Singapore’s push to secure exclusive concert deals for major global artists, such as Taylor Swift and now Lady Gaga, may seem like a smart business move.
After all, attracting high-profile events reinforces the city-state’s status as a premier entertainment hub. But in the long run, this strategy comes at a cost Singapore cannot afford.
Beyond the immediate tourism boost, such exclusivity risks something far more significant—regional goodwill.
In an era where democratic influence is rising across Southeast Asia, alienating ordinary citizens in our neighbouring countries could have lasting diplomatic and security consequences.
Public sentiment is increasingly shaping regional policies
Southeast Asia is evolving politically. Many of our neighbours, including Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand, are becoming more democratic, with public sentiment playing a greater role in shaping national policies—particularly in areas like defence and foreign relations.
Singapore’s relations with its neighbours have historically been shaped by pragmatism and diplomacy.
However, if Singapore is perceived as “hoarding” global entertainment while preventing neighbouring countries from enjoying the same access, it risks stirring up resentment among ordinary citizens.
And let’s be clear: most people in the region cannot simply hop on a flight to Singapore to catch these concerts. Even for those willing to travel, the costs are prohibitive—not just for flights but also for accommodation. Singapore is one of the most expensive cities in Asia, with high hotel rates adding to the financial burden on visitors.
Concert seats are limited, and travel costs make attending these events unrealistic for many fans from Indonesia, the Philippines, China, South Korea, or Japan.
The optics of a wealthier Singapore shutting out less affluent neighbours will not go unnoticed, particularly at a time when economic disparity is a sensitive issue.
Singapore may see this as just another business move. But to ordinary citizens in Jakarta, Manila, or Bangkok, it looks like a rich country that keeps entertainment to itself while pricing everyone else out.
A gift to politicians seeking to stir resentment
This is where the danger lies. Exclusive concert deals hand a free talking point to politicians in the region who are eager to exploit dissatisfaction with Singapore.
Public frustration over concert access may seem trivial, but in a political climate where national pride matters, such grievances can quickly become symbols of deeper resentment.
If local politicians frame this as Singapore “bullying” its neighbours or depriving them of cultural experiences, it becomes an easy narrative for ordinary citizens to latch onto.
And in an era of social media, grievances spread fast.
When a former Thai Prime Minister claimed Singapore paid Taylor Swift millions to keep her shows exclusive, the reaction was swift—even if the actual numbers were unclear. The damage was already done.
Is the economic return even worth it?
The economic justification for these exclusivity deals remains questionable.
The Singapore Tourism Board (STB) has claimed that Taylor Swift’s exclusive concert brought significant tourism benefits, but where are the concrete numbers?
Moreover, it is important to examine the role of public funds in securing these deals.
In the case of Taylor Swift’s concert, the STB explicitly provided a grant—but never disclosed the amount or the conditions attached.
For Lady Gaga’s concert, Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong insists that no government grant was used. But if exclusivity was granted, then surely some form of financial incentive was offered.
Would the economic impact have been any different if Singapore had hosted the show without blocking neighbouring countries?
This brings us to the role of Kallang Alive Sport Management (KASM)—the entity responsible for securing the event.
KASM is not an independent commercial company. It is wholly owned by Sport Singapore and, by extension, the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY).
This means that any financial losses incurred by KASM would ultimately be covered by MCCY, which is funded by taxpayer money.
So while it may not be a direct “grant”, any financial incentive offered by KASM is still a public expenditure.
The government may frame it differently, but the outcome remains the same—public funds are being used to secure exclusivity.
Would Singapore have still benefitted economically without exclusivity? Almost certainly. But instead, the government has chosen to alienate its neighbours while spending taxpayer money in ways that remain unclear.
Singapore should be building bridges, not walls
If Singapore truly wants to be a regional entertainment hub, it should be fostering regional cooperation in arts and culture—not shutting others out.
Instead of using taxpayer money to make concerts exclusive, why not co-sponsor regional tours, ensuring fans in neighbouring countries also benefit?
Instead of claiming Singapore is the only entertainment hub, why not position itself as the cultural connector of Southeast Asia—bringing global talent to the entire region?
Singapore is already an economic and technological leader in ASEAN.
But instead of spending billions to safeguard its position through military investments in submarines and fighter jets, it must think more like Japan and South Korea—leveraging culture for influence, not exclusion.
A short-term win with long-term risks
Ultimately, Singapore needs to consider whether these exclusivity deals are worth it in the long run. The city-state can still be a regional entertainment hub without depriving its neighbours of access to major artists.
In the grand scheme of things, these exclusivity deals do not serve Singapore’s diplomatic, economic, or strategic interests.
They only generate short-term headlines while creating long-term friction with countries that we rely on for trade, security, and cooperation.
Singapore has built its success on regional goodwill and stability.
It should not be risking that for the sake of a few concerts.
The post Exclusive concert deals: A short-sighted move that risks regional goodwill appeared first on The Online Citizen.
