Ticketmaster to Start Online Ticket Auction 390
Jason1729 writes "According to the NY Times, ticketmaster is going to begin auctioning off the best tickets to events online. They claim it's to eliminate scalping, but in truth it guarantees every seat will be scalped for the highest price with all the money going to ticketmaster. It also eliminates the possibility of getting a decent seat by waiting in line or being lucky."
Welcome news! (Score:5, Interesting)
When was the last time you have been to a major ticketed event where Ticketmaster didn't control everything? Ticketmaster is the primary ticket seller for 27 of the 30 NHL teams and 28 of 30 NBA teams. An anti-trust case has been brought against them in the past, but it was unsuccessful. Ticketmaster has even been accused of signing you up for services you never ordered [entertainm...rdscam.com].
The end-user has really very little choice in matters like this, aside from not going to ticketed events.
September 1, 2003? (Score:2, Interesting)
1. cut-out middle-man (e-bay)
2. take a percentage of a premium for tickets
3. profit
no ??? needed
It's as simple as supply and demand... the basis of our whole economy. It's a function of a free market and with the internet as a huge enabler, I wouldn't be surprised to see more goods and services sold this way. Just look at how popular sites like ebay, ubid, etc. are. This move attempts to cut out the middle-man and allows ticketmaster (along with the event operators) to reap in even more profits. The only person who gets screwed is the average consumer who can't justify paying increasingly expensive ticket prices. Ticketmaster has nothing to lose by doing this, and only a lot more profit to gain. It's a brilliant business move and one of the side effects of capitalism.
But did it happened?
Re:Capitalism in action (Score:2, Interesting)
Companies like Ticketmaster are the reason I look for small, local concerts who handle their own tickets. You are much more likely to get a great seat. At Ticketmaster, you are likely to pay through the nose just for the privilege of attending.
Re:Time to route around the damage... (Score:2, Interesting)
Going to? (Score:4, Interesting)
might be an improvement really (Score:3, Interesting)
What does worry me is that they will try to game the system. With anonymous bidding run by ticketmaster it would be pretty easy for ticketmaster to bid on its own tickets to boost the price, then if they accidentally win just award the ticket to whatever real bidder bid the highest.
If they did that, would it actually be illegal? Otherwise, it seems like something they almost should do to boost profits. They are beholden to their shareholders after all.
Capitalism is a real system (Score:2, Interesting)
This is already in place (and not a big deal)! (Score:5, Interesting)
In any case, their auctions are not replacing their current ticket selling system, it is just a way for them to make some extra money, and people to be able to score a few last minute tickets at prices that they would be paying scalpers anyways (so basically it is just a way for ticketmaster to make more money). For certain big-name concerts they apparently hold a few sets of tickets and auction them off after the rest of the tickets have sold out. I regularly get concert updates from ticketmaster and it seems like once every month or so there is one of these auctions (the last few I remember are Roger Waters [ticketmaster.com], Red Hot Chili Peppers, Madonna...), and they have rarely been of any interest to me... for one thing, these are the kinds of concerts which often have face value prices of $100+ to begin with.
I think most everyone here agrees that ticketmaster has way too much of a monopoly over ticket sales, and their fees are ridiculous. But this whole auction thing is nothing new, and it just moves some money from money-grubbing scalpers to money-grubbing ticketmaster executives, and hardly changes anything. The fact that nobody here seemed to notice that this auction thing has already been going on for some time pretty much proves my point.
Ticketmaster shooting themselves in the foot? (Score:5, Interesting)
BUT Ticketmaster is doing this in an auction format. Something that scalpers already do on eBay. Couldn't it be possible that the bands just avoid Ticketmaster's probably 40% (I'd think it would be even more) comission and just put them on eBay themselves for a substantially reduced cost?
I'd imagine that it wouldn't be that difficult for eBay to implement a system just for concerts. I mean, I imagine that most of Ticketmaster's business is online anyways, eBay is a lot more popular and could easily promote and develop something for tickets.
I mean, the only benefit I can see Ticketmaster has over a tickets.ebay.com type setup would be the physical presence at a few locations... but I believe they hire a different company for that (at the venue). How hard would it be for companies that already sell Ticketmaster tickets to create a business account on ebay to purchase set-priced tickets for customers and print them right there?
Re:Capitalism in action (Score:3, Interesting)
And if there are people willing to pay that price, why shouldn't they be sold the tickets? That's how capitalism works - whoever is willing to pay the most gets the goods. The price is determined by how high it can be and still have everything sold. It sounds like an auction is the perfect way to achieve that.
