231–240 of 378 posts
It seems like a step in the right direction to combat scalpers. I've wondered though... Why not have a non-transferrable ticket system? If you can't go then you return your tickets to the pool and if they sell you get your money back.
Wouldn't a proportional return not be better?
For those against this: I'm curious to hear your take on how you'd stop/mitigate scalping.
Not a direct answer to your question but go to see local bands. The ticket prices are way better and so is the crowd and the show.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Fewer people go to concerts Scalpers don't buy tickets and not sell them. The most scalped concerts are obviously the most attended > fans can’t afford the tickets See above. I assume what you are upset about is that rich fans are the ones going. > less connection with the artists, less interest in music overall I think you need to explain your logic here.
Not OP but - I think one could make the case that if tickets were sold via a lottery and non-transferable, the average lottery participant would be a bigger fan of $ARTIST than the average person who can afford the scalped price for a ticket today. Arguably if rich people are just buying the $1000 concert tickets just to flex and take pictures for IG, that's a seat that could be going to a 17-year-old who loves the b…
Back in my day 17-year-olds, especially those who would want to attend concerts, were interested in discovering music. Some of those discoveries would absolutely be artists selling out stadiums where tickets can sell for 10x face value, sure. But some of those discoveries were artists relegated to playing in dingy bars where a cover charge would be unthinkable. One might not have been able to see all of their favorite bands (i.e. the most famous among them), but seeing some of those artists would be quite realistic.
Does what you are saying imply that music fans today have converged on listening only to a small group of superstars despite music discoverability never being easier?
For those against this: I'm curious to hear your take on how you'd stop/mitigate scalping.
Spotify's solution can't remain completely anonymous because Spotify will need to limit botters and verify attendee identity at the door. So we're all just pretending that ID isn't involved, and there's no reason Spotify needs to be in the middle.
Spotify's solution obviously sucks for non-platform users, and if the implementation is "sort fans by listen hours in the last month to find true fans", it would also suck for fans who can't listen at work, fans who were on vacation, fans who don't like the latest album as much, etc. This is basically the modern equivalent of JPop/KPop acts putting concert lottery tickets in CDs and forcing a gross incentive on the fan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it‘s an audience/artist experience problem. I worked for one of Australia's biggest outdoor summer music festivals through the 2000s (I built a direct ticket selling platform for them). Their popularity grew each year, and, sure, they could have just raised their prices to try and match supply and demand. They 100% did not want to do that because they knew it would completely change the audience demographics and…
It sounds like they found the price ceiling. Trying to pick your customers is a fools errand, particularly with a music festival where tastes change and people age out.
It's no good optimizing for simple supply and demand in one year if it destroys the product and therefore demand in subsequent years, which is what we're seeing the market. I'm familiar with libertarian principles, but every libertarian economist I've paid attention to has emphasized the importance of second-order effects.
It seems like a step in the right direction to combat scalpers. I've wondered though... Why not have a non-transferrable ticket system? If you can't go then you return your tickets to the pool and if they sell you get your money back.
Someone in a group gets sick or otherwise can't make it? Their seat is now either empty, or their ticket goes back to the pool. They can't give that ticket to someone else.
That's a big deal for a whole slew of reasons. Let's pick just one reason and run with it.
Five 11-year-old-ish girls want to go see Olivia Rodrigo. These kids haven't ever even been inside an arena before and aren't experienced enough to go on their own, and the tickets are expensive. One of the moms of the group decides that she'll take them all. No problem, right?
Except: This mom gets sick. She can't go.
And she can't just give her ticket to one of the other moms or dads because it is non-transferable. And the kids still aren't big enough to turn loose in a crowd without an adult.
The end result of this is stupid: "Sorry, kids. None of you get to go to the concert that you already have a ticket for. Life is hard."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go back to the old way. Get in line physically and go get the tickets. This is one of those "technology should help here but actually makes the problem worse in weird ways" type of situations. Nine Inch Nails/Trent Reznor did this in 2018 and it was infinitely better (I also met a lot of people just standing in line—we recognized each other at the show later and ended up throwing each other around in the mosh pit—a g…
That excludes all fans who don't live in big cities. A lot of people travel just to go to shows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would to multiple the prices multiple times to even discourage the middlemen, gentrifying at the same time the fan base, which is sad
It is, but it still feels better that the money goes toward the artist than it does to go to a middleman. Reality is there is no good solution IMO, no matter what you do, someone is missing out. Just the reality of supply vs demand.
Presumably individuals involved in these cases are already tapped out for how many performances they can do, so why not have other people put on the same show to expand the supply?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still have the issue of transferring tickets to friends or such if you can't make it. Axios and some providers handle this.
If you "can't make it", you just have to eat the loss. True fans will make it.
It seems like a step in the right direction to combat scalpers. I've wondered though... Why not have a non-transferrable ticket system? If you can't go then you return your tickets to the pool and if they sell you get your money back.
Non-transferable tickets suck for their own reasons. Someone in a group gets sick or otherwise can't make it? Their seat is now either empty, or their ticket goes back to the pool. They can't give that ticket to someone else. That's a big deal for a whole slew of reasons. Let's pick just one reason and run with it. Five 11-year-old-ish girls want to go see Olivia Rodrigo. These kids haven't ever even been inside an a…
Are there other common cases that would apply? I assume there are probably some other situations, but I can't think of what they might be. I also find it hard to understand why a little bit of leeway couldn't be baked into the language of the transferable nature under certain circumstances. Presumably the venue wants people to have a good time so they will want to come back again and again, right?
Perhaps something as easy as "If one friend can't make it, you can give it to a different friend." Then, at the door, the guards can look at the ID of someone and ask basic questions; "What is (person)'s name? What town does (person) live in?" Etc.