Is Big Business Killing the Concert Experience?

[jonnythan]

He did exactly what he said he did. He wrote a significant essay urging the US to heavily fund and push for the creation of the network that would become the internet. He authored and pushed the bill (now known as the Gore Bill) that was called the most important moment in the history of the internet by one of the internet's founding fathers. He popularized the term information superhighway. Gore was the strongest proponent of funding and pursuing this technology at a time when no one even knew wtf it was.

But anyway. How about that McDonald's coffee case?

 

[westcott]

If you keep going back to Ticketmaster. The closer you get to the concert date more, and more tickets become available. And not just the seats left in the upper deck. Great seats like down in front of the stage. I have waited more then a few times and have done this and ended up with better seats then I would have gotten at 10am the day of sale.

Thanks for the head up but I am not optimisitic. CWP has limited seating that is reserved but I will keep checking.

I guess I am getting old. I remember the good old days when a concert was not hard to get into and the costs were reasonable. Ticketmaster was just entering the picture but the credit card companies were not. It was still fairly easy to get tickets and their were plenty for the average Joe to buy, even if he did have to wait in line for many hours.

It is the block sales to big business before official sales date that really gets my goat!!! A limited reserve seating venue like CWP makes it impossible to buy a ticket.

I have to admit, we have been a beneficiary of the big business tactic. I sent my wife to Barbara Streisand in Atlanta last year and we got the tickets through Amercian Express preferred client services. But, I would rather see the service done away with if it means a more level playing field and less profits for big business. Ticket prices are already out of control and it is ruining the family experience. The same holds for football, baseball, basketball, and any other major sporting event.

Rant over!!!

 

[Jack Hammer]

I don't mind that sponsors get some good seats before the tickets go on sale. They are helping "bring" the show by sponsoring it, they earned the right to have good tickets and do with them what they want.

What is wrong messes things up is that ticket resellers are able to buy huge blocks of tickets before the people who actually want to go to the show can. Then the resellers (modern form of a scalper) jack the prices up. Now a $38 ticket to a show costs $125 or more. It's why normal people are not able to go to a show without spending a small fortune.

I still don't understand how these companies are legally allowed to stay in business. They are performing the same function as scalpers do, which is illegal. They buy tickets to shows solely for the purpose of reselling them at a much higher price??!?

Another downside is it drives prices up overall. People get used to having to pay $100 in order to find a $38 ticket for a crappy seat to a show and events will start to charge $100 for a crappy seat.

Jack

 

[jonnythan]

Scalping is not illegal by itself.

It's generally illegal to attempt to resell a ticket on the premises of an event, but selling it down the block, to a buddy, or over the internet is perfectly legal.

Some (15) states prohibit selling tickets for more than face value.

 

[WmAx]

I don't see anything that should be changed. Yes, it sucks that it is difficult to get the ticket. But this is business/capitalism in effect. It's a good thing! Like any product, the tickets are being sold, re-sold and end up in the hands of the one willing to pay the most. There should be no law preventing this. Someone stated that 15 states prohibit people from selling tickets for more than their face value. That is a rubbish law, if that pertains to selling off of the event premises. But I'm not sure where the laws generally apply. It's your right to do with your property(and if you buy the ticket, it's your property) what you will, whether you want to sell it for $0.01, $1,000,000,000.00, or you want to burn it.

The only times that I can for see government interference as being warranted in a capitalist system is when, if otherwise, in some extraordinary case, some catastrophe may occur directly effecting a substantial percentage of people's well-being/health/safety, in relation to some sort of critical service. I'm just throwing that in as a qualifier. But that is not the case here.

Heck, I would not mind buying a new Corvette for $15,000-$20,000. I bet they cost substantially less (but actual cost does not matter, this is only for theoretical argument) than that to actually manufacture. But why should GM be FORCED to sell me a product at the price that I prefer, when they can get substantially more money?

-Chris

 

[ogewo]

Acoustics is killing my concert experience. Most concerts I've been to have cost me between $30 and $60, but the sound was such that I may not have gone even if it was free.

 

[Jack Hammer]

I'm not against capitalism. I'm against price gouging. People should be able to sell their stuff, in this case tickets, on the open market. What gets at me is when each reseller can come in and buy tickets to an event by the hundreds (or thousands) before they actually go on sale. Causing an event to sell out in about a minute. Then the people who stood in line all night to get tickets cant get them. Then those people have to pay 5x or more face value.

It's been such a problem here (Chicago) that they have recently started setting limits on how many tickets you can get at a time. I heard, not sure if it's true, that there was some legislation being discussed.

