A marketing analysis and economic impact of The Eagles


Published on

Published in: Travel
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

A marketing analysis and economic impact of The Eagles

  1. 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis research was conducted and would not have been possiblewithout the help and assistance of several individuals. The authorswould like to thank the following people and institutions:1. The Chief Financial Officer, Mr Justin van Wyk, for all his support, for allowing the research to be conducted, and especially for providing the economic information.2. Ms Desti Loeijs for her kindness and for her help in providing the passes for the fieldworkers.3. Big Concerts for financial support.4. Prof. Melville Saayman for his support and for believing in the research.5. The following tourism staff and students from the North-West University for the distribution of the questionnaires at the FNB stadium in Johannesburg as well as Greenpoint Stadium in Cape Town. • B. Manners • A. van Dyk • M. Thanjekwayo • N. Blignaut • M. Fourie • W. Wessels • A. Steenkamp • M. Scholtz • E. Swannepoel • M. Kruger • S. van Staden • J. van Zyl • H. Kent • M. Strydom • M. van Graaff • W. van Zyl • I. du Preez6. The concert attendees for their positive attitude and participation in the survey.7. Rod Taylor for the language editing. i
  2. 2. Table of contents1. INTRODUCTION 12. RESEARCH AIMS 23. METHOD OF RESEARCH 24. PROFILE OF THE EAGLES CONCERT ATTENDEE 3SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 34.1 Gender 34.2 Age 34.3 Marital status 44.4 Home Language 54.5 Province of residence 54.6 Level of education 64.7 Occupation 7ECONOMIC PROFILE 84.8 Number of people in travelling group 84.9 Number of people paid for 84.10 Local resident 94.11 Length of stay in the area 104.12 Number of tickets purchased 104.13 Expenditure 11CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR 124.14 Initiator of attendance 124.15 Decision to attend 124.16 Heard about the concert 134.17 Motivation to attend 16MUSICAL INTEREST 194.18 Number of musical events attended in 2011 194.19 Preference of Artists/Bands/Performers to perform in South Africa 204.20 Attendance at other Musical Festivals 204.21 Preferred type of music 214.22 All time favourite Artist/Band/Performers 22KEY MANAGEMENT ASPECTS 234.23 Aspects that influence value for money perception 23 ii
  3. 3. 5. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF AN EVENT 275.1 Total spending of attendees 285.2 Economic value based on SAM calculations 296. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 366.1 Profile of The Eagles concert attendee 376.2 Conclusions with regard to the survey 376.3 Conclusions regarding economic impact 386.4 Recommendations made by respondents 386.5 Recommendations made by researchers 39 iii
  4. 4. List of Tables4. PROFILE OF THE EAGLES CONCERT ATTENDEE 3SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 3Table 4.1: Age 4Table 4.2: Marital status 4Table 4.3: Province of residence 6Table 4.4: Level of education 6Table 4.5: Occupation 7ECONOMIC PROFILE 8Table 4.6: Number of people in travelling group 8Table 4.7: Number of people paid for 8Table 4.8: Length of stay 10Table 4.9: Number of tickets purchased 11Table 4.10: Expenditure per group (in ZAR) 11CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR 12Table 4.12: Initiator of attendance 12Table 4.13: Heard about the concert 13Table 4.14: Motivation to attend The Eagles concerts at Cape Town and Johannesburg 17MUSICAL INTERESTTable 4.15: Number of musical events attended in 2011 19Table 4.16: Preference of artists/bands/performers to perform in South Africa 20Table 4.17: Preferred type of music 21Table 4.18: All time favourite artist/band/performer 22KEY MANAGEMENT ASPECTS 23Table 4.19 Perception of value for money 23Table 4.20 Key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience 245. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE EAGLES CONCERTS 27Table 5.1: Total spending of concert attendees 28Table 5.2: Total direct spending due to the event 29Table 5.3: Impact through output and GVA multipliers 31Table 5.4: Impact on output 32 iv
  5. 5. Table 5.5: Total impact on regional output and GVA 34Table 5.6: Total impact on regional income 346. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 36Table 6.1: Profile of the The Eagles concert attendee 36 List of Figures4. PROFILE OF THE EAGLES CONCERT ATTENDEE 3SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 3Figure 4.1: Gender 3Figure 4.2: Home language 5Figure 4.3: Local residents 9Figure 4.4: Decision to attend 13MUSICAL INTEREST 19Figure 5.4: Attendance of other music festivals 21 v
  6. 6. 1. INTRODUCTIONBig Concerts is South Africas premier concert promoter with over eighteen yearsexperience of more than a thousand shows, including those of Robbie Williams, U2,Neil Diamond, Roxette, James Blunt and Michael Jackson. They were recentlyincluded in the Pollstar list of the Worlds Top 100 Promoters at number 20. No otherAfrican promoter features in the Top 100. Big Concerts was also voted the PeoplesChoice as South Africas top event company (The Star 2006). In the eighteen yearsthat BIG Concerts has promoted music in South Africa, the company has grown fromone to twenty full-time employees and today, almost every significant internationaltour promoted in South Africa sees Big Concerts involved in some capacity.Big Concerts also recently managed to bring one the legendary rock `n roll groups toSouth Africa, namely The Eagles. The Eagles is an American rock band that wasformed in Los Angeles, California in 1971 by Glenn Frey, Don Henley, BernieLeadon, and Randy Meisner. The Eagles managed to obtain various number onehits as well as internationally acclaimed awards for their contribution to music as anart. Some of their most famous singles included: Desperado; One of these nights;Hotel California; Life in the fast lane; Tequila Sunrise and Take it to the limit.The band was active from 1971 until 1980 after which it broke up, with each membertrying to pursue their own careers. The band however, got back together in 1994 andcontinued their success. In 2012 The Eagles, in conjunction with Big Concerts,decided to bring their tour to South Africa where they performed two shows, one atthe FNB Stadium in Johannesburg and one at the Greenpoint Stadium in CapeTown. 2. RESEARCH AIMSThis research project had the following primary aims: • To determine which aspects influence visitors’ perception of value for money at a concert. • To determine the spending patterns of the visitors at the event. • To determine what motivates visitors to attend Big Concerts events. 1
