In November 2022, Taylor Swift’s fans struggled to get tickets for her upcoming Eras tour on Ticketmaster. The ticket sale was plagued by long wait times, website outages, and limited ticket availability. Many fans were outraged and blamed Ticketmaster. Following the backlash, Ticketmaster issued an apology to Swift and her fans. The incident raised further criticism about Ticketmaster’s dominance in the ticket sales industry. This article examines whether Ticketmaster offered an adequate apology to Swift, the key problems with the ticket sale, and the wider criticisms of Ticketmaster’s business practices.
Did Ticketmaster apologize to Taylor Swift?
Yes, Ticketmaster did issue an apology to Taylor Swift and her fans following the issues with her Eras tour ticket sale on November 15, 2022.
On November 17, 2022, Ticketmaster released a statement saying: “We want to apologize to Taylor and all of her fans – especially those who had a terrible experience trying to purchase tickets.”
The company acknowledged that they failed to meet expectations and said that they were working to improve the situation moving forward.
However, many fans felt that the apology was inadequate given the scale of problems with the ticket sale. Critics said the statement lacked specifics aboutTicketmaster’s responsibility and did not outline any concrete steps to prevent similar issues happening again.
So while Ticketmaster did offer an apology to Swift, it appeared to many that it was a generic statement that did not accept full accountability for the botched ticket sale.
What were the key problems with the Ticketmaster Eras tour ticket sale?
The key problems with Ticketmaster’s handling of the Eras tour ticket pre-sale on November 15, 2022 included:
– **Website outages** – The Ticketmaster website and app crashed due to overwhelming demand. Fans faced long wait times trying to access the platform.
– **Bot attacks** – Ticketmaster claimed their systems were overwhelmed by bots trying to buy up tickets. This blocked genuine fans from accessing tickets.
– **Limited ticket availability** – Due to Ticketmaster’s Verified Fan system and other presales, there was extremely limited inventory left for the general sale. Hundreds of thousands of fans missed out on tickets entirely.
– **Poor queue system** – Fans complained of unfair queue systems. Some waited hours only to be kicked out and sent to the back.
– **Overpriced resale tickets** – Many tickets immediately popped up at astronomical prices on resale sites like StubHub.
– **Lack of transparency** – Ticketmaster did not communicate effectively about the limited tickets or problems with the sale.
The combination of these issues left many of Swift’s fans angry, disappointed, and confused by the chaotic ticket sale process.
What was the fan and industry reaction to the ticket problems?
The reaction to the Eras ticket sale issues was very negative from both fans and industry experts:
– **Fan outrage** – Fans complained bitterly across social media about the wasted time, inability to get tickets, and Ticketmaster’s poor handling. The hashtag #TicketmasterTaylorSwiftScandal trended.
– **Lawsuits** – A number of lawsuits were filed against Ticketmaster for alleged antitrust violations. Fans accused them of monopolistic practices.
– **Investigation** – The US Senate Judiciary Committee announced plans to investigate Ticketmaster for lack of competition in the industry.
– **Industry criticism** – Experts and insiders criticized Ticketmaster for their lack of preparation and failure to prevent scalping. Calls grew for major reform.
– **Reputational damage** – The fiasco hurt Ticketmaster’s reputation. Their stock price also took a hit in the aftermath.
The ticket sale was considered a major public relations disaster for Ticketmaster. However, some PR experts thought their apology statement was vague and inadequate in addressing stakeholders’ strong concerns.
Ticketmaster’s Control and Dominance of Live Event Ticketing
The intense backlash Ticketmaster faced highlighted ongoing criticisms about their domination of primary ticketing and live events.
Ticketmaster’s Market Share
Ticketmaster controls around 70% of the primary ticket sales market in the US, and over 80% for major concert venues. This gives them enormous power over tour ticketing:
| Category | Ticketmaster Market Share |
|---|---|
| Overall US ticketing | 70% |
| Major concert venues | Over 80% |
| NFL ticketing | Around 95% |
| Broadway show venues | Over 70% |
This lack of competition has allowed Ticketmaster to impose higher fees and less favorable conditions on venues and customers. Their dominant position makes it extremely difficult for artists to tour major venues without cooperating with Ticketmaster.
Key Factors in Ticketmaster’s Industry Control
Several key factors have enabled Ticketmaster to gain and maintain dominance in event ticketing:
– **Exclusive venue contracts** – Long-term exclusive deals with major venues lock up key inventory and make it harder for competitors to enter the market.
– **Vertical integration** – Ticketmaster’s 2010 merger with Live Nation created a vertically integrated company that controls ticketing, promotion, artist management and live events.
– **Consumer lock-in** – Fans tend to gravitate to the largest ticketing platform with the best inventory. Network effects help Ticketmaster maintain a strong consumer base.
