• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

Ed Sheeran

  • Thread starter Thread starter 4p
  • Start date Start date
Mesai said:
My understanding is that this is the Ed Sheeran tour. It's not Download or Reading Festival where you're buying a ticket to see multiple artists, you're buying a ticket to see Ed Sheeran and whatever opening acts happen to be there, right? He has control over his tour.

Yes, the decision to cut Macklemore came from the venue, I don't think I've said otherwise, but Ed supports the decision otherwise he'd have cancelled. Being neutral doesn't mean inaction.

Imagine a scenario where a white dude gets invited to a BBQ and brings his non-white friend along as a plus 1. They get there and realise it's hosted by the KKK so the non-white guy needs to leave. The white guy decides to stay because he really likes ribs. Ed really likes ribs.
Click to expand...

He clearly doesn't have full control over the tour, the promoter can end the contract with Macklemore as a clear example of an area Sheeran doesn't control. If the contract was unfairly terminated by the promoter, Macklemore will have legal basis for recourse. I assume they terminated the contract based on a clause, hence why Macklemore hasn't said he's going to court over it. Unless that's all happening in the background and yet to be announced.

Your view he didn't cancel the tour so he must support the decision is a very absolute view, when in reality, there are plenty of other reasons why he didn't cancel the tour. He'll most likely have a legal obligation with the promoter to complete the tour as en example, he also has fans that have paid for tickets, accomodation and travel.

You can't just say he hasn't cancelled the tour so must support the removal of Macklemore or he's aligned to Israel - that's an absolutely massive stretch.
 
Mesai said:
My understanding is that this is the Ed Sheeran tour. It's not Download or Reading Festival where you're buying a ticket to see multiple artists, you're buying a ticket to see Ed Sheeran and whatever opening acts happen to be there, right? He has control over his tour.

Yes, the decision to cut Macklemore came from the venue, I don't think I've said otherwise, but Ed supports the decision otherwise he'd have cancelled. Being neutral doesn't mean inaction.
Click to expand...

This is a very simplistic view of how this actually works in practice.

The artist has some influence over the tour itself. But ultimately, the promoter (e.g. AEG, Live Nation etc) is funding all the upfront costs and putting the thing together, they hold the leavers.

Sure the headline artist has a certain amount of clout and the bigger the artist, the more clout they have but you should be under no illusion that they pull the strings, they don’t.

It’s a very complex web on contracts and all lines go back to the promoter.

If the artist breaks the contract and it’s not one of the allowed clauses, there will be very real financial consequences which will not be covered by insurance (something like illness or death are examples of things typically covered by insurance, but not always).
 
Last edited:
sigma said:
This place ended up in the news too based on comments made
Click to expand...
Not surprised at the same time as I've seen various things posted on here (more the GD subforum TBH, which invites people to speak their mind and that inevitably draws in questionable people and posts). Still though, it is far better than those other places, as moderation is one of the key differences on here.
 
arknor said:
its cancel culture because hes not openly left wing and maybe doesnt really care about politics.
you will be left wing in public or we will come for you with negative sentiment online.
Check reddit sometime and look at UKnews etc and note how some stories get thousands of likes, whilst most get maybe a few hundred.

its literal activism to try and promote certain things and control the narrative with fake engagement, alternative permissions will be heavily downvoted and people won;t be allowed to see them the echo chamber must keep echoing.

I'd ask to speak with an adult :D our countries literally becoming a laughing stock
literal reddit mods thinking the world behaves like reddit
Click to expand...
And Kraft refusing to host Macklemore is not the same thing ?
 
Mekrel said:
He clearly doesn't have full control over the tour, the promoter can end the contract with Macklemore as a clear example of an area Sheeran doesn't control. If the contract was unfairly terminated by the promoter, Macklemore will have legal basis for recourse. I assume they terminated the contract based on a clause, hence why Macklemore hasn't said he's going to court over it. Unless that's all happening in the background and yet to be announced.
Click to expand...

b0rn2sk8 said:
It’s a very complex web on contracts and all lines go back to the promoter.
Click to expand...
I'm aware that there are contracts in place with break clauses, exit costs, etc. Doesn't mean he can't cancel or move venues (as long as the fans are reimbursed), we're just talking about a couple millionaires and billionaires losing some money.

So the defense is that it's a lot of effort and it'll cost rich people money. Maybe he isn't pro-genocide, maybe he's just weak willed or apathetic but he's still aligning himself with bad people and you can choose to support that or not.
 
I don’t think you can say that, you simply don’t have the information action to come to such a conclusion. These are not small sums being out on the line, it’s entirely possible it could be a substantial financial penalty for Ed Sheeran for pulling the plug in the context of his wealth.

For example, when Michael Jackson died, he left his estate with a $40m liability to the promoter for the tour which was due to start shortly after. That’s with 2009 prices don’t forget.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom