It's pretty weird how popular music and comedy acts resist setting ticket prices at market clearing levels. If you're selling tickets at a flat rate and a sellout happens in a few minutes that means your tickets were too cheap. Shortages in a market are bad and can be solved with higher prices. Acts that leave surplus on the table are mostly benefiting scalpers not the fans, and it is also part of the reason Ticketmaster can tack on their huge fees. In the internet era there is no reason not to setup an auction system and sell the tickets to the highest bidders.
What seems to happen is that acts worry about their shows having too many random rich people and not enough "real fans". They think without the super-excitement from the "real fans" it would ruin the experience of the show. I'm not sure if that is true, anyone willing to pay a lot of money to attend is probably a real fan, rich or not. But if the bands want to they could allocate a smaller portion of tickets at a lower price using some other method, maybe a lottery, but it's going to be hard to keep the scalpers out.
With all the problems with the copyright-based business models fans should actually want their favorite acts to raise prices and make as much money as they can from touring, instead of the money going to middlemen.
In general, I 100% agree with you that prices should rise or fall until markets clear, but there is a counter argument that I believe is correct in some cases:
Fans are a complex system, and the people who might turn out for dozens and dozens of shows over years, create buzz, convert friends to your cause, etc. may not have the funds to pay for tickets priced at the margin.
Thus, it might be a mistake to charge market clearing prices that cause long term damage in your fan base.
I don't know for sure that this is correct, but in general, the market evolves behaviors that make sense, so the fact that very few performers try to squeeze every last dollar out suggests to me that it might be a reasonably intelligent strategy to avoid the quick profit that way.
the people who might turn out for dozens and dozens of shows over years, create buzz, convert friends to your cause, etc. may not have the funds to pay for tickets priced at the margin
Maybe that could be solved with a loyalty system?
E.g. tickets could get a discount weighted according to how many tickets you've previously bought for that act.
Of course the discount should only apply for one ticket (or a small number) to prevent the scalpers from taking advantage.
Not how many tickets you have bought, but how many shows you have actually shown up to. Scan people's tickets at the door, and keep a database so that you can reward those who attend reliably.
That's the same thing unless you have some kind of double authentication to prove the person who bought the ticket is the same one using it at the show. Like, say, matching it to an outside-authenticating number, like SSN or driver's license number.
Otherwise a scalper can just use "employees" to purchase a few tickets (the limit) at each venue, and resell them.
Let's also have some backscatter imagers to make sure nobody brings weapons into the venue. Emulating the airlines is a business model guaranteed to succeed!
I have always wondered about a market for an auction platform that serves events/similar. After the success of the restaurant Alinea in Chicago, the owner's next project (Next) actually sells tickets to eat there:
'Whether Mr. Achatz’s fans will be similarly loyal remains to be seen. Next will have a highly unusual online-only booking system that sells nonrefundable tickets, rather than accepting reservations. Once a seat for Paris 1906 is bought on line, if the baby sitter cancels or the girlfriend doesn’t feel like going out, it can’t be canceled. It can, however, be sold, scalped or bartered. “We are very interested to see what that secondary market might bring,” said Mr. Kokonas, who devised the system.'
Restaurants that oversell inventory could use a similar tactic but with an auction platform for some of their seats to allow people a chance with last-chance bookings if they're willing to pay. I know I would definitely have considered it when I was heading to Chicago and couldn't get a booking weeks in advance.
The Next ticketing system is a good idea for Achatz because it eliminates an obstacle to purchasing tickets: the near total uncertainty as to when you might get a table. A seating for 4 people at Alinea might require a month or two advance notice; a prime date perhaps even more. So it's a win to be able to look at a website and see when you might be able to get a table --- or, with the new Sicily menu, quickly discover that there are no seatings to be had.
Incidentally, if you're hoping for last minute seatings, there's always the strategy of just calling them at the last minute or even just showing up to see if they've had cancellations. I've gotten lucky at least once.
I'm from South Australia, so when I'm near exceptionally popular restaurants, it's usually while travelling so I have a fixed window and won't usually have locked that window in until a week or two beforehand.
And the reason I hate calling is that I imagine I'm one of a string of no-chance hopefuls just being a nuisance. And the staff are on the other end thinking "Doesn't this guy know who we are?! You're two months late, bozo."
Would love a web-based system to get around all this!
(Only been to Chicago once and quite liked it despite the weather at that time of year. We enjoyed Avec and The Violet Hour. Had a chance to go to Moto but bailed in the end.)
