The Man Who Broke Ticketmaster (vice.com)

Jason Koebler quotes a report from Motherboard: The scourge of ticket bots and the immorality of the shady ticket scalpers using them is conventional wisdom that's so ingrained in the public consciousness and so politically safe that a law to ban automated ticket bots passed both houses of Congress unanimously late last year, in part thanks to a high-profile public relations campaign spearheaded by Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda. But no one actually involved in the ticket scalping industry thinks that banning bots will do much to slow down the secondary market. Seven years after his Los Angeles office was raided by shotgun-wielding FBI agents, Ken Lowson, the man who invented ticket bots, told Motherboard's Jason Koebler he's switched teams. Now, he's out to expose the secrets of the ticket industry in a bid to make sure tickets are sold directly to their fans.

Comments

Full bank account

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that he's made his money from it, of course he can sit back and relax and not worry about having to pay the bills and become an advocate for the industry.

Easy solution

[Anonymous Coward]

One Ticket Per Customer.

Re:Easy solution

[magarity]

Auctions.

A few last minute concert-goers would have to privately buy from someone, but an auction format would mean that the first sale price would rapidly approach the true price and thus eliminate the scalpers' profits.

Re:Easy solution

[ezdiy]

Market is already what this guy was doing, it's just a shadow one (auctions are unrelated in this scenario - those are for single items, not commodities).

And yes, the market of limited supply at a fixed rate is trivial to corner if you can buy it all out before with trivial amounts of capital. The proper trick is for tickcetmaster be the actual elastic supplier during the markets course until closing - by emitting new tickets / buying back to prevent fluctuations - in such a way that 1 hour before the event, last free ticket will be emitted.

Re: Easy solution

[magarity]

Auctions are not unrelated because show tickets are not a commodity. A certain ticket is for a certain seat for a certain show. Some shows may be general admission, but then a ticket is still reasonably distinct as it is for a certain show.

Re: Easy solution

[ezdiy]

Fair point. With seat numbers you get something akin to bonds or options instrument market, not real commodity.

Maturity times are different for each piece of instrument, but it is lumped together with each being priced by the slight variation in demand for each variant. Because in general, the market does not care about the slight differences between variants. They're fine as long they get *some*.

What I'm trying to say is that auction technically is very limited form of market - where your bid is allocated to only one item. Which is simple to understand, but inefficient in market terms - on financial instrument markets, you put a bid for classes of parameters (seat range, if you buy two seats, ensure those are next to each other etc) - basically a set of seat numbers you're ok with, in given price range, and you get first ticket which will match. The whole point is to not limit your capital to one item, when near-identical seats around are potentially cheaper.

Put a captcha on

[Anonymous Coward]

TicketMaster and the like could easily stop bots IF THEY WANTED TO. But they don't, because they get sellouts, sometimes to things that wouldn't otherwise sellout.

Re:Put a captcha on

[MightyMartian]

My hunch is that at least some of the bots are their's.

At any rate, the face value of a concert ticket is meaningless. Since Ticketmaster and the venues find so many clever ways to hold back tickets, distribute them to resellers and other parties before you ever get your hands on one, the dollar value is just pointless. They might as well have tickets called "Cheapest, Cheap, Affordable, Expensive, Really Expensive and HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU REALLY LOVE THIS BAND!!!!"

After I went to see AC/DC in 2015 in Vancouver, I said that was it for me and big venue concerts. It was an incredible concert, to be sure, but the amount of money and time it took to get there was just outrageous. My wife and I had just as good a time heading over to watch King Crimson in December 2015 in a nice 3000 seat venue where you could actually see the band without the need of a video screen, where volume levels weren't so insane that you were still functionally deaf 48 hours later, and where the venue wasn't filled with beer-swilling psychotics. When I went to my last Rush concert there was literally a drunken couple in the row ahead of us who got into a fucking brawl. Seriously, those people must have paid over $300 for tickets, and to do that and then spend god-knows how much to get pissed up on venue beer, and then get into a fight and get thrown out! Fuck it, big venues suck, and Ticketmaster's evil schemes to fuck you out of more money than the face value of the ticket just puts the cork on it.

Re:Put a captcha on

[Anonymous Coward]

My hunch is that at least some of the bots are their's.

It is a market in which we have no idea, how many tickets are actually for sale. There is no reason why Ticketmaster would not keep tickets off the primary market and sell on the secondary. It is clear that is what is happening. Since tickets get sold out faster than you could actually buy them in a automated way.

Re:Put a captcha on

[NatasRevol]

ticketmaster is not the solution to anything.

Re:Put a captcha on

[sexconker]

My hunch is that at least some of the bots are their's.

Most are. In fact, TicketMaster skips the bots entirely.

TicketMaster owns and operates TicketsNow, which is ticket scalping site.
TicketMaster pinches off a chunk (often the bulk) of tickets and gives them to TicketsNow BEFORE they go on sale.
If they don't sell on TicketsNow, TicketMaster takes some back and releases them on TicketMaster. This is why TicketMaster has the option to be alerted in case more tickets become available.

TicketsNow (and they probably have other sites that are the same damned thing) is their primary business because it lets them get out of any pricing contracts. TicketMaster "sells" the tickets to TicketsNow in advance (or at T 0), and TicketsNow resells them at a much higher price.

Re:Put a captcha on

[KozmoStevnNaut]

big venues suck

Not necessarily. I think it's more a case of "mainstream audiences suck" or "people who aren't used to going to concerts suck". I see it all the time, especially mainstream rock concerts. There is always a segment of (usually middle-aged) people there, who only go to a concert every other year. They don't know their limits when it comes to beer, they don't know basic concert etiquette, they get angry if they accidentally get bumped, and they especially get pissed off if someone spills a little beer on them, even though they're standing in the dense crowd close to the stage.

I have never seen this type of behavior at a death metal show, for instance. And I probably attend at least 2 metal shows every month.

Re:Put a captcha on

[Anonymous Coward]

(Posting AC because I work in the industry.)

TicketMaster and the like could easily stop bots IF THEY WANTED TO.

Absolutely wrong. It's an arms race. We are constantly trying to block the bots, and they are constantly trying to beat our new defenses.

It's true that the major ticketing agencies also own some of the secondary dealers. What I don't see anybody else talking about is how they also own the venues. Add the contracts with multiple local and national promoters, and it becomes very difficult to track financial incentives for a given show.

Eg: A promoter buys the entire tour for an artist. The artist gets an advance and a percentage of the gate. Live Nation, which now owns Ticketmaster, owns the majority of large venues that those concerts can be staged at. Individual venues may have deals for concessions, or regulations on union labor.

Whoever owns the concessions - parking, food - makes more when there's a full house. Same for merchandise. Whoever owns the primary market for the tickets wants to sell as many tickets as possible face price. Whoever owns the secondary market wants to resell at the highest possible price.

That's a very short list. And that each venue the owners of each piece could be different. In some cases one organization can own the venue, the tour, the concessions, everything. Other times the promoter has to pay the venue a flat fee upfront to stage the event, hire all employees, etc., eating all the cost upfront.

Who loses money when the talent breaks a leg, or goes into rehab? Who has flat rates versus upside potential? Etc. etc. etc.

tl;dr

This is a very complex industry. There're no simple answers to why people do things, and the answers that are true today can change by next week.

Re:Put a captcha on

[wallsg]

Just wait 20 years and then see them for free at the State Fair.