  7. 7. • To determine the key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience • To estimate the economic impact of the event. 3. METHOD OF RESEARCHTo achieve these aims, the following approach was implemented: A questionnairewas developed by TREES at the North-West University in cooperation with the eventorganisers, focusing on the following aspects: • Demographic data. • Expenditure patterns. • Consumer behaviour. • Travel motivations. • Musical interest. • Aspects that influence perception of value for money.Visitors were approached before the show and the fieldworkers explained the goal ofthe survey as well as the questionnaire. Based on simple random sampling, 466visitors formed part of the survey in Cape Town and 423 visitors formed part of thesurvey in Johannesburg.The results from the respective surveys will be discussed in the next section. 2
  8. 8. 4. PROFILE OF THE EAGLES CONCERT ATTENDEE SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE4.1 Gender 54% 53% 53% 52% 51% 51% 50% 49% 49% 48% 47% 47% 46% 45% 44% Johannesburg Cape Town Male FemaleFigure 4.1: GenderAs shown in Figure 4.1, more female respondents participated in the survey at bothThe Eagles concerts. Fifty-three percent (53%) of the respondents in Cape Townwere female while 47% were male, whereas 51% of the respondents inJohannesburg were female and 49% were male.4.2 AgeThe largest category of respondents who attended The Eagles concerts at bothCape Town and Johannesburg were aged between 50-64 years (46% and 42%respectively), followed by attendees between 35-49 years of age (25% and 22%respectively). Respondents between the age group 25-34 years accounted for 14% 3
  9. 9. and 22% respectively, whereas respondents aged between 20 and 24 yearsaccounted for 8% of respondents at both concerts (Table 4.1). Based on theaverage age of the attendees, Cape Town had the oldest respondents (46.38 years)as Johannesburg’s average age of the respondents was 42.98 years.Table 4.1: AgeAGE CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG< 19 2% 4%20-24 8% 8%25-34 14% 22%35-49 25% 22%50-64 46% 42%65+ 5% 2%Average age 46.38 42.984.3 Marital StatusTable 4.2 indicates that the majority of the respondents at both The Eagles concertsin Cape Town and Johannesburg were married (62% and 54% respectively),however, a significant percentage of the respondents also indicated that they weresingle (18% and 19% respectively) or in a relationship, not married, (12% and 16%respectively). The remaining respondents were divorced (4% and 6% respectively),living together (2% and 5%) or widowed (2% and 1% respectively).Table 4.2: Marital StatusMARITAL STATUS CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGSingle 18% 19%In a relationship (not married) 12% 16%Married 62% 54%Living Together 2% 5%Divorced 4% 6%Widow/er 2% 1% 4
  10. 10. 4.4 Home LanguageThe majority of the concert attendees at The Eagles concerts in Cape Town andJohannesburg were English speaking (66% and 63% respectively) while 31% and36% respectively of the respondents were Afrikaans speaking (Figure 4.2). Only 1%at the Johannesburg concert and 3% at the Cape Town concert indicated otherlanguages which included Dutch, French, German, Greek and Italian. 70% 66% 63% 60% 50% 40% 36% 31% 30% 20% 10% 3% 1% 0% Afrikaans English Other Cape Town JohannesburgFigure 4.2: Home Language4.5 Province of residenceThe majority of respondents at the respective The Eagles concerts originated fromthe host province: 81% from the Western Cape at the Cape Town concert and 82%from Gauteng at the Johannesburg concert. The host provinces attracted visitorsfrom their neighbouring provinces such as 8% of respondents in Cape Town from theEastern Cape, 2% from the Northern Cape while 4% of respondents at theJohannesburg concert were respectively from the North West and Mpumalanga.Only 2% of respondents (Cape Town and Johannesburg) were foreigners from 5
  11. 11. countries such as Bavaria, Canada, Dubai, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy,Namibia, the Netherlands, the UK, Zambia and Zimbabwe.Table 4.3: Province of residencePROVINCE CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGWestern Cape 81% 1%Gauteng 2% 82%Eastern Cape 8% 2%North West 0% 4%Mpumalanga 0% 4%Northern Cape 2% 0%Kwazulu-Natal 5% 4%Limpopo 0% 0%Free State 0% 1%Outside RSA borders 2% 2%4.6 Level of EducationTable 4.4 indicates that the majority of the respondents at both The Eagles concertswere well educated with either a diploma or a degree (44% and 37% respectively)while 28% at both the Cape Town and Johannesburg had matric as their highestlevel of education. Respectively, 15% (Cape Town) and 17% (Johannesburg) hadgained a professional qualification and respectively 9% and 13% (Cape Town andJohannesburg) had a postgraduate qualification.Table 4.4: Level of educationLEVEL OF EDUCATION CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGScholar 3% 4%Matric 28% 28%Diploma/Degree 44% 37%Postgraduate 9% 13%Professional 15% 17%Other 1% 2% 6
  12. 12. 4.7 OccupationThe majority of the respondents at the Cape Town and Johannesburg concerts (41%and 46% respectively) were in professional occupations, followed by 19% and 21%respectively who were self-employed (Table 4.5). A significant number ofpensioners (6% and 2% respectively), housewives (7% and 4% respectively) andstudents (7% and 9% respectively) were attracted to both The Eagles concerts.Other occupations included an admin assistant, chef, designer, contract worker,councillor, marketer, musician, office advisor, receptionist, sound engineer, taxconsultant, teacher and tour operator.Table 4.5: OccupationOCCUPATION CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGProfessional 41% 46%Self-employed 19% 21%Technical 5% 5%Sales 5% 8%Work at mine 0% 1%Civil service 3% 1%Housewife 7% 4%Pensioner 6% 2%Student 7% 9%Unemployed 1% 1%Other 6% 2% 7
