Jump to content

Update: U2 Manager Guy Oseary Responds To Fans' Concerns Over E+I Tour Pre-sales


Max Tsukino
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Subscriber

I can't specifically explain those, but in general... band management (for most bands, not just U2) will usually say that those are speculative listings, and that those sellers don't actually have those tickets. 

However, it's worth noting that it's against the rules at sites like StubHub to list tickets you don't have. Could all of these people just be breaking the rules? Possibly. 

The more upsetting possibility is that those tickets are being scalped by the band's management, promoters and corporate sponsors. I've seen a lot of tour contract riders leaked and posted for other bands where part of the contract includes delivering a quantity of high quality tickets for the band's own associates to scalp. 

Season ticket holders for sports teams at these venues also often have the opportunity to buy tickets directly from the venue before they go onsale to anyone else. 

So I fear it could be one or more of those things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 254
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Subscriber

GUY OSEARY'S REPLY

Finally the letter raises the question of ticket allocation and the U2.com subscriber allocation being two tickets while the CITI presale offered four. Two is what we have always offered when the band are playing indoors in arenas with smaller capacities and what we wanted to do this time was ensure that subscribers were FIRST in line for presales which they have been. 

4 hours ago, mike7man said:

Unfortunately, the original fan letter didn't mention (or only briefly and to a minor degree) one key additional issue:  That the u2.com presale allotment (I'm not talking about the ticket limit)--that is, the actual number (and quality, if seats) of presale tickets was markedly smaller than in previous tours.  This went beyond the iNNOCENCE folks basically having no chance at GAs--many eXPERIENCE folks couldn't obtain GAs either.  And the presale seats in general were clearly inferior.

48 minutes ago, Matkin22 said:

There's a reason for that, and that is we couldn't make that assertion without having the actual data in front of us; something that only Ticketmaster likely has and that they would not share under any circumstances except for legal reasons. Without being able to show that is actually true, we could not include it in the letter. We only presented what we could document.

Even if there were data, I guess the other problem is establishing agreed upon expectations, or even harder the actual terms.  The subscription offers / ads seem to use similar soft language:  "first access", "first in line", "exclusive window".  All of which can be true, of course, and still not mean anything.  Did everyone notice how Mr. Oseary made the point to put the FIRST of "first in line" in all caps when he was mentioning but not addressing Citi?!

Yes, I did in fact have my own first access in an exclusive Innocence window that ordinary Citi and Verified Fan buyers did not.  The end result:  I saw no GA and got disappointing seats.  I then got lucky and got my own access to both Citi and Verified Fan in the days following and saw GA tickets for both, as well as comparable seats to those I had purchased in Innocence.

So I'd certainly bet a significant portion of tickets, GA included, were held back...never made available to me as an Innocence member, nor to those Experience subscribers before me.  The tough part, though, is:  does anything actually establish this as an infringement of the U2.com subscriber ticket benefit?  Common sense certainly would say yes, particularly as "outside" presale groups such as Citi are newly added, with better benefits (ticket quantity) of their own, and likely their own wedge of the allotment pie.

But I guess common sense and fairness unfortunately are pretty foreign ideas when it comes to concert tickets and their providers.  Or even band management it seems:  who cares about Citi, and their equally good (or better) tickets, and their higher limits, they weren't FIRST after all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
1 hour ago, kidcurran1 said:

If you read some of the previous post then we can all be certain that the reason Citi and then the TM Verified Open Sale offered 4 tickets is so that TM can make double bubble on the tickets as it gives people the chance to buy more than needed and then sell the extras on for much more money. People in the fan club however would be more likely to use the tickets and actually attend shows meaning we offer much less to TM and it's re-sale scam. Simple really and summed up in the one word.......Greed.

Bang on.. Ticketmaster resale is scalping no doubt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber

Here is the response I received today, which in summary only offer resolution by the additional dates:

"Due to higher than normal email volume we have fallen behind on responding to your emails. We're sorry that this has kept us from getting back to you in a timely manner and we are working diligently to get caught up.