Re:Put a captcha on

[sysrammer]

Yeah. I remember going to Elton in the 80's. We got up to watch and dance along with Bennie and the Jets. How can you not? Well, maybe 80% of the audience couldn't. But this was the OC. The Yuppies were so wrapped up in career/life/family (in that order) that they forgot how to party.

It looks like very generation has their Yuppies.

Re:Put a captcha on

[sysrammer]

Hell yeah, baby. Good price and usually a better venue. Usually the same sound. More wrinkles.

Supply and demand

[Doub]

You got scalpers and bots because some morons want to circumvent the rules of the market. When supply is limited and demand is high, prices should go up. Then no bots, no scalpers. Of course poor people would have to go see something else, like one of the many good scenes that fail to attract audiences.

Re:Supply and demand

[ShanghaiBill]

The problem is that demand for many performances is hard to forecast, and the performers want sell-out crowds. So they price the tickets low to ensure that every seat is filled. But then the scalpers come along and buy up the tickets, boost the price, and often have unsold inventory, which means empty seats.

The solution is NOT to ban scalping. Scalping is a response to a market failure, and trying to ban it is not going to work. A better solution is to put the tickets on sale at a high price with a publicly announced sliding price scale, so the price drops each day as the performance gets closer. So customers have a choice of either paying now and having a guaranteed seat, or waiting and maybe getting a cheaper ticket next week. This will maximize revenue, fill every seat, and leave no space for scalpers.

Re:Supply and demand

[gurps_npc]

No. You got scalpers and bots because:

1) People refuse to let the free market set prices. Some events are worth more than the ticket price, otherwise no one would ever buy via a scalper. Instead they insist on a communist "Let everyone watch for the same price" method.

2) The people running the system do not suffer from the scalping, so they do not bother to institute simple methods to stop it.

  For example, simply set it up so that you can only buy tickets either a) an hour before the show using cash abd getting your hand stamped, or b) with a credit card - that must be shown to pick up the tickets upto an hour before the show.

So take your pick of solution - either make let the free market price the tickets (with time affecting the price today's tickets are more expensive than ones for next year). Or use real security to ensure that the purchaser watches the show.

Re:Supply and demand

[MightyMartian]

The poor people end up in nose bleed, but the last time I did that, I ended up watching the band on the video screens and asking myself why I would pay over a thousand bucks for tickets, hotel, meals and gas when I could go buy the live DVD of one of their concerts for $30 on Amazon six months later.

That being said, I said Pink Floyd in 1995, and that is one band where nosebleed seats don't matter. But those guys knew how to put on a big venue concert, and really, nobody gives a shit which little ant on stage is David Gilmour.

Re:Supply and demand

[ShanghaiBill]

For example, simply set it up so that you can only buy tickets either a) an hour before the show using cash abd getting your hand stamped, or b) with a credit card - that must be shown to pick up the tickets upto an hour before the show.

1. Many people are not going to go to a show that requires them to waste an hour of their time, with no guarantee of even getting a ticket.
2. Scalpers can simply pay homeless people to stand in line and buy up the tickets.
3. This scheme would likely INCREASE demand for scalping, since in addition to getting a guaranteed ticket, you don't have to stand in line.

Re:Supply and demand

[whoever57]

The problem is that demand for many performances is hard to forecast, and the performers want sell-out crowds.

How is it that the scalpers can predict demand, but Ticketmaster cannot?

Re:Supply and demand

[taustin]

Only selling tickets just before the show as resulted in stampedes, and riots, with dozens of deaths at a time.

Your solution is inferior.

(Requiring each ticket to be registered to a specific name, and requiring ID to get in, is another matter.)

Re:Supply and demand

[Anonymous Coward]

My father is a scalper. He makes decent money at it. He does not buy out who stadiums or rows or anything. He just shows up the day the tickets go on sale. Waits in line. Picks up a pair for something front and center. Waits until about 3-4 weeks before and doubles his money. No computer involved. I conservatively estimate he makes 2-3k per month doing it. Once and awhile he gets a home run and some fool pays him 2k for something he paid 50 bucks for. At worst he gets stuck with it and goes to a concert.

Why did the bots show up? Money. Instead of making say 100-300 bucks per set. You can make 10k easy per day. https://www.stubhub.com/

This is a good insight into the kind of people who do this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

They are not happy winning 1 or 2 items. They want *all* the money. Many times the people owning and running the bots are one in the same as the ones this dude dealt with. I have not met a car dealer that was not hip deep into every scam out there. I include my father in that group.

Re:Supply and demand

[ShanghaiBill]

How is it that the scalpers can predict demand, but Ticketmaster cannot?

Because scalpers set prices to maximize profits. In most cases, ticketmaster does not set the price, and their clients generally set the price to FILL THE VENUE, with short-term profit as a secondary consideration.

Re:Supply and demand

[sexconker]

The scalpers ARE TicketMaster, most of the time. TicketMaster owns TicketsNow, which is basically eBay for scalpers. TicketMaster moves its own tickets to TicketsNow to charge obscene prices, preventing anyone from buying them on TicketMaster.

Re:Supply and demand

[TheSync]

How is it that the scalpers can predict demand, but Ticketmaster cannot?

They don't - scalpers are making a bet - the sometimes lose. This is the situations for many "distributors" in different retail industries, where wholesalers give up some profit to retailers in exchange for reduced risk.

Re:Supply and demand

[Anonymous Coward]

When my wife was watching ticket prices for NFL tickets, this is exactly what happened. The seats started at around $230 and we ended up buying them at $195. Still expensive, but they were really good seats and the team isn't in San Diego anymore, so no more local NFL games. I won't drive to LA and pay $200 per ticket.

Re: Supply and demand

[RCourtney]

Option "A" is how it use to work pre-internet. Not hours before, but months before the event.

People would go line up at that various music stores that were authorized Ticketmaster resellers. You'd get a numbered wristband and wait (similar to how people line up for Black Friday Sales now). You were allowed to buy up to a certain amount (usually 4) tickets.

The pro scalpers would just pay young adults to stand in line for them and buy the maximum allowed ticket amount.

They would then post ads in news papers and the like for "Event Tickets" and people would call to get the 2nd hand price.

Not much different than how it works today except, surprise, it use to require more actual humans to do before automation.

Re:Supply and demand

[gurps_npc]

1) Not that hard to show how many tickets are left
2) What part of hand stamped did you not understand?
3) What part of "credit card" allows you to buy the ticket in advance do you not understand?

Re:Supply and demand

[gurps_npc]

If you actually read my post you would see that credit cards would let you purchase tickets in advanced. In other words, the solution you "thought up" and wrote about (i.e. ID) was already in my post.

My solution was superior to yours as it still allowed for cash sales.

Re: Supply and demand

[gurps_npc]

I gave ONE solution with multiple parts. (A) as an all cash option for those not using credit cards.

I also required hands to be stamped, something that would prevent the obvious abuses you mentioned.

Re:Supply and demand

[Anonymous Coward]

Riots? Well, that'll thin the herd. Consider it a Darwin award.

What's weird is that TicketMaster and other schemes to officially sell tickets are there ostensibly to stop scalping, where the ticket is bought for more than the face price. Yet these schemes sell the ticket for the face price THEN CHARGE FOR THE SERVICE.

Uh, that's what scalpers do.