> And the reason I hate calling is that I imagine I'm one of a string of no-chance hopefuls just being a nuisance. And the staff are on the other end thinking "Doesn't this guy know who we are?! You're two months late, bozo."
Speaking from personal experience, once you get past barriers in yourself like that, life opens up to you. Using the internet as a crutch to avoid social interaction with a possibility of embarrassment is unhealthy.
You're right and luckily I'm only like that with phones. Generally sociable, well-rounded and out-and-about otherwise. Just the phones...
Of course, if I worked the phones at a restaurant like that, you can bet I'd be driven nuts by all the calls and wish people would give it up or the boss would devise another system!
I'm not saying tiered pricing is bad, or that expensive tickets are bad. I as a fan may not like it, but, I get it. I can grok that. It's one thing to trade in goodwill for money. To insinuate fans should be happy about it, or that this simply solves the problem? That's simply crazy talk.
You're not "solving" the problem of shortages, you're just deciding to make it a "cost" problem for fans. And that has its own set of fan-related problems (namely burn) that, if you can't solve, are bigger than "we can't justify renting a venue for another showing, sorry everyone."
"If you're selling tickets at a flat rate and a sellout happens in a few minutes that means your tickets were too cheap."
Not necessarily. I see nothing wrong with attempting to control the entire end to end experience, including ticket price. If he's selling at $45 because that's what he wants, there's nothing wrong with that.
Or should cancer or diabetes pills be $1000 per pill because the manufacturer will find enough people to pay? There are other legitimate factors in pricing besides maximizing profit.
But it's inefficient: at an artificially low price (let's stipulate that's what $45 is for Louis C.K.), the show attracts more buyers, a larger proportion of whom aren't dedicated fans. Meanwhile, dedicated fans (not heartless rich people) might be perfectly happy to pay $46, $48, or $54 dollars; they can't, though, because they've been locked out by a flood of superficial fans.
This is to say nothing of the deadweight loss of the inevitable efforts, much of which will be successful, to game the system.
Ostensibly, Louis C.K. wants to keep prices low in service to his fans. But to be totally responsive to the desires of his fans and improve his financial outcome, he should recognize that his shows are going to sell out, his tickets are therefore a scarce good, and some kind of auction mechanism is needed to figure out the right price for a ticket.
Inefficient for whom? The only person who is affected by a low price is Louis CK. He already said that he's making more than enough money for himself so that he's content, so as a show of good will, he's trying his best to lower the cost of the tickets for his fans. For his fans, it's good. Sure, he could make more money by increasing the prices of his tickets, but he doesn't want to do that because he wants to pass along the cost savings to his fans.
Also, he recognizes that he can't lower the price and not deal with the scalper problem, so he is attacking it by doing his best to traffic anyone who tries to sell his tickets for above face value. If this works, then it solves the problem of the scalpers not being able to make a profit, and Louis CK being able to keep ticket prices low for his fans.
The idea that "true" fans are being locked out by "superficial" fans is just plain dumb. What makes a "true" fan vs a "superficial" fan? If I've only seen one of his concerts on HBO, that means that I'm not eligible to go see him live? Do we really need a pissing contests between fans to see who really "deserves" to go see him live? That's dumb.
Sometimes it's not about extracting the maximum possible dollar amount. Artists like sharing their work with other people. Many of them would gladly do it for free if they could, but charge because they have to make a living just like everyone else.
>some kind of auction mechanism is needed to figure out the right price for a ticket.
If Louis is happy with what he's making off the tickets, then they're set at the right price. What you're proposing would essentially lock out many of his fans that couldn't afford the "right" price that would be set with an auction system.
The traditional problem with intentionally setting an artificially low price is that resellers would buy up tickets, sell them back at market prices, essentially locking out those fans and also reaping the additional profit that the artist was intentionally forgoing.
What Louis is trying to do is design a system that locks out the resellers, and in turn essentially turns the ticket selling process into a lottery for those fans that care enough about seeing him to go buy a ticket early.
As long as there are more people that want to see him than can fit in the venue, there's no way to make it totally fair for everyone. But the approach he's taking allows him to make an amount he's happy with while keeping the financial cost of getting in at a point that he feels is fair to the fans.
It may be inefficient from a pure market standpoint, but, frankly, I think it's going to accomplish exactly what he wants it to.
When I was in college, the opportunity cost of a $45 ticket was eating badly instead of eating well for two weeks. Now I have a regular job, the opportunity cost of a $45 ticket is much lower - I'll have to wait a few weeks until I buy that DVD box set of 'House MD'.
