Indian sensibilities stand at a crossroads in cultural and economic evolution, particularly regarding high-profile events such as concerts. The recent controversy surrounding the ticketing announcement for the Coldplay concert in Mumbai highlights significant challenges in this arena. The summoning of top executives from BookMyShow, the exclusive online ticketing platform, by the Mumbai police over ticketing issues makes one ask if it is a troubling bureaucratic reaction.
The sale of the Coldplay tickets — a private event legally facilitated by a digital platform — represents a legitimate business transaction in a free market. If the platform engaged in black-marketing, it rightfully deserves punishment. If ‘ticket scalping’ had been done by AI bots deployed by other platforms, then it’s a lesson for policymakers in preparing regulations for cyber safety and consumer protection. However, it is essential to recognise that there is nothing wrong with person A purchasing a ticket from an official platform and then privately selling it to person B, a willing buyer ready to pay a higher price. This mirrors real estate transactions, where property values rise with announced infrastructure developments, or the increase in value of a private art collection when an artist passes away.
Allegations of black-marketing in such cases often reflect vested interests seeking to benefit from extortionist tactics. India is not a communist market, where ticket access is dictated by hierarchy; in a democratic market with free economy, the price of tickets reflects the intent of organisers, shaping the audience they wish to attract.
Let’s consider Singapore as a benchmark. What can we learn from its ambition and focus on building an investor-friendly international city?
The earlier deal between Singapore and Taylor Swift for her Eras Tour exemplifies how cities and nations can strategically position themselves to attract high-profile artists and events. Concerts featuring global superstars like Taylor Swift, Coldplay, Beyoncé, and K-pop sensations like BTS and Blackpink provide a substantial temporary boost to the local economy.
Singapore, with just 5.5 million inhabitants, went all out to secure Taylor Swift's exclusive performance in Southeast Asia — a region of 660 million people across 10 nations. To ensure she performed only in Singapore, the government reportedly offered US$2-3 million per concert in “subsidies”. This strategic marketing positions Singapore as a premier destination for high-profile events and tourism, with estimated revenue from Taylor Swift’s concert ranging from S$300 million to S$400 million, contributing about 0.2% to Singapore’s GDP in the first quarter of this year.
Moreover, the success of Taylor Swift's concert in Singapore exemplifies how strategic partnerships with global superstars can boost tourism and local economies. This “Swiftonomics” highlights the potential for concerts to generate revenue beyond ticket sales, driving spending in local hotels, restaurants, and attractions. Singapore’s proactive approach not only secured one of the world’s biggest stars but also generated a multifaceted economic impact, demonstrating the power of leveraging global entertainment for both soft power and economic growth. The Formula 1 Grand Prix in Singapore, attracting around 300,000 visitors annually, illustrates how large-scale events foster a lucrative tourism ecosystem that significantly contributes to the nation’s GDP, and attracts global investors and tourists in its audience.
In contrast, India's approach has often been characterised by grassroots regulations that complicate rather than facilitate. As we aspire to become a developed global economy, hosting luxury events and engaging with the world will increasingly become the norm. As our economy expands, expectations for more luxury events will inevitably grow. It is crucial that we tone down the “licence raj” mentality still present in various sectors, including entertainment. This over-regulation breeds irritation and inefficiency, dissuading local participation and international interest.
Despite a promise made long ago by a Maharashtra political leader to develop Mumbai’s infrastructure to surpass even that of Singapore, the city’s residents still contend with persistent potholes and crumbling systems. While new projects are underway, the gap between ambitious plans and the realities of outdated infrastructure continues to disrupt daily life. Yet, the citizens’ classic “chalta hai” attitude offers only a false sense of redemption, hindering the progress needed to support high-profile events and attract global talent and investments.
Mumbai has much to learn from Singapore’s adept use of strategic soft power through hosting large-scale events. For Mumbai to harness its full potential, it must adopt a similar approach — prioritising a supportive environment for large events, facilitating partnerships with global artistes and businesses, and celebrating its own rich cultural heritage. For those old enough to have attended or read about the Michael Jackson concert in 1996, where the pop icon had to meet a political supremo to ensure the event’s smooth execution, highlighted that even 30 years ago, major events in Mumbai required political support to guarantee success. This level of political interference, once a necessity, risks backfiring in today’s globalised world.
With consumers now free and financially able enough to travel to other cities or countries for concerts and events, the original host city stands to lose far more than just the event itself. The economic impact, potential tourism revenues, and invaluable global branding are all at risk. In modern times, such obstructionism could push marquee events and global stars to bypass Mumbai altogether, leaving the city out of the conversation and missing out on strategic opportunities to enhance its international standing.
Dr Srinath Sridharan is a policy researcher and corporate adviser. X: @ssmumbai