The answer is that Ticketmaster gives 50% of their revenue to the venue, which is a pretty good deal for the venue, so they have every incentive to keep that relationship going
They run a not that complicated website. As someone who loves live music, they take way too much in ticket fees for the value and difficulty of the service they provide. Legitimately, it feels like expertsexchange.
Economically, it doesn't seem to make sense for artists and venues to be giving so much money to a partner who is delivering so little value. Even if the venue is getting half of the ticket master fee, the tickets selling with the fee included is proof that the customer is willing to pay that much, why share more than a small fraction of the ticket price with a website?
> Economically, it doesn't seem to make sense for artists and venues to be giving so much money to a partner who is delivering so little value.
Artists and venues receive a part of the fees that TicketMaster charges. TicketMaster's essentially being paid by artists and venues to be the bad guy.
sf4lifer|3 years ago
robrenaud|3 years ago
Economically, it doesn't seem to make sense for artists and venues to be giving so much money to a partner who is delivering so little value. Even if the venue is getting half of the ticket master fee, the tickets selling with the fee included is proof that the customer is willing to pay that much, why share more than a small fraction of the ticket price with a website?
oblio|3 years ago
The sooner techies understand this, the better.
Read this: https://stratechery.com/2018/the-bill-gates-line/
Ticketmaster is a large aggregator.
ars|3 years ago
That's not entirely true, the surge demand on their site is enormous. They pay for enormous capacity that is used only sporadically.
Denvercoder9|3 years ago
Artists and venues receive a part of the fees that TicketMaster charges. TicketMaster's essentially being paid by artists and venues to be the bad guy.