First of all I'm sure they could find an unused estate to convert into what they want. The dudes are used to playing in houses, I'm sure they wont mind if its not a perfect concert hall.
Also, taxes on tickets and stuff or other promotions or rent for the night could very much turn into a big profit.
About the law, I don't have anything against the law, just that I can't understand why would they be so obsessed with preemptive action instead of on-the-spot
> First of all I'm sure they could find an unused estate to convert into what they want. The dudes are used to playing in houses, I'm sure they wont mind if its not a perfect concert hall.
"The dudes" might be okay with it, but the city would own that venue and not only do they have to obey their own law on how it's maintained and regulated, but they'd be liable for anything that happened inside it. Further, if the city owns it, they're going to use it for more than just "the dudes", and those people may have different requirements.
> Also, taxes on tickets and stuff or other promotions or rent for the night could very much turn into a big profit.
You're assuming that (1) anyone will rent the space and (2) anyone will come if they do. These aren't minor assumptions.
> About the law, I don't have anything against the law, just that I can't understand why would they be so obsessed with preemptive action instead of on-the-spot
How much effort have you even bothered putting into stepping into their shoes rather than tyrannically deciding that your solution fixes all possible ills and should stand in for any agency on their part?
Also, taxes on tickets and stuff or other promotions or rent for the night could very much turn into a big profit.
About the law, I don't have anything against the law, just that I can't understand why would they be so obsessed with preemptive action instead of on-the-spot