So now I can buy tickets that before I could not afford. Have I become a more dedicated Louis CK fan? Or have I just become a richer fan?
I agree with you in theory, but I don't think the argument works here. If the shows are under-priced, they will sell out quickly. The dedicated fans will be the ones who know about the show and buy early.
As I remember, the economic concept of "efficiency" has a pretty narrow meaning: The market for a commodity will reach an equilbrium at the most efficient state if prices are allowed to change freely (a free market). An efficient outcome is defined as being an outcome that maximizes the surplus value when the surplus of each individual transaction is summed. The surplus value of a transaction is the difference between the lowest price a seller would accept and the highest price a buyer would pay. The strongest negotiator will take a bigger share of the surplus.
Even if the surplus is split unfairly on many transactions, the market is still said to be efficient if it meets the above definition.
Louis CK's ticketing idea is a pretty unique case because in some ways tickets are easily fungible and lend themselves to this traditional economic analysis.
On the other hand, if Louis ck decides he's only doing 50 shows at mid sized venues, and prices are 45 dollars, as long as all tickets sell the market is actually perfectly efficient. Louis has no more product to sell. If he could have sold the same amount of tickets at $65 all that means is that fans are taking more of the surplus, as opposed to scampers. Even though there might be way more fans than tickets, the market is at an efficient equilibrium because Louis CK's supply curve has become totally inellastic at $45.
>They think without the super-excitement from the "real fans" it would ruin the experience of the show.
i don't think it's so much about the experience of the show, it's more about the image of the artist. if only adults with full time jobs can afford to go to the shows, then they become known as artists that only responsible old people enjoy. and no responsible old person wants to see a show that only responsible old people enjoy, they want to go to the shows that the young cool people are going to.
In the email he sent announcing this ticketing system, Louis CK explained that he's making what he considers plenty of money, so he wants tickets to be inexpensive for his fans. They also have their system set up so that if they can tell that someone is scalping their tickets, they will refund the money and revoke the tickets. I agree with you in general, but Louis CK doesn't give a shit that he's leaving money on the table. He wants it to be easy for his fans to get to his shows.
You need to put down your name when you buy your ticket and they reserve the right to check ID at the door, meaning it's impractical for scalpers to buy them.
Selling out soon is not a major problem if you assume your biggest fans are those who are willing to act the fastest. I bought a ticket a few minutes after I got the email to ensure I wouldn't dither for a day and not be able to get them.
More and more acts are charging market rates for tickets. I went to buy tickets for the traveling "Book of Mormon" production in Seattle and I had a pretty rude sticker shock.
Better the production get it than the scalpers, I guess, but I can't justify that much on the play when I haven't even finished the book yet.
Broadway is certainly headed this way with "dynamic pricing" and the "airplane model", where tickets increase in rate and availability as the event gets closer.
This is phenomenal. I mean that both in the colloquial (it's fuckin' awesome) and the literal. Louis CK's direct-to-consumer efforts are a phenomenon that (I sincerely hope) are ushering in a new era of entertainment marketing and sales.
The plethora of middle men at all stages of the current state of the industry (talent discovery, production, distribution) are really destroying the art.
Kudos to Louis for using his success as a platform for change. I hope others in the industry will discover their courage and follow suit.
At some point there is always, I believe, the need for the 'middleman' in terms of curation - if everyone sold tickets on their own website you might not know they were around, or not ever hear about them. But I hope that when these new kinds of curations sites evolve (and I'm sure they will) there is a way to monetize sufficiently to maintain a human presence.
Retroactively cancelling tickets is a non-starter. Labour intensive and prone to embarrassing false positives.
There are two simple, proven ways to avoid ticket re-sale. The first is to use "print at home" tickets. People are unwilling to repurchase these as there is no guarantee that they won't be sold multiple times. The second is to use a registration system and personalised tickets, ideally with a photo provided by the customer.
I wish Louis CK every success, but operating a ticket agency is a complex business. Not just the ecommerce side (which is a nightmare in itself given the bursty nature of the traffic), but marketing, fulfilment, customer services, reissue and an understanding of local rules and regulations are all essential components.
I'm in the UK where the market is more fragmented (and competitive). I do understand the frustration with Ticketmaster in the US, but good ticket agencies can and do add value to the process - and leave the artist free to concentrate on their art.
> We reserve the right to change the method of delivery to Will Call (pick-up at the box office) at any time after purchase. If we make this change the ticket(s) may be picked up within 2 hours of the show’s start time and a photo ID and the charge card used for the purchase will be required to claim the ticket.
