Who killed the rave? • Hacker News Board

Re: Who killed the rave?

#201

Post by aprilthird2021 » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:50 PM UTC

api wrote: post #29

yieldcrv wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article also mentions that earlier ending events made to accommodate aging millennials have seen an unexpected and huge interest from Gen Z But yeah, the decline of the nightlife and hospitality sector is what this article is about, as the regulated rave experience is very mainstream and has been for a long time now The production value is quite high now and still improving so I don't see why the illicit rave exp…

> I don't see why the illicit rave experience would be so interesting when the facilities would be so lacking in comparison. I swear if you strip away legal pot and LGBTQ rights (not saying those are bad) we have culturally returned to the 1950s. This is a very conservative period with little interest in or tolerance for actual outside-the-lines culture or experience.

Yeah I agree. Internet puritanism, some might call it. Turns out the possibility of being recorded all the time and having your life upended based on some 15 second clip of you makes people conservative and wary of risks

Re: Who killed the rave?

#202

Post by GuB-42 » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:51 PM UTC

in-pursuit wrote: post #124

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #70

> The proportion of club nights running beyond 3am fell in 12 of 15 global cities between 2014 and 2024, according to a Financial Times analysis of events on listings website Resident Advisor. Club nights are not raves. Raves are (usually) not posted on RA. The underground scene is doing just fine.

I assert this without evidence, but I would highly suspect club attendance numbers and rave attendance numbers to be strongly correlated.

Maybe those who go to raves are more likely to go to clubs too, but it doesn't mean that a decrease in club attendance means a decease in rave attendance. It may simply mean that clubs are not the preferred destination for partygoers anymore.

To support that, it looks like music festival attendance is going up over the years. Music festivals are, I think, closer to raves than they are to night clubs, which, by the same logic, would suggest an increase in rave attendance.

Also worth mentioning that some of what was called a rave before is now a club. There is a difference between occupying a decommissioned soviet building after the fall of the Berlin Wall and a fancy club on high valued real estate, even though it used to be the same place.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#203

Post by HellDunkel » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:52 PM UTC

steveBK123 wrote: post #118

Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…

My guess is: the pandemic and online dating.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#204

Post by post-it » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:52 PM UTC

UltraSane wrote: post #196

steveBK123 wrote: post #118

Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…

Seems like rent is so high in big cities that so many businesses are no longer possible. I think one solution to lower rent is a rule that for every month a rental property is vacant its book value declines by 10 times the rent.

> I think one solution to lower rent is a rule that for every month a rental property is vacant its book value declines by 10 times the rent.

Wouldn't that just lower its property tax, thereby making it more profitable for owners to leave venues unrented (compared to the status quo)?

Re: Who killed the rave?

#205

Post by post-it » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:53 PM UTC

steveBK123 wrote: post #118

Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…

> Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably.

Which, in turn, makes events that do happen more expensive, decreasing turnout. If there's a Friday night event for CA$15 with CA$5 drinks, I'm much more likely to go than if it costs CA$50 with CA$15 drinks.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#206

Post by MisterTea » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:54 PM UTC

steveBK123 wrote: post #118

Probably a bunch of factors... Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably. GenZ studies have found a lower participation in "risky behavior" which late night clubbing may or not be considered. Mobile internet & smartphones seem to be killing all forms of live in person interaction. And finally electronic music of various forms used to be a niche, and now it's mainstream. In the…

> Tier 1 city RE prices have made live entertainment venues harder to run profitably.

Abandoned warehouses and other commercial building you could host a rave were once plenty in NYC. No more. Hell when I was a kid there were three abandoned factory buildings in my neighborhood we'd break into and become our "club house" in grade school. You just had to watch for squatters and neighbors calling the cops. Now you're lucky if there are even lots around - most have been built on already.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#207

Post by jrwoodruff » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:54 PM UTC

Tade0 wrote: post #191

wpm wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply is artificially limited.

Supply can't possibly keep up when real estate is used as an investment. As an analogy to the dead internet hypothesis I present the dead real estate market hypothesis. Increasingly it's just investors buying and selling properties from each other. And it's not just a hypothesis. China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma i…

Also made possible by the internet and computers in general, I'd argue. Without the easy availability of prices, sales data, and general number crunching capabilities I don't think this would be happening. Certainly not at the scale we're seeing.

Re: Who killed the rave?

#208

Post by aprilthird2021 » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:55 PM UTC

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote: post #24

In my time night clubs were about hooking up, guess no need for that in the age of tinder?

Also, as the comments will show you, we have a very negative attitude now towards anyone who wants to hookup with someone they just happened to see in person and tried to initiate with that person. So if that's the response you'll get, why go out? Stay in and play it safe with apps

Re: Who killed the rave?

#209

Post by apwell23 » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:56 PM UTC

UltraSane wrote: post #199

Tade0 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply can't possibly keep up when real estate is used as an investment. As an analogy to the dead internet hypothesis I present the dead real estate market hypothesis. Increasingly it's just investors buying and selling properties from each other. And it's not just a hypothesis. China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma i…

It isn't a hypothesis. It is a well known fact. The more expensive a property is the more time it will be spent vacant because a lot of the very expensive properties are just uses as investments.

why doesn't someone introduce a legislation to tax vacant second homes at astronomical rates

Re: Who killed the rave?

#210

Post by janalsncm » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 4:57 PM UTC

Tade0 wrote: post #191

wpm wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supply is artificially limited.

Supply can't possibly keep up when real estate is used as an investment. As an analogy to the dead internet hypothesis I present the dead real estate market hypothesis. Increasingly it's just investors buying and selling properties from each other. And it's not just a hypothesis. China built enough homes to house its population twice over, yet it's not reflected in the prices. All because everyone and their grandma i…

> enough homes to house its population twice over

This is because a ton of them are in the Chinese equivalent of like Boise, Idaho where demand is fairly low. People want to live where the high paying jobs are.