Think of it like this. If every one knew there was going to be a gas shortage soon but more gas wouldn't be available until tomorrow at noon. When you go to the pump to buy gas when they open, it's all gone because some company came in and paid off the delivery people to sell 95% of it to them before it made it to the store. They then take that $1.95 a gallon gasoline and start selling it for $50 a gallon. You have to pay the price if you want to drive because they are the only ones with gas for sale.

Again, I'm not against capitalism, just price gouging.

Jack

ps. I'm sure there are plenty of holes in my example, just take it as the general gist of what I'm getting at. I'm not trying to argue with people or debate symantics.

 

[WmAx]

Think of it like this. If every one knew there was going to be a gas shortage soon but more gas wouldn't be available until tomorrow at noon. When you go to the pump to buy gas when they open, it's all gone because some company came in and paid off the delivery people to sell 95% of it to them before it made it to the store. They then take that $1.95 a gallon gasoline and start selling it for $50 a gallon. You have to pay the price if you want to drive because they are the only ones with gas for sale.

The cries of price gouging of tickets should not even be associated with a a critical product/service such as gasoline supply. It seems to me, that by default, a bias can be created in some readers, by the critical nature of this product/service being associated with a consumer optional product such as a concert ticket. In that respect, I consider this a non-fair analogy.

I am not an economic expert. I'm just responding based on my very limited knowledge in this subject. But it seems to me that in fact, if this particular gasoline scenario occurred, it would probably result in warranted regulation. But such a thing seems not probable to occur, as the complexities of pulling this off would be substantial. How would it ever happen? Just a few considerations: Often the large gas station chains are tied directly to the refineries via contract or ownership, and the fuel must end up at the station as the primary point of sale or the contract would be violated and/or the gas station (the distribution point) would lose money. In the case of contract violation, this would eventually be self-corrected via the legal system. In the case of owned stations by refineries, they would be putting their own distribution points (fixed, long term money makers) at risk to make a 'quick' buck. In either case, it would be temporary, but they could risk putting a major consumer mistrust image up for themselves, causing substantial temporary losses even when the product is available again at the primary distribution points. How does the company that purchased all of the available gas from a substantial number(enough to cause substantial shortage at normal distribution points) of points move it? You have to have distribution points. That would be the gas stations. It seems another case where the system is successfully self-regulating.

In the case of the concert tickets -- they are moving them. Somebody is paying someone, and someone must be making money, or the practice would not continue. Since this is private property/service being offered, the sellers and buyer and re-sellers have the right to charge whatever amount that they desire. It's not likely they will ask for more than they expect to receive. Why should these private owners/companies be required to sell their product/service at a price that you (or me) would prefer? If they so desire, they have the right to never sell the tickets.

The only times I am against price/policy of a private company to the point where I would approve forcible interference, is when it fits my previous qualifier concerning critical service/product, or the business relies upon the government to force their business model to work/perpetuate against consumer will. At this point, the government(which is supposed to be of the people, for the people) is counter-acting it's own purpose, and is to me, a vile act.

-Chris

 

[Jack Hammer]

...ps. I'm sure there are plenty of holes in my example, just take it as the general gist of what I'm getting at. I'm not trying to argue with people or debate symantics.

The gas example was far from apples to apples. see my quote above about trying to get the general gist of what I meant.

This is one example of what I'm referring to: Cubs selling tickets.

Do a search for Chicago ticket brokers and you'll see what I'm actually talking about. Capitalism is buying a product and reselling at a profit. Price gouging is taking capitalism to an ultra-extreme. Buying an item out at wholesale and then cornering the market and reselling it for 50x msrp is not how capitalism should work. People complain all day about Monster and Bose overcharging for their products and they aren't even in the same league as what I'm talking about.

Jack

 

[WmAx]

Buying an item out at wholesale and then cornering the market and reselling it for 50x msrp is not how capitalism should work. People complain all day about Monster and Bose overcharging for their products and they aren't even in the same league as what I'm talking about.

Jack

I read the article. Sounds like they are selling their (they own it) product/service for the most they can get. Personally, I would do the same. If someone wanted to give me $100.00 for X item, and another was only willing to give me $10.00 for X item; guess the amount at which I would sell. If not enough were buying at the higher amount, I (they) would be forced to sell at the lower amount to move the product/service.

All I see so far are complaints about not being able to see one's favorite band/team/whatever in person because the price ends up too high.


