Oasis

[Dales]

1 hour ago, charlierc said:

Is this just an assumption that anyone who had a Ticketmaster account in the UK was either trying for tickets or just looked at the queue out of curiosity counts?

 

It does seem fairly hard to quantify exactly who counts for this.

 

Working from home today and had the TV on listening to the news and Morning Live came on after and they mentioned Oasis, so I left the TV on. There consumer rights/scam expert gave a warning on the danger of being scammed while buying Oasis tickets. He also said the extra date's were going to be offered to those who missed out on the original ballot process. I have no idea, if thats just his interpretation or he actually knows thats the way they are going to do it.

 

Using the ballot data does seem the logical way to do it as they have the details of everyone who registered. They also know who got issued with a code and whether the code was used to purchase tickets. So would be the obvious way to pick people to invite.

[DeanoL]

14 hours ago, dingbat2 said:

Oasis's message about dynamic pricing is all bollocks unless they decide to refund the £200 extra the dynamic pricing customers paid. Its their choice, especially if the new dates have all standing tickets at £150. 

Is it there choice? There's a lot of assumptions being made here. Ultimately it's up to the band how much they want to get involved in how things are sold, so it's their choice to that extent. So you have folks like Heaton who get very involved.

But I suspect for this the promoter essentially offered them a fee of £X million for Y performances and they negotiated on that. Then it was down to the promoter to set the price and determine how to sell the tickets. (There may even have been a bidding war between multiple promoters).

 

I mean, it's down to the band in as much as the prices are generally high because the fee they negotiated would have been high. It's also possible they negotiated a lower fee for these extra dates in exchange for not doing dynamic pricing this time around. But they can't go back and renegotiate the contract they made for the initial dates. It's signed and done.

[duke88]

13 minutes ago, Dales said:

 

Working from home today and had the TV on listening to the news and Morning Live came on after and they mentioned Oasis, so I left the TV on. There consumer rights/scam expert gave a warning on the danger of being scammed while buying Oasis tickets. He also said the extra date's were going to be offered to those who missed out on the original ballot process. I have no idea, if thats just his interpretation or he actually knows thats the way they are going to do it.

 

Using the ballot data does seem the logical way to do it as they have the details of everyone who registered. They also know who got issued with a code and whether the code was used to purchase tickets. So would be the obvious way to pick people to invite.

 

Lots of people who were unsuccessful with the first ballot will have got tickets in the general sale though. How are they going to know that?

[Alan_C]

11 minutes ago, duke88 said:

 

Lots of people who were unsuccessful with the first ballot will have got tickets in the general sale though. How are they going to know that?

There's no way of knowing that, and there will be a lot of people who got a ticket on Saturday who will get one for these Wembley gigs. It's probably just the most fair way they can think of. 

[Dales]

2 minutes ago, duke88 said:

 

Lots of people who were unsuccessful with the first ballot will have got tickets in the general sale though. How are they going to know that?

 

The codes were tied to your email and so they could cross reference. Your point is very valid, also how many ended up buying on See tickets or Gigs and Tours. Do you count everyone who joined the Ticketmaster que? Those in the que to join the que?

 

However they run it, there will be some people who are not happy as they feel excluded or think it's unfair. Ultimately, they will probably pick a way that is easy for them to administer and not really care whether anyone agrees or not. We may never even know the details or the methodology of how they do it.

 

However, I am pretty sure that one way or another a huge amount of tickets will go to those who already have tickets for other shows. Those who go to lots of festivals and gigs i.e the sort of people on efestivals are good at securing tickets. Who here put all there faith in just one person buying the tickets. Like getting Glasto tickets friends and family will have been roped in  to try on your behalf. So, however they do it via the initial ballot details, those who joined the que, those who logged on to ticketmaster on the day or even anyone with a ticketmaster account, there will be chances to buy again. Those with tickets already, can and will end up securing more tickets.

 

These big ticket events are always going to be loaded to those who are better organised and have big social groups and they will have all the bases covered how ever the draw is worked. 

 

My guess is that they will use the initial ballet for some if not all tickets because its easy to do They could even leave out anyone who had a code whether that was used or not. There is never going to be a way to do it that please's everyone.

 

Even If they had a new ballot, those who are on top of these things are still going to get everyone they know to sign up and increase their chances again.

 

[she bangs the drums]

5 hours ago, MilkyJoe said:

I suspected this was going to be the outcome from the band and to be honest it is the best response they could have come up with. Plausible denial and all that. I can't see anybody being refunded though. At the end of the day it was their choice whether to cough up the extra 200 quid and they knew that others had only paid 150.