  13. 13. ECONOMIC PROFILE4.8 Number of people in travelling groupTable 4.6: Number of people in travelling groupPEOPLE IN GROUP CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG1 person 2% 3%2 people 53% 35%3 people 11% 12%4 people 18% 28%5 people 7% 10%6 people 6% 9%7 people 1% 2%8+ people 2% 1%Average 3.09 3.54The majority of the respondents at the Cape Town and Johannesburg concertstravelled in a group of two people (53% and 35% respectively), followed by peoplewho travelled in a group of four people (18% and 28% respectively) and three people(11% and 12% respectively) (Table 4.6). The average size of the attendees’travelling group to the concert in Johannesburg and Cape Town was 3 and 3.5persons respectively.4.9 Number of people paid forTable 4.7: Number of people paid forNUMBER OF PEOPLE CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGPAID FORNone 15% 19%1 person 20% 17%2 people 49% 38%3 people 6% 7%4 people 7% 11% 8
  14. 14. 5 people 2% 5%6+ people 1% 3%Average 1.84 2.06According to Table 4.7, the majority of respondents at both concerts paid for twopeople (49% and 38% respectively). Paying for only one person accounted for 20%and 17% respectively of the respondents at the Cape Town and Johannesburgconcerts, while 15% and 19% respectively were not financially responsible foranyone. The average number of people for whom respondents at the Cape Townand Johannesburg concerts were financially responsible was 2 people.4.10 Local ResidentsAs shown in Figure 4.3, the majority (69% and 64% respectively) of respondentswho attended The Eagles concert in Cape Town and Johannesburg were localresidents. Yes No 69% 64% 36% 31% Johannesburg Cape TownFigure 4.3: Local Residents 9
  15. 15. 4.11 Length of stay in the areaTable 4.8 Length of stayLENGTH OF STAY CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGNone 31% 62%1 night 17% 9%2 nights 11% 9%3 nights 3% 4%4 nights 10% 9%5 nights 9% 3%6+ nights 19% 4%Average nights spent 3.19 1.52As shown in Table 4.8, the majority of the attendees (62%) at the Johannesburgconcert did not overnight in the area while only 31% of Cape Town attendees didnot. Seventeen percent (17%) of Cape Town attendees stayed only one night, 19%for six or more nights and 11% for two nights. Nine percent (9%) of Johannesburgrespondents stayed for one, two or four nights. Based on the average length of stay,attendees at the Cape Town concert spent an average of 3 nights in the area,whereas respondents to the Johannesburg concert spent an average of less than 2nights in the area.4.12 Number of tickets purchasedTable 4.9 indicates that the majority of respondents to The Eagles concerts at CapeTown and Johannesburg purchased two tickets (55% and 39% respectively),followed by one ticket (15% and 13% respectively) and four tickets (10% and 16%respectively). On average, respondents purchased two tickets for the Cape Townand Johannesburg concerts. 10
  16. 16. Table 4.9: Number of tickets purchasedNUMBER OF TICKETS CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGPURCHASEDNone 7% 11%1 Ticket 15% 13%2 Tickets 55% 39%3 Tickets 8% 10%4 Tickets 10% 16%5 Tickets 3% 6%6+ Tickets 2% 5%Average 1.84 2.154.13 ExpenditureAttendees at the Cape Town concert had the highest average spending per group(R1846.56) (Table 4.10). The highest spending categories included tickets(R897.63), food (R243.12), transport (R240.54) and accommodation (R229.86).Johannesburg’s average spending per group was R1804.41 where this amountcomprised mainly tickets (R1257.83), food (R149.91) and transport (R134.61). It isclear that that the different ticket prices at the venues as well as the respondents’length of stay had a significant influence on the average spent at each concert.Table 4.10: Expenditure per group (in ZAR)ITEMS CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGTickets 897.63 1,257.83Accommodation (if applicable) 229.86 60.37Food 243.12 149.91Beverages 125.95 115.64Transport (return) 240.54 134.61Souvenirs and merchandise 41.35 28.84Parking 24.41 53.60Other 43.70 3.59TOTAL 1,846.56 1,804.41 11
  17. 17. CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR4.14 Initiator of attendanceThe majority of the respondents at both The Eagles concerts (55% at Cape Townand 44% at Johannesburg) indicated that they initiated their attendance themselveswhile others were initiated by family (26% and 30% respectively), friends (16% and19% respectively) and respondents’ spouses (18% and 13% respectively).Table 4.12: Initiator of attendanceINITIATOR OF CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGATTENDANCE YES NO YES NOSelf 55% 45% 45% 55%Friends 16% 84% 19% 81Media 8% 92% 8% 92%Spouse 18% 82% 13% 87%Family 26% 74% 30% 70%Work 5% 95% 3% 97%Boyfriend/Girlfriend 7% 93% 4% 96%Other 1% 99% 2% 98%4.15 Decision to attendAccording to Figure 4.4, the majority (36%) of the respondents at the Johannesburgconcert made their decision to attend when Big Concerts announced that The Eagleswill perform in South Africa. Thirty-six percent (36%) of respondents in Cape Townand 23% at the Johannesburg concert made a spontaneous decision to attend theconcert. Only 19% of Cape Town attendees decided to attend when it wasannounced. Other respondents in Cape Town and Johannesburg (4% and 17%respectively) mostly got the tickets as presents. 12
  18. 18. Johannesburg Cape Town 36% 36% 23% 20% 19% 17% 17% 15% 13% 4% Spontaneous A month ago More than a month When it was Other decision ago announcedFigure 4.4: Decision to attend4.16 Heard about the concertAccording to Table 4.13, respondents to the two The Eagles concerts indicated on afour point Likert scale the extent to which the different media motivated them toattend the concerts.The following media influenced the respondents to a greater extent or completely toattend The Eagles concerts:MEDIA CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGComputicket’s website 41% 46%Word-of-mouth 56% 66%Radio 51% 74% 13
  19. 19. The following media aspects were indicated to have influenced the respondents’choice to attend the The Eagles concerts to a lesser extent or not at all:MEDIA CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGTwitter 92% 84%Internet blogs 88% 79%Facebook 76% 70%Magazines 75% 71%Big Concerts’ website 78% 72% 14