The venue should either pay such schemes so it's free or the schemes should be closed down. Buy on the day, at the door or permitted retailer (acting as the venue's representative). It worked before. If it doesn't work now, then there's something else wrong, not scalping tickets.

Re:Supply and demand

[KozmoStevnNaut]

This will also unfairly give people with large disposable income a huge advantage, as if they didn't have enough advantages in society already.

The fix is simple: Make it illegal to sell tickets for higher than face value. It has worked amazingly well here.

Re:Supply and demand

[KozmoStevnNaut]

I've found my solution to this problem: Stop going to bigass mainstream shows, they suck anyway (outside of acts like Pink Floyd).

Go listen to more interesting music, in smaller and more interesting venues instead.

Re: Supply and demand

[drinkypoo]

I also required hands to be stamped, something that would prevent the obvious abuses you mentioned.

It does nothing of the sort, unless you greatly improve the quality of hand stamps. People simply draw a copy of the stamp. Are you going to have people trained to detect counterfeits accurately verifying all these hand stamps?

Re:Supply and demand

[danbert8]

Ticketmaster doesn't many money on the price of the ticket, the venue does. Ticketmaster makes money on their ridiculous bullshit fees which the get regardless of the base price of the ticket.

Re:Supply and demand

[ShanghaiBill]

The fix is simple

Not everyone believes that anything needs to be "fixed", or that scalping is a problem at all.

Make it illegal to sell tickets for higher than face value. It has worked amazingly well here.

Why should the police and courts get involved in supporting and subsidizing a broken business model?

Should the police also arrest people that resell used cars for prices not approved by the auto manufacturers?

   

Re:Supply and demand

[Anonymous Coward]

Scalping does nothing to fix the (what you assume is broken) business model. The only people getting rich are scummy middlemen with no skin in the game, not the providers of the services.

Re:Supply and demand

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Is there currently a problem with "car scalpers"?

No, because you have a huge number of sellers to choose from, both first-hand and second-hand.

Not so with tickets. Generally the tickets for a particular show is only sold through one outlet, at a price that has been agreed on by the venue, the artist('s management) and the ticket company.

Scalpers unfairly deprive people of the ability to buy tickets at the agreed price, by creating artificial scarcity. Hence why regulation is needed.

Re:Supply and demand

[crtreece]

The only people getting rich are scummy middlemen with no skin in the game

You must be talking about companies like Ticketmaster, right? Because all the ticket scalpers have skin in the game, they didn't get the tickets they are selling for free. If they buy tickets that they don't sell, they take a loss.

Re:Supply and demand

[crtreece]

b) with a credit card - that must be shown to pick up the tickets upto an hour before the show.

If I buy one of these tickets, which often go on sale months before an event, and for some reason I'm not able to go, can I get a refund? Or did I just piss away whatever I spent on the tickets and leave some empty seats to discourage the artist, other fans and venue? Well, I guess the artist and venue wouldn't be toooo mad, they got paid.

Re:Supply and demand

[tlhIngan]

The problem is that demand for many performances is hard to forecast, and the performers want sell-out crowds. So they price the tickets low to ensure that every seat is filled. But then the scalpers come along and buy up the tickets, boost the price, and often have unsold inventory, which means empty seats.

The solution is NOT to ban scalping. Scalping is a response to a market failure, and trying to ban it is not going to work. A better solution is to put the tickets on sale at a high price with a publicly announced sliding price scale, so the price drops each day as the performance gets closer. So customers have a choice of either paying now and having a guaranteed seat, or waiting and maybe getting a cheaper ticket next week. This will maximize revenue, fill every seat, and leave no space for scalpers.

No, the problem is Ticketmaster.

You might not believe this, but the public only gets around 50% of the tickets, or less (33-50% of the tickets are general sales).

Do you remember those credit card commercials that give you "advantages"? Like "members get to see the latest shows"? Guess what? A good 33% of tickets (minimum) is reserved to these credit card companies for sale to their members. Then there are all the other reward companies that do the same - have a cellphone with us? You're a member, and can get member perks too.

The rest are "promo" tickets - some are dedicated to contests and other stuff (like you see on the news where you can enter to win tickets, etc). A lot is reserved for band members to give to family and friends (and by band members, I mean broadly, "band members" because it includes roadies as well, and likely the staff working the event get friends and family tickets). These can also include fan club tickets as well.

As for reverse auction for scalping, it won't work. The event sells out anyhow (it just increases the risk a scalper might have unsold tickets, but if they're going to be all sold, then they're all sold). And a lot of artists love cheap seats because they know there are fans who cannot afford more expensive tickets.

Re:Supply and demand

[Anonymous Coward]

The fix is real simple.

Turn seats in to a bidding operation.

Someone signs in to ticket master, selects blocks of seats that are acceptable, or even entire venue, sets the maximum price willing to pay for seats and enter credit card information. 48 hours before show, bill highest bidder for those seats and issue tickets via email.

Done.

You can even set initial seat price to free and make up the difference in beer price at venue, like that isn't happening already. Always have a packed venue.

It's called...

[Anonymous Coward]

... supply and demand, bitches.

Re:It's called...

[Anonymous Coward]

So, free tickets or $1 tickets if the demand is low? No? Then why is it okay to charge $300?

Re:It's called...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Free tickets or $1 each if nobody wants to go. Supply and demand.

If nobody wants to go, then free tickets (or, more likely, just cancel the whole damn show). If everyone on the planet wants to go, then $1m per ticket.

For everything in between, let the market sort out the price of a Guns'n'Roses ticket FFS. If they end up being $1,000 a ticket then Axel will either need to do more concerts, or buy another Ferrari. If they end up being $1 a ticket then Axel needs to retire or start flipping burgers.

Supply. And. Demand. Bitches.

Many of the ticket sites....

[bazmail]

...are hand in glove with the scalpers. I was offered a job once at a company that automates the purchasing process on ticket selling sites using bots, then resell at vastly inflated prices. they claimed that they get unofficial help from the ticket selling sites, and even give kickbacks. Rather than being shy about it, the guy was boasting about it. I declined. The guy interviewing was a douchebag.

Re:Many of the ticket sites....

[MightyMartian]

Ticketmaster was nailed on this something a decade or so ago as I recall, where one of the reseller sites was actually their company. Ticketmaster basically has a lock on tickets for any significant concert, and while multiple jurisdictions in North America have tried to bust the monopoly, it always ends up with a slap on the wrist and Ticketmaster promising to be good in the future, even as they dream up new ways to screw over consumers. I'm quite sure the way you see it is exactly the way it works, they'd get nailed with antitrust lawsuits if they actually had any hard relationship with the resellers, so it just ends up being a quid quo pro instead. Still actionable, I suppose, but a helluva lot harder to prove.

Re:Many of the ticket sites....

[TheSync]

Ticketmaster basically has a lock on tickets

The "lock" is guaranteed regular payments to venues. Anyone with enough capital could try to "buy out" the venues and compete with Ticketmaster.

TicketMaster is Evil

[Anonymous Coward]

Ticketmaster here is the bad agent, as they both declined to actually stop the bots technically (it's not that hard to do) and are deliberately fleecing people. Now, the producers are just as evil, as they created ticketmaster to jack up the ticket prices without jacking up the face value. And, the producers blacklisted the arenas that didn't go along with this extortion.