– **Industry connections** – Ticketmaster’s deep entertainment industry connections make venues and promoters less likely to take risks on alternative platforms.
– **Government inaction** – Critics argue that regulators have not done enough to restrain Ticketmaster’s power or promote fair competition.
This combination of factors has contributed to an entrenched, dominant position that marginalizes competitors and potentially harms consumers. Calls are growing for regulators to address Ticketmaster’s alleged anti-competitive practices.
Criticisms of Ticketmaster’s Business Practices
Besides their market dominance, other aspects of Ticketmaster’s ticketing business have drawn public criticism and complaints over unfair practices.
Service Fees
One of the biggest sources of frustration for Ticketmaster customers is their services fees added onto ticket prices. A breakdown:
– **High fee amounts** – Fees frequently add 25-30% (or more) to base ticket prices. For expensive tickets, fees can be over $100 per ticket.
– **Vague fee names** – Descriptions like “convenience charge” and “order processing fee” are seen as misleading for mandatory fees.
– **Lack of transparency** – Full fee amounts only appear late in the checkout process after customers are invested in buying.
– **No fee ceiling** – Unlike some resellers, Ticketmaster does not set a cap on maximum fees charged.
While Ticketmaster argues their fees cover costs and prevent them from raising ticket prices, many feel they abuse their position to charge excessive hidden fees. Calls have grown for greater fee transparency and limits.
Resale Sites and Scalping
Another concern around Ticketmaster is their ownership of secondary resale sites like StubHub, which enables ticket scalping:
– Ticketmaster itself runs a resale exchange to sell spare inventory at market prices (i.e. higher than face value).
– Consumer rights groups allege Ticketmaster funnels high-demand concert tickets straight to resale sites at inflated prices.
– This scalping redirects profits from artists and venues towards Ticketmaster’s own resale platforms.
– Their dominance of primary sales also reduces pressure on Ticketmaster to prevent scalping and unfair secondary sales.
Ticketmaster claims resale sites provide a safe option for customers and help suppress illegal scalping activity. But critics argue their resale operations incentivize and enable scalping that exploits fans.
Captive Audience Practices
Some of Ticketmaster’s product developments have also raised concerns about exploiting their captive consumer audience:
| Practice | Description |
|---|---|
| Captive ticket insurance | In 2019, Ticketmaster began requiring ticket insurance for high-demand shows. Customers cannot opt out of paying insurance fees. |
| Mandatory ticket bundling | Fans must sometimes buy tickets as bundled “platinum” packages with extra fees and perks they do not necessarily want. |
| Dynamic ticket pricing | Ticketmaster uses demand-based pricing models that frequently raise prices over time, limiting cheaper advance sales. |
These types of tactics that lock customers into fees and purchases they did not actively choose have prompted pushback and accusations of unfair practices. But Ticketmaster defends the practices as providing benefits and choices for customers.
Calls for Ticketmaster Reform
The controversies surrounding Ticketmaster’s Eras tour ticket sale and dominant position have amplified calls for reforms to increase competition, transparency and oversight of the ticketing industry.
Potential Regulatory Reforms
To counter Ticketmaster’s industry control and protect consumers, some reforms that regulators could implement include:
– Breaking up Ticketmaster and Live Nation’s 2010 merger on antitrust grounds.
– Banning exclusive long-term venue contracts that shut out competitors.
– Requiring more fee transparency and caps on maximum charges added to ticket prices.
– Prohibiting anti-competitive technological restrictions like unique barcode ties between Ticketmaster and ticket resale sites.
– Establishing a compulsory licensing model so venues can use any authorized ticketing platform.
Voluntary Industry Changes
Aside from top-down regulation, experts argue the following voluntary changes could also improve industry practices:
– Artists and promoters demanding more control and incentives in ticketing contracts.
– Venues opening up inventory across multiple platforms through non-exclusive deals.
– Primary ticket sellers investing more in bot prevention and purchase limits.
– Resale platforms implementing fee caps and increasing transparency.
However, such moves would likely require collective action across the industry. Ticketmaster currently has little incentive to unilaterally reform its profitable practices and dominant market position.
Conclusion
While Ticketmaster did issue an apology statement to Taylor Swift and her fans, most observers saw it as an inadequate response to the major problems experienced during her tour ticket sale. The fiasco highlighted ongoing criticisms of Ticketmaster’s market dominance and business practices that create a poor ticketing experience for fans. Calls are growing for meaningful reforms through regulation, voluntary restraints, and collective industry action. However, Ticketmaster has shown little willingness to change its profitable ticketing model without significant external pressure. Ultimately, it may take forceful government intervention or a coordinated industry shift to create a more competitive, transparent, and consumer-friendly ticket marketplace.