This is the same as your "use a registration system and personalised tickets" solution, except without forcing everybody to go through all that hassle. It seems he's chosen to let a few scalpers have a chance, instead of ruining the experience for everybody.
Also, when you attempt to buy the tickets, (at least for the SF venue), your only delivery method is print at home. It looks like your implied fears that he doesn't know what he's doing are unfounded.
He's a successful and no doubt intelligent person - I'm sure he's thought it through and taken advice. As a live entertainment fan I hope he succeeds - just adding my thoughts.
Collection at box office can be quite chaotic in volume and, in the UK at least, there are often license restrictions as to how many tickets can be issued that way.
Another common problem is that people buy on a parent or friend's card who doesn't attend, or that the card expires before the show and is discarded.
I wonder if he's having issues with being denied access to certain venues. The reason why ticketmaster and the rest can get away with those fees is because they give a kickback to the venue owner. The venue owner can tell acts to get lost if they don't go through the ticket vendor that gives them $5 per ticket for nothing. Obviously CK is a huge act and you can't blacklist him, but you may need his level of star power to pull this trick off. Even Pearl Jam couldn't do this and they were hugely popular. Maybe stand-up venues aren't as greedy/stupid.
Indeed, he says as much in the message: it was a real challenge to find venues around the country that could work with our exclusive ticketing service under these perameters [sic]
He is playing at offbeat venues; The Chicago Symphony center, for instance, and the Symphony Center in San Francisco. A quick peek at both venues will show you that neither are popular among mainstream touring acts.
I only checked the Texas shows, but the Magnolia Theatre in Dallas is a pretty "classic" theatre that has hosted plenty of top-tier comedians, and ACL Live in Austin books all kinds of heavy-hitting musical acts in addition to the stuff you see on the Austin City Limits television show. Not exactly comedy-specific clubs, but probably more appropriate than the places run by Ticketbastard/AEG Live.
They're certainly still getting a cut, it's just not itemized during checkout for all to see, I guess. The only other thing on the receipt besides the ticket price was sales tax, which came out to an even total of $45.00.
In his post he said he had trouble finding venues that would work with him on this. I know last time through Arizona he played Comerica Theatre (capacity 5500) and on this tour he is playing the Celebrity Theatre (capacity 2650). I would guess that this specific venue change was due to Comerica Theatre not wanting to work with his exclusive ticketing.
I'll bet you that if you look closely enough you'll find the Comerica (and most other equally large venues) is owned by Livenation/Ticket Master and as such will only deal with acts who work though Ticketmaster. That's the hardest problem to solve with ticketing, the fact that most venues of a decent size won't touch you unless you also use their ticketing service.
Pearl Jam is really a different example: you can't use, say, a local movie theater that converts to stage because of the sheer size of the equipment needed (Metallica had their own jumbo jet for this). For smaller bands and other groups however, I hope to see this kickstart a new era.
Yes, it is practically guaranteed this locks him out of numerous larger venues that have exclusive ticketing deals. A price he's willing to pay clearly.
Not only he is one of the sharpest comedians on earth, he's also quickly becoming our lead crusader against exploitative middle men. Louie, you are our century's Montaigne.
However, there is a slight snag to that: its unlikely he could have pulled this off with out first getting a huge following from the traditional media and all those middle men.
Don't get me wrong, what he is doing is brilliant. And Im so glad that it is Louis CK doing this who I was already a fan of. That down load of his gig for $5 was the perfect example of what we want, an artist in control selling his art of a damn reasonable price, and making good money too. Plenty of people did pirate it, but more than enough bought it. But what we need to see work is people working their way to a similar position, making the same sort of money, but with out having traditional media putting them there first.
What Louis CK is doing is brilliant, but it needs to grow and spread. Im rather hoping that somewhere in the back ground he is passing what he has learned on to fellow artists and this thing can grow.
You have to fight power with power. No, he probably couldn't have done this without gaining traction using traditional means, but so what? He's using the power he's gained in that system as leverage to improve the system.
He's in a position to improve the system because he's a part of it, and only because he's a part of it.
"Also, you'll see that if you try to sell the ticket anywhere for anything above the original price, we have the right to cancel your ticket (and refund your money). this is something I intend to enforce."
I thought this was great at first, but I wonder how this will work.
Won't canceling the ticket hurt the person who buys it from a scalper? I don't see a way for him to stop scalpers from selling them, and after it's out of their hands the scalper doesn't care if the ticket is cancelled. I foresee buyers not finding out until the event and being angry.
