Recent comments in /f/explainlikeimfive

AstralDragon1979 t1_je3t3c9 wrote

Ticketmaster handles all of the irritation-causing aspects of the ticket purchasing and allocation process, serving as a scapegoat or punching bag for the public to hate while the artists come away clean from the bad PR. Taylor Swift doesn’t want to sell concert tickets directly to her fans because inevitably many of them will be disappointed when, for example, the stadium sells out within 0.3 seconds of starting the sale, or when logistical issues arise. When things go wrong, she will be blamed. Instead, artists prefer that Ticketmaster be assigned the “bad cop” role of handling all that stuff, and the artists get to pretend they have nothing to do with the concert-goers bad purchasing experience or disappointment.

9

explainlikeimfive-ModTeam t1_je3skui wrote

Please read this entire message


Your comment has been removed for the following reason(s):

  • Top level comments (i.e. comments that are direct replies to the main thread) are reserved for explanations to the OP or follow up on topic questions (Rule 3).

Joke-only comments, while allowed elsewhere in the thread, may not exist at the top level.


If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe it was removed erroneously, explain why using this form and we will review your submission.

1

AlanMorlock t1_je3rs66 wrote

None of which would work if they hadn't been allowed to vertically integrate and take over the ticketing for essentially every venue over a certain size. There's not another game in town.

10

OneNoteToRead t1_je3rpr4 wrote

It’s a popular game engine developed by Epic. Lots of AAA games use it as it’s quite sophisticated and powerful. It has a lot of features and incredible realism out of box; it’s capable of close to state of the art photo realism.

But if you play enough of these AAA games you’ll begin to notice the similarities in Unreal based games.

8

mcimolin t1_je3rm4x wrote

Most people have covered the equity part, but not the "buying things with equity" part.

Equity is how much your home is valued at minus how much you still owe for it. Once you reach a certain amount of equity, or certain amount of house you own vs the bank owns, the bank is then willing to loan you money against that equity (Home Equity Line of Credit or HELOC). These types of loans tend to have a significantly lower interest rate than traditional loans. The other thing you can do is leverage the equity in your house towards a second mortgage on a seperate property. This let's you have a second rental property or similar, again, at often a lower interest rate.

2

W_HoHatHenHereHy t1_je3r4w2 wrote

People have missed one more important factor, live nation also represents and manages many artists. So, they rep the artists, to perform in venues they control, using a service they own to sell tickets to those shows.

32

Arianity t1_je3qa5t wrote

>Could really big acts enact a vendetta against Ticketmaster, and insist on playing (for example) in nothing but outdoor, Woodstock-like venues?

Groups like Pearljam have tried exactly that, and failed. And it really hurt the band's career. You would need many acts to work together (and also do so in a way that doesn't fall under anti-trust action of their own). That sort of collective action is very difficult, especially given the potential risk that it fails, or retaliation from Ticketmaster.

Ticketmaster has something like an ~85% market share. They're really, really big.

38

WeDriftEternal t1_je3q9fe wrote

There's not necessarily a good alternative, but thats not really whats at the heart of the situation here, it more has to do with how the deals are made and big time artists juice their deals and ticketmaster eats the shit for it. Not that ticketmaster isn't a piece of shit and scam, they are, but the artists are not innocent, nor are they ignorant of whats happening, either, they are happily complicent (again except Robert Smith)

2

jellicenthero t1_je3q8ii wrote

7

AlanMorlock t1_je3pkzj wrote

12

ScholarImpossible121 t1_je3p5ar wrote

Not a US view, but it is similar overseas. In my country there are 2 main ticketing companies (of which Ticketmaster is one) and large stadiums are mostly owned by by state governments.

The state governments then sell exclusive supply rights to one of the two ticketing companies. The venue receives a share of the fees charged by the ticketing company.

You also have the ticketing companies owning the companies that are acting as promoters, meaning that 3 of the 4 main parties are financially benefitting from the arrangement.

Another point is that the band can use the ticketing company and promoter as a shield against their ticket prices. The band/promoter (its the promoter who I assume is working on instructions from the band) hold tickets back from the general public sale and then sell on the resale market to be able to take advantage of the higher price people are willing to pay while also being able to keep the face value of the ticket down.

Also, setting up said company would require a huge investment and logistical overlay and probably isn't worth the hassle to a band for a marginal increase in overall revenue. This is similar to the argument of employees and unions.

11

WeDriftEternal t1_je3oy3x wrote

You're missing a big part. Most acts go with ticketmaster because they make more money with them, than any alternative, especially for big acts, particularly big acts.

Ticketmaster takes the hit and shit, and the artist appears clean, but anyone who knows the business is laughing because the artist specifically is doing it to make more money and just pretending otherwise. Robert Smith of the Cure though is fucking pissed, they lied to him it appears

40

urlang t1_je3otpr wrote

Ticketmaster is vertically integrated. They not only act as a ticket vendor but they also control all the venues. Truly all of the venues that are suitable for big names to perform at. Check the John Oliver video on this.

22