[cletus]

This is of course interesting and will lead to inevitable comments about disruption being needed in event ticketing.

Let me save you the trouble as this has been rehashed many times already: the problem here is Ticketmaster's exclusives on venues and the entertainment's willingness to let Ticketmaster be the "sacrificial anode" and focus of ire from both audiences and performers.

There was a deal done some years ago--I forget the name--whereby performers would get 90% of ticket sales.

The way around that is not to increase ticket prices but to add "fees". Online transaction fees, mail fees, processing fees, booking fees, you name it. The fees in some cases are approaching the ticket price. Ticketmaster does this, splitting the proceeds with promoters and venues while the artists get a 90% cut of an ever smaller part of the pie.

Ticketmaster has multi-year exclusive deals with venues such that none can really afford the attractive cuts they get to "go it alone".

IMHO this situation has reached the point of requiring government action as this is now an antritrust issue (the ticketing market basically cannot function now).

Until that happens any ticketing disruption is doomed.

[rmc]

Ticketmaster's exclusives on venues

Another problem, especially when a ticketing start up tries to go after a medium or large venue, is that Ticketmaster has the capital to give venues (some) of the money from the ticket sales before their sold (e.g. a few months or a year before). The venue then has money to do stuff before the event.

To compete against that, you need to have a lot of money in the bank (i.e. not a start up).

[dlikhten]

Well said, good sir, well said. However it still goes to show that there is a disconnect between "popular" and "up and coming". The rules for Louis C.K. and up-and-coming comedians are quite different. He is a gorilla and can use his momentum to do interesting things, others cannot.

Disruption is possible IF the seller company choses to take a multi-year hit while de-throning ticketmaster. If that happens with the backing of big names like Louis it may be a possibility.

[pinchyfingers]

This isn't a situation requiring government action. This is an opportunity for entrepreneurship, where venues will have to take the risk of staying with Ticketmaster, or not. Clearly, Louis CK is exemplifying this.

[jim-greer]

Entrepreneurs have been trying since 1995 to dislodge Ticketmaster. They've never gotten the big venues to sign on, and I do think is is a classic antitrust violation.

[callmeed]

On top of that (somewhat to TM's credit), I remember reading an article stating that they were the only company who had proven they could handle the huge load of online sales for top-tier acts (think Gaga and Bieber).

Let's face it, Louis CK's site probably could not handle 100K simultaneous people buying tickets and choosing seats.

EDIT: found the article http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/mf_ticketmaster/all/

[voltagex_]

That's interesting. The Australian branch of Ticketmaster uses queuing and delays to handle load and still often crashes when "big" events go on sale (annual festivals, Radiohead)

[beedogs]

Confirmed. The radiohead ticket release was an abomination. Although somehow, Ticketek manages to be even worse.

[bitdestroyer]

Radiohead couldn't even handle Radiohead on their last American tour.

[vijayr]

"Ticketmaster's exclusives on venues"

Sorry for the dumb question - does this mean that nobody else can book these venues?

If that is the case, can't CK (and other comedians) find a neutral venue (or a venue that is not already on Ticketmaster's list)? At least in his case, he doesn't need sophisticated venues (like the ones need for an opera, or a circus for example)

Also, for disruption - can't a company buy/build a venue, and pitch it as "just pay the rent, and you take care of ticket sales and everything else" model?

[dsl]

Effectively. You can still book venues, you just can't sell tickets to your event without Ticketmaster being involved.

A company called Livenation went around about 10 years ago and bought all the venues large enough to hold a profitable concert or show, then a few years back merged with Ticketmaster.

Livenation won't sell you one of their venues. Building a new one large enough to be profitable is near impossible. It's not just a building, its massive parking lots, planning and building commissions, working with local police for traffic management, unions for load ins/outs, getting sizable power feeds from your local utility, multi-million dollar sound systems, concessions contracts, medical services, etc., etc., etc.

[beedogs]

Does this mean that Ticketmaster runs the risk of overextending itself and collapsing in a heap, the way Clear Channel did after buying up hundreds of radio stations throughout the 90s and early 00s? (ihopeihopeihope)

[rmc]

If that is the case, can't CK (and other comedians) find a neutral venue (or a venue that is not already on Ticketmaster's list)?

Yes, that's what happens if you're still small. Now what happens if you're a mega-rock star and what to have a gig with 10,000+ people? Those venues are locked up.

can't a company buy/build a venue

Where? Which city/country? If you do that (which'll cost a fortune in up front costs), that only helps the artist in that location. What happens to the rest of their tour when they go to other cities? They have to go to Ticketmaster then.

[cdcarter]

No, it just means Ticketmaster is the exclusive provider of box office services.

That is a potential disruption model (if you could manager actually buying/building a venue) but there's a reason (commercial) venues almost always require you to use their box office services. Often times, the venue gets rent in terms of a flat fee plus a cut of the net adjusted gross box office revenue. A bigger show puts more strain on the venue and they'll want a slightly larger cut. The venue then wants to oversee the settlement, and, therefor, the box officing.

[larrys]

"this situation has reached the point of requiring government action as this is now an antritrust issue "

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870476290457502...

[skrebbel]

> Until that happens any ticketing disruption is doomed

, in the US.

There's a very similar reason why Spotify started in Sweden, and took years until jumping the pond.

I'm not saying everything is better in Europe, and in fact I've no clue about the ticket sales situation in most European countries. But I am saying that, much as many would like to forget, innovation and market disruption is not a US monopoly.

[rmc]

Oh I assure you Ticketmaster is the 800 lb gorilla in the room in several European countries.