Let me encourage you to deliberately, publicly boycott all shows sold through ticketmaster. It's a blatantly illegal monopoly, but a politically well connected one.

Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[HornWumpus]

You want a ticket, tell us how much you will pay for it. We'll sell the tickets to those making the highest offers. Done.

Scalping will continue at the edges, but the people putting on the shows will get the lion's share of the money, the only problem with scalping.

If Artists want to fuckover scalpers, all they've ever had to do was add shows. Let the scalpers buy all the tickets to shows 1 and 2. See how much the scalpers can get for them after they announce shows 3, 4 and 5 (continuing until they don't sell out).

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[Anonymous Coward]

The artists are not, and never were, in the equation. Just read up on how Pearl Jam took on Ticket Master and lost.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah the elephant in the room really is that the scalpers really are responding to natural market forces. Demand drives the price and there clearly is very high demand.

On the other hand, the show industry industry really is at fault here. There aren't enough shows and seats to fill demand and the venues/ticketmaster don't do much about it because they enjoy a lock on the the market. They have no incentive to improve because there is little competition.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[Anonymous Coward]

Easier way

1) Require driver's license ID or CC number to buy a ticket
2) Require presentation of the above ID at venue or you are denied entry
3) Print "non transferable" on all tickets

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[HornWumpus]

I recall Prince fucked over a few cities worth of scalpers doing exactly what I described.

But they don't really want to play half empty shows, even if every ticket was sold. Fragile egos and all. Plus scheduling issues.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

So you basically just want the rich people with high disposable incomes to go to the shows, and no ordinary people?

And no, artists can't just add new shows as tickets sell out, it only happens for really big names, and they have a limited number of shows they can add. For one, you need a venue. And the band (or whatever) is probably moving on to the next city, so they can't exactly just hang around and do extra shows.

And how in the hell would you just schedule another NFL/any sports match?

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Easier solution: Simply make it illegal to resell tickets at higher than face value.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[swb]

So you basically just want the rich people with high disposable incomes to go to the shows, and no ordinary people?

Uhh, "ordinary people" can't own yachts, exotic sports cars, large precious stones, private jets or any of a number of expensive things.

The reality is that popular concerts have a demand that exceeds supply at the face value. Even if you could manage to totally eliminate scalping and sell the tickets on first come, first serve basis with limits you'd be basically re-writing the rules to say "just the people who can stand in line for hours get to buy tickets and not ordinary people with jobs or families". There is no form of rationing that can please every person with a demand for the product when demand exceeds supply.

A reverse auction makes the most sense, starting the price very high and dropping it as demand ebbs. You'd still pay more for the tickets, but it would cripple scalpers who expect to buy at face value and resell at market-demand prices since the initial ticket prices would be high and with demand driving price drops, scalpers wouldn't be able to buy tickets in any volume without keeping price levels high. Scalpers can't arbitrage tickets at prices above price points where the market has already refused to buy them. Scalping only works because they are able to sell tickets at a price the market accepts and buy them at below-market prices.

I've long suspected that the artists (which includes their management) collude with the scalpers anyway by supplying the scalping market with tickets marginally above face price. They get to write off the face price of the tickets as a promotional expense and gain the income as off the books cash.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

No, it's more likely that Ticketmaster is in cahoots with the scalpers, in fact they've already had several convictions for this.

What I'm saying is, that instead of handing rich people another piece of society and culture on a silver platter, why not simply make it illegal to sell tickets at above face value? Because yes, scalpers can still sell tickets at way too high prices, as long as the shows sell out. And most big shows do. So the scalpers will simply buy their tickets at medium prices (no reason to overpay) and sell them at high prices once the show sells out.

And since when did people stand in line for hours to buy tickets? It's all online now.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[thegarbz]

The reality is that popular concerts have a demand that exceeds supply at the face value.

So then what's the solution? Make it an expensive rich person experience? Or eliminate scalping instead making it a fan dedication based experience? I prefer the latter. If I were an artist I'd much rather play for someone who was sitting on the ticket master site at 9:59am hitting refresh over and over again because they really wanted to come rather than just another rich fuck thinking "meh, I'll throw my money in this direction today".

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[rsmith-mac]

What I'm saying is, that instead of handing rich people another piece of society and culture on a silver platter,

From a practical perspective, they already have it. You have to be rich to buy from the scalpers in the first place.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[Gr8Apes]

Easier solution: Simply make it illegal to resell tickets at higher than face value.

That's already been done in various locales and has had near zero effect, other than you can't buy tickets walking up to the venue.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[Gr8Apes]

There is another solution to this that conceptually already exists and is in use. Maybe it's time to figure out a way to apply it on a large scale.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[HornWumpus]

What? It has no effect except making the scalping happen in the parking lot, crack deal style.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[HornWumpus]

You're saying you work for half market or less because your bosses are 'fans'? Moron.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[HornWumpus]

For shows with that kind of demand, that's _exactly_ what I'm suggesting.

But in the long term it ISN'T THAT SIMPLE. Right now acts don't see much of the revenue from really popular shows, if they did see that revenue, they would add dates. Right now they run relatively few shows as they aren't getting price signals, breaking the market.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[swb]

why not simply make it illegal to sell tickets at above face value?

Because making selling some things illegal doesn't work? Here in Minnesota scalping used to be illegal and it never stopped anyone, and like drugs, it only made the problems worse (fake tickets, etc).

And since when did people stand in line for hours to buy tickets? It's all online now.

I would argue that's made dominance of the ticket market by scalpers worse, not better. Now they can automate dominating ticket sales. At least in-person ticket sales can impose reasonable limits on per-person sales and give people with the gumption to show up early a chance of buying tickets. And it forces scalpers to work a lot harder to corner the market -- they need to hire a lot of mules, especially if the box office does something like indelible UV hand stamps.

Look, I don't like the notion that big events are a rich man's game anymore than anyone else, but there's no practical way to ensure only true-blue "fans" get reasonably priced tickets. You have to make arbitrage of tickets unprofitable by shifting the profit to the ticket originator -- attack the fundamental economics of price and scarcity. Holding prices down just means you're picking winners and losers on some other criteria.

The bottom line is you're chasing a good priced below what the market will bear and the market will respond by pushing the ticket price up.

My personal response has just been to see fewer "popular" shows and attend more local/indie events. They're priced reasonably and easier to get into, and quite often just plain better because the venues are more intimate. I will still go to the occasional (once a year or less) popular event, usually because my wife wants to go, but really at that point I'm happy to buy from the legal resellers we have -- I can actually *get* the tickets then and not worry about getting ripped off.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

why not simply make it illegal to sell tickets at above face value?

Because making selling some things illegal doesn't work? Here in Minnesota scalping used to be illegal and it never stopped anyone, and like drugs, it only made the problems worse (fake tickets, etc).

>

It shouldn't be illegal to resell tickets. In some cases, I've bought tickets for a show, and later found out that I could not attend. I sold the tickets at face value to someone who was able to attend, but didn't get a ticket before they sold out.

It would simply be a regulation on maximum price, not an outright prohibition on reselling. We introduced this rule a couple of decades here, and it really does work.

It is possible that some people make fake tickets, and sell them to people who then discover that they can't get in. But this also happens now, allowing scalping does not curb fake tickets at all.

The bottom line is you're chasing a good priced below what the market will bear and the market will respond by pushing the ticket price up.

