Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 193 posts

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#171

Post by jorvi »

troupo wrote: post #163
DANmode wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does, and I think they’re aware: > Your life won't be any less rich if you go see a local band instead of Taylor Swift. Do you disagree? If so, why?

Ah yes, the bands that can gather more than 1000 fans at a concert are all Taylor Swifts. One of my favorite bands I've listened to since their first album is First Aid Kit. On their 10th anniversary they had several sold-out concerts at Globen [1] in Stockholm. Should've I just stopped immediately once they crossed the threshold of 100 fans worldwide? But they are a local band, they are Swedish. In August I'm going…

> a Finnish band called Steve'n'Seagulls

I wonder if their name is a deep cut Nightwish reference, who are also Finnish: https://youtu.be/gg5_mlQOsUQ?t=17s

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#172

Post by freejazz »

ceejayoz wrote: post #165
lmm wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Artists will claim to be opposed because fans like it when they do so.

Artists have canceled swathes of tickets for this reason. https://variety.com/2024/music/news/chappell-roan-cancels-sc... I've seen quite a few cases of this. Not everyone's money-only.

And they are free to make the tickets non-transferrable. The Cure did that. Last Phish MSG run the tickets were non-transferrable and I had to use CashorTrade to trade my tickets.

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#173

Post by troupo »

jorvi wrote: post #171
troupo wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the bands that can gather more than 1000 fans at a concert are all Taylor Swifts. One of my favorite bands I've listened to since their first album is First Aid Kit. On their 10th anniversary they had several sold-out concerts at Globen [1] in Stockholm. Should've I just stopped immediately once they crossed the threshold of 100 fans worldwide? But they are a local band, they are Swedish. In August I'm going…

> a Finnish band called Steve'n'Seagulls I wonder if their name is a deep cut Nightwish reference, who are also Finnish: https://youtu.be/gg5_mlQOsUQ?t=17s

Brilliant :) No I wonder this, too

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#174

Post by carlosjobim »

cococohen1122 wrote: post #88
carlosjobim wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Oops that’s not allowed so now no one gets to go? You sell your own ticket back to the event. Your three friends of course have their names on their tickets, so they can go if they want to. > Or you buy tickets as a gift for someone. Do you buy gifts to people whose name you don't even know?

I tend to buy 2-4 tickets for a show way in advance of me knowing which of my friends would go with me

Sure, that won't be possible with name-tied tickets. On the other hand, you can wait on buying those tickets until you know.

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#175

Post by butlike »

autoexec wrote: post #29
jp57 wrote: post #16

The horizontal control of venues is only one issue. A perhaps bigger issue is the vertical integration (if that's the right term) of first-party ticket sales and resale in one company. Ticketmaster has no real incentive to try to prevent resellers from buying up all the tickets on first sale, because it gets to charge fees on all the resales through its platform. The more times a ticket is resold, the better. I don't…

Why not just ban the transfer of tickets and allow refunds? You buy a ticket, you show your ID at the door. Early refunded tickets get resold online and late refunds are sold at the venue. All seats, including the best seats, go to actual fans instead of scalpers just hoping to make a profit while providing zero value. First choice in seats goes to the most passionate and attentive fans.

I think it's because touring as an artist isn't free, so they need some guarantee of income to make the journey to the venue. If there's a risk the concert goers will refund the tickets, then the artist is the one left holding the proverbial bag.

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#176

Post by butlike »

bombcar wrote: post #114
hgoel wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is a buyer supposed to trust that the scalper won't just run away with the money? And conversely, how is the scalper supposed to trust that buyers aren't just feigning interest and will back out at the last minute? Even escrow systems don't necessarily bypass this because ultimately the buyer is likely spending on more than just the concert ticket. They're probably taking time off work, maybe traveling in from an…

We'll start a HN online marketplace, called "Dive Station" that will guarantee everything and offer insurance and double-your-money back guarantees. We'll get bought out by TicketMaster within 5 years.

Live Elation

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#177

Post by butlike »

tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #58
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s kind of annoying in practice. For example you buy four tickets to go with your friends. But you get sick so you offer your ticket to a different friend instead. Oops that’s not allowed so now no one gets to go? Or you buy tickets as a gift for someone. There’s a lot of legit reasons to want transfers, outside of scalping.

I can't do this with airline tickets, hotel bookings, train tickets, dinner reservations, or any other kind of receipt that allows me to put my butt in a seat at a specified time. Why are concert tickets special?

Cause you can't traffic someone at a concert. Doesn't make sense if I can buy a plane ticket then transfer the ticket to the girl I'm trafficking.

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#178

Post by butlike »

Nursie wrote: post #125
sporkland wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can agree scalpers are net negative. And I like your ideas but I don't see why the venues and artists don't want to capture more of what people are willing to pay enabled by what the parent comment suggested. I wonder if in your system it actually attracts fans or just people that have the time to wait for tickets.

> I don't see why the venues and artists don't want to capture more of what people are willing to pay Because artists don't always want to extract the maximum money possible from their fanbase? Artists are not always rapacious capitalists. Sure, they want to make money from the show, but a lot of them also genuinely want to reach people who may not be able to drop hundreds of bucks on a ticket. Always selling to the…

I think there's levels to it. I've seen what I would consider a big artist at a small venue for $20 plus tax, no fees. You could tell that show was a labor of love for the artist. But, I would never expect to pay that price going to a festival like Coachella, or even a local stadium show.

Actually, writing this comment got me thinking that maybe the larger the venue, the more expensive the ticket needs to be out of necessity. More hands in the cookie jar, and all that.

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#179

Post by butlike »

nradov wrote: post #104
QuantumFunnel wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the big artists people want to see ever play at those venues

That's exactly my point: boycott the artists who contract with Live Nation. Your life won't be any less rich if you go see a local band instead of Taylor Swift. People have so many options now and yet they're afflicted with this weird FOMO.

That's not fair. Taylor Swift is so big because so many people resonate with her. They want to go see an artist they connect with. I get it, going to see the up-and-coming garage band with the DIY attitude at CBGBs has a comfy I'm-there-in-a-you-had-to-be-there-time, but not everyone finds that superior. Some just want to see the artist they like. And that's ok too.

Re: Live Nation illegally monopolized ticketing market, jury finds

#180

Post by butlike »

traderj0e wrote: post #71
bsimpson wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one that pisses me off is when the waitress tells you to pay with your phone, and it's charged a "convenience fee."

I won't go anywhere that wants you to pay with phone period, cause it's just annoying and usually means bad food/service. If they somehow hid this fact until the end and wanted a fee for it, I'd just slap a bill on the table and leave. Don't think that's even a crime.

Right? As silly as it might sound, I go out to interact with people. I don't want a mindless unthinking automaton as a server. I want someone who will check in on how the service is going, and also make recommendations if I ask. I really don't understand the push to make inherently social endeavors more isolating. I guess it's money. :(
Post reply on HN