We have had many inquiries regarding the upcoming #U2eiTour. We are happy to announce that new shows have been added and the registration has been reopened for an opportunity for U2.com Subscribers to purchase tickets to the new shows. If you have not already registered/completed Setup on U2.com and would like the opportunity to purchase tickets for the new shows make sure to follow the steps to register for the Verified Subscriber presales. Please log into your U2.com account and got to Account Info to view the instructions. http://www.u2.com/profile

If you previously completed your Setup and did not purchase tickets there is no need to register again. You will be considered registered for the new presales as well."

So what I am hearing is "sorry about the screw up, and try to buy some other tickets if the band happens to do additional dates near you.  But thanks for the subscriber money anyways!"

I honestly thought there would be a good faith attempt to resolve the issues that have come up recently. My issue is the same as many-long time fan club member, locked out of anything but $350 tix. 

Apparently I was overly hopeful, and again truly surprised by the outcome.  Thanks to all who have tried to resolve these issues - it sadly looks like my fan club days and support of the band's live shows are coming to a close.  Fairly bitter ending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
6 hours ago, sawheaton said:

Exactly what I'm thinking! What is the point of this presale when they don't include a significant allotment of GA's? Too many people claiming to come up with none. I wasn't able to get any. But there were lots of seats up in the rafters at stupid expensive prices. Seems to me they were trying to offload the bad seats on fan club members at top prices. 

And in regards to being able to use unused presale codes for the added dates!? Really?! How is that a benefit? That is what I was expecting and has always been the case. We know they add second dates in some cities and even add in new cities sometimes. Many people hold one or more codes to use when those go on sale. Saying we can use our codes for those new dates isn't some special treatment to make things right. 

For people like me who got my code sent out far to late to be of any use. Guy claims they are reaching out to make things right for those people but I've not heard anything. I'd like GA tickets for MSG or Las Vegas shows but I'm not getting any offers. I'm on the list and have been doing pretty much anything that can be expected.  

I received a presale code, attempted to use it for the first round of presale...it didn't even work! I replied to a thread with my email and phone # on Ticket master along with others who had the same issue. Was supposed to receive a new code, but never did. So now will I get one for the presale of the added shows? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
6 hours ago, vertigojds said:

I can't specifically explain those, but in general... band management (for most bands, not just U2) will usually say that those are speculative listings, and that those sellers don't actually have those tickets. 

However, it's worth noting that it's against the rules at sites like StubHub to list tickets you don't have. Could all of these people just be breaking the rules? Possibly. 

The more upsetting possibility is that those tickets are being scalped by the band's management, promoters and corporate sponsors. I've seen a lot of tour contract riders leaked and posted for other bands where part of the contract includes delivering a quantity of high quality tickets for the band's own associates to scalp. 

Season ticket holders for sports teams at these venues also often have the opportunity to buy tickets directly from the venue before they go onsale to anyone else. 

So I fear it could be one or more of those things. 

Some fans get money from helping scalpers and bots...bands and management do not need that money....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
3 hours ago, monica martino said:

Thanks to all the mods and fan sites all over the world 

Mr Oseary' answer just stated the obvious, no real solutions no real explanations 

 

Typical management speak...

a great deal of talk about what should have happened but no effort to address what did happen.

To sum up his response, "Sorry to hear that you didn't get tickets. We just announced new dates so you can try again."

This wouldn't have happened when Paul McGuinness was steering the ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber

The problems are indeed complex as there are basic market dynamics of supply and demand on the one hand, and, on the other, the feeling that
U2 and U2.COM could have done so much more in both the lead up and the aftermath of the presale fiasco. And, unfortunately, because of this
complexity there are simply no easy answers and solutions.
 
