Live Earth Theory

It's all about the money.

I'm sure you guys have heard of how the Live Earth event has caused more waste than how to save as it rallies.

I have been thinking about it and I have a theory. Keyword: Theory.

There will be some who will disagree with me but remember, it's a theory. If you wanna discuss, yes please, but don't turn it personal.

Okay, here goes:

Let's calculate how many artists are there = 150.
How many acts are there since some artists perform together = About 90?
Let's calculate the amount of audience at the concerts = Dunno. Let's put it as X

So let 90 acts be hundred percent - 100%

Among the 100%, I think only 10% are already disbanded bands who came together just for Live Earth. So make this 90%.

Have I gone Matrix Reloaded? Try to keep up.

Now ask yourselves this: for the 90%, wouldn't the artists themselves have their own concerts anyway?

Here's the audience calculated = X divided by 90% = A

So A is the estimated amount of audience at their own concerts.

Will that total 90% amount almost sum up to the audience at Live Earth?

A times 90% = X

Would the energy wasted be around the same?

Let energy per concert per artist be B.

Energy used in Live Earth divided by X = B

Then,

B times 90% = Live Earth?

So the producers had got them together for the same event at maybe zero cost? And with the concerts recorded for broadcasting live and reruns, wouldn't the producers get money out of the broadcasters?

And they haven't even come out with DVDs yet. Imagine that they did. How much more will they earn?

Would you agree with this equation:

(B times 90%) + (A times 90%) = Live Earth but with some extra bucks?

And come on, the event ended not so long ago, it's too early to say if the message of saving earth has worked.

Only time will tell, so quit saying that it's wrong for the event to happen...for now.

It created more awareness no?

Sorry about the maths...