But it's not a "what the market will bear" situation. Ticket sales for an even are generally from one source only, with a price agreed upon by the venue, the artist's management and the ticket company. In this situation, there is no market competition. The price is set at a level where they expect to be able to fill the venue.

Scalpers are simply scammers, driving up prices by creating artificial scarcity.

My personal response has just been to see fewer "popular" shows and attend more local/indie events. They're priced reasonably and easier to get into, and quite often just plain better because the venues are more intimate. I will still go to the occasional (once a year or less) popular event, usually because my wife wants to go, but really at that point I'm happy to buy from the legal resellers we have -- I can actually *get* the tickets then and not worry about getting ripped off.

On this, we completely agree. I just came home last night from a tiny show featuring two local bands. ~50 people in a room not much larger than my apartment's living room, and we even managed to get a good mosh and a wall of death going. I love it when the artists can get right up in your face, you don't get that with big shows.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

The market doesn't really exist in this case. There is just one source of tickets, selling at a price agreed to by the venue, the artists and the ticket seller, set at a level where the expect to be able to fill the venue. There is no market when you only have a single source of the good you want to buy. And don't call it a monopoly, because how the hell would you even create market competition for the same single venue's seats?

Scalpers are scammers who artificially drive up prices, by creating artificial scarcity.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

No, you can't just "add shows" whenever you want, based on ticket sales. When it happens, it's extremely rare, and only because the tour schedule was built around it beforehand.

You need a venue (and all associated people) and you need the time. Artists generally don't just play one concert once, they tour with a set schedule, which is set long before the tickets go on sale.

You really don't have any goddamn clue how this stuff actually works in the real world, do you?

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

What? It has been done here (Denmark), and ticket reselling above face value basically doesn't exist anymore. The risk:reward factor simply isn't worth it for the scalpers.

And you can still buy tickets from people outside the venue, from people who may have an extra ticket, because a friend couldn't come. I've done that multiple times, and simply paid face value. Hell, I was even given a ticket for free once.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[swb]

But it's not a "what the market will bear" situation. Ticket sales for an even are generally from one source only, with a price agreed upon by the venue, the artist's management and the ticket company. In this situation, there is no market competition. The price is set at a level where they expect to be able to fill the venue.

No, it is what the market will bear. The "market competition" for a concert is basically all the other entertainment options other than seeing the concert -- other shows, staying home and watching Netflix, other hobbies, etc. Just like the market competition for iPhones is Samsung, Google, LG, etc.

There is a single source for the tickets for any other show (just like there's a single source for iPhones), but there is a market of buyers who represent the "demand" side of the market. If there are more people who want tickets for a given concert than there are seats inside the venue, then demand has exceeded supply.

Basic economics suggests that as demand rises, price will rise as well, until the price rises to the point that demand falls off -- this is the demand price ceiling, the price above which people will not buy and will seek alternatives. Popular concerts are usually priced well below the demand price ceiling and the fact that scalping exists at all demonstrates that. If tickets were already at the demand price ceiling, nobody could resell them above face price because above that price there is nearly zero demand.

You imply that there is something of a monopoly on tickets because scalpers corner the market. Yes, sort of, but the natural monopoly actually rests with the *artist* who is the source of the tickets. Apple prices iPhones at about 3x their manufacturing price and has high demand and waiting lists, but almost no "scalping" because they have already priced the phone close to the demand ceiling *because* they are using their monopoly on supply to set the price. If they didn't, there would be "scalping" of iPhones at the price the demand would bear.

It's weird that artists will *willingly* surrender a natural monopoly on the supply of tickets to resellers and let *someone else* take all the extra profit the market demand can obtain. They are literally the only monopolists who decide they "make enough already" and will hand over *all* the extra profit the market will deliver for their product.

No amount of hand-waving will make the demand for popular concert tickets go away -- the only thing that will lessen is raising prices, and to eliminate resellers you have to make it unprofitable to resell them. The price *has* to rise to control demand, and pricing tickets near the demand price ceiling is the only way to do this. Price the tickets very high and then slowly reduce the price as demand falls, but hold prices if demand is constant. This keeps the price at the market demand ceiling and eliminates the profit that scalpers need to operate.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Popular concerts are usually priced well below the demand price ceiling

Why is this somehow a bad thing? Sure, there is a drive to maximize profits, but it is countered by a drive to not piss off your fans and primary customers with ridiculously high ticket prices. Maybe "the market will bear it" in the short term, but at the price of pissing of a large part of your customer and fan base.

It could work if your entire customer base had large amounts of disposable income, but by and large, they don't. Music fans are generally working people with ordinary incomes. They usually have to save up for tickets, and they don't appreciate being made to feel ripped off.

this is the demand price ceiling, the price above which people will not buy and will seek alternatives

You seem to not understand how fandom works. There is no alternative for Metallica for a Metallica fan.

pple prices iPhones at about 3x their manufacturing price and has high demand and waiting lists, but almost no "scalping" because they have already priced the phone close to the demand ceiling *because* they are using their monopoly on supply to set the price. If they didn't, there would be "scalping" of iPhones at the price the demand would bear.

Uh, have you completely missed what happens whenever a new Apple product goes on sale? Within hours or less, listings pop up at Ebay, Craigslist and other sites, selling brand-new iPhones for 2-3x the price Apple is charging. I know they've been trying to curb it by only allowing each customer to buy a single iPhone, but there are relatively simple ways around that, and the profits are definitely worth it.

The price *has* to rise to control demand, and pricing tickets near the demand price ceiling is the only way to do this. Price the tickets very high and then slowly reduce the price as demand falls, but hold prices if demand is constant. This keeps the price at the market demand ceiling and eliminates the profit that scalpers need to operate.

This will also severely piss off the fans, and without fan goodwill, you are nothing as an artist. It will be seen as greedy and petty, and it will turn fans into haters.

The major flaw in your thinking is that you only think about maximizing profits. But you're completely forgetting the human element, the artist-fan relationship, the long-term goodwill and a bunch of other "soft" factors.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[swb]

[Popular concerts are usually priced well below the demand price ceiling]
Why is this somehow a bad thing? Sure, there is a drive to maximize profits, but it is countered by a drive to not piss off your fans and primary customers with ridiculously high ticket prices.

It's a bad thing because it creates an unstable market for tickets and results in scalping!

This will also severely piss off the fans, and without fan goodwill, you are nothing as an artist. It will be seen as greedy and petty, and it will turn fans into haters. The major flaw in your thinking is that you only think about maximizing profits. But you're completely forgetting the human element, the artist-fan relationship, the long-term goodwill and a bunch of other "soft" factors.

If you want to be pissed off about high ticket prices, blame the artist for having too few performances. They can easily address the supply side of the market by playing more concerts. If a concert with $25 tickets (I just made the number up, I only wish they were that cheap) sells out and results in $250 scalped tickets the fan-savvy solution is to just perform more concerts in a given city.

IMHO, the larger problem here has something to do with the nature of popular musicians (whether it's Metallica or Adele). I don't think many of them think of themselves as performing musicians, but they think of themselves as recording musicians. They don't tour that much, or if they do, their idea of a "World Tour" is 75-odd concerts in 9 months, covering the entire world, after selling 5 million records. If you can sell 5 million records, shouldn't that mean you can sell 5 million tickets at reasonable prices?

It would seem there's a short-term publicity machine at work here, that's as or more focused on short-term popularity rather than long term artistry.