-Chris

 

[Jack Hammer]

All I see so far are complaints about not being able to see one's favorite band/team/whatever in person because the price ends up too high.


-Chris

100% there

The tickets for the sold out Police concert here in a few months are selling for ~$3,000+ a seat from the brokers who bought up all the tickets at $54 & $94 ea before the general public could get tickets. I didn't want to go in the first place and it still irritates me.

Jack

 

[westcott]

Steely Dan (my all time favorite band) will be playing there on May 8th(85.00), but I was so turned off by thier last performance in Palm Beach(outdoors), that I'm hesitant to go to the Seminole venue, is it completely indoors? Or partial?

Sorry for the delayed response. I am not getting instant mesaging from this thread for some reason.

It is all open air with some reserved seating that is covered with a pavillion roof but no walls. It does have some air conditioning and it is not to bad if you can get a seat there.

I saw Jethro Tull's 25th aniversary tour there on the right wing, 14 rows back. Very enjoyable but it was not the middle of summer.

I think we had winter on a Thursday last year!!!!


WmAx,

I think you are missing the point. These businesses are buying tickets before the tickets are made available to the general public then charging whatever they can get for them. They are purchasing large blocks of tickets, as well.

I would buy as many tickets as you would be willing to sell me before they are available to the general public, any day of the week too!!!!

This practice causes an immediate skew of supply and demand. The brokers are creating the short supply and getting top prices because of it.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

This practice causes an immediate skew of supply and demand. The brokers are creating the short supply and getting top prices because of it.

You think ticket brokers reduce supply?

Ticket brokers have exactly ZERO effect on supply. The only way your incorrect claim would be true is if a ticket broker bought 'x' amount of tickets, and only sold a portion of them. If what you say is true and brokers limited supply, the end result would be a concert with a bunch of empty seats. If you're not willing to pay a fair market value for a concert, then dont go to the concert. It sounds like the complainers are a bunch of "Leftists" who have absolutely no comprehension of how supply and demand really works in the marketplace.

Many of the responses are coming from waaaaaay out in 'left' field foul territory.

Yea, it's all the brokers fault

Based on many of the comments, I'm almost expecting somebody to suggest the federal government should subsidize the difference between fair market and the printed face value with my tax dollars.

 

[Jack Hammer]

Unfortunately things in Chicago have a way of getting done in a less than straight forward way many times. I've never seen so many things so constantly crooked as I've seen here. People, politicians, and businesses are costantly getting getting caught for generally crooked ways of doing things here. Crooked in Chicago is business as usual.

I'm not an extremist. I'm not a leftist, rightist, or whateverelsist. I don't expect the government to come in and control free trade, or the ebb and flow of market values, etc. I don't even go to concerts or sporting events very often, and generally when I do, I'm either on someones list or got free tickets.

I think the "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" attitude is pretty sad.

I'm done, Best wishes

Jack

 

[westcott]

You think ticket brokers reduce supply?

Ticket brokers have exactly ZERO effect on supply. The only way your incorrect claim would be true is if a ticket broker bought 'x' amount of tickets, and only sold a portion of them. If what you say is true and brokers limited supply, the end result would be a concert with a bunch of empty seats. If you're not willing to pay a fair market value for a concert, then dont go to the concert. It sounds like the complainers are a bunch of "Leftists" who have absolutely no comprehension of how supply and demand really works in the marketplace.

Many of the responses are coming from waaaaaay out in 'left' field foul territory.

Yea, it's all the brokers fault

Based on many of the comments, I'm almost expecting somebody to suggest the federal government should subsidize the difference between fair market and the printed face value with my tax dollars.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. If big business did not buy up all the tickets ahead of time, they would be sold at the box office for their listed retail price and not for the huge mark up they are getting. They are artifically reducing supply by eliminating access to the general public.

You want to make everyone happy. Stop selling tickets to big business before they are available to the general public. Your reference to political ties is inappropriate and invalid.

 

[stratman]

Well they can just print on the ticket, "price reflected is CPSRP*", like autos have MSRP, that way you can haggle the price with the broker.

*Concert Promoter Suggested Retail Price.

 

[10010011]

Retail prices were reasonable and started around US$90 for pit, $75 for center, left right, and $45 or so for lawn seats.

For RUSH?

I remeber seeing Rush when they were the opening act for Ted Nugent back in like 1978 (back when they were GOOD!). I think I only paid $8 to see both of them.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

If anybody really cared they'd stop selling advance tickets and move to a 'first come, first serve' business model. The acts don't care, they get paid the same anyway.