  20. 20. Table 4.13: Heard about the concert MEDIA CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG TO A TO A TO A LESSER NOT AT TO A LESSER NOT AT ALL GREATER COMPLETELY GREATER COMPLETELY EXTENT ALL EXTENT EXTENT EXTENTTelevision 52% 14% 15% 19% 40% 12% 23% 25%Radio 39% 10% 23% 28% 19% 7% 34% 40%Big Concerts’ 65% 13% 10% 12% 54% 18% 15% 13%websiteMagazines 61% 14% 16% 9% 52% 19% 18% 11%Newspapers 51% 11% 19% 19% 45% 21% 19% 15%Word-of- 36% 8% 21% 35% 23% 11% 35% 31%mouthFacebook 66% 10% 10% 14% 57% 13% 16% 15%Twitter 85% 7% 3% 5% 70% 14% 9% 8%Internet blogs 79% 9% 4% 8% 66% 13% 14% 7%Computicket’s 50% 9% 17% 24% 39% 15% 26% 20%websiteOther 50% 6% 5% 39% 63% 12% 11% 15% 15
  21. 21. 4.17 Motivation to attendTable 4.14 shows that attendees at The Eagles concerts considered the followingmotives to attend the event as important to extremely important:MOTIVE CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG % %To see my favourite band 95% 91%T o enjoy the music 97% 96%It is a unique, once in a lifetime experience 92% 92%These concerts are entertainment at its 91%best 92%For nostalgic reasons/memories 92% 88%I always wanted to see The Eagles perform 92%live 91%To have fun and because I enjoy these 88%types of special events 91%The Eagles is a well-known international act 90% 92%To be part of this unique and exciting event 87% 87%This concert is value for money 80% 81%The following motives were considered as less important to not important at all:MOTIVE CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG % %Because of social status in terms of being 76% 64%seen by othersBecause I have seen The Eagles before 68% 67%and wanted to do so againBecause I got tickets free or as a present 66% 58%Because of the possibility of meeting the 59% 53%artist in personBecause the attendance makes one part of 41% 35%the performance 16
  22. 22. Table 4.14: Motivation to attend The Eagles concerts at Cape Town and JohannesburgMOTIVATION CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG Not at all Slightly Important Very Extremely Not at all Slightly Important Very Extremely important important important important important important important importantTo see my favourite band 1% 4% 14% 26% 55% 4% 5% 11% 31% 49%Because I got tickets free or as 54% 12% 9% 9% 16% 45% 13% 16% 13% 14%a presentTo spend time with family, 15% 14% 21% 22% 28% 13% 10% 24% 29% 24%friends or someone specialIt’s a sociable event 11% 14% 27% 26% 22% 8% 10% 33% 29% 20%This concert is value for money 9% 11% 26% 28% 26% 9% 10% 30% 26% 25%I try to attend as many of these 20% 15% 23% 20% 22% 14% 23% 24% 19% 20%music events as possibleThe Eagles is a well-known 5% 5% 13% 24% 53% 3% 5% 19% 29% 44%international actIt is a unique, once in a lifetime 4% 4% 8% 20% 64% 3% 5% 13% 28% 51%experienceI always wanted to see The 2% 7% 11% 17% 63% 3% 5% 17% 27% 48%Eagles perform liveTo be part of this unique and 5% 8% 11% 21% 55% 7% 6% 21% 28% 38%exciting eventTo have fun and because I enjoy 4% 5% 23% 26% 42% 4% 8% 22% 32% 34%these types of special eventsThese concerts are 3% 5% 19% 27% 46% 3% 6% 24% 31% 36%entertainment at its bestT o enjoy the music 1% 2% 9% 25% 63% 2% 2% 15% 31% 50%For nostalgic reasons/memories 5% 3% 18% 26% 48% 5% 7% 20% 32% 36%For a chance to be with people 10% 12% 24% 20% 34% 8% 10% 28% 29% 25% 17
  23. 23. who are enjoying themselvesTo experience new things 9% 14% 23% 22% 32% 8% 11% 23% 28% 30%These concerts enable one toexperience the possibility of theartist singing a song for the first 17% 20% 22% 14% 27% 14% 18% 25% 20% 23%time or a song that has not beenrecorded on CDBecause these concerts enableone to get physically close to the 18% 12% 26% 17% 27% 13% 19% 28% 19% 21%artists when performing a songBecause I have seen TheEagles before and wanted to do 59% 9% 12% 6% 14% 57% 10% 14% 9% 10%so againBecause the attendance makes 26% 15% 25% 16% 18% 19% 16% 27% 19% 19%one part of the performanceBecause of social status in 68% 8% 8% 5% 11% 53% 11% 16% 10% 10%terms of being seen by othersBecause of the possibility of 47% 12% 13% 8% 20% 41% 12% 18% 11% 18%meeting the artist in personTo relax and escape from dailytension and my busy every day 19% 12% 19% 19% 31% 15% 10% 25% 23% 27%environment 18
  24. 24. MUSICAL INTEREST4.18 Number of musical events attended in 2011According to Table 4.15, a significant percentage of the attendees at the Cape Townand Johannesburg concerts indicated that they had not attended any concerts in 2011(32% and 30% respectively) while others attended only one concert (28% and 31%respectively). This is followed by respondents who attended two (21% and 19%respectively) and three concerts (9% and 12% respectively). The average number ofmusical events attended in 2011 by attendees was two concerts at both the Cape Townand Johannesburg concerts.Table 4.15: Number of musical events attended in 2011NUMBER OF MUSICAL CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGEVENTS ATTENDEDNone 32% 30%1 event 28% 31%2 events 21% 19%3 events 9% 12%4 events 4% 3%5 events 2% 2%6 events 2% 1%7+ events 2% 2%Average 1.5 1.6 19
  25. 25. 4.19 Preference of artists/bands/performers to perform in South AfricaRespondents indicated that they would also like to have the followingartists/bands/performers perform in South Africa (Table 4.16):Table 4.16: Preferred artists/bands/performers to perform in South Africa CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG • ACDC • ACDC • Adele • Bon Jovi • Bon Jovi • Bryan Adams • Bruce Springsteen • Dire Straits • Eric Clapton • Eric Clapton • Fleetwood Mac • Fleetwood Mac • Foo Fighters • Foo Fighters • John Mayer • Linken Park • Madonna • Madonna • Metallica • Metallica • Nickelback • Pink Floyd • Pink Floyd • Queen • Queen • Red Hot Chilli Peppers • Red Hot Chilli Peppers • Rolling Stones • Rolling Stones4.20 Attendance at other music events or festivalsThe majority of the respondents at the Cape Town and Johannesburg concerts (85%and 78% respectively) indicated that they do attend other musical festivals 20
  26. 26. Yes No 85% 78% 22% 15% Cape Town JohannesburgFigure 4.5: Attendance of other music festivals4.21 Preferred type of musicAs shown in Table 4.17, the majority of the respondents at The Eagles concerts preferto listen to Rock ‘n roll, pop, blues and country music. It is notable that the attendees atconcerts such as The Eagles, do not prefer music such as punk rock, jazz, heavy metal,rap, R&B, reggae, country, folk/traditional or Afrikaans. Other respondents identifiedthat they prefer to listen to alternative, classic rock, dance, gospel, hip hop and house.Table 4.17: Preferred type of musicTYPE OF MUSIC CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG YES NO YES NOPop 70% 30% 63% 37%Punk Rock 40% 60% 24% 76%Classical 55% 45% 40% 60%Instrumental 50% 50% 28% 72%Jazz 52% 48% 28% 72%Blues 59% 41% 35% 65% 21
