When a concert promoter puts money into advertising, the real question is not how many people saw the campaign. It is whether that spending helped sell enough tickets to justify the investment.
This is where ROAS, or Return on Ad Spend, becomes useful.
At its simplest, ROAS measures how much revenue is generated for every pound spent on advertising. The calculation is straightforward. Understanding what the result actually means is much more important.
The Simple Formula Behind ROAS
The formula is:
ROAS = Attributed ticket revenue ÷ Advertising spend
So, if a concert campaign spends £8,000 and generates £32,000 in attributed ticket sales:
£32,000 ÷ £8,000 = 4
The campaign has achieved a 4:1 ROAS, or 400%.
That is a useful measure of advertising efficiency, but it is not a measure of profit.
This distinction is particularly important for concerts. Ticket revenue has to exist within a much larger financial model that can include artist fees, venue hire, production, staffing, ticketing costs, taxes and other expenses. A campaign can therefore produce an impressive ROAS while the concert itself remains financially challenging.
The More Useful Question: What Is a Sustainable ROAS?
Rather than choosing an arbitrary target such as 3:1 or 5:1, organisers should work backwards from the economics of the concert.
Suppose a £60 ticket leaves £24 of contribution after the relevant variable costs associated with the sale. That means the contribution margin is 40%.
In this simplified example, the break-even ROAS is:
1 ÷ 0.40 = 2.5
So a ROAS of approximately 2.5:1 would be the point at which the advertising revenue generates enough contribution to cover the advertising spend.
This does not mean 2.5:1 is automatically the correct target for every concert. The calculation depends on which costs are included, the event's financial structure and what the organiser is trying to achieve.
The important principle is that ROAS targets should come from the economics of the event, not from a generic industry benchmark.
A Lower ROAS Can Sometimes Be More Valuable
ROAS can also encourage the wrong decision when it is viewed in isolation.
Imagine one campaign produces a 6:1 ROAS and sells 100 additional tickets, while another produces a 3:1 ROAS and sells 1,000 additional tickets at an acceptable contribution.
If the concert needs to sell those additional 1,000 tickets, the second campaign could be far more valuable despite its lower ROAS.
This is why concert advertising should be judged alongside the event's ticket inventory, sales velocity, contribution and commercial objectives.
A promoter is not trying to win a ROAS competition.
The goal is to sell the right number of tickets at an economically sensible cost.
The Next Pound Matters More Than the Average
There is another reason organisers should be careful with ROAS.
Suppose the first £10,000 of advertising generates £50,000 in attributed revenue. That is a 5:1 ROAS.
It would be tempting to assume that another £10,000 will generate another £50,000.
But advertising rarely scales in such a perfectly linear way.
The first part of the campaign may reach highly interested fans who convert relatively easily. As the budget expands, the campaign may need to reach broader audiences who are less familiar with the artist or less certain about attending.
The average ROAS may therefore remain impressive while the marginal return from additional spending starts to fall.
This makes one question particularly important when deciding whether to increase a concert's advertising budget:
“What will the next £1 of advertising probably generate?”
That question is often more useful than simply looking at the campaign's historical average.
ROAS Should Be Read Alongside the Ticket Funnel
A good concert marketing report should therefore look beyond ROAS.
Customer acquisition cost shows how much advertising is required to generate a buyer. Conversion rate indicates how effectively visitors become purchasers. Average order value reveals how much revenue is generated per transaction. Ticket sales velocity shows whether inventory is moving quickly enough.
And contribution margin helps answer the question ROAS itself cannot:
How much of that ticket revenue is actually available to support the economics of the concert?
Where measurement is sufficiently reliable, incremental sales are even more valuable because they help distinguish demand created by advertising from demand that already existed.
Together, these numbers tell a much more complete story.
So, What Is a Good ROAS for a Concert?
There is no universal answer.
A 2:1 ROAS could be acceptable for one event and inadequate for another. A 5:1 ROAS could be excellent, or it could simply reflect a campaign targeting people who were already highly likely to buy.
The right target depends on ticket prices, contribution margins, existing demand, audience characteristics, remaining inventory and the financial objectives of the concert.
This is why copying a benchmark from another promoter or another type of event can be misleading.
The right ROAS is the one that makes sense for the economics of your particular concert.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: How do you calculate ROAS for a concert?
A: Divide the ticket revenue attributed to advertising by the amount spent on advertising. For example, £30,000 in attributed ticket revenue divided by £6,000 in advertising spend gives a 5:1 ROAS.
Q: Is a 4:1 ROAS profitable?
A: Not necessarily. ROAS measures attributed revenue against advertising spend. It does not include all the costs involved in producing a concert, so it cannot by itself determine profitability.
Q: What is a break-even ROAS?
A: A simplified break-even ROAS can be estimated as 1 divided by the relevant contribution margin. If the contribution margin is 40%, the break-even ROAS is approximately 2.5:1.
Q: Why can attributed ROAS overstate advertising impact?
A: Some customers may have purchased tickets without seeing the advertisement. Attribution systems can still assign those purchases to the campaign, so attributed revenue is not necessarily the same as incremental revenue.
Q: Should concert promoters always aim for the highest ROAS possible?
A: No. Maximising ROAS can sometimes mean spending too little and missing valuable ticket sales. The goal is to generate additional sales at an economically sensible cost while considering the concert's inventory and financial objectives.
Q: Can a lower-ROAS campaign be better?
A: Yes. A lower-ROAS campaign may generate significantly more incremental ticket sales or reach new audiences, making it more valuable to the concert overall.
Q: Should a promoter increase the advertising budget when ROAS is high?
A: Not automatically. As campaigns scale, the return from additional spending can decline. The expected marginal return of the next amount spent should be considered before increasing the budget.
If you need additional advice or support, the TicketCRM team is always ready to help with your questions!