Jasmine Birtles
Your money-making expert. Financial journalist, TV and radio personality.
From ‘Swiftonomics’ to Harry Styles: what big tours really do to the UK economy
Vicky Parry
2nd Feb 2026
As Harry Styles prepares for a run of Wembley Stadium shows this summer, headline figures suggest a huge economic windfall. But behind the billion-pound claims, economists warn that the reality of pop-powered growth is far more complicated. MoneyMagpie Editor and consumer expert Vicky Parry does a deep dive.
Do stadium gigs really boost the economy? What Harry Styles’ Wembley shows reveal
When Harry Styles takes to the stage at Wembley Stadium this summer, the economic effects will be visible almost instantly. Hotels in north-west London will sell out. Trains will be busier than usual. Bars and restaurants will extend their opening hours.
In recent years, scenes like this have increasingly been framed as evidence of a powerful new force in the UK economy: the blockbuster concert. From Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour to Oasis’s reunion dates, major gigs are now routinely credited with injecting hundreds of millions — sometimes close to £1bn — into Britain.
Harry Styles’ Wembley run is the latest to be cast in that light. But while the local buzz is undeniable, economists warn that the national picture is far more complicated than the headline numbers suggest.
What the Harry Styles gigs are expected to generate
Early indicators around Styles’ Wembley shows point to intense demand. Travel industry data showed searches for hotels near the stadium jumping dramatically following the tour announcement, with some reports citing increases of more than 1,800%. That matters because overnight stays — not ticket sales — are where much of the economic benefit is concentrated.
Ticket revenue itself largely flows to promoters, labels and the artist, though Styles has committed to donating £1 from every UK ticket sold to a grassroots music venue levy. Symbolically important, but modest in economic terms.
The real impact comes from secondary spending: accommodation, food and drink, transport, shopping and tourism. For cities hosting multiple shows, that can mean several days of unusually high footfall across hospitality and retail.
What other tours tell us
Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour has become the benchmark for what some have dubbed “Swiftonomics”. Barclays estimated the UK leg could generate around £997m in spending, based on an average fan outlay of roughly £848 once travel, accommodation, food and merchandise were included. London alone was projected to benefit by around £300m.
Other artists show similar patterns. Oasis’s forthcoming reunion tour has been forecast to inject about £940m into the UK economy, with individual cities seeing tens of millions in additional spending. ABBA Voyage, the long-running virtual residency in east London, has reportedly contributed more than £2bn since opening in 2022, helped by its longevity and international appeal.
These figures are not invented — but they are often misunderstood.
Why “economic boost” doesn’t always mean growth
When banks or consultancies say a tour “adds £1bn to the economy”, they are usually referring to gross spending, not net economic growth. That distinction is crucial.
Much of the money spent on concerts would likely have been spent elsewhere: on other gigs, domestic holidays, meals out or leisure activities. Economists refer to this as the substitution effect. From a national perspective, spending is often shifted rather than newly created.
A fan travelling from Manchester to London for a Wembley show may boost London’s hotel sector while reducing spending in their home city. GDP does not automatically rise as a result.
Government assessments of national events reflect the same caution. Analysis of the late Queen’s Platinum Jubilee suggested more than £1bn in extra spending — but also noted that the additional bank holiday reduced overall output by closing businesses and disrupting normal economic activity.
Concerts versus royal and national events
Royal occasions and state celebrations are often portrayed as economic windfalls, but their impact is similarly mixed. While the monarchy contributes billions annually through tourism and global branding, one-off events rarely deliver sustained growth.
In some respects, stadium tours may offer clearer benefits. They attract overseas visitors, concentrate spending in specific locations, and encourage multi-day stays. Hotels, transport operators and hospitality businesses can plan around them.
But even here, there are trade-offs. Large tours can drive sharp rises in hotel prices, displacing other visitors and squeezing local residents. The gains are unevenly distributed and often temporary.
Why the big numbers endure
If the economic case is ambiguous, why do billion-pound figures persist?
Partly because they are useful. Cities want to attract major tours. Promoters want to demonstrate value. Banks want cultural relevance. And in an era of weak growth, any sign of momentum is appealing.
There is also a cultural factor. Big concerts feel like collective moments, and economic narratives reinforce their perceived importance.
The bottom line
Harry Styles’ Wembley shows will undoubtedly deliver a surge of activity for London’s hospitality and tourism sectors. They will create work, generate tax receipts and fill hotel rooms.
What they will not do — despite some of the larger claims — is transform the UK’s economic fortunes.
Stadium tours energise cities and showcase Britain as a global cultural destination. But their true value lies in local impact and cultural power, not in solving structural economic problems.
Between the hype and the spreadsheets, that is where the real story sits.
Subscribe
Login
0 Comments
