When it was just touts outside a venue buying unwanted tickets and seeling them on then I'd agree. But this is touting on an industrial scale. It's the difference betwen a guy with a fishing rod and a fleet of Japanese factory trawlers.
But then if people are prepared to pay 250 quid to see Coldplay I obviously live in a world I've lost touch with completely.

I'm going to a sold out gig at the 02 this evening. Standing sold out in an hour, I didn't have a problem buying a ticket. The day I have a problem is the day I have an issue with there companies. I'd like to know the actual percentage of tickets that are genuine purchases. There is a lot of hysteria involved in this I bet.

I haven't looked to buy tickets for anything for a while, so you'd know more than I would on that score. It might be the case that it's been blown out of proportion, I just see this as an example of corporates getting rid of "sleazy" touts just so they can replace them with an industrial equivalent. Some people were making a few quid and the big boys didn't see why it shouldn't be them.
These sorts of things are all made possible by the internet though, and I guess it's all fairly inevitable once you take that into account.

Now you understand. Oh and less of the sleazy if you don't mind...

Didn't see this programme, but is the practice any different to an individual selling "spare" tickets on Ebay, which I seem to recall promoters being up in arms about a few years ago? Or is OK if they do it, but not if an individual does it?

As Dave said, I've never had an issue getting a ticket for any event I've wanted to go to!

If people aren't clever enough to get on early and book their own tickets, then they deserve to be ripped off!

But wasn't the point of the programme showing that these companies were basically blocking punters, who considered themselves "clever enough to get on early and book their own tickets", from buying and then selling the tickets they had bought themselves on at inflated prices? Hardly deserving of ripping off Average Joe.

The ticket issue is a bit of a red-herring. Of course it's wrong but it is also of trivial importance next to problem of big business - when caught out by what few investigative reporters there are these days - slapping a high court injunction on the story. It begs the question - how many other public interest stories are currently being blocked by a legislative system which clearly favours the business class?

Every customer who was on there moaning about not getting a ticket was a dathery women who didn't have much clue about anything pretty much!

I fail to understand how you could not get a ticket for something you wanted to see. If it was that important to you, you'd get one by any means neccessary!

From the original link

"viagogo staff compete directly with real fans to buy tickets from primary ticket sellers, like Ticketmaster, for in demand events as soon as they go on sale. To get around systems put in place to prevent bulk buying of tickets, viagogo staff use multiple credit cards registered to different addresses"

That seems to explain some of it. It may not be illegal but it's a bit poor if your business model relies on blocking other people from buying a product so you can then sell the same product to the same person for a mark up, all the while masking your identity. And if there's nothing "wrong" with it, why the injunction?



I don't disagree totally, as long as by any means necessary involves exposing as bent those who buy tickets in an organised fashion, with no intention of going to said event, just so others who genuinely want to go have to pay more.