Pet Shop Boys Community

minimal wrote: Fri 17 Apr 2026, 8:45 am

Morse wrote: Thu 16 Apr 2026, 8:47 pm

markreed wrote: Thu 16 Apr 2026, 12:01 am

The whole reason Dreamworld has run so long is because the marginal cost (i.e. day to day running costs) are low compared to revenue, and the upfront investment of staging the show was recouped very early in the touring cycle. But again, and to be clear, if money was all they were interested in, they'd tour 10 months a year. And it isn't.

Actually, the reason the Dreamworld tour has run so long is more likely because it's a global farewell tour, rather than it being exclusively about marginal cost. Pet Shop Boys have never toured one show for 4 years...logically, they're only going to do that if it's going to be their last global stage hurrah.

The reason Dreamworld continues to run is that the show is booked. Therefore, there is no need for PSB to call it a day. New Order have been doing likewise for ten years without releasing a new album in that time.

m+

Oh I don't doubt that it is booked up....I just think it's a global farewell tour.

dbaseboy wrote: Fri 17 Apr 2026, 11:23 amActually, a sister version of Volume but this time with all the fan club newsletters, Literallys (all 42 of them), Annuallys and some additional and new conversations etc would be great!

I'm sure the original print files for Literally are long gone, but it would be great to get a book compiling all the features.

I also really enjoy the brief snippets where they talk about new releases, so it would be interesting to have those reprinted. Speaking of which, have they ever commented on the actual tracks on Relentless? I've never come across commentary on, say, KDX125 or The Man Who Has Everything.

Morse wrote: Fri 17 Apr 2026, 12:50 pm

minimal wrote: Fri 17 Apr 2026, 8:45 am

Morse wrote: Thu 16 Apr 2026, 8:47 pm

Actually, the reason the Dreamworld tour has run so long is more likely because it's a global farewell tour, rather than it being exclusively about marginal cost. Pet Shop Boys have never toured one show for 4 years...logically, they're only going to do that if it's going to be their last global stage hurrah.

The reason Dreamworld continues to run is that the show is booked. Therefore, there is no need for PSB to call it a day. New Order have been doing likewise for ten years without releasing a new album in that time.

m+

Oh I don't doubt that it is booked up....I just think it's a global farewell tour.

It's not. Now, please repeat once again that you just think it's a global farewell tour, LOL.

m+

minimal wrote: Fri 17 Apr 2026, 3:46 pmNow, please repeat once again that you just think it's a global farewell tour, LOL.

I think some people are getting caught up in the distinction between an official farewell tour and a de facto farewell tour. Neil Tennant will be 72 in July. Assuming they keep to their recent four-year release schedule, he'll be 74 and 78 when the next two albums are released. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest they won't be mounting the sort of multi-year global campaign we've experienced with Dreamworld. Will there be more performances? Yes, probably. They seem to love playing live these days.

But Dreamworld is probably the last tour of its kind. Certainly album 17 won't have anything like it.

NotInvisible wrote: Thu 16 Apr 2026, 10:09 pm Annually just arrived here, and we can stick a fork in the question of Obscure budgeting.

Chris Heath: "To prepare for these shows, a very substantial amount of rehearsal will be required - only a handful of the chosen songs have even been played in concert before."

Neil Tennant: "The shows are losing money, and we're giving ourselves an enormous amount of work to sell copies of a book we also won't make any money out of, but we're doing it because we want to do it."

There we have it.

Now factor in the merch sales. I would not be surprised if they sold £30k/night of merch. That's £150k gross, with a 40% profit margin average.

markreed wrote: Fri 17 Apr 2026, 11:42 pm

NotInvisible wrote: Thu 16 Apr 2026, 10:09 pm Annually just arrived here, and we can stick a fork in the question of Obscure budgeting.

Chris Heath: "To prepare for these shows, a very substantial amount of rehearsal will be required - only a handful of the chosen songs have even been played in concert before."

Neil Tennant: "The shows are losing money, and we're giving ourselves an enormous amount of work to sell copies of a book we also won't make any money out of, but we're doing it because we want to do it."

There we have it.

Now factor in the merch sales. I would not be surprised if they sold £30k/night of merch. That's £150k gross, with a 40% profit margin average.

“Neil is wrong.” Great argument, champ.

