161–170 of 250 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm ok with either. Though I tend to think public ownership makes more sense because a city can only support so many venues in general.
Most cities have lots of venues of various sizes, I like a market place of them rather than a publicly owned monopoly. (Hence why I dont like Canada healthcare either)
Any tactic you could imagine was employed to deter this. They'd hire PIs to collect names and inconvenience them with BS regulatory complaints and lawsuits, rearrange street sweeping/sidewalk steaming schedules to have their cars towed, etc. When things came to a head they had just worked out a deal with cash courier chain to supply their employees with cash to buy the tickets because the card processing would somehow always be down.
If you've tried to buy a ticket to a sporting event in person recently you might have noticed that they don't even let you use cash anymore.
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…
Agree... and not defending Ticketmaster, but regarding scalpers in general, I am not sure why one would blame only the ticketing system. If the artists are willing to say sell tickets for $50.00 and the demand is such that some resell to $400.00 the same seat. Is it the fault of the ticketing system ? Who is the victim ? - The artist who could have make more money (but then they could have price it better) - The fans…
This is sort of applying the same logic that justifies high frequency trading except in this particular case, the market overlaps with the arts.
Society at large values "fairness" in a hard to define but culturally important way and "let the free market determine the price" for access runs counter to that I think in many peoples minds.
I think it's generally very easy to come up with various solutions that solve the problem, that all likely reduce the profit made by intermediaries like ticketmaster, it's purely political will and people kicking up enough fuss to implement 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…
Entirely correct. what they're saying is they want "a service that charges less money". But that idea conflicts with the venues/promoters/artists that want to charge more money. And it also conflicts with the other fans who are willing to pay more. There is no possible world where you can reliably get Taylor Swift tickets for $25.
Why hasn't there been a real competitor to youtube yet? Similar question. Some markets really are screwed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worse, they are all owned by the same company now. It’s all a multi-headed hydra of suck. Live Music has been completely monopolized.
If you like specific acts, sure. Or maybe some cities take independent venues more seriously than others. Growing up, ok I missed out on getting Metallica tickets because I didn't want to support clear channel (or Live Nation, or TM, etc...), but I still was able to see plenty of amazing metal bands in indie venues. Another interesting note: Weird Al is playing three venues within driving distance from me. Only one o…
I saw Metallica once, many moons ago, and it was at this big venue which of course was Live Nation/TM. It sucked ass. Sound was terrible, had to watch screens to see what was going on, beer was ridiculously priced and yet somehow long queues.
I decided then I wouldn't go to those venues anymore. If a band I like plays there, whatever, not worth it.
Meanwhile I've had many, many concert experiences that were 100x better than the Metallica concert for a fraction of the price of the Metallica ticket at small, local venues.
My buddy recently invited me to another such big-ass venue with some popular band, and it just cemented by view. So not worth it.
Ticketmaster's parent company, Live Nation, owns and operates numerous venues worldwide. This includes controlling booking for many major concert locations, which contributes to its dominant position.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember Oasis. They're the ones who literally pissed on the audience here back in the 90s. The idea that they care if their fans live or die really comes down to whether they could get sponsors on board or not.
Can't find any evidence of this urination incident, got a link?