What 118000 People and a Wristband Taught Me About the Future of Business
- 1 day ago
- 12 min read
It started with a number that did not make any sense.
Twenty-four hours before showtime, the ticket data had no business being that high. Event was originally planned for 80,000 to 90,000 people which was already a higher number, even for an Artist of that magnitude. That was the working assumption. That was what the logistics were built around. That was the number in everyone's heads when they went to sleep the night before.
Then, sometime in the late afternoon on May 29th, the curve bent.
I have seen concert demand curves before. I know what a steady sell looks like, what a surge looks like, what a panic-buy looks like when social media decides something is the only thing happening in the world that night. This was different. This was the kind of number movement that makes you stop whatever you are doing and read the screen twice.
Our observations from the Istanbul event started accumulating in real time. The city was shifting. Istanbul was making a decision about this concert collectively and simultaneously, the way cities sometimes do when something crosses from event into moment.
By the time we went to sleep that night, we knew. This was going to be something different.
The Space Between Watching and Doing
Let me be precise about what our role was, because precision matters here and because the temptation to overstate is one of the most reliable failure modes in any account of a remarkable event.
Belkin Marketing is a small team. Fewer than ten people. Among other things fully described in this blog, we specialize in the relationship layer of live entertainment: VVIP hospitality, artist access, backstage coordination, premium guest experiences, and the kind of logistical trust-work that makes the difference between a guest who feels genuinely welcomed and one who has technically been admitted. We were not responsible for production. Not for venue operations, security, or primary event organization. Those were handled by teams like Access Opera, ILS Vision, and Backstage.Global with far more local operational resources than ours, as it normally happens for such big event.
It is not glamour, though it occasionally produces glamorous moments. It is coordination. It is communication chains that have to work without fail. It is knowing which call to make and when, which relationship has the weight to solve a problem, and which person in which corridor can get you from where you are to where you need to be. It is the work that is invisible when it functions correctly and catastrophic when it does not.
Backstage.Global had done this before at scale. The Enrique Iglesias concert in Albania taught us things about international artist management and premium hospitality that no training program could have produced. Tirana's Skanderbeg Square, Ricky Martin, crowds that cared deeply and showed up completely. You learn what trust infrastructure looks like when you have to build it across language barriers, cultural differences, and time zones, under a deadline that does not move.
Istanbul was a different order of magnitude. But the work was the same work.
What 118000 People Actually Looks Like
Here is what nobody tells you about very large crowds: they do not feel like a number. Numbers are abstract. What 118000 people actually feels like is a city inside a city, moving with its own logic, its own tempo, its own patience or impatience.
Atatürk Olympic Stadium sits on the European side of Istanbul, and getting there from most of the city requires a commitment. The metro runs. The roads run. But neither was designed to absorb this kind of surge in a single direction at a single time. By late-afternoon, the transit system was doing what transit systems do when they meet their limits: it slowed, compressed, and forced everyone into a negotiation with time that nobody had quite planned for.
I watched people walk distances they had not planned to walk. I watched families with children navigate the gap between where the transport stopped and where they needed to be. I watched the city improvise, as cities do, filling the gaps with informal vehicles, redirected buses, and the particular kindness of people who know a place well enough to give useful directions.
What surprised me was not the scale. I've seen such scales before. What surprised me was the texture of it.
The crowd was calm.
Not superficially calm. Genuinely, observably, remarkably calm. I have been at events a fraction of this size where the energy felt dangerous, where you could feel the edge in the air, where the crowd's mood was something you tracked the way you track weather. This was not that. These were 118,000 people who had collectively decided that they were here to have an experience, and that getting here was part of it, and that patience was the appropriate response to the situation in front of them.
I have thought about why that was. Istanbul is a city that has learned to move. Its residents navigate one of the world's most complex urban geographies every day. They are practiced at the kind of patient improvisation that large logistical challenges require.
They bring that practice with them.
And the crowd was international in a way that mattered. Istanbul has a specific gravity in the global cultural imagination. Istanbul Blockchain Week and the city's growing reputation as a bridge between Eastern and Western innovation communities reflect something real about how the city draws people who are interested in being where things are happening. The people who came from outside Turkey to be at this concert were people who had already made a series of decisions that filtered for a certain kind of intentionality.
You could feel it in the crowd.
The Myth of the Technology Stack
Here is what I expected, walking into a record-breaking 2026 event: a sophisticated operational technology layer. Digital ticketing systems. QR verification at every gate. Data analytics running in real time. Some version of the infrastructure we are building at Backstage.global for the future of event technology. Maybe, optimistically, early signs of what Web3 event solutions might look like at genuine scale.