But I think the key difference is that Ticketmaster, et al. aren't promoting this. So no-one is likely to even realize these events are occurring unless they've gone to, or were directed to, louisck.net.
So that leaves, most likely but not by no means certainly, only people who buy scalped tickets who should've known better.
And I can't imagine they'll find any sympathetic ears, or amount to a notable contingent compared to Louis fans who grok the pseudo-honor system play he's making and will be far more angry at the jilted scalped-ticket-buyer for having purchased from scalpers in the first place.
"only people who buy scalped tickets who should've known better"
I'm under the impression that you can still resell tickets, but not for over face value. So people are still going to see tickets for sale on sites other than louisck.net. And those who check his site and see SOLD OUT will probably head out pretty quickly instead of sitting around to read the terms of sale.
A consumer seeing tickets on a third party site, checking Louie's site and seeing "sold out" then search again on third party sites seems very plausible.
Surely some transactions will get through on third party sites before his people can get it taken down. And a no-sympathy approach towards those buyers would be a terrible move.
Absolutely. I agree that honest 'victims' will happen. Outright ticket fraud happens all the time when people deal with scalpers.
I was just trying to explain why I don't think it'll be a notably larger problem than with any other event nor do I see the victims getting even the usual (low) amount of sympathy.
There are simply too many people who agree with Louis' efforts to keep his work as affordable as possible for there to be notable blowback on him.
Tie the tickets to a credit card, require the old and new credit cards to both be part of the swap transaction online. Ask both how much the transaction cost.
That's a lot of infrastructure for a single tour, but if he got it working well, he could turn it around to other performers to use.
That's what a few major tours are requiring nowadays: paperless tickets where you don't even get a ticket, just your card.
With this, he's still sending out paper tickets though. It'll be interesting to see how this in-between method will work as he does seem very serious about cancelling sold-for-profit tickets. Do third party ticketing sites have a way of letting tours get ahold of those who bought second hand tickets.
Knowing that might not be allowed in reduces the chance that you will buy a scalped ticket, which increases the risk for the scalper, which decreases their profit margin - which means they will pre-buy fewer tickets.
Otherwise it's going to be instantly sold out by scripted bots.
It was my understanding that TicketMaster/IAC had contracts with most venues that secured its position as the only place to buy tickets online. For example: http://iac.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=604
Is that no longer the case? Or did Louis CK figure out some hack around those agreements?
"...It was a real challenge to find venues around the country that could work with our exclusive ticketing service under these perameters. It means I'm playing in very new places. I really appreciate all of these theaters that are letting us give this a try."
We did a charity concert at one of those venues.
Between ticketmaster's cut, and their $$$ mail you a ticket charge or the $$ print your own ticket fee and the tax that somehow we don't get back because we aren't a big enough charity
It would have been better to make it free and pass a hat around
He's just playing different venues. For example, he'll be playing Symphony Hall in Boston, where they already do all their own ticketing, instead of the TD Bank North Garden, which uses TicketMaster.
As per the text in the link he's had to play at "smaller" and "newer" venues who aren't locked into those contracts. This means he might have to play more shows at a particular venue if it's smaller.
I fully understand the hatred of scalpers but I also kinda like knowing they're an option. I've bought a few overpriced tickets to events I really wanted to attend. I like that I can attend most events I'm interested in so long as I'm willing to pay for it. Is it worth $150 for a $50 ticket? Not usually, but sometimes.
There are plenty of systems that give those willing to pay more a better chance at securing tickets.
But what it really comes down to, is that it's hard to square any of those systems with many artists' desire to keep ticket prices as affordable as possible, so that their 'true' fans aren't priced out by profiteers, suits or yuppie douchebags.
The theoretical flip-side is that scalpers may create an artificial demand, which is what causes high prices. Obviously it's more complicated than that because price is also driven by demand & if the show isn't sold out then the scalper inventory is not worth more than face value. But when you do hear about scalpers in cahoots with ticket vendors or even the promoters - showing up getting escorted to the front of the line and buying up all of the front row seats - it's questionable whether they are doing a service or disservice.
