An investigation into the arguments for and against greater regulation of ticket touting and secondary ticketing at live

music events in the UK.

Word Count: 9,899

Rebecca Amy Johnson

A Dissertation submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for award of the degree of BA (Hons) Music and Live Events Management of Buckinghamshire New University

May 2013

Student ID 21009185

Page |2

Contents. Abstract
1. Introduction
1.1 Main Problems Related to Ticket Touting 1.1.1 Problems for fans 1.1.2 Problems for promoters 1.1.3 Problems for artists 1.1.4 Problems for secondary sellers 1.2 Touting vs. Secondary Sellers 1.3 Legislation 1.4 Structural Overview and Research Focus

4
5
6 6 6 7 7 8 8 12

2. Literature Review
2.1 Introduction 2.2 Current Definitions and perceptions 2.2.1 Fans Views 2.2.2 Artist Views 2.2.3 Music Industry Views 2.3 Influencing Factors 2.4 Future 2.5 Conclusion

14
14 14 16 18 20 22 26 27

3. Methodology
3.1 Introduction 3.2 Data Types 3.3 Data Collection Methods and Sampling 3.4 Target Audience 3.5 Data Analysis

29
29 29 30 32 33

4. Results
4.1 Original Results 4.2 Comparative Results

34
34 45

Student ID 21009185

Page |3

5. Discussion
5.1 Introduction 5.2 Question 5 5.3 Question 6 5.4 Question 7 5.5 Question 8 5.6 Question 9 5.7 Question 10 5.8 Question 11 5.9 Question 12 5.10 Question 13 & 14 5.11 Question 15 & 16

49
49 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 57 58 58

6. Conclusion
6.1 Limitations and recommendations for further study 6.2 Conclusions

60
60 61

7. Reference List 8. Bibliography 9. Appendices

63 72 77

Student ID 21009185

Page |4

Abstract.
The purpose of this study is to investigate what effect, if any, ticket touts have on the music industry in the UK. It will investigate the different types of touts in the UK music industry and the roles they undertake. This study will contemplate whether they are a necessary part of the industry or if they are redundant in the present day music industry, and will discuss the arguments for and against legislation regarding touts, and try to reach a conclusion which benefits all stakeholders involved. To do this, the study will firstly discuss the previous literature which has been released on ticket touting, the opinions will be discussed in sections, dependent on who the literature was written by, the paper will study views from different stakeholders, including fans, artists and music industry professionals. This literature will then be compared to the findings this study will produce through a questionnaire posted online. The questionnaire will consist of 16 questions, covering a number of topics that were debated and derived from the literature review. As a result of comparing, all the findings, it was found that there is no universal definition of a ticket tout, although the majority of respondents define a tout as the people who sell a ticket outside a venue on the day of a show, with a lower percentage of people believing tickets sold online are touts. There was also no answer regarding whose responsibility it is to regulate the secondary sales market, so a suggestion is that the music industry and government work together to maintain this industry.

Student ID 21009185

Page |5

1. Introduction.
Ticket touting at live events in the UK has been a common practice for years, and is a continuously growing industry, with a limited supply and constant demand from customers. Touts are referred to as the lone players outside venues but also large corporations who are allocated tickets in bulk to sell on at extraordinarily high mark-ups. Since 2012, ticket touting has been a subject under speculation from fans, the government, and the music industry. This is because in 2012, a bill to restrict touts did not make law and also in 2012, a dispatches documentary revealed how the secondary market actually works, was aired on national TV. This dissertation will recognise the opinions from a number of different parties, including fans, promoters, artists, the government and the secondary ticketers. It will also investigate whether ticket touts are seen as a problem or salvation and whether both the industry and the public can agree on if industry self-regulation or government legislation is preferable. A history of ticket touting in the UK has been included in Appendix 1, and an examination of USA ticket touting legislation has been included in Appendix 2.

The UK live music industry is currently worth 1,541 million (Mintel, 2012a) and has seen a steady growth for a number of years. The UK music industry as a whole is worth approximately 3.6billion (Page and Carey, 2010), a 5% rise from 2008 (The Economist, 2010). The value of advance ticket sales in 2003 was approximately 1.4 billion. Of this, around 580 million were sales made through primary

Student ID 21009185

Page |6

ticket agents (Office Of Fair Trading (OFT) 2005, p.1) This suggests that 800 million sales were made on the secondary market. Between 1999 and 2003, the advance ticket sales market grew by 150% (OFT 2005) and is continually growing. Ticketmaster Entertainment sold more than 141 million tickets worldwide in 2008 (Ticketmaster Entertainment Ltd 2008).