Uh, have you completely missed what happens whenever a new Apple product goes on sale?

No, I intentionally glossed over it, because arbitrage for iPhones usually only happens for the first 1-2 months the new model is available (in the US) and then shifts to international arbitrage, selling new models where they aren't yet available. And Apple has gotten a lot better at ramping up production to eliminate this.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[HornWumpus]

Most venues sit empty, most nights. It would take changes, but it is not impossible.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

And how do you propose the bands structure their touring plans for this? Keep in mind that the touring schedule is set before any tickets are sold, and they can't just hang around every city for 3-4 days on the off chance that they could sell more shows.

You're being very silly right now, and you obviously have no idea how venue booking, staffing, touring or any of this works in the real world.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

It's a bad thing because it creates an unstable market for tickets and results in scalping!

You're blaming the artists, venues and ticket sellers for the scalping. No, blame the goddamn scalpers for being greedy fucks!

Your reasoning seems to be that if they simply sold the tickets at higher prices, there would be no scalpers. If they increased the prices to what the scalpers charge, they wouldn't sell out the venue.

You're really sounding like an economy 101 student right now. Newsflash: Not everything is a classical market. Hell, even Adam Smith realized that not every area is best served by a classical market.

If you want to be pissed off about high ticket prices, blame the artist for having too few performances. They can easily address the supply side of the market by playing more concerts. If a concert with $25 tickets (I just made the number up, I only wish they were that cheap) sells out and results in $250 scalped tickets the fan-savvy solution is to just perform more concerts in a given city.

It's blindingly obvious that you have absolutely no idea how touring schedules, venue booking, staffing, transportation or anything related to these subjects actually works in the real world, outside your economics textbooks.

A touring schedule has to be made in advance to accommodate extra shows, way before the tickets go on sale, you can't just add new dates willy-nilly. And if you put in room for extra shows beforehand, you'll end up with a band just wasting their time for a couple of days to a week between shows.

IMHO, the larger problem here has something to do with the nature of popular musicians (whether it's Metallica or Adele). I don't think many of them think of themselves as performing musicians, but they think of themselves as recording musicians. They don't tour that much, or if they do, their idea of a "World Tour" is 75-odd concerts in 9 months, covering the entire world, after selling 5 million records. If you can sell 5 million records, shouldn't that mean you can sell 5 million tickets at reasonable prices?

It would seem there's a short-term publicity machine at work here, that's as or more focused on short-term popularity rather than long term artistry.

Holy shit, how is it even possible to be this wrong about a subject.

The vast majority of artists make the overwhelming bulk of their income from touring and especially from merch sales at shows, probably 80-90% or more.

Putting out a record generally only makes the record companies money, the artists get a pittance, unless they're gigantic stars with their own lawyers on retainer.

No, I intentionally glossed over it, because arbitrage for iPhones usually only happens for the first 1-2 months the new model is available (in the US) and then shifts to international arbitrage, selling new models where they aren't yet available. And Apple has gotten a lot better at ramping up production to eliminate this.

Apple has been getting better at managing their artificial shortages.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[Anonymous Coward]

What if two people want to buy your extra ticket? Why should they not be able to compete to offer incentives for you to pick one over the other?

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Why should they?

In these cases, I'll sell to the first person to contact me. The price is already set, there is no negotation needed. It makes it much easier for both parties. I'm a fan too, I don't want to rip off fellow fans.

You libertarian "the free market will solve all problems!" types really need to wake up and realize that not every part of life is a competitive bidding war.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[swb]

Your reasoning seems to be that if they simply sold the tickets at higher prices, there would be no scalpers. If they increased the prices to what the scalpers charge, they wouldn't sell out the venue.

You're really sounding like an economy 101 student right now. Newsflash: Not everything is a classical market. Hell, even Adam Smith realized that not every area is best served by a classical market.

*Of course* if you raise prices close to what scalpers charge now you'd reduce nearly all scalping *and* sell out venues. Venues sell out now *with* ticket prices inflated due to ticket scalping. What makes you think they would stop selling out simply because the seller of the tickets changed from scalpers to the box office?

And the purpose of a reverse auction with prices which drop when demand drops is to reflect that not everyone is willing to pay a high price to see the concert -- if the prices are too high, people won't go and will stay home, so you keep dropping the price until it reaches some floor where demand picks up.

And yes, it is very close to an ideal market, despite your desire to cloud the basic economics with vague concepts like "fandom" and the emotional relationship between fans and musicians. Like it or not the musicians are a business and the entire tour is run as a business. They won't tour for free nor will the venues, roadies, etc, work for free.

And really, "fandom" actually drives demand and demonstrates fans are willing to pay more for a high demand product.

It's blindingly obvious that you have absolutely no idea how touring schedules, venue booking, staffing, transportation or anything related to these subjects actually works in the real world, outside your economics textbooks.

Obviously a global tour mapped out city-by-city in advance has logistical demands where adding extra shows is difficult to impossible, but the problem is they don't usually build in extra concert dates or the flexibility to add them up front. Other touring events, like Broadway shows, often stage weeks of performances in a single city.

Like I said before, this is a *choice* on the part of musicians and their management -- they could build in extra time so that shows could be added when they planned the tour. But the touring schedule is chronologically compressed on purpose, probably because generally speaking pop music stardom is publicity driven and they are recording artists primarily (regardless of where their net income comes from) because touring drives record sales and radio airplay *not* record sales and radio airplay driving ticket sales.

The vast majority of artists make the overwhelming bulk of their income from touring and especially from merch sales at shows, probably 80-90% or more.

All the more reason that it's puzzling that artists would leave their own income on the table and allow scalpers to make the extra money. Why not play more shows at conventional prices or auction the tickets to eliminate the profit margin of scalpers?

There's no way to avoid the economics of this situation, it is a very large business, not merely a service to fans -- you can't eliminate scalping via laws that ban it.

Like I said in my first post, the only other paths to controlling it are much more complex. I think closer auditing of ticket sales by touring management might be the best thing you can do. Make sure that tickets "sold' are actually sold through retail outlets, and not sham sales by managers/promoters directly to scalpers for kickbacks -- this would be tax evasion and some kind of fraud.

Short of that, you are a prisoner of the market -- demand exceeds supply, and people (and mostly fans) are already proven willing and able to buy tickets way above face price.

Re:Ticket sellers should just run dutch auctions.

[KozmoStevnNaut]

All the more reason that it's puzzling that artists would leave their own income on the table and allow scalpers to make the extra money. Why not play more shows at conventional prices or auction the tickets to eliminate the profit margin of scalpers?

It's only puzzling to people who think everything in this world revolves around extracting as much short-term profit as possible from any given situation. These artists are in it for the long run. They don't play music simply for profit, you'll only last a couple of years with that attitude. They play music because they love playing music, and they're trying to make it last for as long as possible. And like I've explained multiple times before, you can't just add shows or build in room for more shows into the touring schedule. You have to account for available venue, staff, your own crew and a whole host of other money and time sinks.

That is the major flaw in your thinking. You cannot think outside your market paradigm. The relationship between performers, fans, touring, recording and a host of other factors is a hell of a lot more complicated than a simple market model.

Like I've told you a couple of times: We've made it illegal to resell tickets above face value here, and it works. I don't care about your market theories, this is about what works in the real world, not in your textbooks.