Here is what I found: wristbands. Physical wristbands.
Metal all-access passes. And, to be fair, those were very cool and already are making an every collectors dream on eBay it seems.
Event printed out paper tickets with QR code in some cases! Human beings at checkpoints making judgment calls based on what was in front of them, not what was in a database. The kind of operational infrastructure that would have been entirely recognizable at a major event twenty years ago, functioning, at 118,000 people, with a reliability that frankly humbled me.
I want to be careful here, because this observation could be read as a criticism and it is not intended as one. It is an observation about where the actual operational weight lives in a large-scale event, and about what that means for how we think about technology in this space.
The technology evangelists, and I count myself among them when the occasion calls for it, have a tendency to locate the solution to operational complexity in the system. Better software. More integrated data. Smarter verification. Real-time analytics. All of this is real and all of it matters.
But it is not where the event was held together.
The event was held together by people. By the security staff who read a crowd instinctively and moved before a problem formed. By the backstage coordinators who knew which guest needed what, and when, without being told. By the production team whose communication was fast enough and clear enough that 118,000 people had an experience that felt, to most of them, seamless.
The wristband that granted access to the backstage area value was not in the material. Its value was in the network of human relationships and verified trust that made it meaningful. Someone had decided that this person could be in this space. That decision was relational. The wristband was just its representation.
We are building technology at Backstage.global that we believe will make this layer more transparent, more verifiable, and more valuable for all parties. But this event reminded me that technology succeeds when it encodes existing human trust at scale, not when it attempts to replace it. The moment you try to solve a relationship problem with a software solution, you have misunderstood the problem.
Why Relationships Scale Better Than Systems
I have had this conversation from the other side of the table.
Founders asking how to access investors often arrive with the assumption that the problem is informational. They hunt for a better pitch deck. A more sophisticated CRM. A more systematic approach to outreach. And don't get me wrong — sometimes those things do help. But the founders who get in front of the right investors, and more importantly who get taken seriously by them, are almost always the ones who arrived via a relationship that someone trusted enough to make.
The same principle appeared in every room I was in during that Istanbul weekend.
The access that mattered was not access that could be purchased at the door. It was access that existed because someone had invested, over time, in a relationship that had enough weight to open a door. The artist management relationships we had built. The connections with production teams from previous projects. The shared history with people whose word in the right moment meant something.
These things do not appear suddenly. They compound. A conversation in Tirana in 2023. A problem solved gracefully in circumstances where it could have gone badly. A favor extended without expectation of immediate return. A reputation built not by stating it but by being consistently, verifiably the person who does what they said they would do.
The VVIP experience we delivered in Istanbul was, in large part, the product of investments made years before the concert was even announced. The ability to place the right person in the right space at the right moment came from trust built in entirely different contexts. That trust transferred. That is what trust does.
If I were to do this specific project again, I would approach one thing differently: I would seek a more direct relationship with artist management from the beginning. Not because the project failed, it did not. But because I could see, clearly, the moments where a more direct connection would have allowed faster decisions, cleaner communication, and a smoother experience for everyone involved. Every layer of intermediation adds friction. The relationships that remove layers are worth building even when there is no immediate project that requires them.
Especially then, actually.
The Crowd That Defied the Stereotype
I want to dwell on this for a moment because it surprised me more than almost anything else about the weekend.
Large crowds have a reputation. Particularly large crowds at large concerts, in large cities, under conditions of logistical pressure. The reputation involves aggression, impatience, reduced individual accountability, the statistical inevitability of something going wrong somewhere that requires a response.
I did not see that.
What I saw was 118,000 people exercising a collective patience that I found genuinely moving. People who had waited longer than they planned to wait, in a city they might not know well, for an event they cared about enough to cross significant distances for, and who responded to that situation with a grace that reminded me of something important.
Behavior at scale is not determined by the size of the crowd. It is determined by the character of the crowd, and the character of the crowd is determined by the character of the people in it. When you attract people who have made a genuine choice to be somewhere, who have invested real resources in being there, who have arrived with a level of intention that filters out casual attendance, you get a different crowd than when you fill a space by other means.
The people who came to Istanbul for this concert had decided to be there. That decision shaped everything that followed.
There is a business lesson in this that I am still processing. The audiences and communities that are most valuable are not the ones you acquire most efficiently. They are the ones that have self-selected through some process that required genuine investment. The friction is the filter. The filter is the feature.
The Afterparty That Became Something Else
We thought we understood the scale of what we were doing.