This is what I think of Guy Oseary's reply:
 
Mr. Oseary's letter is a diplomatic writing. Obviously the U2 manager recognizes the problems that people had with the various presales, but at the same time
tries to steer clear from the fact that U2 has a contract with Live Nation who, on their part, have contracts with the venues who have contracts with the (official)
ticket offices (TM, AXS). U2 management - on behalf of U2 – cannot simply walk away from those contracts, or change the outline and details from those agreements.
Especially not with U2’s core operation being rolled out as we speak, namely; performing in front of a live audience. This is both the craft and art of U2, as well
as it is their business for mostly pragmatic reasons (I don’t believe U2 is “in it” for the money: they are Artists first and foremost, but it has to roll!).
 
Now there are two sorts of issues that bother U2 fans: the first concerns the technical problems (e.g. the wrongly applied algorithm, codes not working), and the
other is with regard to the very idea of Verified Fan itself that promotes itself as “rooting out scalpers and bots,” but yet seemed to have worked merely in favor of
the secondary market. What makes the problem even more complex is that it looks like as if the secondary market has had a benefit from the technical issues.
 
But all of this comes down to the very practical concern of getting U2 fans to the U2 concerts. It is what the fans want, and I believe it is what U2 wants as well.
There is absolutely no interest for the band to be either the jukebox act for the money, or to play their new songs in front of a hostile crowd that wants to have
value for their hard paid cash. Where it all goes wrong, in my opinion, is that the contract U2 has with Live Nation allows for too few tickets for the U2.COM
long term subscribers.
    U2 has been around for roughly 40 years and because they are so good over this relatively long period of time, fans have grown with them. Some of these
long time fans have families now and want to take their kids with them to the concert, while others may have the financial means to travel abroad and see concerts there. Families need to buy four (4) tickets at least, while travelers don’t come over for just one show. This is why the CITI bank presale set so many bad blood,
because it felt unfair that those eligible were able to buy four (4), while long term subscribers only had opportunity (if they had at all!), for two (2).
 
Mr. Oseary, doesn’t address this CITI issue at all, but it is obvious that U2 is bound to these ticket allocations by contract. Still, I believe that this deal is not
good for fans and band alike. U2 management will do well to review this situation at their earliest convenience. This for reasons already outlined in the above,
but also because this CITI allocation gives supply to an unwanted demand of making Verified Money over the heads of Verified Fans.
 
Yes, there is something to say for Verified Fan as it diminishes the changes of fans buying fake tickets (I’ve seen it happen just a few months ago at a Stones concert
where two people paid € 450,- euro for false tickets – definitely unverified scalpers!), while still enabling people to resell their tickets in case when their plans have
changed for what reason whatsoever. But Verified Fan may not lead to Verified Scalping, as seems to have happened now.
 
In sum: the main problem for fans is the poor allocation of U2.COM subscriber tickets. Too few tickets were available for a legit fan based demand.
The technical problems only made the situation worse, and the fact that U2.COM has too little capacity to handle these problems made it even more worse.
Now U2 may be bound by contract, but it should be fair when at least it is recognized that whatever deal they got themselves into is not operating as was,  
and is desired. With that recognition given, I believe we can move forward to finding solutions. If not for now, then at least for the near and foreseeable future.
 
Joyce aka BiGgiRL
(u2start staff member)
 
Edited by B!gGiRL
layout
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber

It is also possible that all or most of the venues have very specific contractual arrangements which mean that around 70% of all tickets sold are under their control rather than the band's promoter.  Often this means the venue has a direct tie in with Ticketmaster and corporate deals, aimed at maximising income over and above that which it gets for the venue hire.  This is becoming the norm now for major venues where they have a strong bargaining position.  For Ticketmaster (and indirectly Live Nation) this may also lead to additional revenue being generated via reseller market, but it is generally bad news for fans as allocations for areas such as GA and the better value seats can be severely restricted.

The business model has a changed a lot in recent years and it is only artists who are truly independent (and big enough) who have the ability to negotiate something different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...