4 ms·

Ticketmaster's business model is to take the reputation hit and allow venues and performers to increase fees. This specific move is probably driven by greedy v

Ticketmaster's business model is to take the reputation hit and allow venues and performers to increase fees. This specific move is probably driven by greedy venues. https://stubcrew.com/the-ugly-truth-about-ticketmaster-fees/ https://stubcrew.com/the-ugly-truth-about-ticketmaster-fees/ talks about it more. EDIT: and the downvotes here is probably evidence that they succeeded

cletus 7y ago
Not sure why you're getting downvoted (unfortunately people seem to use this as a proxy for "I disagree with you" or, worse, "you contradict my position"; here have an upvote) but you are 100% correct. All those fees Ticketmaster charges, the artist (and venue?) gets a cut off. Ticketmaster is the lightning rod here but everyone is complicit.
Someone1234 7y ago
Agreed, they're one of several "lightning rod" organizations. They exist to deflect hate, while everyone profits. Same thing with academic textbooks. Book publishers are lightning rods, allowing collages/departments/professors to avoid the reputation hit. If you want to know who is responsible for a bad thing just answer one question: Who has the power to fix it? For example performers/venues could use a non-ticketmaster intermediary, and college professors/schools could assign a non-$300 textbook, but neither do because they gain substantially from the arrangement (either financially or in terms of free labor in the textbook example). So if you "hate" ticketmaster or textbook publishers, you're playing right into their game and the problem will never be fixed. You have to pressure actual decision makers, not lightning rods.
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  You can’t fix people, only incentives.
- Teever 7y ago
  > For example performers/venues could use a non-ticketmaster intermediary, It's not so easy. Doing so can lock them out of business with ticketmaster.
- bsder 7y ago
  > If you want to know who is responsible for a bad thing just answer one question: Who has the power to fix it? For example performers/venues could use a non-ticketmaster intermediary Is this actually true? I thought Pearl Jam(?) tried this many moons ago when Ticketmaster was far less powerful and eventually caved in because it was so stupidly difficult to coordinate all the idiots infesting the music event business.
- masonic 7y ago
  Promoters have exclusive deals with ticketing agencies, and venues have exclusive deals with promoters. Groups who choose to avoid them, like ZZ Top did for years, have limited venue options.
mplewis 7y ago
This comment is correct. Here's a Freakonomics Radio investigation into Ticketmaster: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/live-event-ticket-market-screwed/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/live-event-ticket-market-sc...
redis_mlc 7y ago
I think Ticketmaster owns a lot of the venues, and the ones they don't, probably have onerous contractual terms.
fivre 7y ago
The fees aren't my issue with Ticketmaster. I'm well aware of the misdirection they provide. My issue is with every aspect of actually using Ticketmaster. Most competitors have much nicer UX; Ticketmaster is a bunch of legacy cruft held together with duct tape and prayers.

cletus 7y ago

Not sure why you're getting downvoted (unfortunately people seem to use this as a proxy for "I disagree with you" or, worse, "you contradict my position"; here have an upvote) but you are 100% correct. All those fees Ticketmaster charges, the artist (and venue?) gets a cut off. Ticketmaster is the lightning rod here but everyone is complicit.

Someone1234 7y ago

Agreed, they're one of several "lightning rod" organizations. They exist to deflect hate, while everyone profits. Same thing with academic textbooks. Book publishers are lightning rods, allowing collages/departments/professors to avoid the reputation hit. If you want to know who is responsible for a bad thing just answer one question: Who has the power to fix it? For example performers/venues could use a non-ticketmaster intermediary, and college professors/schools could assign a non-$300 textbook, but neither do because they gain substantially from the arrangement (either financially or in terms of free labor in the textbook example). So if you "hate" ticketmaster or textbook publishers, you're playing right into their game and the problem will never be fixed. You have to pressure actual decision makers, not lightning rods.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
You can’t fix people, only incentives.
Teever 7y ago
> For example performers/venues could use a non-ticketmaster intermediary, It's not so easy. Doing so can lock them out of business with ticketmaster.
bsder 7y ago
> If you want to know who is responsible for a bad thing just answer one question: Who has the power to fix it? For example performers/venues could use a non-ticketmaster intermediary Is this actually true? I thought Pearl Jam(?) tried this many moons ago when Ticketmaster was far less powerful and eventually caved in because it was so stupidly difficult to coordinate all the idiots infesting the music event business.
masonic 7y ago
Promoters have exclusive deals with ticketing agencies, and venues have exclusive deals with promoters. Groups who choose to avoid them, like ZZ Top did for years, have limited venue options.

mplewis 7y ago

This comment is correct. Here's a Freakonomics Radio investigation into Ticketmaster: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/live-event-ticket-market-screwed/ https://freakonomics.com/podcast/live-event-ticket-market-sc...

redis_mlc 7y ago

I think Ticketmaster owns a lot of the venues, and the ones they don't, probably have onerous contractual terms.

fivre 7y ago

The fees aren't my issue with Ticketmaster. I'm well aware of the misdirection they provide. My issue is with every aspect of actually using Ticketmaster. Most competitors have much nicer UX; Ticketmaster is a bunch of legacy cruft held together with duct tape and prayers.