  27. 27. Heavy metal 46% 54% 25% 75%Rap 35% 65% 8% 91%Rock ‘n Roll 80% 20% 76% 24%R&B 49% 51% 25% 75%Reggae 46% 54% 23% 77%Country 59% 41% 41% 59%Folk/Traditional 56% 54% 20% 80%Afrikaans 44% 56% 23% 77%Other, specify 4% 96% 8% 92%4.22 All time favourite artists/bands/performersRespondents indicated the following artists/bands/performers were their all timefavourite performers (Table 4.18):Table 4.18: All time favourite artists/bands/performers CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG • Bon Jovi • Bon Jovi • Led Zeppelin • Queen • Neil Diamond • The Beatles • Pink Floyd • The Eagles • Queen • The Rolling Stones • Sting • U2 • The Beatles • The Eagles • U2 22
  28. 28. KEY VALUE FOR MONEY ASPECTS4.23 Aspects that influence value for money perceptionRespondents to The Eagles concerts were asked to rate the importance of variousmanagement aspects which they thought would influence their perception on value formoney. These aspects where rated on a five-point Likert scale where 1 indicated noopinion and 5 indicated completely. Table 4.19 shows that attendees at The Eaglesconcerts considered the following aspects to have an influence on the perception ofvalue for money to a greater extent or completely:Table 4.19: Perception of value for moneyASPECTS CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG % %Quality of the entertainment 85% 85%Quality of the show 88% 84%The quality of sound 85% 83%Atmosphere 80% 81%Quality of the infrastructure 85% 81%Venue / Location 76% 78%Personal safety 80% 78%Total event experience 78% 75%Venue Management effectiveness 80% 72%The total experience offered by the facility 73% 71%Its a once in a lifetime experience 79% 71% 23
  29. 29. Table 4.20: Key management aspects for a memorable visitor experience CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG KEY MANAGEMENT To a To a To a lesser To a lesser ASPECTS No opinion Not at all greater Completely No opinion Not at all greater Completely extent extent extent extent1. Quality of theaccommodation 36% 15% 13% 19% 17% 38% 12% 11% 18% 21%that is being usedduring the trip2. Quality of thefood and 10% 10% 29% 34% 17% 12% 7% 29% 33% 19%beverages3. Price of food 8% 11% 33% 30% 18% 11% 14% 25% 32% 18%and beverages4. Quality of the 6% 3% 6% 19% 66% 5% 3% 7% 20% 65%entertainment5. Price of the 33% 15% 19% 18% 15% 32% 14% 21% 18% 16%accommodation6. Parking cost 16% 23% 32% 17% 12% 12% 16% 33% 25% 14%7. Transport cost 23% 20% 23% 24% 10% 20% 13% 31% 25% 11%8. Availability of 31% 28% 21% 10% 10% 26% 24% 22% 19% 9%souvenirs9. Price of the 28% 25% 21% 12% 14% 27% 21% 21% 19% 12%souvenirs10. Atmosphere 6% 3% 11% 36% 44% 3% 3% 13% 43% 38%11. Venue / 7% 4% 13% 32% 44% 5% 3% 14% 37% 41%Location 24
  30. 30. 12. Availability offacilities for 40% 28% 8% 13% 11% 42% 19% 17% 10% 12%children13. Exchangerate, in the case of 49% 17% 8% 14% 12% 52% 12% 13% 12% 11%foreigners14. The totalexperience offered 10% 4% 13% 40% 33% 7% 5% 17% 38% 33%by the facility15. Quality ofservices offered by 7% 5% 14% 39% 35% 6% 7% 18% 38% 31%staff16. Total event 4% 5% 13% 32% 46% 6% 6% 13% 30% 45%experience17. Variety of food 8% 13% 28% 27% 24% 9% 13% 32% 29% 17%18. Level of 4% 5% 14% 40% 37% 7% 8% 19% 27% 39%hygiene conditions19. Price of the 3% 5% 20% 40% 32% 7% 4% 25% 35% 29%tickets20. Personal 4% 4% 12% 32% 48% 5% 3% 14% 30% 48%safety21. Quality of the 4% 2% 6% 26% 62% 4% 2% 10% 26% 58%show22. Quality of the 3% 1% 11% 40% 45% 3% 1% 15% 33% 48%infrastructure23. VenueManagement 6% 3% 11% 37% 43% 5% 6% 17% 30% 42%effectiveness 25
  31. 31. 24. Its a once in a 2% 4% 15% 29% 50% 8% 6% 15% 22% 49%lifetime experience25. How close you 4% 5% 21% 33% 37% 5% 6% 36% 35% 18%are to the stage26. The quality of 3% 2% 10% 28% 57% 4% 2% 11% 31% 52%sound27. The qualityand size of the 3% 4% 15% 36% 42% 6% 4% 19% 31% 40%screen 26
  32. 32. 5. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE EAGLES CONCERTSThe economic value of any event is dependent on a number of factors, of which themost important are: • The spending by attendees and organisers. • The number of attendees. • The distribution of the money spent through the economy.The spending of attendees was determined with the survey conducted, while thenumbers of attendees are based on ticket sale figures obtained from the organisers.Since the events are funded from the ticket sales, no additional spending for organisingthe events has been added. However, ticket income is appropriated to differentspending categories, based on budget allocations obtained from the organiser. Todetermine how the money is distributed throughout the economy, a number of methodscan be employed. The current research makes use of the Social Accounting Matrices(SAM) of the Western Cape and Gauteng, to determine the multiplying effect of thisspending.The multiplier concept is applied using economy-wide consistent data on a particular(regional/provincial) economy as is normally contained in a Social Accounting Matrix(SAM). SAMs extend the basic input-output concept from production to incomedistribution and include both social and economic data for an economy. A SAM consistsof data from input-output tables, national income statistics, and household income andexpenditure statistics. In the present case, the authors used a SAM for the WesternCape Province as well as the SAM for the Gauteng Province, which was developed byConningarth Consultants (2006). The Western Cape SAM (based on 2006 prices) usedin these analyses distinguishes between 55 sectors, 12 household types and four ethnic 27