Offering a partial refund would not be fair on the many people who got onto the Ticketmaster site (some before the people who chose to pay the extra £200) and voted with their feet. 

 

 

 

Many of which would have a ticket if they had been available at £150.

 

 

 

People made a decision on whether to pay the extra so it is what it is.

[MilkyJoe]

11 minutes ago, she bangs the drums said:

Offering a partial refund would not be fair on the many people who got onto the Ticketmaster site (some before the people who chose to pay the extra £200) and voted with their feet. 

 

 

 

Many of which would have a ticket if they had been available at £150.

 

 

 

People made a decision on whether to pay the extra so it is what it is.

Yep. It wasn't my suggestion that people should be refunded. I was one of the ones that voted with my feet!😊

[Dales]

At the moment we dont really know how the ballot is going to be run and so we can all make assumptions on the methodolgy.

 

There also seems to be a lot of people also speculating that these new dates will not have dynamic pricing, However, I have not seen anything official looking that says it will not be used again. All Oasis have done is pass the buck, they have not stated it will not be used again. So maybe if you are the last bunch in the staggered sale, will be left with the same expensive options or will th bin off dynamic priced tickets in favour of more packages?

[Ayrshire Chris]

You’ve just got to love Bob Mortimer and his posts

 

[Hirstys 12th Pint]

Pretty sure those in with a chance of the ballot will be those that registered initially minus those successful with the initial ballot plus the emails used to order a ticket on Saturday. 

 

There will still be a high chance that those already in a possession of a ticket purchased by a friend will be chosen in the second ballot. 

 

Really there is no other fair way.  I am still absolutely gob smacked at the demand for these gigs.

 

[Justcalledtosay]

17 hours ago, FrogStupid said:

On the subject of Saturday's shitshow and 'Dynamic Pricing', according to the NME:

 

Responding to the complaints over dynamic ticketing, the statement from the band said: “It needs to be made clear that Oasis leave decisions on ticketing and pricing entirely to their promoters and management, and at no time had any awareness that dynamic pricing was going to be used.

 

“While prior meetings between promoters, Ticketmaster and the band’s management resulted in a positive ticket sale strategy, which would be a fair experience for fans, including dynamic ticketing to help keep general ticket prices down as well as reduce touting, the execution of the plan failed to meet expectations. All parties involved did their utmost to deliver the best possible fan experience, but due to the unprecedented demand this became impossible to achieve.”

Absolute bollocks.

[hurdy]

We had a strategy to keep ticket prices down by doubling the price of tickets

 

As you say, absolute bollocks

[slumberjack]

3 minutes ago, hurdy said:

We had a strategy to keep ticket prices down by doubling the price of tickets

 

As you say, absolute bollocks

Aye, totally agree! Say for example that they announced that all Manchester tickets were going to be £250 each (average of £150 and £350), I imagine that demand would have been lower. They’ve contributed to the demand and failed to manage expectations by announcing tickets we’re going to be £150 and (conveniently) failing to mention dynamic pricing before the sale.  

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, hurdy said:

We had a strategy to keep ticket prices down by doubling the price of tickets

 

As you say, absolute bollocks

It's true in so far as they'll have had a budget for each show. So they need to pay the band X, the venue Y, crew Z... plus whatever profit margin they want means tickets have to bring in £XXX,XXX per show. So then you either divide that number by the number of tickets and sell them all for the same price (more than £150) or you do some tiering and dynamic pricing bullshit to make the lower end prices cheaper, effectively subsidising them with the higher cost tickets to hit your desired revenue.

 

Now yes, they could have chosen to take a lower profit margin to bring prices down. Or the band could have taken a lower fee. But that was never going to happen. This whole reunion is a golden egg for the promoters, venues and band and they're going to milk it for as much as it's worth.

[neil_clarky]

The Competition and Markets Authority has launched an investigation:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-launches-investigation-into-ticketmaster-over-oasis-concert-sales

 

 

If anyone wants to relay their experiences:

 

https://connect.cma.gov.uk/oasis-tickets

[CR77]

Sorry if mentioned elsewhere... a friend got through to Ticketmaster after 4+ hours of waiting and turned down the £350 standing tickets.  He was about to shut down his computer, when suddenly Gigs and Tours sprang to life, and offered him the £150 standing tickets - so obviously he got those.  Seems crazy that the sites were offering different prices, and it was pure luck if Gigs and Tours worked before Ticketmaster.  I can imagine there are lots of people who paid £350, and yet a Gigs and Tours opportunity may have been just around the corner.  Sickening.

