Ticketday: Whats your Internetspeed? Importance?

[Pinhead]

It does if you want eFestivals to be here next year

[gmb1992]

1 minute ago, Pinhead said:

It does if you want eFestivals to be here next year

Ahhhh okay! 

Will do then  

[stuartbert two hats]

10 minutes ago, gmb1992 said:

Does that actually make a difference?

No.  eFestivals make commission on a lot of links, but Glastonmbury sadly, is not one of them.

Why would they pay out affiliate money when they sell out in 30 minutes?

[Pinhead]

Ah, I see. I can't remember but were the ads still switched on during last years sale? I would think that might help attract a little revenue?

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, gmb1992 said:

Does that actually make a difference?

Not for Glasto tickets, unfortunately. It does for most other tickets you might find links for around here.

[FestiZebra]

I will be trying for the same batch of tickets with 3 others in the household under the same wifi, do we think it would be beneficial for me to tether my laptop to a phone 3G signal?

[eFestivals]

28 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Why would they pay out affiliate money when they sell out in 30 minutes?

I've always thought that about all tickets via ticket agents (particular when they're the exclusive agent for that tour), whether they sell out or not. After all, if i put a link on a page or not, if someone wants that ticket they'll go and buy one somewhere. There's no way i'd have believed they'd still be paying commissions now at the time I first started collecting ticket commissions 15-ish years ago.

The reason there's no affiliate money with the Glasto tickets is actually for the different reason of Michael having twisted See Tickets arm over the fees. The boss of See has told me that he's not sure if they make a profit or not on doing them - but that it's somewhere around break even - and that they continue to do them on a sort-of loss-leader basis because it's a fantastic way of reinforcing the See Tickets branding. Via them doing Glasto tickets, they're well-known by just about everyone as a major and legitimate ticket agent.

PS: ticket sale commissions are about 50% of what they were a year ago.

So please do use the links.

Edited October 7, 2016 by eFestivals

[Pinhead]

So, in terms of caring about the sale and therefore the reliability of the system that sells tickets, there could be two schools of thought. Either they don't care about it cos they may be making bugger all from the whole affair anyway, or they do care because a cocked up ticket sale would be negative PR for them rather than the preferred kudos of a successful sale. I'd imagine too that successful ticket sales breaking record times each year would also be good PR for them, which may lead to investment in the overall performance of the system each year.

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, Pinhead said:

So, in terms of caring about the sale and therefore the reliability of the system that sells tickets, there could be two schools of thought. Either they don't care about it cos they may be making bugger all from the whole affair anyway, or they do care because a cocked up ticket sale would be negative PR for them rather than the preferred kudos of a successful sale. I'd imagine too that successful ticket sales breaking record times each year would also be good PR for them, which may lead to investment in the overall performance of the system each year.

They've made a number of technical cock ups thru the years, tho I'd say that needs to be considered alongside the fact that selling tickets is at the cutting edge of of online transaction technologies, because of the occasional massive demand. There's been plenty of stories over the years of other big online sales fucking up, and i don't think See compares particularly badly alongside, especially as they're not (or at least, weren't) part of a massive global ticket-selling corporate.

I'd say from what I know that they're very committed to doing it well. Boss man there won't speak to me now, cos i laughed about that DNS cock-up a few years ago, and also because i didn't contact him to tell him about it (I had my own busy system to manage the demand on at the time, so I don't feel he's being reasonable, but there you go).

And those of us who've been around here for a long time will have seen just how much it's improved over the years, cos that marathon 24+hour sale in 2003(?) isn't anything like happens now..

But I'd guess they're also in a similar position as me with efests, where the benefits from a higher technical spend to manage peak demands start to have less beneficial effects beyond a particular point, with a balance is reached for performance against the cost.

[Pinhead]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Boss man there won't speak to me now, cos i laughed about that DNS cock-up a few years ago

Yeah, for 0% commission on the ticket link click-throughs, all the indirect promotion this site gives them plus your own site under considerable pressure during ticket sale, agreed its a bit unreasonable of him for sure.

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

They've made a number of technical cock ups thru the years, tho I'd say that needs to be considered alongside the fact that selling tickets is at the cutting edge of of online transaction technologies, because of the occasional massive demand. There's been plenty of stories over the years of other big online sales fucking up, and i don't think See compares particularly badly alongside, especially as they're not (or at least, weren't) part of a massive global ticket-selling corporate.

I'd say from what I know that they're very committed to doing it well. Boss man there won't speak to me now, cos i laughed about that DNS cock-up a few years ago, and also because i didn't contact him to tell him about it (I had my own busy system to manage the demand on at the time, so I don't feel he's being reasonable, but there you go).

And those of us who've been around here for a long time will have seen just how much it's improved over the years, cos that marathon 24+hour sale in 2003(?) isn't anything like happens now..

But I'd guess they're also in a similar position as me with efests, where the benefits from a higher technical spend to manage peak demands start to have less beneficial effects beyond a particular point, with a balance is reached for performance against the cost.

I think the 24hr beast was 2004- that was the one with the Freya link and rumours of a server being on fire- I'd gotten my tickets pretty swiftly but was trying for a friend for hours until the mythical Freya link! Was that also an urban myth or did it actually make a difference? 

[The Nal]

04 was tough alright but I do remember when there was a "resale" texting a mate to tell him and he said "Ill have a look when I get home". And he got one an hour or so later. 

[Avalon_Fields]

3 hours ago, Scruffylovemonster said:

You have ten minutes. 

That's only perhaps ten minutes to begin with (Not long after 9am)  isn't it, unlike the standard ticket booking systems where the tickets are held for you as long as you complete the transaction within the timed limit, the Glastonbury tickets are first come first served for those completing the process.

[timbrass]

Does anyone know what Seetickets use to detect automated browser refresh?  What is stopping you firing up 10,000 small Azure images (which at £0.01 per hour for the 60 mins of the sale would cost ~£100), each running a script that in effect says "keeping refreshing until you get the booking page, then stop and redirect that session to the console"

[Pinhead]

Freya was 2004

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I've always thought that about all tickets via ticket agents (particular when they're the exclusive agent for that tour), whether they sell out or not. After all, if i put a link on a page or not, if someone wants that ticket they'll go and buy one somewhere. There's no way i'd have believed they'd still be paying commissions now at the time I first started collecting ticket commissions 15-ish years ago.

The reason there's no affiliate money with the Glasto tickets is actually for the different reason of Michael having twisted See Tickets arm over the fees. The boss of See has told me that he's not sure if they make a profit or not on doing them - but that it's somewhere around break even - and that they continue to do them on a sort-of loss-leader basis because it's a fantastic way of reinforcing the See Tickets branding. Via them doing Glasto tickets, they're well-known by just about everyone as a major and legitimate ticket agent.

PS: ticket sale commissions are about 50% of what they were a year ago.

So please do use the links.

The company I work for (not related to music or tickets in any way) have run in the past and currently do provide white label services for a few highly regarded household names. These are definitely more or less loss leaders (or break even at best) because it's more about the ability to say to clients that we provide x for y which adds a huge amount of credibility. When it comes to the level of service it's maintained at all costs because the last thing they want is to cock something up on behalf of such a big name irrespective of the fact that it's doesn't directly make any money, so I'm sure that's definitely the case for See and the last thing they would want is a bad service.