Live data from Hacker News

CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

behind.pretix.eu

181–190 of 285 posts

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#181
Even privacy unfriendly methods may not solve the problem.

Buying large concert tickets in China has required the buyer's personal ID since several years ago, and the personal ID associated with the ticket cannot be changed after the order is placed. At the entrance of those concerts they do verification based on ticket, ID card and facial recognition. There are still many scalpers who offers tickets even after they're "sold out", though. What they do is to let buyers lie they forgot their ID cards so that there's a higher possibility of entering with the ID card provided by scalpers (which they used to buy tickets). And by the way, the scalper don't have to provide their own ID card - personal information leakage is so common here.

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#182
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scalper problem is a mispricing problem: Scalpers are just arbitrageurs because ticket prices are artificially very low. If you want to fix that, you need to ask yourself "why are ticket prices artificially very low?" first. The answer probably isn't "artists/venues like leaving money on the table".

Ticketmaster has it's own resale platform. It's able to double dip. They basically say tickets are relatively cheap and scalpers are the bad guys. They encourage the scalpers. Then they can resell using their own resale platform and they get fees on top of that. The fees on re-sellers are crazy, and they take fees from both seller and buyer. Seller Side: List price: $100 StubHub seller fee (15%): -$15 Seller receives…

It's much more complicated (and worse) than that.

Ticketmaster reserves some seats during sale to be dynamic pricing, which they start higher than normal and then depending on demand and what they see on the secondary market they re-price those as the initial sale or presale is ongoing, just minutes after it starts.

Also, promoters, artists and venues might get their own allotment of tickets to do with as they want, likely negotiated in contracts. Those seem to find their way onto secondary markets often as well.

> They do other things that's baffling like selling tickets a year ahead of time, which is kind of weird considering very few people, even big fans, would be really on top of buying tickets a year out. It's obviously designed for scalpers.

Yes, I've commented on this here before. In some cases it's because tours go on sale at the same time (to generate buzz), and the early events are relatively soon and the last events are quite far out. They also often do release chunks of ticket inventory at later stages. That said, I'm convinced that often brokers are used as a simple way to provide immediate cash and reduce risk. Why would a promoter want to sell out over months when they can sell out immediately and know that regardless of whether the brokers make money (they don't always) they have sold everything and can say the event is sold out and they have cash in hand now and not months from now.

I used to work in this industry and there's a lot of shady stuff that goes on, and it's not all on the broker/scalper side.

> You can easily solve this by having the ticket tied to a name and requiring you to show ID

That's been done for a long time and you can still get around it if the margin is good enough. You just have to either want to go to the event yourself or be willing to one ticket out of the maximum you can purchase as the cost of doing business. You can't really make every seat have a name initially because not everyone actually knows who they're going to invite for sure at time of purchase, so if you want to really make it effective you have to limit the number of tickets per transaction to 4 or less. Even then, people will be incentivized to buy the max and have people go with them to use the extra tickets at cost or more, it may not be brokers but the regular public will do it too.

The actual solution for this is fairly simple. It's supply and demand. Play more shows at a location and the ticket prices will drop. Kid Rock has done it for decades at this point. Artists don't like having to put the extra work in for less money (tickets will be cheaper) and don't want to take the risk that the demand won't be there if they book the venue early. That risk is pushed out to brokers.

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#183
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ticket sales companies and scalpers are holding the bag for everyone else. It is extremely convenient for artists, promoters and venues that ticketing sites will tack on a bunch of extra fees, take the blame for pushing up the price of tickets, then share out most of that extra cash to everyone else in the chain. Scalpers are effectively providing financing for the rest of the industry - it's obviously preferable to…

> it's obviously preferable to get paid for the entire tour on the day it's announced it's only obvious to "private equity" type people. There is energy in the concerts - and a lot of people go to live shows for that. Otherwise, one would listen to the recording / watch music videos instead - it is cheaper and the seats are nicer too. If the seats are half-empty, or only full of people who are ready to pay exorbitant…

>> it's obviously preferable to get paid for the entire tour on the day it's announced

> it's only obvious to "private equity" type people.

I mean, who wouldn't look at their current expenses, look at their future cashflow, and be like hey, it would sure be nice to be paid today for work I'll do over the next year?

Venues need deposits (maybe), transportation needs deposits, set builders need materials, marketing needs budget, merchandise production needs to pay vendors, etc. Insurance needs to be purchased.

It all adds up to it'd be nice to have ticket sales money sooner rather than later.

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#184
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ticket sales companies and scalpers are holding the bag for everyone else. It is extremely convenient for artists, promoters and venues that ticketing sites will tack on a bunch of extra fees, take the blame for pushing up the price of tickets, then share out most of that extra cash to everyone else in the chain. Scalpers are effectively providing financing for the rest of the industry - it's obviously preferable to…

> it's obviously preferable to get paid for the entire tour on the day it's announced it's only obvious to "private equity" type people. There is energy in the concerts - and a lot of people go to live shows for that. Otherwise, one would listen to the recording / watch music videos instead - it is cheaper and the seats are nicer too. If the seats are half-empty, or only full of people who are ready to pay exorbitant…

>> it's obviously preferable to get paid for the entire tour on the day it's announced

> it's only obvious to "private equity" type people.