My view is that if you sell £750k of tickets for 5 shows + merch sales (maybe £150k gross), and you can't cover your costs for a 5 person band and zero AV staging, with no travel costs and no days off, you're working inefficiently, to be polite about it.

Politeness doesn't actually cost anything.

markreed wrote: Sat 18 Apr 2026, 6:50 pmMy view is that if you sell £750k of tickets for 5 shows + merch sales (maybe £150k gross), and you can't cover your costs for a 5 person band and zero AV staging, with no travel costs and no days off, you're working inefficiently, to be polite about it.

You're entitled to that view. Neil says flat out these shows lost them money. I guess you can accuse them of working inefficiently, but it's probably classier to just stop digging.

I’m guessing it was the prep etc for the Obscure shows that cost the money. Programming 36 ish new songs, extensive rehearsals, then the venue, the band and merch production. A bit like making a new album and only doing a tiny tour to promote it.

During their career they have made a loss, performance and nightlife tours have been confirmed by Neil for making big losses. They had to play a few festivals after the savoy shows so they could break even and Neil has said previously that playing one night at the o2 makes more than a run of concerts at the royal opera house. It’s possible other things have made losses because of their attention to detail and not compromising and they do things that they want to do and perhaps making a profit isn’t necessarily why they do it. I’m sure they both have plenty of money tucked away for when they decide to pack it all in.

The recent concerts at the electric ballroom were amazing and it was great to see them genuinely enjoy them and if it was a one off I’m incredibly grateful for this.


Volume is a gorgeous book and can’t have been cheap to produce and if sales continue to go well they might break even or perhaps a little profit?


Chris and Neil look like they will continue to do things they want to do, it’s possible that naked won’t make them much money and perhaps it’s all about getting something they have written to the stage and nothing else. I do hope I’m wrong and it becomes a long running musical in London and beyond.

If Neil ever gets round to writing his memoir we might get some info about each tour and project and what did make money and what didn’t.


Maybe at the Camden shows the price of the merch was because of trying to break even or a small profit. I dare not think of how much I’ve spent since getting all the different formats of west end girls since it was released. After all these years I still get excited when I get to a concert and see the merch and want everything but no matter how much I save in preparation it’s never enough.

I'm not convinced Volume will make them any money at all - they're not listed as authors, the visual designs aren't theirs (aside from the odd thing like the Hotspot photos) and you don't get paid for someone using your likeness so...by what mechanism would they actually get paid for it? It's a book about them, not by them.

Ramzy wrote: Sun 19 Apr 2026, 10:10 am I'm not convinced Volume will make them any money at all - they're not listed as authors, the visual designs aren't theirs (aside from the odd thing like the Hotspot photos) and you don't get paid for someone using your likeness so...by what mechanism would they actually get paid for it? It's a book about them, not by them.

Excellent points there. Neil said at Obscure that the publishers were very pleased with the sales of Volume not "We're very pleased!"

I wonder with the Volume special edition that some financial kickback to the Boys was /could have been built into the price as a thanks for promoting (and signing!) it.

I'm thinking a similar model to the skateboard deck sales.

Ramzy wrote: Sun 19 Apr 2026, 10:10 am I'm not convinced Volume will make them any money at all - they're not listed as authors, the visual designs aren't theirs (aside from the odd thing like the Hotspot photos) and you don't get paid for someone using your likeness so...by what mechanism would they actually get paid for it? It's a book about them, not by them.

They'll get paid to license the relevant materials they own, and presumably for the commentary.

markreed wrote: Sat 18 Apr 2026, 6:50 pm My view is that if you sell £750k of tickets for 5 shows + merch sales (maybe £150k gross), and you can't cover your costs for a 5 person band and zero AV staging, with no travel costs and no days off, you're working inefficiently, to be polite about it.

Politeness doesn't actually cost anything.

4 shows as one night to charity!

eastendboy wrote: Sun 19 Apr 2026, 8:12 am During their career they have made a loss, performance and nightlife tours have been confirmed by Neil for making big losses.

At the beginning of the book "Pet Shop Boys versus America", Chris Heath writes :
" They explain the tour's* poor financial standing. They are budgeted, right now, to loose half-a-million pounds**. 'Now we can afford to lose a lot of money,' says Neil. 'It's an amusing way to go bankrupt.' "

* The Performance Tour
** That's £500,000 of 1991 !