It sounds to me like he doesn't want people to have an essentially guaranteed seat as long as they have a lot of cash. He'd rather people all pay the same and get in or not based on factors other than their wealth or spending. What you're implying is a bug, I believe he sees as a feature. If you fail to get a $50 ticket and then can't buy your way in at $150, that's the system working as intended.
hello folks! I'm going on tour this year from October through Feb. I'll be all over the goddamn place. This year, I'm trying something new, building on the fun, success and fan-benifit of selling my content online. We are selling tickets to this tour exclusively here on louisck.com. I only wanted to do this if there was a way, like with LIVE AT THE BEACON, that it could bring the price of tickets down and make them easier and less complicated to buy. We figured out a way.
Making my shows affordable has always been my goal but two things have always worked against that. High ticket charges and ticket re-sellers marking up the prices. Some ticketing services charge more than 40% over the ticket price and, ironically, the lower I've made my ticket prices, the more scalpers have bought them up, so the more fans have paid for a lot of my tickets.
By selling the tickets exclusively on my site, I've cut the ticket charges way down and absorbed them into the ticket price. To buy a ticket, you join NOTHING. Just use your credit card and buy the damn thing. opt in to the email list if you want, and you'll only get emails from me.
Also, you'll see that if you try to sell the ticket anywhere for anything above the original price, we have the right to cancel your ticket (and refund your money). this is something I intend to enforce. There are some other rules you may find annoying but they are meant to prevent someone who has no intention of seeing the show from buying the ticket and just flipping it for twice the price from a thousand miles away.
Some of these rules may be a pain in your ass, but please be patient. My goal here is that people coming to see my shows are able to pay a fair price and that they be paying just for a ticket. Not also paying an exhorbanant fee for the privalege of buying a ticket.
Tickets across the board, everywhere, are 45 dollars. That's what you'll actually pay. In every case, that will be less than anyone has actually paid to see me (after ticket charges) in about two years and in most cases it's about half of what you paid last year.
The benifit for me is that I won't get angry emails from anyone who paid a ton of money to see me due to circumstances out of my control. That makes me VERY happy. The 45 dollars also includes sales tax, which I'm paying for you. So I'm making more or less depending on the state.
Another benifit to me is also one to you. I get your email address (if you opt in) when you opt in. You don't have to join ANYTHING to buy these tickets and if you opt in, youll only hear from me once in an old man's jizz-cycle.
Obviously none of this means anything if the shows aren't good. So that's up to me. As I do every year, I'll be performing a brand new hour (or more) on all of these shows.
Lastly, it was a real challenge to find venues around the country that could work with our exclusive ticketing service under these perameters. It means I'm playing in very new places. I really appreciate all of these theaters that are letting us give this a try.
Setting up this tour has been fascinating and difficult. this ticketing service is a brand new thing and I really fucking hope it works and that there aren't any problems. If anything comes up, please be patient.
Doing things this way means I"m making less than I would have made if I did a standard tour, using the usual very excellent but expensive ticketing service. In some cities I've had to play smaller venues and do more shows. But I like doing more shows and about a year ago I reached a place where I realized I am making enough money doing comedy so the next thing that interested me is bringing your price down. Either way, I still make a whole lot more than my grandfather who taught math and raised chickens in Michigan.
alright, that's it, folks. I'll be sending this message out to folks on the opt-in list and sending a separate email that lays it out much more simply with the proper links. I am doing this because when I emailed you about LIVE AT CARNEGIE HALL, (which is still on sale for 5 dollars!) about half of the people who got the email really enjoyed the long, verbose, unedited message. The other half HATED it and would have preffered a price, a link, and me shutting the fuck up.
This way, you can read this if you like, or your can just see the massive shit-ball of text and throw it in the garbage, and focus on the simple email.
Setting up this tour has been fascinating and difficult. this ticketing service is a brand new thing and I really fucking hope it works and that there aren't any problems. If anything comes up, please be patient
There is something so honest and earnest about this message. It's basically what I wish I could say whenever I was doing something new and difficult.
I'm one of those people who enjoyed reading the long emails. It's easy to believe HE wrote them, and there's an appeal to that.
But I find it hilarious that, after that long email, he mentions they'll be sending a TL;DR version later. I have to wonder if that was humor, or just a legitimate "ah well" moment. I can't tell, and that makes it better.
One recorded incident had Spooner write a note asking for a fellow lecturer at New College to see him immediately about a matter. The note had a postscript informing the lecturer that the matter had been resolved and he no longer needed to see him.
I wrote a long email to everyone on our launch list this week. I was scared to do it beforehand, but long emails are actually OK. Well, they're better than ok. I got a phenomenal response.
The trick with long emails is, you have to say something interesting, write in an honest and open way, and people have to care about your subject matter.