  33. 33. groups. The Gauteng SAM distinguishes between 37 sectors, 12 household types andfour ethnic groups.5.1 Total spending of attendeesThe survey responses were compiled for both the Cape Town and Johannesburgevents and are reported accordingly together with the total for both events. The averagespending by attendees for each of the concerts was determined based on the surveydata (see Table 4.10) and ticket sales, and are shown in Table 5.1.Table 5.1: Total spending of concert attendees Cape Town Johannesburg TotalTickets 12,159,436.00 14,699,650.00 26,859,086.00Accommodation 3,113,667.64 705,568.93 3,819,236.57Food 3,293,341.14 1,751,969.29 5,045,310.43Beverages 1,706,199.27 1,351,413.34 3,057,612.61Transport 3,258,450.37 1,573,132.44 4,831,582.81Souvenirs 560,178.69 337,084.93 897,263.62Parking 330,701.16 626,423.97 957,125.13Other 591,931.47 41,977.41 633,908.88Total 25,013,905.73 21,087,220.31 46,101,126.05It is evident that total spending in Cape Town exceed spending in Johannesburg andthis result is even more pronounced when spending on tickets is excluded from thespending per venue. Without spending on tickets, spending in Cape Town amounts toR12.85 million compared to spending of R6.39 million by attendees in Johannesburg(see Table 5.2).Organiser spending stems from the income received from ticket sales (R26.9 million).Artist fees represent a substantial leakage from the South African economy, and are 28
  34. 34. subtracted from organiser spending to reflect the true value of the event. Table 5.2indicates the spending per venue as well as total spending and represents the totaldirect impact of the event.Table 5.2: Total direct spending due to the event CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG TOTALATTENDEE SPENDING 12,854,470 6,387,570 19,242,040ORGANISER SPENDING 5,327,541 6,139,517 6,139,517TOTAL 18,182,011 12,527,087 25,381,557From Table 5.2, it is evident that the money spent in the South African economy due toThe Eagles concerts amounts to more than R25 million (i.e. the direct impact of theevents). All spending stems from consumers, since spending by organisers (R6.14million) is funded from ticket sales. However, even when one excludes spending ontickets, the direct impact of attendees far exceeds that of the organisers (R19.242million).5.2 Economic value based n SAM calculationsAttendee spending is converted to the associated increase in production and income inthe regions of Gauteng and the Western Cape using economic multipliers from SAMsfor the Gauteng and Western Cape Provinces. The classical SAM multiplier approachemploys distinct multipliers for each expenditure-related sector. The multipliers convertexpenditure into the associated increase in output and income and estimate secondaryeffects as the participant/spectator spending circulates through the regional economy.Provincial Social Accounting Matrices 1 (SAM) were used to estimate the regionalmultiplier (direct and indirect) impact for each of the provinces that hosted The Eaglesconcerts.1 Social Accounting Matrices are an extended form of the basic Input-Output model. 29
  35. 35. Attendee expenditureThe quantification of the direct and indirect impact of the attendees expenditure at theevent in the region is summarised in Table 5.3. As this expenditure is partially appliedby the attendees of the event in the purchase of goods and services in the region, thisrepresents an inflow of money into the region, mobilising economic activity, generatingemployment and generating additional revenues for the province.The total effect on the provincial economy is determined through multipliers, which canbe used to determine the total effect on output (gross additional economic output) andGross Value Added (GVA) 2. These multiplier measures are intrinsically linked, relatingan initial direct stimulus to the final ‘multiplied’ impact generated. Output multipliersgenerally overestimate the impact of an event, due to double counting, while this is notthe case when GVA is used. GVA only takes into account the value added by eachindustry due to the increase in demand in one industry. Value added in production(GVA) is measured by factor incomes in terms of the compensation of employees andthe operating surpluses of firms, and can therefore be thought of as the increase inincome of factors of production in the regional economy.Table 5.3 reflects the effects on output and income caused by the attendeesexpenditure resulting from the event. It is evident that the R12.85 million spent byattendees at the Cape Town concert creates output in the province valuing R16.5million, while income (as measured through GVA) increases by R7.1 million. The R6.39million-spending by attendees of The Eagles concert in Johannesburg results in outputin the province to the value of R10.5 million, while it translates into income worth R4.5million.2 GVA (at basic prices) is a measure of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) which accounts for the impact of taxes andsubsidies. This GVA is obtained by subtracting indirect taxes from GDP and then adding subsidies. The GVA atbasic prices corresponds to the value of incomes paid to the factors of production – the compensation of employeesand the gross operating surpluses of firms. GVA or GDP can be used as multiplier measures, depending on thepreferred treatment of taxes and subsidies, on condition that the measure used is clearly identified. 30
  36. 36. Table 5.3: Impact through output and GVA multipliers (ZAR, 2006 prices) – attendees CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG Direct Total Total GVA Direct Total Total impact output impact impact output GVA impact impact impactAccommodation 3,113,668 4,317,482 1,440,941 705,569 929,706 317,656Food 3,293,341 4,467,339 2,181,953 1,751,969 3,027,616 1,382,040Beverages 1,706,199 2,314,419 1,130,416 1,351,413 2,335,406 1,066,062Transport & Parking 3,589,152 4,199,016 1,705,722 2,199,556 3,585,198 1,484,968Souvenirs & Other 1,152,110 1,236,389 642,003 379,062 641,710 293,400Total (in ZAR) 12,854,470 16,534,644 7,101,034 6,387,570 10,519,636 4,544,126In terms of the analysis of the expenditure by attendees of The Eagles concerts, the firstconclusion is that the effect on output in the Western Cape Province is much greaterthan in Gauteng Province (R16.5 million compared to R10.5 million). The reasons forthis include the higher total spending by attendees in the Western Cape. The secondconclusion is that the income that resulted from attendee spending due to the event issignificant in each province, with the Western Cape again benefitting more thanGauteng (R7.1 million compared to R4.5 million). The total impact on output resultingfrom expenditure by attendees surpassed R27 million, while total income received ismore than R11.5 million.Organiser expenditureTo estimate the economic impact of the expenditure made by the organisers of theevent, an approach similar to that for the expenditure by event attendees was followed.All expenses incurred by the organisers at each venue were allocated into one of theSAM categories (excluding VAT from Computicket sales and artist fees). Thesecategories are summarised in the main national accounts sectors, as reflected in Table5.4. The effects on output for each of the venues resulting from the spending of theevent organisers are also shown. 31
