201–210 of 250 posts
I don't know much about the details work (I don't buy tickets through TM), but I've wondered why doesn't TM just ban the resale of tickets? If someone buys a ticket from TM for $100 and resells it for $300, that person is pocketing the $200 difference, not TM. So why does TM allow it?
>With all the hate Ticketmaster has gotten [...], I'm surprised Ticketmaster still has a hold of pretty much the entire market. How are they doing this? This question is a common mystery because you're using the perspective of the fans . E.g. "I hate Tickemaster ridiculous fees because it's price gouging, etc" But the mystery of Ticketmaster being dominant is solved once you understand it from the perspective of the…
>The add-on "convenience fees". Hence the US needs 'full price up front' laws in the same manner as Australia does. This kind of law shuts this crap down fast.
Many of the other commenters have explained how the ownership structure of Ticketmaster gives them near monopoly control because they also own the radio stations and the venues and the promoters. (I'm using "they" and "own" very liberally in this paragraph.) The simple fact that there's an ownership link between Ticketmaster and the scalper I mean totally legit resale sites is so wildly corrupt that, well, it's textb…
Go to a lot of smaller shows, been using DICE for a long time - I think they dominate the smaller venues (in the UK at least). They've made tickets as easy as Amazon made ecom. Alerts when for when tickets go on sale, (almost one click!) buy for friends and share, bans if you sell over face value, and (for a lot of places) you can return tickets to the pool to resell if you can't go (so there's often last minute wait…
From the point of view of the promoters, concerts are a two-sided marketplace. Two-sided marketplaces are notoriously difficult for small players to compete in. You need to attract good acts so people will buy tickets, but to attract the top acts you need to show that you can sell lots of tickets. Ticketmaster avoided the two-sided market problem until they reached scale. They were just a website where you buy ticket…
I started thinking about this when analyzing the new crowdfunding site, http://trypieces.com that may reimburse backers if something doesn't fund, just for trying.
So the idea is to "empower performers to play anywhere and everywhere that suits them best."
Many of the other commenters have explained how the ownership structure of Ticketmaster gives them near monopoly control because they also own the radio stations and the venues and the promoters. (I'm using "they" and "own" very liberally in this paragraph.) The simple fact that there's an ownership link between Ticketmaster and the scalper I mean totally legit resale sites is so wildly corrupt that, well, it's textb…
Ticketmaster uses their monopoly power to unfairly squeeze the venues and the artists too. They're using their monopoly power to squeeze all sides of the live music marketplace - fans, artists, venues, and promoters. So the bad guys are really Ticketmaster, not the artists.
Many of the other commenters have explained how the ownership structure of Ticketmaster gives them near monopoly control because they also own the radio stations and the venues and the promoters. (I'm using "they" and "own" very liberally in this paragraph.) The simple fact that there's an ownership link between Ticketmaster and the scalper I mean totally legit resale sites is so wildly corrupt that, well, it's textb…
Go to a lot of smaller shows, been using DICE for a long time - I think they dominate the smaller venues (in the UK at least). They've made tickets as easy as Amazon made ecom. Alerts when for when tickets go on sale, (almost one click!) buy for friends and share, bans if you sell over face value, and (for a lot of places) you can return tickets to the pool to resell if you can't go (so there's often last minute wait…
Everything you're stating sounds alot like Tixel in Australia.
Tho I'm not sure they manage the venue / original ticket sale. More of a scalp free marketplace.
Only place I will buy or sell tickets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the word 'literally' has gone the way of the emdash
literally has had two meanings for decades, maybe centuries 1) Literally Literally 2) Figuratively It's semantic bleaching
You know, "I could literally eat a horse." in which it is clearly understood that the speaker is not claiming that they could physically fit a horse inside their stomache.
I have a bunch of ideas where artists and performers should crowdfund their own shows. Once they have the funds, the performer hires out a venue and issues their own tickets. Backers of the initial hiring can get preference or free tickets for getting a venue booked in the first place - maybe even a slice of the final door total. I started thinking about this when analyzing the new crowdfunding site, http://trypieces…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ticketmaster's job is to take the heat for ticketing (high prices, BS fees, sketchy reselling, etc), but funnel enough money back to the producing parties (artist/event, venue, promoter) that nobody is going to go through the effort to try to compete. Better to set their margins at 2-3% and keep a monopoly than be forced down in a competitive marketplace.
Considering so many people here don't care about the corporate structure of Live Nation and instead blame Ticketmaster, it seems like they are doing a good job. After all, the idea of competing with Ticketmaster is silly, since the problem isn't originating in Ticketmaster at all, that's where the problem is most visible.
People complaining about Ticketmaster are complaining about Live Nation too. It's just that the Ticketmaster brand gets the heat, because that's how they run the brand.
It's not like Ticketmaster wasn't doing the same stuff when Live Nation was a separate company, or even when Live Nation was a separate company that was doing its own ticketing.