"...tickets are sold directly to their fans..."

[turkeydance]

the tickets are already sold to fans of tickets

How do you solve the issue...

[Anonymous Coward]

...of a couple who want to buy seats next to each other?

Re:How do you solve the issue...

[Opportunist]

Have one buy a ticket and have the other one "want to sit next to (id)" when they buy it.

Re:How do you solve the issue...

[taustin]

And when that seat has already sold in the meantime? As well as the next 20 seats down the row? And one of the two people is a minor, say, a 10 year old?

Re:How do you solve the issue...

[dgatwood]

Same thing that they should do for airline seats: Instead of assigning a seat, assign a set of preferences with ranked weighting. For example, sort the following in order of personal preference:

• I wish to have an aisle seat.
• I wish to have a window seat.
• I wish to sit next to my [n] traveling companions.
• I wish to be near the front/back.
• I wish to be in a bulkhead row.
• I wish/do not wish to be in an emergency exit row.

The first one might have a weight of 2,000, the second one might have a weight of 1,000, etc. Additional infinte badness weights would be given for things like children traveling with parents to ensure that they are never split up or placed in an emergency exit row if they do not qualify. Then, about an hour before the flight, you go through and place people based on those weights, giving priority (in cases of conflicts between equal weights) to the person who bought the ticket first, and you assign seats to everyone that maximizes everyone's experience as much as possible.

Obviously with something like a concert venue, the options would be different, and the timing would be different, but you might have things like:

• I prefer an aisle seat
• I require accommodations (handicapped access)
• I wish to be next to other people in my group
• I prefer section [foo]
• I want to be close to the stage
• I want to be in the front/back row of my section

And you charge different amounts of money for some of those options, obviously. But in some circumstances, you could offer to bump people up to a nicer section if the front isn't full or whatever, and you could rearrange people within the section almost arbitrarily up until you assign them a seat a couple of days prior to the event. Additionally, by requiring the participants to come back to the event website to get an actual seat assignment, scalping becomes much less practical.

Re: How do you solve the issue...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or just ask for a name when selling tickets, print it on the ticket, and make clear that entry is refused without a valid ID matching the name

Re: How do you solve the issue...

[dgatwood]

That brings a whole new set of problems, like people buying no-refund tickets being unable to even give them to their friends if they realize that they can't make it to the show for whatever reason... not to mention all the empty seats that make the concert seem unpopular, thus reducing demand for future shows.

Re:How do you solve the issue...

[RockDoctor]

You missed the most imprtant safety-related seating metric :
I wish to face in / against the direction of travel.

Having taken a number of hard landings and violent turbulence in various helicopters over the years, I can assure you that you get thrown about far less in a rear-facing seat. (Except for those rare occasions when the aircraft is flying backwards, which the pilots only do at taxiing speed anyway, on account of having to look in their mirrors while doing it.)

Take a cue from airline tickets

[Anonymous Coward]

And require a name for each ticket then require IDs at the door. Seems easy enough.

Re:Take a cue from airline tickets

[ShanghaiBill]

And require a name for each ticket then require IDs at the door. Seems easy enough.

Because it takes 30 minutes to board 100 passengers. Go luck doing that with a 50,000 seat stadium.

Re:Take a cue from airline tickets

[taustin]

It does, but not because they're checking tickets. Stadiums have much better flow for foot traffic, enforced by fire marshals who think they are God (and are correct). They have to check the ticket anyway, it's a small matter to check an ID at the same time. You do need people walking the line reminding everyone of that, and pre-checking that everyone has both. I've seen that done at concerts - and at airports with boarding passes and passports.

The biggest obstacles is that the people who would have to implement won't. They have too much invested in the current system of scalping.

I'm so glad I despise pretty much all popular entertainment.

Horrible title!

[mmell]

Ticketmaster broke the box office. "Well, it's a policy that ensures a healthy mix of the rich and the ignorant, sir." - Waylon Smithers

Before Ticketmaster, I really didn't have too much difficulty getting tickets to shows - I saw Yes, Jethro Tull, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin and quite a few others in concert. Cost me around $30-$50 a pop (in 1976 dollars). With Ticketmaster, prices almost immediately doubled - and have continued to rise at a rate significantly higher than inflation could ever explain, that is when the show I want to see hasn't already been "Sold Out" to scalpers.

I guess that's why we nerds invented Pirate Bay, TOR and BitTorrent. Really, I'm too old for the concert scene anyhow. Wine, women and song got to be too much for me, so I gave up singing!

Re:Horrible title!

[TheSync]

With Ticketmaster, prices almost immediately doubled - and have continued to rise at a rate significantly higher than inflation could ever explain,

Ticketmaster pays venues lock-in fees to reduce their risks. The extra money for tickets due to the introduction of Ticketmaster means more venues are able to survive.

The recent run-up in ticket prices, however, is all about Internet music piracy. Big artists can not make much money from recordings due to piracy, so instead they make money from touring.

Re:Horrible title!

[darkitecture]

Cost me around $30-$50 a pop (in 1976 dollars). With Ticketmaster, prices almost immediately doubled - and have continued to rise at a rate significantly higher than inflation could ever explain

Inflation calculator says $30-$50 in 1976 dollars is $126-$210 dollars now. Tickets for Guns n' Roses current tour range from $155 to $280 for front row pit (standing area directly in front of the stage) tickets. Pretty sure inflation explains most, if not all of that. Ticketing middlemen suck for sure and they add their cut to the top of the pile, but inflation plays a much bigger role than you're leading us to believe.

Re:Horrible title!

[sjames]

Big artists have NEVER made any money from recordings.

Re:Horrible title!

[TheSync]

Then why has Paul McCartney made $15 million in royalties for "Wonderful Christmastime"?

Re:Horrible title!

[sjames]

OK, so one of the biggest performers of all time managed to get some royalties from one of his songs that managed to get on the must play at Christmas list.

And he's still getting royalties on it in spite of internet music piracy.

Ticketmaster are no better than the scalpers

[Anonymous Coward]

Ticketmaster don't provide anything of value anyway.

I work for an independant theatre in the UK. Some artist's agents (not all) insist that we allocate a percentage of our seating for ticketmaster. I can only assume that their agents receive some back hander from this because it certainly doesn't benefit the fans.

An example:

We have an artist whom we know will sell out, and we could sell every seat through our box office. A customer wants to book two tickets.

Booked through us:
Face value of the tickets: £28.50 each
Booking fee £2.50 (flat fee, not per ticket, goes towards printing and postage costs)
Total: £59.50

Booked through ticketmaster:
Face value: £28.50 each
Service charge: £3 per ticket (for what?)
Postage: £2.95
Total: £65.95

By booking through ticketmaster the customer has paid £6.45 more and has received nothing more than if they'd booked through us, and we would have sold every seat (approx 1300 of them) without ticketmaster's help. Ticketmaster are pointless.

I would rather have "shotgun-wielding FBI agents"

[Anonymous Coward]

than axe-wielding BSA (business software alliance) agents that I had at my last two employers. The first was because of AutoCAD and the second because of Windows. That was a scary experience having people with axes screaming at front-line office employees. We since then decided to not allow any Microsoft software to be used in our company. Microsoft's BSA attack was damn scary.

Re: I would rather have "shotgun-wielding FBI agen

[Anonymous Coward]

The BSA showed up where I work with axes and kicked down a couple of doors. Since we make Xbox games, apparently we had to agree to that. They scared the hell out of us.