  37. 37. Table 5.4: Impact on output (ZAR, 2006 prices) – event organisers CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGSECTOR DIRECT IMPACT TOTAL OUTPUT DIRECT TOTAL OUTPUT IMPACT IMPACT IMPACTAgriculture 0 25,300 0 13,037Mining 0 2,610 0 37,479Manufacturing 79,345 404,228 170,902 2,143,813Electricity & water 0 33,018 30,000 85,670Construction 0 62,011 0 114,578Trade & accommodation 1,736,987 1,693,482 1,606,025 1,863,069Transport & communication 733,722 878,386 695,753 1,116,218Financial & business services 2,635,114 2,187,484 3,477,609 2,674,261Community services 142,372 107,609 159,227 100,266Total (in ZAR) 5,327,541 5,394,128 6,139,517 8,148,392Table 5.4 illustrates that the largest direct impacts due to organiser spending are infinancial and business services, trade and accommodation, and transport andcommunication. The spending by organisers in Johannesburg exceed that in CapeTown by almost R1 million, although the distribution of spending between the varioussectors is similar in both provinces.Through the ‘backward linkages’, large indirect impacts are experienced in the transportand communication industry in both provinces as well as in manufacturing in Gauteng.It is evident that the total impact in the Western Cape is only slightly more than thedirect spending. This is due to substantial leakages in the manufacturing, trade as wellas business services industries. It implies that, although the spending takes place in theWestern Cape Province, the benefits for firms occurs elsewhere (probably Gauteng).Based on the data analysis, it is estimated that the total impact of expenditure byorganisers in the regions is more than R13.5 million in terms of output generated. Theresults of the study suggest that the sectors that benefited most from expenditure inhosting the events are, in order of importance, financial and business services, tradeand accommodation and manufacturing. 32
  38. 38. In terms of GVA, the income generated due to organising the event translates intoR3.135 million in the Western Cape and R4.164 million in Gauteng. Again, it is evidentthat the benefit is distributed unevenly between the two provinces, with factors ofproduction in Gauteng benefitting more compared to those in the Western Cape.Overall impactThis section represents the overall spending in the local economy that can be attributedto the event by all attendees (locals and visitors from abroad and from the rest of SouthAfrica) and organisers. Given the estimation of the economic impact presented above, itshould be kept in mind that, by definition, the calculation of the economic impact shouldonly include the expenditure that would not have occurred in the absence of the event.Therefore, the inclusion of local spending in the calculations is a contestable area.Although the locals do not bring money into the community from outside regions asvisitors do, it is valuable to include their spending as it has the effect of initiatingeconomic activity within the local economy. Examined in this way, an event’scontribution to a local economy is comparable to a local business that both drawsmoney from, and contributes to, its community. To consider only the tourist rand interms of economic impact would greatly underestimate the complete financial benefitsof the event and other similar events. In addition, this study recognises that, withoutsuch events, a significant amount of money would leave the area due to locals seekingan alternative event for participation in other regions.The usefulness of the overall impact is that it allows one to measure the amount ofmoney that the event circulates through the local economy from every source fromwhich the event draws financial impact. The sum of the impacts gives us an estimate ofthe total impact of the event in the region. This is shown in Table 5.5.The analysis of the results indicates that the total direct economic impact of the event isR30.709 million, which translated into output worth R40.596 million. That is equivalent 33
  39. 39. to an aggregated output multiplier of the order of 1.32. Therefore, for each rand spentdue to the event, 32 cents are generated additionally in terms of indirect expenditure.The aggregated output multiplier is obtained by dividing the total output impact by thedirect impact.Table 5.5: Total impact on regional output and GVA (R million) CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG TOTAL Direct Output GVA Direct Output GVA Direct Output GVAAttendee 12.854 16.535 7.101 6.388 10.520 4.544 19.242 27.054 11.645Organiser 5.328 5.394 3.135 6.140 8.148 4.164 11.467 13.542 7.299Total 18.182 21.929 10.236 12.527 18.668 8.708 30.709 40.596 18.944In terms of value added, it is evident that the R30.709 million direct spending due to theevent led to gross value added of R18.944 million, indicating the income that factors ofproduction earn due to the spending. This is equivalent to a GVA or income multiplier of0.62. Therefore, for every rand spent due to the event, someone in the regions earns62 cents thereof in income.One of the elements of the additional value added that will result from the event isremuneration of employees whch, in turn, affects household income. In particular, theimpact on low-income households can be highlighted, as this can be used as anindicator of the extent to which the event contributes to poverty alleviation throughoutthe provincial economies. This is summarised in Table 5.6.Table 5.6: Total impact on regional income (R million) CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG TOTAL Low Other Total Low Other Total Low Other Total income income income income income income income income incomeAttendee 1.317 5.784 7.101 0.536 4.008 4.544 1.854 9.792 11.645Organiser 0.425 2.710 3.135 0.375 3.789 4.164 0.800 6.499 7.299Total 1.742 8.494 10.236 0.911 7.797 8.708 2.653 16.291 18.944In terms of GVA, the contribution of the event to income for low-income householdstotals R2.653 million. In total, the income of households that can be attributed to 34
