Jay-Z’s lawyers say the ‘4:44’ tour is a wild success. But ticket prices keep telling a different story.
Jay-Z’s 4:44 tour continues to suffer from weak demand across multiple cities, with sinking prices and widespread availability. Meanwhile, Jay-Z’s handlers continue to insist that the tour is massively successful.
Unfortunately, the data isn’t quite matching that narrative. Just last week, the rapper canceled Fresno as tickets in Anaheim dropped to $6. The Fresno cancellation happened just five days before the gig, raising suspicions of weak interest.
But that was just the beginning.
Just this afternoon, tickets slumped below $10 in another market: Lincoln, Nebraska. That followed a similar development in Nashville, with other cities likely to slip into the single-digits as buyers hunt for bargains.
We’ve also been unable to locate one sellout, even in markets like Brooklyn, Chicago, Philadelphia, or Washington, DC.
Instead, availability remains widespread on most dates. That includes dates scheduled for this week, with tickets easily purchased across most sections.
Indeed, these deals aren’t restricted to the nosebleeds.
Just this afternoon, fans in Lincoln could grab a second row seat for just $187. That’s a serious bargain, and one that also sharply contradicts the narrative that Jay-Z is smartly driving up the price of premium seats.
Instead, this looks like sluggish demand is affecting every buyer class, including high-rollers.
Earlier, Jay-Z’s lawyers threatened legal action against Digital Music News for writing unfavorably about the tour.
As part of the legal threats, the lawyers pointed DMN to a Billboard piece claiming that Jay-Z’s $6 tickets were intentional and part of a master plan to evade scalpers. The clever plot was leading to record-smashing sales, according to Billboard.
Separately, Billboard writer David Brook assailed DMN’s coverage, calling it ‘lazy’.
Jay-Z’s attorney, Andrew Kupinse of Cummings & Lockwood LLC, has not responded to our request for more information. Specifically, we’ve requested additional details on exactly which portions of our coverage he finds false and defamatory, while presenting the indisputable facts of our coverage.
More as this develops.