Ask the (former) ticket scalper.

[Mtgman]

@gaffa

Sorry, but I don’t buy that. I’ve been to too many non-Ticketmaster concerts. Scalpers make people less interested in going to concerts because even the illusion that they could get a decent seat without being a rich asshole has been taken from them.

I’m not sure I understand your comment. The fact that a concert isn’t booked through Ticketmaster doesn’t really matter because there’s still a primary ticketing agent, a venue, and an artist and their interests don’t really change if the agent isn’t ticketmaster. The venue and the artist want a full house first and foremost, and a healthy profit second. So they set the price points accordingly. That’s generally much less than a substantial minority of fans are willing to pay, especially for good tickets, thus the secondary market, operated by scalpers.

@Princhester

However, you engage in a massive excluded middle when you suggest that the only alternative to the current system is upping the price of “all the tickets”.

I’ll freely admit I wasn’t being particularly rigorous with the construction, but I think you misread when you infer I meant raising all prices was the only alternative. A possibility being specifically delineated does not necessarily deny the existence of other choices.

The basic economics still apply. Ticket prices, especially for prime seats, are priced vastly under market c.f. the scalper’s existence. Ticketmaster, and the venues, could make more profit if they raised prices and pocketed the money the scalpers currently make. The reason this doesn’t happen is because the artists, and to a lesser extent the venues, want full houses and value them more than larger sums of income. Thus the artists book the largest venues they can, and set a price point to where they’ll sell a large majority of the tickets. This is a simplification because the venue and the promoter have input into ticket prices too, but the artists have veto power. Generally they don’t bother reviewing the decisions the promoter and venue make as long as there are good crowds. Promoters and venues have to walk the line between setting too high a price point and not selling the seats, or setting them too high and having empty seats and pissing off the artist. Ticketmaster wants to be in the middle of this, so they sell at the price the gestalt of promoter/venue/artist want, even if it is below what the market would bear otherwise. Ticketmaster isn’t dumb though, their recent acquisition of StubHub has put them in a position to benefit from both sides of the market. Initial sales, and their attendant fees, and the aftermarket re-sales commission through StubHub.

As far as other alternatives, there are tons of them. Not allowing re-sale, more tiers of pricing, limits on tickets per entity, reserving prime seats for targeted sales(through a fan club pre-sale or season ticketing are the most common implementations). Pretty much all of these have been/are being used to greater or lesser extents, but scalpers are still with us because that substantial minority of fans drive up the market rate far above what the majority are willing to pay, and get fleeced for it.

Enjoy,
Steven

[Princhester]

You aren’t excluding the middle yet you are. You say that promoters and venues have to walk a line, and your argument depends on this being true, yet they don’t have to walk that line, as you yourself say.

[gaffa]

@Mtgman

I’m not sure I understand your comment. The fact that a concert isn’t booked through Ticketmaster doesn’t really matter because there’s still a primary ticketing agent, a venue, and an artist and their interests don’t really change if the agent isn’t ticketmaster. The venue and the artist want a full house first and foremost, and a healthy profit second. So they set the price points accordingly. That’s generally much less than a substantial minority of fans are willing to pay, especially for good tickets, thus the secondary market, operated by scalpers.I’ll freely admit I wasn’t being particularly rigorous with the construction, but I think you misread when you infer I meant raising all prices was the only alternative. A possibility being specifically delineated does not necessarily deny the existence of other choices.

The artists have another goal, which is to have the biggest fans up front, rather than the ones with the deepest pockets. Admittedly, some big fans may have deep pockets, or may be willing to go into debt to pay scalper prices. But back when there was one or maybe two prices and getting good tickets was the result of being willing to wait in line, you got dedicated fans right up front.

As far as other alternatives, there are tons of them. Not allowing re-sale, more tiers of pricing, limits on tickets per entity, reserving prime seats for targeted sales(through a fan club pre-sale or season ticketing are the most common implementations).

I do like some of these anti-scalper ideas. One that was used by (I think) Def Leopard, was having a pit between the front of the stage and a walkway that you could purchase the opportunity to be in. But when you got to the special ticket line for the pit, one of the bands roadies would quiz you. Only on passing the quiz about the band could you get the wristband to enter the pit. This ensured that their biggest fans were in the area right up front, delivering the enthusiastic audience necessary for a great show.

Pretty much all of these have been/are being used to greater or lesser extents, but scalpers are still with us because that substantial minority of fans drive up the market rate far above what the majority are willing to pay, and get fleeced for it.

No, scalpers are with us because some people have too much money and can throw it around.