  40. 40. hosting the event in Gauteng is R8.708 million, while in the Western Cape it is R10.236million. Low income households in the Western Cape Province benefit more than theircounterparts in Gauteng from hosting The Eagles concerts. 35
  41. 41. 6. CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Profile of The Eagles concert attendeeTable 6.1: Profile of the The Eagles concert attendeeDEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURGGender Female (53%) Female (51%)Age 46.38 years (Average) 42.98 years (Average)Marital Status Married (62%) Married (54%)Home Language English (66%) English (63%)Province of residence Western Cape (81%) Gauteng (82%)Country of residence Bavaria, Canada, Dubai, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland,outside RSA borders Italy, Namibia, the Netherlands, the UK, Zambia and ZimbabweLevel of education Diploma/Degree (44%) Diploma/Degree (37%)Occupation Professional (41%) Professional (46%)ECONOMIC INFORMATIONNumber of people in 3.5 people 3 peopletravelling groupNumber of people paid for 2 people 2 peopleLocal residents Local (69%) Local (64%)Length of stay in area 3.19 nights 1.52 nightsNumber of tickets 1.84 tickets 2.15 ticketspurchasedExpenditure per group R1846.56 R1804.41CONSUMER BEHAVIORInitiator of attendance Self (55%) Self (45%)Decision to attend Spontaneous decision When it was announced (36%) (36%)Motivation to attend To enjoy the music; To see my favourite band, It is a unique, once in a lifetime experienceAspects influencing value Quality of entertainment; Quality of show; The quality of 36
  42. 42. for money sound; Atmosphere and Quality of infrastructureMUSICAL INTERESTMusic events/festivals Two events Two eventsattended in 2011Preferred artist to perform ACDC; Bon Jovi, Fleetwood Mac; Foo Fighters; Madonna;in South Africa Metallica; Pink Floyd; Queen; Red Hot Chili Peppers; The Rolling StonesAttendance of other music Yes (85%) Yes (78%)eventsHeard about The Eagles Word-of-mouth (56%) Radio (74%)concertPreferred type of music Pop (70%) Rock ‘n Roll (76%)All time favourite Bon Jovi; Queen; The Beatles; U2artist/band/performer 6.2 Conclusions with regard to the survey The following conclusions can be drawn from the study: • The respondents at both Cape Town and Johannesburg concerts were married, English-speaking women in the 43 to 46 years age range. • Cape Town respondents were mostly from the Western Cape while Johannesburg respondents were mostly living in Gauteng. • Foreign residents were mostly from Bavaria, Canada, Dubai, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Namibia, the Netherlands, the UK, Zambia and Zimbabwe. • Respondents from both cities were well qualified with almost half being in professional occupations. • In both cities, the majority of respondents were local people who travelled to the event in groups of three people of which they were financially responsible for two people. • Cape Town respondents stayed an average of three nights in the area, while Johannesburg respondents stayed for less than two nights. 37
  43. 43. • Respondents from Cape Town as well as Johannesburg both purchased two tickets per group on average, while the average spending per group in Cape Town was R1846.56 and Johannesburg was R1804.41. • Respondents in both cities initiated their own attendance to The Eagles concert, but Cape Town respondents made a spontaneous decision to attend and Johannesburg residents decided the moment that The Eagles’ tour was announced. • The main motives for all respondents to attend the event was to enjoy the music of their favourite band and also because it is a once in a lifetime experience. • The quality of the entertainment, the show, the sound, the atmosphere as well as the infrastructure were indicated as being very important aspects influencing value for money. • Respondents at both concerts indicated that they attend at least two concerts per year on average, where Cape Town respondents prefer pop music and Johannesburg respondents prefer Rock ‘n Roll. • Cape Town respondents heard about the concert through word-of-mouth, while the majority of Johannesburg respondents heard about it on the radio. • Respondents indicated that they would prefer ACDC; Bon Jovi, Fleetwood Mac; Foo Fighters; Madonna; Metallica; Pink Floyd; Queen; Red Hot Chili Peppers and The Rolling Stones to perform in South Africa, but their all-time favourite artists remain Bon Jovi, Queen, The Beatles, and U26.3 Conclusions with regard to the economic impactThe Total Direct Economic Impact of the event is R 30, 7 million and the Total Impact(Direct + Indirect) was R 40, 59 million.6.4 Recommendations made by respondents The following recommendations are made by the respondents at each of The Eagles concerts. 38
  44. 44. CAPE TOWN • Better seat planning • Everything in general is too expensive • Ensure that the personnel are well informed • There should be more space around seating • Place the big screen higher up • Host more events in Durban • Improve general signage JOHANNESBURG • Everything in general is too expensive • Big Concerts should have a loyalty card • Explain how parking works beforehand • Ensure that the personnel are well informed • More well-mannered staff • Cleaner ablution facilities • Improve general signage • Plan ahead for different weather conditions (such as rain)6.5 Recommendations made by researchers • Respondents at the Cape Town concert were furious with Computicket when there were double bookings made for certain seats in the blocks closest to the stage. Computicket refused to take any responsibility for this or to give any form of remuneration. As a result many respondents, who were under the impression that they purchased a ticket close to the stage, had no seat and had to be seated at the back. Considering the ticket prices for this particular concert, this type of mistake is inexcusable. • Staff working at Computicket should be better informed to handle enquiries especially regarding the stage and seat layout. Respondents complained that staff misinformed them about the seats and that what they booked did not match 39
  45. 45. the seats on the layout. This played a fundamental role in the confusion anddisappointment surrounding the seats. Although this is not the responsibility ofthe promoters, respondents felt that as a result they did not receive value for theirmoney and this negatively reflects on Big Concerts. 40