PDA

View Full Version : How is ticketmaster different than Expedia?



seadog
09-14-2009, 06:58 PM
So I generally try to avoid TM like the plague due to their BS but I find myself generally forced to use them soon for a concert I want to see in California. I cringe at what totals something like 40% service charge and having to pay to get tickets emailed vs having them mailed which is free, despite the obvious cost benefit in their favor for email.

It got me thinking though, how are concert promoters or venues any different really than an airline? Both sell seats for a limited capacity, and date specific 'event'. Why couldn't numerous companies sell the same inventory as is the case with expedia, orbitz etc? Why can't promoters/venues have their own online system similar to airlines operating concurrently with TM and a host of non-horrible sites and email you tickets, just like airlines?

Like I mention the extra fee for emailed tickets is especially frustrating. Normally when a new way of doing things comes about that benefits both consumer and supplier, the difference is split and both are better off. But not here. Its like when banks first came out with ATMs(mind you some still do) but its "forget we're saving heaps because of no labour, we're gonna charge you for the convenience.

End Rant.

nich148_9
09-14-2009, 07:05 PM
Because Ticketmaster, Live Nation, etc. have contracts with different venues. Ticketmaster is a monopoly.

seadog
09-14-2009, 07:23 PM
I know its a monopoly, but how does that serve anyone but ticketmaster? Fans don't benefit because of higher prices, and venues/artists don't benefit because they have a more limited exposure to the market. Let TM do their thing, If I'm a venue/box office why wouldn't I want to encourage more sales by making it easier to buy? Is there something I'm missing where this system operating alongside TM would hurt anyone but them? Economically it just looks like a flawed model.

Tik-Tok
09-14-2009, 07:35 PM
Originally posted by seadog
I know its a monopoly, but how does that serve anyone but ticketmaster? Fans don't benefit because of higher prices, and venues/artists don't benefit because they have a more limited exposure to the market. Let TM do their thing, If I'm a venue/box office why wouldn't I want to encourage more sales by making it easier to buy? Is there something I'm missing where this system operating alongside TM would hurt anyone but them? Economically it just looks like a flawed model.

Less hassle for the venues to sell their own tickets for every event. I guarantee you some of those "Service Fee's" are going into the venues purse.

It's the same reason airlines sell bulk seats to travelocity, expedia, etc. It's guarantee'd revenue for them, with no hassles.