This is the failure of a non-free market

[Anonymous Coward]

When you let prices fluctuate based on market demand and there is no artificial monopoly those fans who want to go will pay the market rate. It's that simple. We should not be utilizing violence and coercion (passing laws) for the "sake of fans". Utilizing violence on peaceful people (in this case those who operate bots) is silly and immoral. Particularly when the entities whom have this problem could implement systems to curtail the problem without the use of government, violence, or coercion (threat of violence/theft).

http://www.shiresociety.com/ Migration of liberty minded people to the free state: New Hampshire (or it will be, once we have enough people here, we're already hit 20,000 participants, have elected numerous reps, and won various supreme court cases)
http://www.freekeene.com/ Liberty oriented news covering New Hampshire and in particular the migration of activists from around the US and world to NH.

Anti-scalping laws are total bullshit

[Applehu Akbar]

Their argument is that if ticket resale were allowed, "speculators" would buy up all the tickets to games and concerts and sell them off at exorbitant prices.

Here in Arizona, ticket resale for any event from a string quartet to the Super Bowl has been legal for years, and I have not heard of a single case of market distortion caused by ticket hoarding for resale. There are even special resale areas near stadiums where ticket resellers gather.

Given this open market situation, no reseller wants to take on the risk of monopolizing blocks of event tickets that they may suddenly find they can't sell. Rather than trying to be better at judging the market than the event promoters themselves, they make lesser but certain money on the brokerage spread, providing a resale market for people who cannot make use of a purchased ticket when their plans change.
http://cronkitenewsonline.com/...

Arizonans wish we had jurisdiction to provide a resale market for all those non-refundable airline tickets that people have to throw away when something comes up and they can't make a flight. Airlines would be able to sell non-refundable flights without needing a tribunal to read doctor's notes and listen to endless sob stories. AT the same time, passengers would be able to recoup part of their loss for a foregone flight. Can we get the new DOT to take another look at this idea?

In-Person Purchasing

[jIyajbe]

If a specific venue wants to reduce the problem of ticket bots, they could simply have ticket purchases to be at the box office only. After all, if you are physically going to the show, you are physically capable of going there to buy tickets.

Edge cases: the venue is not in your current city; you have a physical limitation that greatly increases the inconvenience of going there to get the tickets (e.g., in a wheelchair); I'm sure people can think of others. Possible solution? For these cases, purchase over the phone.

(Note that the added fees that Ticketmaster and their ilk charges would disappear. ("Convenience fee" my ass))

What obvious problem with this idea did I miss, thus proving that I am an idiot?

Re:In-Person Purchasing

[Lehk228]

part of the convenience fee goes to the venue, it's basically ticketmaster taking the flak for higher prices in exchange for some of the profit (so a venue might get $42.50 for a $40 ticket with a $5 fee)

Re: I would rather have "shotgun-wielding FBI agen

[ChrisMaple]

This is why concealed carry is a good thing.

It's economics, stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

The prices of tickets are, sadly, too low. Performers don't want to look like the bad guys, and therein a second-hand market is born. It's economics. Organisers should target a price at which one ticket remains unsold and be done with it.

Last time I was mildly interested in seeing a major band in my city the show sold out in less than 5 minutes. Yay.

ticket Lotty

[Joe_Dragon]

ticket Lotty

Too bad

[buss_error]

There's not many companies I hate worse than AT&T and Sony, but there is one. Ticketmaster.

They're breaking themselves

[Waccoon]

I know this may be a bit off topic, but idiotic games are just part for the course.

I wanted to buy tickets to see Steve Martin at Boston Symphony Hall a few years back, and visited the TicketMaster web site. I wasn't surprised to find I had an offer for a front-row seat, since I was very early and this wasn't exactly AC/DC or some massively popular band. However, the web site insisted I needed to buy the tickets within 10 minutes, or I'd most likely lose my seats to another buyer. I messed around for a bit to see what the rates were for other seats, and sure enough, once the 10 minute timer was up, the front-row seats were no longer available and I was offered a new selection a few rows back. Rinse and repeat a few times, and I soon found myself in the middle of the venue, with all the front row seats having sold out, and the site urging me to buy RIGHT NOW before I risk losing out and every seat has been sold. No matter what I did, the web site wouldn't give me a decent seat again.

I knew very well the seats weren't selling out, so I simply cleared my web browser cookies, and... found myself in the front row again.

Another lovely bonus is how they offered to mail me the tickets for free, but they would charge (if I remember correctly) a $17 convenience fee for electronic tickets I could print myself. They employ e-book logic, apparently.

This type of bologna is why I stopped going to major concerts entirely. Also, it was surprisingly fun to visit a local race track (Seekonk Speedway in MA) for a mere $20, rather than one of the regional NASCAR races. Small shows may not have as much spectacle, but they're still lots of fun and you don't have to put up with all this ticket gouging nonsense

Why blame bots? Blame Ticketmaster.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's any number of controls they could implement to stop this but they don't. Sounds kind of suspicious huh? The last time I bought tickets I had my finger on the mouse waiting on the countdown timer button, account pre-created with credit card info entered, and I hit "best available seats" as fast as humanly possibly. 2 seconds after tickets went on sale, all I could get was nosebleed tickets. It's time Ticketmaster was investigated; there's no possible way this is normal. I also don;t understand why all major bands don't just sell their tickets directly with their own system with mind numbingly simple controls to make sure tickets are limited to actual fans. I doubt I'll ever bother with the current process again.

Easier solution

[Anonymous Coward]

Sell on the door only.

Easiest solution

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Make it illegal to profit from tickets, by mandating that tickets may only be sold at face value or below. This also encourages possible ticket buyers to report scalpers.

Of course, it also requires a population that's not likely to just think "screw everyone else, I'm getting my ticket!", which may be problematic in the US.

Re:Easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe there's enough of a public interest in this to warrant law enforcement.

Besides, both parties are usually happy about the arrangement. The buyer wants tickets, the scalper has them at a price the buyer is willing to pay. There's not much incentive to report scalpers - that'll just make it harder for you to find tickets to the next show.

Re:Easiest solution

[KozmoStevnNaut]

Scalpers only make it "easier" to find tickets if you're way late to the party and only find out about the show at the last minute.

And the scalpers are actually making it harder to buy tickets late, from an official source, as they buy up large amounts of ticket to sell for ridiculous profits. They're creating an artificial shortage.

Re:Easiest solution

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not an artificial shortage. The same quantity of tickets are available. The only difference is who's selling them.

And the price of course, but if that's what people are willing to pay...

Re:Easiest solution

[KozmoStevnNaut]

but if that's what people are willing to pay...

The scalpers should be rewarded for their greed?

this is communism

[Anonymous Coward]

If speculation in theater tickets is illegal, why isn't specualtion in stocks? Making speculation illegal really is a key feature of communism. What about speculation in computers? Why isn't it illegal for me to buy a computer cheap on eBay and then offer to sell it on Amazon for more? Oh, it all depends on who you are, whether your product may be speculated. Now I understand.

Ticketbastards

[Sir Holo]

Ticketbastards.

They have exclusive contracts with so many venues that an artist cannot find a place to perform that does not have a "Ticketmaster-only" contract for shows. Ticketbastards run an obscene, monopolistic racket.