Government enquiry into ticket touts - send them your views

[scarletmist]

The Government is carrying out an Independent review to discover the effectiveness of consumer protection measures in the online ticketing marketplace. The Review will also consider how well the consumer is being protected by existing legislation.  The review seeks to gather information on the operation of the secondary ticket market and to understand how the interaction with the primary market affects the availability,pricing and fair trading of valid tickets.

They are especially keen to look at the balance between profiteering by touts and the reasonableness of non-transferable tickets, and the use of automatic ‘bots’ by touts. Specific questions that they want answered include:-

• What is the range of perceived impacts, both positive and negative, for events and event organisers of the secondary market?
• What views do consumers express on the effectiveness of existing/new transparency measures in providing clearly understood choices and terms?
• What are the prices, costs, charges and commissions associated with tickets on the primary and secondary markets?
• Personal experiences of consumer protection measures when buying and selling tickets (whether or not successful).
• How well terms and conditions of sale, their enforcement and redress mechanisms are operating (e.g. replacement/returns/refunds)

Scarlet Mist will be responding to this consultation, but we would encourage users and gig-goers to give the government their views.

You need to reply by 20th November 2015 to they have set they have up for this purpose: ticketing@culture.gov.uk

As an alternative, you may submit written evidence by post to:
Ian Jenkins
Call for Evidence co-ordinator
Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)
100 Parliament Street
LONDON
SW1A 2BQ

Further information and the full Consultation papers are at

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-consumer-protection-measures-applying-to-ticket-resale-call-for-evidence

 

[LondonTom]

Something hopefully most of us gig/festival goers get behind, instead of just complaining about the problem!

Edited October 18, 2015 by LondonTom

[t8yman]

Following the announcement of Adele's first tour in 4 years, I had numerous family members hassling me to "get them tickets" as if I have some kind of magic ability to get tickets, when all I do is what they could do - be online when they go on sale! Anyway, back on topic - Adele's "people" have made it very clear they "will not tolerate" people buying tickets to resell, and that they look unfavourably on touts and scalpers.

Her ticketing "partner"?

Ticketmaster - one of the biggest offenders in the industry. Getmein is simply legalised scalping, and is owned - as we all know, by ticketmaster.

She is one of the wealthiest people in music at the moment, she could easily find an almost tout proof (i know thats a bit of an exaggeration) way of selling a handful of dates. Its just lipservice.

[russycarps]

1 hour ago, t8yman said:

Following the announcement of Adele's first tour in 4 years, I had numerous family members hassling me to "get them tickets" as if I have some kind of magic ability to get tickets, when all I do is what they could do - be online when they go on sale! Anyway, back on topic - Adele's "people" have made it very clear they "will not tolerate" people buying tickets to resell, and that they look unfavourably on touts and scalpers.

Her ticketing "partner"?

Ticketmaster - one of the biggest offenders in the industry. Getmein is simply legalised scalping, and is owned - as we all know, by ticketmaster.

She is one of the wealthiest people in music at the moment, she could easily find an almost tout proof (i know thats a bit of an exaggeration) way of selling a handful of dates. Its just lipservice.

 

radiohead did it when I saw them at the o2. She only cares about the £££, I doubt she gives a shiney shite about the poor saps getting ripped off.

 

 

 

[eFestivals]

it's dead easy to beat the touts.

DON'T FECKIN' BUY FROM THEM!!!

[eFestivals]

19 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

but there'll always be people with enough money, and who couldn't give a shit who they buy their tickets from.

The process is scandalous. The people selling tickets, have probably already decided how many they'll be 'saving' for their secondary outlet.

But their 'scandal' can only work if people play the game, making the buyers - any buyer - as much of a part of the scandal.

From the many times this subject has come round here previously, it's clear that almost everyone who buys a ticket from a tout absolves themselves from being a part of the problem, instead choosing to regard their own dealings with touts as somehow more justified than other people's.

 

[zero000]

5 hours ago, eFestivals said:

it's dead easy to beat the touts.