[charlierc]

6 hours ago, philipsteak said:

 

 

https://www.trybooking.com/uk/events/landing/57573

 

OK, it includes a meal but £52 for a tribute band!

And it was announced months ago, well before the Oasis gigs

The one at my local sweatbox (namely this show) was nowhere near that ridiculous price-tag. I get that you're as much paying for the meal and overall occasion, but still. Yikes.

[Furq]

2 hours ago, DeanoL said:

It's true in so far as they'll have had a budget for each show. So they need to pay the band X, the venue Y, crew Z... plus whatever profit margin they want means tickets have to bring in £XXX,XXX per show. So then you either divide that number by the number of tickets and sell them all for the same price (more than £150) or you do some tiering and dynamic pricing bullshit to make the lower end prices cheaper, effectively subsidising them with the higher cost tickets to hit your desired revenue.

 

Now yes, they could have chosen to take a lower profit margin to bring prices down. Or the band could have taken a lower fee. But that was never going to happen. This whole reunion is a golden egg for the promoters, venues and band and they're going to milk it for as much as it's worth.

Yeah, they had to make a very difficult choice between making absolute shed-loads of money.... or boat-loads of money.

Ticketmaster offers artists that option - and Oasis (management) took it.

Anyway, folk might find this interesting...

Oasis, so-called ‘dynamic pricing’ and how Ticketmaster’s two-tier ticketing system ACTUALLY works




 

Edited September 5, 2024 by Furq

[maelzoid]

I cannot see the current government investigation resulting in a ban on platinum pricing, but event ticketing needs reform and there are a few measures that can be implemented that could be positive.

 

All prices should be publicised before the tickets go on sale. Preferably when the sale is announced.

 

End transaction / booking / printing / delivery fees. One price - the price advertised is the price you pay. The associated fees can be folded into the price.

 

If dynamic ticketing is being considered, sellers need to be upfront about it - how much the hike is, what percentage of tickets are affected and what conditions trigger it - and that info must be detailed when the ticket announcement is made.

 

Artists and their management must contractually agree to this dynamic pricing. There have been cases whewre the artists have been unaware (eg. Crowded House and the Cure) but equally, some acts will dishonestly say it was done by the promoter to save face. If we have this condition, artists who choose greed can no longer hide behind mgmt / promoters / ticket agents.

[Skip997]

Up to the punters IMO

 

Stop paying ridiculous prices for rubbish. Support decent acts, e.g. the fantastically entertaining L’Entourloop can be seen in London in October for less than £30

[Suprefan]

3 hours ago, neil_clarky said:

The Competition and Markets Authority has launched an investigation:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-launches-investigation-into-ticketmaster-over-oasis-concert-sales

 

 

If anyone wants to relay their experiences:

 

https://connect.cma.gov.uk/oasis-tickets

My experience: I got tickets faster than the rest and didnt pay more money cause I was prepared. 
 

 

ticketmaster has a load of data available. They know what everyones doing. It will be easy to figure out who will be eligible for a ballot and who wont. They could easily filter the rejection ballot people and just give uk registrants priority. As mentioned, tied into emails which were also ticketmaster accounts. When the swift shitshow happened you had Tm put together a report in no time at all with specific data. They have it all at their fingertips. WhT do you think those fees go towards. Its security and analytics.

[sildante]

23 hours ago, FrogStupid said:

Totally agree. Taylor Swift did it.

 

She didn't offer any refunds when using dynamic pricing to my knowledge, but point me in the right direction if I'm wrong. Crowded House managed to when they had the same issue in NZ though.

 

Taylor Swift was actually one of the first artists to use dynamic pricing for her Reputation tour a few years ago and was heavily criticised for it at the time, which is what led her team to opt against it for the Eras tour, after the likes of Ed Sheeran had started to call it out.

[Suprefan]

On 9/4/2024 at 10:34 AM, Ryan1984 said:

£40 to park a car!

let me tell you about $100 usd to park a car is normal in the u.s.

[Suprefan]

Looks like theyll use ballot entries for data purposes

[CaledonianGonzo]

Vetted for bots my f**king arse.  It identified me as a bot ten minutes before the presale opened and my Ticketmaster account is still f**ked a week later.