If they charge too much, they'll have tickets left over, which is a waste, so they don't want to do that. If all the tickets are sold then, by definition, they aren't charging too much. More than you can afford does not equate with too much.
Re:Sounds like the free market. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Waiting in line? (Score:4, Interesting)
Interestingly, many venues for which Ticketmaster sells tickets are public property, bought for some rich bigwigs by the taxpayers. Case in point in is "US Cellular Field" in Chicago. Paid for by the taxpayers, but no taxpayer could afford World Series tickets last year.
Your government at work for you, as always.
cool place to work (Score:1, Interesting)
EXCELENT Move!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
Please note that the above is the case even when you include scalpers in the equation. Why? Because in that case you'll have "x" seats scalped, and "y" seats unscalped, so at the same time "a" and "b": "a" for the "x" seats and "b" for the "y" seats. Only at the instant the show is beginning and the doors are closing the scalpers' prices drop to the middle point to fill the remaining few seats.
So, by having the seats auctioneed way before the show, you solve almost all of the above problems, since the seat price will approach the best it can the ideal offer/demand equilibrium point. Of course this won't be always perfect, but even so, it will be better than what we have today.
Now, I only wish movie theatres start doing this too. If you wish to see the movie the day it's launched, it's just that you pay a premium, with the added bonus of no queues. And if you're price concious with a very limited budget, you can simply wait until the price to drop enough to reach your price point. And in all of this the theatre owners would guarantee many more full houses compared to what happens today, thus more profit, what would in time prompt more theatres to open, thus dropping the prices again. Everyone wins.
Many times (not always, of course) a free market approach is the way to go. This one is a clear example of such a case.
Re:Its Bull! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Capitalism in action (Score:2, Interesting)
Because in many cases the band would like to actually get their fans at the show. They don't choose Ticketmaster -- they simply have to use them. It's the simple definition of a monopoly and one that's long past due to be busted up six ways from Sunday.
There are a lot of bands that, I'm sure, would like to be able to play smaller shows where the audience can actually see them, but because of the warping of the economics of Ticketmaster they have to play only huge, expensive shows spaced few and far between. I've watched in dismay as the concert circuit has become bifrucated into two spheres -- a. gigantic, expensive shows largely by one-hit-wonder supermegasmash bands or tired old farts, and b. little tiny club tours by bands that just barely eke out an existence. Between RIAA and Ticketmaster the actual music industry is dying.
Re:If you cant beat them, you have too much ethics (Score:3, Interesting)
So now Ticketmaster is providing you a service whereby you don't have to stand in line to get the ticket you want.
Of course, the greed factor here is you have to buy the tickets ahead of determining whether the venue is going to sell well or not. And if it doesn't sell well, you'll have paid more than what you would have through scalpers.
But at least the scalpers won't be losing (counting their time standing in line for you) money on overhyped events.
Remember, in Capitalist United States, what's illegal for people to do, is OK for a monopoly corporation to do.
It's not all pessimism... (Score:2, Interesting)
- You won't have to wait 3 days in line for front row tickets.
I can finally get good tickets! (Score:3, Interesting)
No bias there at all. Just to add a little counter-spin, it also means it is possible to get good tickets for a show when you want them. Right now the good tickets are, at best, chaotically distributed, meaning there is no way to ensure you get an optimal seat. Really want a good seat? A band you've been a fan of for ten years? Want to treat your girlfriend to an extravagent night out? Tough.
Why can't you get them? Since the best tickets go for the same price as the good tickets, there is no upside in selling the best tickets. They all go to concert promoters and wind up being given to local celebrities in exchange for a possible sound byte on the local news, or given away on the "Annoying Morning Stupidity" show. How does that benefit the real fans?
Re:Welcome news! (Score:3, Interesting)
Ooh, bad advice. In many countries, US included, that gives $$$ [cornell.edu] straight to the whole system you're trying to avoid.
I'm glad so many retards pay through the nose for the top few hundred acts. It keeps my preferred entertainment cheap. I can see the performances I want in cool smaller venues and not pay anything to the evil overlords.
Re:Welcome news! (Score:3, Interesting)
I haven't looked recently so I don't even know if Best Buy and the other big box stores even sell the "digital audio" type of CD-Rs anymore. I'm sure if you go to Guitar Center or any other low-budget-musician supply store, you'll find them: basically they're designed for use with special "consumer" audio recording devices, which wouldn't use the data discs. (Oh, and they cost a lot more than the computer/data ones, obviously.)
Interestingly enough, actual professional-grade CD-burners (which the industry seems to define as anything with balanced XLR inputs and rackmount ears), normally don't have such silly restrictions, and will happily burn onto whatever type of blank you shove in there.
