Consumer is WRONG!

Phil from Eastbourne

www.stuff.co.nz...


Consumer is WRONG!
As the person who brought Elton to NZ on the last 5 occasions, I am very qualified to make comment on the assertion by Consumer that fans should get partial refunds for the concert the other night due to Elton leaving the stage with an illness.
First the issue of what is 'the concert'?
As the Promoter (Chugg) did not advertise a specific duration of the concert or the list of songs that were going to be played, any appearance by the said artist (Elton) constitutes a performance/concert and the 2 hours that he delivered is huge value for money and longer time onstage than most other artists and nearly all the Millennial artists half his age.
Now the technical legality......:
The party the Consumer is looking at is the Promoter Chugg who has the contract with Elton for his Australasian tour. As Elton's contract will state based on the ones I have been part of in the past, he legally must play 90 minutes which he did the other night. All extra time is at the discretion of the artist as is his song choices. Elton is rare in that he has always delivered a 2 1/2 to 3 hour concert(s) because he wants to and NOT because he has too. It's his thing!
So the audience got more than the promoter was contracted with the artist to provide, there was no misleading advertising and the audience had a 30 minute extra 4-5 songs already.
If he had stood up taken a bow and waved and walked off no one would have been the wiser!
So Consumer while often you get it right. This time you got it wrong!