DON'T FECKIN' BUY FROM THEM!!!

Unless it's for face value or less.

[GlastoSimon]

6 hours ago, russycarps said:

 

radiohead did it when I saw them at the o2. She only cares about the £££, I doubt she gives a shiney shite about the poor saps getting ripped off.

In fairness to U2 earlier this month, they had a ticketless system (probably identical to the Radiohead system) which was pain free for the buyer and drastically reduces tout numbers. 

5 hours ago, eFestivals said:

it's dead easy to beat the touts.

DON'T FECKIN' BUY FROM THEM!!!

The thing is, I'm not really sure regular gig goers are the problem, I can't imagine many of them use tout sites - either for moral reasons or because they don't have to. I'd be surprised if many regulars use them anyway. 

I'm certain its the one-gig-a-year, spend anything to get there types who ruin it by using them. The touting sites make a steal from these big gigs. It was the same with Take That's comeback, Coldplay are renowned for attracting touts too. It's difficult to stop these idiots making the touting sites a pretty payday. 

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

I know, I get that. But hoping that the whole population will somehow all agree to not buy from secondary outlets, is not very likely to happen, AND it would still penalise the punters who want to go. There could be regulations to stop it happening... 

So it's OK to do something immoral unless there's a law to stop you?

You've just repeated the tax-avoider's mantra.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, GlastoSimon said:

The thing is, I'm not really sure regular gig goers are the problem

They're certainly a part of the problem. They're as big a part of the problem as anyone else who buys from touts.

And if it was only irregular gig goers who were the problem there'd only be irregular touting, I'd say.

 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

so it's the punters fault that ticket outlets are allowed to screw the punters..?

 

okaaaay

No one is holding a gun to those punters heads. An outlet can only screw the punters because the punters allow themselves to be screwed. One cannot happen without the other.

They are the same thing.

 

[incident]

1 hour ago, tonyblair said:

so it's the punters fault that ticket outlets are allowed to screw the punters..?

 

okaaaay

When that punter has a choice in the matter, then yes, it is.

I've not paid over face value+fees for a concert ticket in over 14 years, and haven't yet missed out because of it. Ticket prices+fees have become disgraceful enough without people adding to the problem by creating the secondary market for touts to exist in.

Every single ticket that you buy at a markup, you're encouraging that tout to keep doing it. End of story. If they were consistently ending up with unsold tickets, or tickets sold at a loss, then they'd stop pretty quickly.

The few times I've not had a ticket in advance, it's just a case of go to the venue, try to get a ticket at face value. You need to accept the fact you might not get in, but if you're prepared to skip the support act, then in my experience about 5 minutes before the main act is due on stage the prices absolutely plummet and you'll be able to get tickets well below face value as the touts try and cut their losses.

[russycarps]

2 hours ago, GlastoSimon said:

In fairness to U2 earlier this month, they had a ticketless system (probably identical to the Radiohead system) which was pain free for the buyer and drastically reduces tout numbers. 

The thing is, I'm not really sure regular gig goers are the problem, I can't imagine many of them use tout sites - either for moral reasons or because they don't have to. I'd be surprised if many regulars use them anyway. 

I'm certain its the one-gig-a-year, spend anything to get there types who ruin it by using them. The touting sites make a steal from these big gigs. It was the same with Take That's comeback, Coldplay are renowned for attracting touts too. It's difficult to stop these idiots making the touting sites a pretty payday. 

Yeah, David Gilmour had a similar system at his recent gigs I believe. The artists can shield the fans from touts if they really want to. But then people still bitch and moan anyway 'but what if I fall ill wah wah wah!' It happens with Glastonbury tickets every year after the resale date

[zero000]

2 hours ago, Scruffylovemonster said:

This still perpetuates the problem. 

I think Incident has summed up my points for me. By picking up tickets for face value or less the touts either aren't making a profit, or are cutting their losses. It does very little to encourage them it's a profitable enterprise.