It would please me to no end if the "Digital Audio" tax was the stake through the heart of the "consumer" CD-R format, since it was a hideous abortion to begin with from day one. Ironically, the only people I ever knew who bought the expensive "Digital Audio" CD-Rs were people in garage bands who had 'consumer' CD-recording equipment that wouldn't use data discs. Meanwhile, a few years later, every guy with a computer and a spare bay in it bought a data drive and started copying CDs.
Hope the industry got their money's worth with that law. Any time I start to feel any moral hiccups while "stealing" music, I just think of what the industry did to DAT and how they tried to do it to CD-R, and go about my merry way.
References:
[1] MUSIC PIRACY AND THE AUDIO HOME RECORDING ACT [duke.edu]. See section The Audio Home Recording Act, specifically: "The SCMS and royalty requirements apply only to digital audio recording devices. Because computers are not digital audio recording devices, they are not required to comply with Serial Copy Management System requirement."
Re:Waiting in line? (Score:2, Interesting)
Ok, you're right. The government should invest in lots of things which create jobs. How about, in addition to building stadiums, they now create whole new companies? Instead of me having to get a small-business loan and collect capital to start a business, I should just go to the government, and have them finance and own my business making gadgets. After all, this worked great in the Soviet Union and China. And after that, let's just eliminate all private ownership of companies, and place them under government ownership. After all, these companies all bring in taxes and create jobs, right? Why mess around with having to get private capital, when we can just let the government finance and own everything? It'll be so much more efficient.
Re:Welcome news! (Score:3, Interesting)
Albertson's / Raley's / Smith's / &c.: These stores generally buy from middle-men, and pay whatever the middle-men ask, then mark it up a bit to make a profit.
Wal-Mart: Wal-Mart tends to use its huge mass of capital and retail power as leverage against suppliers -- "sell it too us cheap, or we won't buy from you." Given the size of Wal-Mart, this is a big threat, especially if Wal-Mart has been buying from the supplier in question long enough for that supplier to hire on enough people to deal with Wal-Mart. Thus, Wal-Mart is using a slightly different model, and can provide lower prices for similar products.
Trader Joe's: Much of what Trader Joe's sells is direct from the producers. They package it up under their own brand, and sell it in their stores.
farmer's markets: This represents direct sale from the producer to the consumer. Farmer's markets tend not to run in the winter, and you have to live in a town that can support one, but they certainly represent an alternative to the grocery store monopoly that you outline above.
ethnic foods: If it is your thing, there are several Asian, Russian, and Mexican grocery stores where I live. These kinds of stores tend to be found only in regions with some population density, though it would seem that even that is a relative term, as there are fewer than 125,000 people in our area, and the next major population center is 120 miles away. Much of what they sell is imported. It come directly from the country of origin, or direct from the country of origin to a distributer to the grocery. It really depends upon the store. I would argue that those items that are being directly imported fall outside of the grocery monopoly that you outline above.
So, to get back to my original argument, your analogy is flawed. Not only are there multiple retailers in the field of groceries, they opperate under differing business plans (only a few of which are listed above, in only very sketchy details). I honestly don't understand how that can be considered a monopoly, especially compared to a single organization like TicketMaster. So, while I really don't care if TicketMaster is a monopoly or not, and while I really don't care about auctioning of tickets, your analogy is absurd.
Re:Waiting in line? (Score:1, Interesting)
In Lincoln's own words - freeing the slaves was nothing more than a sociopolitical tool to achieve what Lincoln believed was the correct end result: denying states the ability to secede from a Union that was taxing them into economic oblivion to the benefit of the other states. Yes, most people aren't bright enough (or honest enough) to grasp this single, utter truth. And most people are too lazy (or lack the intellectual honesty) to study things and figure them out: far better to remember snippets of American History - George Washington cut down a cherry tree, Lincoln freed the slaves and FDR won WWII, Kennedy was shot, Nixon lied when he said that he wasn't a crook, Carter farmed peanuts, Clinton was framed and Bush lied - other than that nothing ever happened in Washington.
Got news for ya (even if you don't care) - Lincoln was the worst thing that happened to the Union bar none. Don't like it when your local electees blow all of your taxes on some stadium for millionaires playing for billionaires? Thank Lincoln. Feel a little shafted when your taxes were sucked into that hole in the ground in Boston that went grossly over budget and still leaks? Thank Lincoln. Billions of dollars for bridges in Alaska? $100,000 for the Punxsatawney Weather Discovery Center Museum? Lincoln's entire fiscal attitude was that taxing and spending was a good thing.