No, it's obvious. Anyone that has to choose between getting $100 right now or $100 trickled in over months would opt for it right now for many reasons (inflation, the ability it invest it, the ability to use if it needed for unexpected situation, etc).

Wanting events to be populated by people that are primed for an experience and part of that priming bing they don't feel like it was too expensive to go might be another thing the artist or venue wants to encourage.

You can combine these things and make specific trade offs, but that doesn't mean all other things being equal that it's not entirely obvious that you should prefer money now to later.

> So giving up (or even worse, cooperating) to scalpers is like selling your business to private equity - you get some money, they get some money, and your customers/fans are fd.

It depends, probably a whole lot more than you think. Sometimes fans like to know they can go to an event if they care enough. In a world without resale markets that would be entirely dependent on the artist deciding to play more shows, because once tickets are sold they're gone. Secondary markets provide liquidity.

Also, sometimes tickets are available for cheaper* on secondary markets than they were on the initial sale (and this was true even before Ticketmaster started changing prices as the sales went on). That's because brokers take on risk buy buying for an event when it's not entirely sure it will still have demand when it's the event date.

For example, I just went to Stubhub (because I'm not sure Ticketmaster's own exchange will allow you to list for less than sale price) and looked for events starting soon. I found a rock concert in Napa where the Orchestra tickets are cheaper on Stubhub ($94 for two) than on Ticketmaster ($115.40 for two). There are plenty of tickets still on Ticketmaster, and some brokers just want to but their losses.[1][2]

There are plenty of ways to look at reselling to make it seem horrible or to make it seem beneficial. It's neither, it's just a normal function of markets, and the more people try to prevent it the more weird problems we'll have. Want to fix ticket prices? Convince artists to take on risk by playing larger venues (which they might not sell out) or add dates (meanind some days might not sell out). Artists don't want to take on that risk, so we have resellers and higher ticket prices.

1: https://www.stubhub.com/zepparella-napa-tickets-5-31-2025/ev...

2: https://www.ticketmaster.com/zepparella-the-led-zeppelin-pow...

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#185
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a hedge. Performers are not in the business of optimizing ROI, they're in the business of performing. Scalpers provide a service: guaranteed income for a fee. There are many analogous examples in other markets where both parties happily take their respective sides of this deal, even though technically one of them is leaving money on the table. Then there is the slightly more insidious incentive: selling out quic…

> Performers are not in the business of optimizing ROI, they're in the business of performing. I have to disagree; performers are absolutely in the business of optimization. Bo Burnham was singing about metrification destroying art 10 years ago. Every standup comic is using social media as a sales funnel to figure out exactly which cities they have an audience in. Even if the performers themselves are not concerned w…

hedging is a tried and true financial strategy. Transpose this to any producer of commodities and it becomes the most normal thing in the world to take guaranteed cash at a discount for guaranteed delivery of the product. It’s the exact same thing.

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#186
post #19

The option that strikes me as missing, is making users pay a cost before they are randomly entered in a lottery for the ticket. So, for example, everyone pays $0.01 on their credit card, or does a holding charge on their credit card, or registers their identity. All in a 5 minute (or 1 day!) window. And then after the window, tickets are randomly distributed amongst every card which so registered. You could check mul…

(Author here) Yes, every kind of lottery/raffle is a possible solution but only with strong identity verification to avoid double-entry and hence only with sacrificing privacy, as mentioned in the article.

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#187
post #15

> So what’s left? If the profit per successful abuse event is $200, the author's suggestion of limits on credit card numbers or phone numbers won't work either. Those are only effective against scaled abuse up to something like $1 / event. Bank accounts would almost certainly be more robust, but that seems quite hard to implement outside of a handful of countries where the online auth ecosystem is built around banks.…

(Author here) Anything else than first-come-first-served requires strong identity to avoid people trying to get better chances with many entries into the pool, thus falling into the "sacrificing privacy" category

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#188

I'm a founder in this space (www.roundtable.ai; YC S23) Behavior is a big missing link. Many CAPTCHA services (including Google reCAPTCHA v3) claim to use behavioral analyses, but you can disprove this using Operator to fill out a form and see reCAPTCHA and other bot detection systems flag it as a human. At Roundtable, we rely on first-order behavioral markers (keystroke, mouse, scroll, click) etc. When first-order a…

(Author here) Interesting! How do you differentiate between a bot and a screenreader user? Both won't move their mouse, scroll, etc but only send a single click event

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#189
1. Digital tickets are purchased via mobile-friendly site or app.

2. Tickets are verified at entrance via time-sensitive QR code displayed in the app.

3. You can "resell"/transfer a ticket to another account (say, friend) via app for a small nominal fee with the cost of ticket refunded to you, but only if you provide ID (of any sort, which can be more or less reliably confirmed).

4. Ticket can be printed to obtain non-time-sensitive QR code, but only if you provide ID.

Re: CAPTCHAs are over (in ticketing)

#190

I am unsympathetic when people insist on selling things for the wrong price and then come up with these elaborate schemes for fixing the problems they themselves caused. If they would simply sell tickets for the prices people are willing to pay in the first place then they wouldn't need to invade privacy or any of this stuff. I've heard the arguments they use to justify why they don't and they're all hogwash.

I am unsympathetic to people who insist on reducing everything to its market value.

I've heard the arguments they use to justify why they do and they're all hogwash.

Post reply on HN