We did not.
The afterparty started as what afterparties usually are: an extension of the evening for a smaller, more selected group. Solid lineup of artists including legendary Burak Yeter was in their trailers waiting. The location was set.
Then the momentum arrived.
I have seen events grow beyond their planned parameters. I have not seen it happen quite like this. The crowd that materialized around the afterparty was not the crowd on any list. It was the residue of 118,000 people who were not ready for the night to end, who had located the continuation of the event, and who had arrived in numbers that the venue and its surroundings were fully equipped to manage.
Approximately 50,000 people.
To be inside that situation, watching it develop in real time, was a specific kind of education in momentum. There is a phase in some events where the organizers are no longer the ones making the decisions about what happens next. The event itself is making those decisions. The energy has achieved a kind of autonomy. You can observe it. You can try to channel it. You cannot stop it from the inside, and you probably should not try.
The authorities stopped it eventually, as they needed to. The scale had exceeded what any responsible management of the situation could allow to continue. Nobody was harmed. The energy dissipated with the same strange grace that had characterized the crowd all day.
What it taught me was that the most ambitious plans are always subject to revision by reality. That scale, once it achieves a certain momentum, belongs to itself. And that sometimes the most professional thing you can do is recognize that the situation has passed beyond what any single team or plan can contain, and let the people whose job it is to manage that take over.
What I Am Taking Back
I wrote a lot of mental notes that weekend. Some of them are about logistics. Some of them are about communication. Some of them are about the specific gap between what we planned and what happened, and about the decisions I would make differently with the knowledge I now have.
But the note I keep coming back to is the one about the wristband.
Not because of the wristband itself. Because of what the wristband represented. A piece of colored silicone that meant exactly as much as the trust that had been invested in the decision to give it. No more and no less. Its entire value was relational. The material was irrelevant. The relationship was everything.
We are at a moment in business where the premium on technology has never been higher. Where the assumption that any operational problem is fundamentally a software problem is pervasive and largely unexamined. Where the pitch for any new venture, including ventures in the entertainment and event space, is expected to include a technological differentiator that sounds appropriately futuristic.
I believe in that technology. I am building some of it.
But Istanbul reminded me that the technology worth building is the technology that serves trust, not the technology that attempts to substitute for it. That the relationships you build before the project exists are what determine the quality of the project. That the strongest asset in any business operating at genuine scale is the accumulated trust of the people inside it and around it, and that this asset compounds more reliably than any other form of capital.
The same principle that applies to how founders build relationships with investors applies to how entertainment teams build relationships with artists, with venues, with communities. It is not a different principle. It is the same principle operating in different domains.
Trust is the most scalable thing in business. It is also the slowest to build. Which is why the people who have been building it for a long time tend to find themselves, somewhat mysteriously to everyone watching from the outside, in rooms that other people cannot get into.
The rooms are not mysterious. The relationships that led there just aren't visible.
The concert ended. Istanbul quieted. The numbers were confirmed and became history: 118,000 people, the largest ticketed stadium concert ever recorded.
Backstage.global played a small part in something huge and world record breaking. That is the honest version. A small part, executed carefully, by a team that has spent years building the relationships that made it possible to be in that room at all.
I drove back with Ozi through Istanbul in the early hours of the morning. The city was still moving, still processing what had happened inside it. I was thinking about Tirana, where we had done something similar on a smaller scale, and about the blockchain conference I had attended in Istanbul months before, where the same conversations about trust and technology and human connection had played out in a completely different register.
Same city. Same principle.
It turns out that what matters at 118,000 people is the same thing that matters at eighteen people in a conference room, or eight people on a Zoom call trying to close a round.
Someone trusts someone. That trust creates access. The access creates the opportunity.
The rest is execution.
Iaroslav Belkin is co-owner of Backstage.global, which provides NFT ticketing solutions, event production, VVIP hospitality, artist relationships, backstage access, and premium event experiences for international entertainment and business events. Previous projects include major concerts in Albania featuring Enrique Iglesias and Ricky Martin, alongside Web3 event solutions and entertainment partnerships across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Iaroslav is also founder of Belkin Marketing, a Web3 and AI strategic advisory based in Hong Kong.
Client reviews: Trustpilot · Clutch · G2 · DesignRush · GoodFirms
Published: June 19, 2026
Last Updated: June 19, 2026
Version: 1.1 (Schemas updated, Information updated, broken links fixed)
Verification: All claims are sourced to publicly verifiable reports, interviews, and datasets referenced throughout the article.
Comments