One thing that got lost in this is it's not just a federal thing, there are 29 other states that have joined this lawsuit with the DOJ, including states like Texas and Oklahoma. That's over half the state governments in the country. Arizona just passed a "Taylor Swift" law to address some of this stuff. There is a lot to this at a state level, although I know that's a mixed bag too. The Cure tried to limit ticket resellers but had limited success based on various state laws. I know Billie Eilish was trying to sell no-transfer tickets too. But even with that, you play venues even like Kauffman or Sandstone it seems almost everyone there uses Ticketmaster. You can't really escape it. [Reply]
Why is LiveNation/Ticketmaster the bad guy when people pay $500 for a seat that was bought for $100 and the person who originally bought it makes a ton? That's free market.
The entertainment industry should find a way to help resolve this.
It seems that non-transferable tickets could work with todays technology.
Originally Posted by scho63:
Why is LiveNation/Ticketmaster the bad guy when people pay $500 for a seat that was bought for $100 and the person who originally bought it makes a ton? That's free market.
The entertainment industry should find a way to help resolve this.
It seems that non-transferable tickets could work with todays technology.
I think it is a slippery slope.
Show me another outlet outside of Live Nation that provides people with the same choice of seats they do. Even going to the venue directly as tickets go on sale won't get you the choice of seat you can get through Ticketmaster these days.
You could have a point if there were another cometitor on Live Nation's level giving a choice of who you spend your money with, and therefore bringing down prices, but there isn't one. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bowser:
Show me another outlet outside of Live Nation that provides people with the same choice of seats they do. Even going to the venue directly as tickets go on sale won't get you the choice of seat you can get through Ticketmaster these days.
You could have a point if there were another cometitor on Live Nation's level giving a choice of who you spend your money with, and therefore bringing down prices, but there isn't one.
How much blame do the artists and their management deserve for this? [Reply]
Originally Posted by scho63:
Why is LiveNation/Ticketmaster the bad guy when people pay $500 for a seat that was bought for $100 and the person who originally bought it makes a ton? That's free market.
The entertainment industry should find a way to help resolve this.
It seems that non-transferable tickets could work with todays technology.
I think it is a slippery slope.
Maybe you're finally getting it, I'm pretty sure that's the point of this lawsuit. Ticketmaster hasn't shown any interest in resolving this because they get to double dip. We'll have to see. I'm not sure they'll be broken up but this is obviously a play to get them to take their business more seriously.
What caused this isn't what you described. When Taylor Swift's last tour was announced, they didn't even have a "general" sale to the public. Ticketmaster themselves cancelled the public ticket sale a day or two before they even went on sale because of "extraordinarily" high demand. That's why the Swift fans flipped out and caused all this. The tickets never truly went to general sale. Now I'm sure some fans got tickets in a presale but a lot of those tickets ended up with scalpers and bots, LiveNation got dragged in front of Congress for it and pretty much admitted it was because of bots and scalpers. Taylor Swift herself called Ticketmaster out on it. Now some people think Ticketmaster is in on that game. They sell the tickets to scalpers, make a profit, then charge a second massive ticket fee when that scalper sells the ticket to a Swift fan for $1200. Whether they're in on it or not, they get to double dip basically.
Either way, the argument is their power over the music industry allows them to do whatever they want, strongarm venues and ticket resellers, and they have no incentive to figure out solutions for any issues that come up. That's literally the whole point of this. [Reply]
It seems fairly obvious they've done some stuff that shouldn't have been allowed. I'm not convinced they'll receive any more than a slap on the wrist and a "please don't do that" though, which they will promptly find a work around for.
It is interesting watching people get all pissed over ticket prices while continuing to ignore the monopolies within their food supply running wild. Perhaps it's just ignorance, but that doesn't make the entertainment vs food comparison any less comical. [Reply]