Secondly I'm referring to old school touting, shady looking blokes outside gigs trying to flog tickets. They are absolutely small fry compared to the massive conglomerates, who have rigged the market in their favour and are shamelessly exploiting fans. They are the real issue here.

[kaosmark2]

I've bought sub face-value a few times, but never from the big online "official" touts. I know the old-school touts outside venues are working together (you can see them talk at discuss pricing at times if you keep your ear out), but it's still much smaller fry.

[russycarps]

the old school touts are absolute scum of the earth. Let's not cloud that fact with romantic, rose tinted memories of something that didnt exist.

 

 

[kaosmark2]

3 minutes ago, russycarps said:

the old school touts are absolute scum of the earth. Let's not cloud that fact with romantic, rose tinted memories of something that didnt exist.

 

 

The idea that they're just shady individuals who buy an dozen tickets and turn up to sell those is flat wrong. It's organised, they're physically aggressive to anyone not in the gang who attempts to sell tickets not via them and Obviously, they're touts. It's the legitimacy and link to the ticketing websites that make the corporate ones Even worse, not the organisation. 

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, russycarps said:

the old school touts are absolute scum of the earth. Let's not cloud that fact with romantic, rose tinted memories of something that didnt exist.

and yet those 'old school' touts are actually doing something for their money, standing in the cold buying spares and selling them on to those in need.

I have much less of a problem with them than I do online touts.

[russycarps]

9 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

The idea that they're just shady individuals who buy an dozen tickets and turn up to sell those is flat wrong. It's organised, they're physically aggressive to anyone not in the gang who attempts to sell tickets not via them and Obviously, they're touts. It's the legitimacy and link to the ticketing websites that make the corporate ones Even worse, not the organisation. 

 

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

and yet those 'old school' touts are actually doing something for their money, standing in the cold buying spares and selling them on to those in need.

I have much less of a problem with them than I do online touts.

I agree the industrial-scale corporate touts are worse, especially because they encourage "ordinary" people to buy up tickets with the sole intention of selling them on for a profit, but I hate the other touts, having experienced the violence first hand. 

 

[eFestivals]

13 minutes ago, russycarps said:

I agree the industrial-scale corporate touts are worse, especially because they encourage "ordinary" people to buy up tickets with the sole intention of selling them on for a profit, but I hate the other touts, having experienced the violence first hand.

I've only ever bought from touts once - on the street outside a venue.

I took the piss out of them, big time.

They did try getting heavy with me, but I just laughed at them - so they were left with the option of getting violent in a public place with loads of witnesses with someone bigger than them, or coming up with another solution.

So in the end they sold me a ticket for face value just to get me to stop fucking up their patter.

Edited December 1, 2015 by eFestivals

[TheGayTent]

Even if you buy a ticket from a tout at face value you are still contributing to the tout's profits...

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Even if you buy a ticket from a tout at face value you are still contributing to the tout's profits...

While you'd certainly be right about that in some circumstances, I don't think that was the case at the particular one-off for-a-new-record-labels-employees show where I bought. I'm pretty sure the only spares for that show had come from the queue.

But I'm not trying to absolve myself from me supporting touting. I know that's the effect my actions had.

[TheGayTent]

That was a general point not aimed at anyone in particular.

[russycarps]

there's loads of people who would pay £50 for a ticket from seetickets or £100 from getmein or whatever without a care in the world. They wouldnt give a shit so long as they get to see the band they want. These sums are microscopic to a lot of people. It's us poor saps who suffer, and since when have we mattered?

If you're rich, you arent going to miss out on gig on principle.

 

 

[eFestivals]

22 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

the punters don't create the market, the ticket outlets do. That's like saying women are the cause of rape, or kids cause paedophilia, or any number of crimes where there's a victim

not true. The punters *ARE* the market.

And no it's not, yo0u're just being utterly ridiculous now.

A buyer cannot successfully operate without a buyer and a buyer cannot successfully operate without a seller. They are 100% co-dependent.