1.1 Main problems related to Ticket Touting.

Ticket touting is an ever increasing industry with an increasing market, and an increasing number of ways to conduct business; there is now a large number of websites and online avenues to purchase tickets, so much that a large amount of problems arise in relation to the way in which ticket resellers do business. 1.1.1 Problems for fans: Some ticket resellers will have a number of employees at box offices and laptops purchasing tickets as soon as they are released. This leaves less chance for fans to purchase tickets they want from primary sellers or box offices. Secondary sellers will then be able to resell the tickets at any price they decide, usually hugely inflated from the face value; this is also a disadvantage to fans because they may be unable to afford tickets at exaggerated prices. 1.1.2 Problems for promoters: When a ticket is bought and then re-sold on the secondary market, the

Student ID 21009185

Page |7

promoters receive none of the additional money created, which could be pumped back into the music industry, for future jobs, acts, shows etc. It can also mean that on the day/night of the event, promoters can be faced with fans being turned away from the event, causing unrest and damaging the promoters reputation.

1.1.3 Problems for artists: If an artists tickets are being sold on secondary avenues, especially when being sold at over inflated prices, fans can be priced out of attending a concert or show. The blame for the ticket prices is often placed upon the artists, with fans often believing that the artist chooses the ticket prices, this can damage the popularity of the artist and affect sales for upcoming tours. Kevin Baird (Two Door Cinema Club) said "I think it is quite short-sighted for an artist to be OK with it, he continues to say that their band doesnt agree with ripping off the fans, and would never allow their tickets to be sold on the secondary market (Crookes 2012). 1.1.4 Problems for secondary sellers: With no legislation to separate those pledging a legitimate ticket business and those ripping off fans, it is easy to confuse good touts with those illegitimate businesses. Sometimes people do look down their noses at youYou do get people out there who buy 6 tickets for a festival when they only needed 4, then theyll sell a couple online, for instance on eBay. Theyre the

Student ID 21009185

Page |8

people whove really killed the industry. Simon Dempsey, Ticket Tout (cited in Bain, 2012).

1.2 Touting vs. Secondary Sellers.

The difference between touts and secondary ticketers is widely debated and many class both as the same. Others believe there is a fine line between touting and secondary sellers. The activity of secondary ticket agents is consequently not illegal. It is, however, regulated to a degree by consumer legislation. Nevertheless, it is clear that some secondary agents have moved beyond legitimate secondary dealing and are breaching this legislation resulting in harm to consumers (OFT 2005, p.10). The Society of Ticket Agents and Retailers (Cited in DCMS Report 2008) define touting as reselling a ticket in a manner which is inconsistent with the standards set by the primary market and when in breach of the terms and conditions on the ticket. The DCMS report (2008) stated that the music industry does not view not-for-profit resale amongst friends and colleagues as touting and that internet-based sellers are not classed as touts.

1.3 Legislation.
There is no legislation to regulate how music tickets should be handled. The only exception is found on the back of the ticket in the form of the terms and conditions. However, this often doesnt control how the ticket should be resold if the circumstance arises. Sport is largely affected by touting, and in 1994, the

Student ID 21009185

Page |9

UK Government introduced the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 which prohibits the resale of a ticket for a football match (S.166, SS.1&2) much to the music industries dismay.

There is no legislation in the UK which supervises the sale and resale of tickets, but there are 2 agencies who try to regulate the secondary market:

ASTA (Association of Secondary Ticket Agents) STAR (Society of Ticket Agents and Retailers / Secure Tickets from Authorised Retailers)

The bigger of the two bodies is STAR with most of the largest primary sellers as members; however, only a small number of secondary ticket agents are members. The Government clearly recognises that touting is a problem, and I believe it is their responsibility to do something about it decided Sharon Hodgeson MP, (2012) and began to create legislation herself, the Sale Of Tickets (Sporting And Cultural Events) Bill 2011 (See appendix 3) however the bill was unsuccessful. Woodward, MP says the problem is not as big as people perceive,

"There is a problem, but it is not a problem for the majority of people buying tickets, eighty-five per cent of the tickets are actually being sold and bought and used by legitimate fans in a legitimate way for the price they should be" (Cited in Briggs, 2007).