With Louis C.K., I don't just like his comedy, I want him to succeed. And when I pay him for his video specials, or buy tickets for his live show, I feel like I'm helping him win, and helping us all win. If you can send an email to make your customers feel like he does me, you'll do very well for yourself.
I understand he doesn't use an editor, but he should at least type in a word processor with spell checking functionality. Errors like 'benifit', 'exhorbanant', 'privalege', and 'preffered' look bad.
This is great to see. Just this past weekend I went to a music festival in NYC (The Governor's Ball) whose ticketing was handled exclusively by Eventbrite. I can't remember the last time I was able to buy anything music related online without Ticketmaster being involved. I hope to be able to do it a lot more.
The "refunding your ticket if you try to sell it" thing, well, that's going to be a pain. Glastonbury Festival in the UK has tried to combat this, and ended up basically producing photo IDs for every ticket. A whole ton of effort, especially for a small attempt like this.
I am not sure I like his solution for scalping. How is he going to know if a ticket has been scalped in order to cancel it? Is he going to rely on the actual scalper to give up their client? That is unlikely to happen. Also, when he cancels a ticket will he refund the original 45 price or the scalped price? It would have to be the original price because otherwise he is opening himself to fraud and huge losses. But if he only returns the original price, then the person that bought the ticket would be fucked. And that person, even if they did buy from a scalper, is presumably a big Louis CK fan (since they bought the ticket at an inflated price). And pissing off your fans is never a good idea. There will be a lot of anger and internet backlash if he actually goes through with his threat of cancelling tickets.
I have actually thought about scalping and here is my solution. It works very well for a comedy show, actually. He should announce a single show (not a tour) in a big city, like LA or NY. He should not have any special rules against scalpers other than saying "reselling this ticket is prohibited". Now the fun part starts. If the tickets get bought out too fast (indicating scalping) he should say "my show sold out very quickly, so in order to afford my fans a way to see me without paying high fees to scalpers, I will do another show in the same city, the next day (or a couple of days after the original show). The price for the new show will be the same, so do not pay any scalpers, just buy the tickets for the second show at face value." If the second show sells out very quickly, then he can just announce a third one. And so on.
Thus, he makes extra money and causes a lot of potential losses for scalpers. Scalpers may have to sell at cost (which means they have to take losses for their sales commissions), or if they buy too many tickets and do not move fast enough, they may even have to sell at a loss.
And the prospect that he can pull this trick any time will likely prevent the smarter and better funded scalpers from ever trying to scalp his shows again.
This would work in a big city, because in a big city it is usually not a problem to get a new venue on a relatively short notice. It would also work better for a comedy show, because a comedy show does not require too much production, so it is possible to change schedules without too much pain.
I think if you just say "no ticket transfers," scalping is pretty easy to defeat. 100% mandatory will call, no paper tickets, and they scan the credit card for the sale at the door. Popular solutions for high demand concerts.
That would work, but as I mentioned before there can be a lot of innocent ticket transfers due to people changing plans, etc. These do not result in price increases or artificial supply restrictions. You do not want to actually prevent these (even if they are technically contractually prohibited) because you will piss off a lot of your fans.
Most the time, with bands that have that policy (I am, admittedly talking like club and theater shows, not arena rock shows), advance notice to the ticketing company + a copy of the original purchasers drivers license is considered sufficient.
It's a nice check and balance, and covers the "sell for cost to a friend/acquaintance" route, but is a determent to the professional scalper, since he is required to surrender his identity, essentially, to a 3rd party.
That would piss people off. A lot of people have to change tickets not because of scalping but because of change of plans, etc. This is especially true for big ticket shows were you are supposed to book in advance.
I love the alternate ideas Louis CK has brought to the table and like the fact that he's taken things into his own hands and been able to get gigs despite all that's against him. Two shows at the Kennedy Center? How cool is that?
As much as I don't want to believe this I feel that scalping is ultimately a means of market correction. If he sells tickets for one show in a city at $45 I imagine that he's a popular enough comic that the price would be higher than that due to the limited supply of Louis. Unless he has a really good way of preventing reselling there will be plenty of opportunists out there looking to sell their $45 ticket for $70 if they can.
I think the solution to this would be to better price tickets so that at least he's profiting off his hard work instead of scalpers. Could he auction each individual seat? the best seats might fetch ridiculous amounts of money but the worst seats in the house might go for say less than $45 and give fans a chance at seeing him.
Part of me is happy that he's getting rid of scalpers. The other part of me likes knowing that I can always get tickets for sold out shows from Stubhub.
