you wouldn't have to, if you had a chance to buy a ticket later, pay such a huge premium for it, which is really to me as a fan and I know to a lot of other folks really is what rankles more than anything.

Isn't that the nub of the issue that so much of inflation comes into the actual buyer that they feel hard done by and it's not going to the artist?

Will Page:

Well, yeah, so that we're back to the question of fees again. But two things, one, learning that the ticket is going to cost X, but by the time you get to the checkout, there's fee and fee added on top rankles fans. If there was just an all-in ticket price, just like there's an all-in airline price and you don't have to learn what airport taxis and fuel duties cost, perhaps that problem goes away as long as the all-in price seems fair bargain, willing buyer, willing seller, off you go.

And then back to the inflation and ticket pricing is your problem with ticket, you thought was going to cost 50 but actually cost you 150 because you bought it off Viagogo, is that a problem? Now back to that dynamic pricing debate. If that ticket you thought was 50 turned out to be 150, and all of that 150 is going to go back to Loyle Carner, does that still remain a problem? Is it the price or is it the leakage? I think you have to bifurcate these issues.

Richard Kramer:

Yes. I mean to my mind, it's a hundred percent a problem of the leakage. And if all that money went to the artist, you would have the choice whether to pay that much to see the artist or not, how much is it worth to you to see Bruce Springsteen or Fleetwood Mac or one of these iconic artists that have been around 30 years building a fan base that's now old enough to be very wealthy and afford the rare concert they might go to? But the inflation that bleeds away to an anonymous middle person is the thing that really I find so annoying.

So, look, you've studied this in gory detail from every different angle. Give us our smoke signals. What are the things we really need to look out for here in this, what is now the largest part of the music industry? The experience of seeing live music, it now dwarfs the recorded music, the publishing, all those other forms of music. What do we need to look out for in terms of getting a handle on the thousand dollars or $10,000 Taylor Swift tickets that congress people were so obsessed about summer?

Will Page:

I think a lot of senators were upset because their children couldn't buy Taylor Swift tickets. I actually think, and by the way, just to clear up that one, Taylor Swift tried to put, I think, 52 stadium concerts on same day, same date, big mistake. That would collapse any system. Beyoncé did it by staggering across states, across time zones, across countries, no problem at all. So that was a bit of a storm in a teacup, but clearly some senators had children who desperately want to see Taylor Swift, hence we had your judicial hearing on Capitol Hill.

So, going to smoke signals, well I want to begin with just a lovely adage about live music industry, if that's the right word. A famous promoter called John Giddings who I met back in 2009, you'll love this. He said to me, "In the live music industry, if you want loyalty, get yourself a dog."

I always thought that was a pretty cool way of, this is a fast and loose business. Once that tour is done, the event is over. It is real time. So I think there are two smoke signals. We've had this huge booming live, it got silenced by the pandemic, it's booming again. Coldplay's gone from 6 to 12 stadium shows. Def Leppard have sold out Wembley Stadium. Motley Crew have sold out Wembley Stadium. Blur is doing two dates at Wembley Stadium. Beyonce is doing nine stadium shows in UK.

The market is skewed towards the big stadium events and away from the small. I've called it go big or stay home. If you want me to leave my sofa and stop watching Netflix, I need a big event to justify doing so. But I think there's two things, one is frequency and the other is repetition. I think frequency is going to be interesting.

Maybe back in 2019 we went to two or three festivals, Love Supreme, great jazz festival in Glyndebourne. Maybe add on top of that a Reading Festival. Two or three festivals was the main. I think with a spending squeeze that's going on just now, I think customers will scale back to one or two.

Now do you have enough more customers to cover that gap or could that be problematic? I think frequency is a big one. People will cut back on a number of times they're going to shows given that they're looking at their energy bills, given that they're looking at their tea in a glass wine of prat costing eight pounds now. Can you believe it? They're just going to be making different choices.

Richard Kramer:

I don't know what prat you go to, but let me just dig in on that one smoke signal. Will that reduction in frequency mean that the market shrinks, or will it mean that fewer mouths get fed other than those, the biggest names at the top?

Will Page:

I think it's the latter. I think, let's take Richard Kramer go see one fewer gig a year. The Gabriels are here, which you thought very highly of, one arena gig a year. Perhaps you're going to see Elton John tonight at The O2, one stadium festival a year. I think what will happen is those three events become two events and two events become large events.

Richard Kramer:

Does that mean ticket prices on the whole go up for those few events?

Will Page:

I think that you'll see people going to fewer shows at higher ticket prices creating more demand, therefore more buoyancy in those stadiums and festivals tickets. So it's going to be a strange one, but there's a frequency. It's not on spending lesson shows. It's I'm going less often and when I go out, I go to bigger events.

I often say that people might shrug their shoulders going to the Roundhouse with 30 quid tonight, but have no problem taking a family of four to see Coldplay at Wembley Stadium for 140 quid a head.

Richard Kramer:

It's the one big event you have circled as your red letter day for the year.

Will Page:

You got it.

Richard Kramer:

And a second smoke signal, the thing to watch out for?

Will Page:

Yeah, repetition. So I did this chart in The Economist once, which was the average age of festival headliners. As a doer pessimistic Scottish economist, this was a doer pessimistic chart ever created. Back in the '90s, you had Brit pop bands in their early 20s headlining festivals like Glastonbury, Radiohead's famous performance, for example. And then today, you got bands in their '70s and '80s headlining Glastonbury.

Now it's not to make an ageist remark, I want to be clear here. It's nothing to do with age or heritage value of the acts. But I think there's a question there about just where these festival headliners of tomorrow are coming from. Audiences today are way more fickle. They're more likely to listen to 30 seconds on TikTok than three minutes on Spotify. I don't think they're sticky with the bands anymore and I'm not sure that we have that conveyor belt of future talent ready to headline these stages.

Remember, the purpose of a headline act is not their headline act. It's that we all know the verse of the song so we can all sing along together. I don't think we got that. I think Dua Lipa 2017 was the last headline act this country broke. So there's this expression of you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. Maybe you can bring Metallica out of the woodwork and put them on a headliner stage this year and everybody goes crazy because they haven't seen Metallica for seven years, but you can't do it next year.

So maybe you could bring Lionel Richie out and do that, but you can't do it again. And it's like you can't get away with these heritage acts year after year, and there's only so many heritage acts left that you can play this game with. I'm worried about the conveyor belt of future talent.

Richard Kramer:

So I guess when I see these festival lineups, they are full of names that I've never heard of. And of course, you see the big names at the top of whether it's the Red Hot Chili Peppers or whomever, Groove Armada are the headliners. But then in receding point type to the very bottom until it's like an eye chart, you have a bunch of other acts. And are we just going to see a range of things and therefore the headliners matter less and therefore, the spoils will get divided among more people, or are the spoils really going just to the top of the tree and everybody else is playing there as a marketing gig?

Will Page:

This goes to the heart of the long tail question, I guess. The purpose of a festival and there's many reasons why people go to festivals, music is one of them. Drugs is another, getting laid is another, add your bucket list as you wish. But one of the big things is towards the end of the big night, the Saturday night, a weekend festival, we all go to that big pyramid stage even and we gather and we sing those anthems together.

That could be Elton John this summer at the Glastonbury. We all know Rocket Man. We're going to sing Rocket Man together. That point where we're all in unison is what really captures the magic of a festival. Now you name me an artist since 2017 that this country has produced where you all think we can sing the songs together. I don't think you can.

Richard Kramer:

Well, Will Page, it's been a fascinating delving into what the heck is in those ticket prices and how do the spoils get divided. With that, we'll close out another lovely episode of Bubble Trouble. We'll be back next week with some more interesting guests we have lined up. And we'll look forward to hearing Will's long tail thoughts on everything to do with the music industry. I think we have some more interesting topics coming up on that as well.

So with that, we'll see you next week on Bubble Trouble. Thanks, Will.

Will Page:

If you are new to Bubble Trouble, we hope you'll follow the show wherever you listen to podcasts. And please share it on your socials. Bubble Trouble is produced by Eric Nuzum, Jesse Baker, and Julia Natt at Magnificent Noise. You can learn more at bubbletroublepodcast.com. Until next time, from my co-host Richard Kramer, I'm Will Page.