Unrelated- He's using eTix.com and I think he killed them.
Trying to buy tickets for SF show and getting "Please wait while accessing the system...." from eTix.com.
I think he would have been really savvy to sell a large percentage of the tickets up front for the standard price, and then auction the remaining bit off as the time for the event nears. Cut out the scalpers, give a fair shake to the people who love you and will jump in line day 1, and get a good bonus from the few who prefer the convenience at the expense of cost.
No middlemen? I just bought tickets, and the purchase was powered by etix.com. I'm assuming they used a payment processing gateway for my credit card, there's another middleman. Don't you imagine the money owed to these entities is just built-in to the price of the ticket?
It appears Etix licenses their platform kinda like Shopify does, but also uses it to power their own marketplace. It seems Louis CK is licensing it. It kinda make sense to use the software that's already been built rather than creating a custom solution, and I imagine this is something that seemed to work for him (or whoever manages his website).
I'm not sure how you expect to pay by credit card without using a payment processing gateway. Even if you paid by cash, the post office would be a middleman as you'd have to pay postage.
I assume by "cutting out the middleman" they mean the ticketing cartel otherwise known as Ticketmaster.
A tip after poking around: when you're on the page where you select how many tickets you want you can click on a hidden "By Section" link and pick your section instead of having it selected for you. I was able to pick up a couple first row balcony tickets using this method.
This is obviously great news, but I really hope he has plans to take it to the next step. It's great that an incredibly successful comedian can get away this this, but nothing will really change in the long run unless smaller acts have access to this direct-to-consumer approach as well, and that will only happen if someone like Louis CK goes out of his way to share the network, tools, and process that he's developed. It doesn't sound like that's something he's interested in doing (he wants to be a comedian, not an entrepreneur), but maybe he's just taking baby steps and he hopes to get there eventually.
Even though the purchase page is on etix.com, it shares all chrome with his site, and the tickets don't seem to appear in any public listings or directories elsewhere. Presumably, there's still a charge, it's just small, and included in the pricing model (along with taxes).
Obviously, it would be awesome if this works out and etix.com (or someone else) makes this low-fee approach more accessible to other performers.
I could be wrong, but I don't think that the actual ticket sales are the hard part with something like this. I think that building a network of venues, and producing and promoting your own tour are probably much more difficult. I think Louis CK could probably help a lot of people out without ever building any software or even offering a product.
EDIT: I definitely agree that etix gaining traction would be a great step in the right direction.
I guess it depends on how you look at it. I think the Kickstarter has done a lot to facilitate direct-to-consumer business models. Sure, Kickstarter is a tool used by creators to reach their audience, just like Gmail is a tool I use to communicate with my clients. Kickstarter and Gmail are both middle-men in a sense, but they certainly work with the direct-to-consumer model.
Louis CK seems particularly well suited for something like this because he seems to be content with the amount of money he has. He could do a lot to improve the entertainment industry by sharing his knowledge without necessarily building a business around it.
This takes a decent sized set of stones, and is overall bold, but likely to work for someone of Louis CKs status. Its been done before unsuccessfully (i.e. Pearl Jame and Ticketmaster) but I think his pricepoint and approach looks more like a sensible business plan and less like a PR stunt. Bravo!
Is anyone else having trouble buying tickets? I'm getting a "Sorry, card cannot be processed" error, even after I asked my friends to buy me a ticket where it worked for their card.
Careful. If they, at their option, decide to do Will Call for getting you your tickets, then you'll need the CC of your friend to pick up the tickets (and his/her ID).
A company called Livenation spent the last few years going around buying all the venues that were big enough to hold large acts. They then merged with Ticketmaster to form one big monopoly.
This role is usually filled by the promoter. The promoter model actually is fairly smart, they maintain local offices in each areas and are responsible for knowing if a show will work in a region, and then booking it accordingly and taking care of advertising and PR.
Now then, of course, companies like LN are forming that are promoter/venue/manager combos and it gets a bit iffy.
What seems to happen is that acts worry about their shows having too many random rich people and not enough "real fans". They think without the super-excitement from the "real fans" it would ruin the experience of the show. I'm not sure if that is true, anyone willing to pay a lot of money to attend is probably a real fan, rich or not. But if the bands want to they could allocate a smaller portion of tickets at a lower price using some other method, maybe a lottery, but it's going to be hard to keep the scalpers out.
With all the problems with the copyright-based business models fans should actually want their favorite acts to raise prices and make as much money as they can from touring, instead of the money going to middlemen.