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 10

Much of the UK government is in support of stopping touts from operating; Mike Weatherly MP says: The UK Government need to catch up. The French are leading the way, the Olympics demanded it, the music industry is begging for action and the fans certainly want it, but what is lacking is our Governments grasp of the overwhelming evidence for action . (Hansard 2012a). Robertson, MP (2008) continues to agree describing touting as extortion at the expense of both fans and the entertainment industries. In 2007, at a ticket tout summit, the government and music industry came together to discuss future action. According to Culture MP, Jowell (2007) Exploitation and excessive profiteering by touts puts tickets out of the reach of real fans...we are determined to protect consumers against this Progress has been made but were going to continue to work with the industry to cut off the commercial opportunities for ticket touts and stamp out unfair practices. Jowell (2007) 5 years on there has been little noticeable action. When a case is taken to court regarding tickets, a number of charges can be used, including The Fraud Act 2006. Both GetMe Tickets and Xclusive Tickets owners were charged with fraud after investigations by the Serious Fraud Office (Music Law Updates, 2009). Touts are charged under S6 and S7 of TFA 2006, Possession etc. of articles for use in frauds and Making or

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 11

supplying articles for use in frauds. In 2010, 2 students were charged under TFA 2006 for advertising tickets for sale which didnt exist (Mitchell, 2010). Touts are rarely charged with theft, this mainly happens when tickets are stolen or forced from their rightful owner. However, in R v Marshall, Coombes and Eren [1998] 2 Cr. App. R. 282, defendants had been charged for purchasing unexpired tickets from London Underground passengers with the intent to re-sell them for profit, they were found guilty under The Theft Act 1968 (Westlaw, 1998). Some special events in the UK have legislation to protect them from ticket re-sale, the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 was created for this reason. A person commits an offence if he sells an Olympic ticket (a) in a public place or in the course of a business, and (b) otherwise than in accordance with a written authorisation issued by the London Organising Committee LOGPGA 2006 S31 SS1, however when a tout was found with more than 23,000 worth of Olympic tickets, he was found guilty and charged only 435, when the maximum penalty was 20,000 (Camber, Gysin and Robsinon 2011). In 2013, Reading Council created a new bill which restricts ticket touts activities in music, football and special events, The Reading Council Borough Bill, this lies alongside the Dispersal Order which Reading festival uses to allow the police to move on and separate groups of people. Police said they would also use the powers against any aggressive illegal ticket touts (BBC News 2011). Also in 2013, the Metropolitan police called for more

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 12

regulation to be put in place, Consideration must be given to introducing legislation to govern the unauthorised sale of event tickets (Metropolitan Police 2013, p.4) and calls for the live music sector to work with the government to create a solution to touting (Complete Music Updates, 2013a). The lack of legislation outlawing the unauthorised resale of tickets and the absence of regulation of the primary and secondary ticket market encourages unscrupulous practices, a lack of transparency and fraud (Metropolitan Police 2013, p.3)

1.4 Structural Overview and Research Focus

This study will be split into sections, consisting of introduction, literature review, research methodology, results section, discussion and conclusion. The aim of the piece of work is to understand how different stakeholders feel about ticket touting in the music industry and to discuss arguments for and against regulating the way in which both touts and secondary sellers commence their business. To do this, the paper will discuss previously published work in the literature review and then carry out primary research to gain more information about subjects covered in the literature review and where it was though more research would be beneficial. This research will then be analysed and compared to the content in the literature review. The conclusion will follow, where the findings will be published.

This study will focus on the UK Live Music ticket market, but will draw information, articles and previous research from all over the world, mainly the

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 13

USA and Australia. The paper may refer to touts as brokers, scalpers or resellers; this is dependent on the country from which the definition originates. If making reference to secondary sales websites, they will be called so.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 14

2. Literature Review. 2.1 Introduction

This Literature review will discuss definitions of ticket touting which have already been published from authors, artists, fans and music industry professionals and their opinions of ticket touting in the music industry. It will then discuss how the live industry is changing in ways which may influence touts behaviours, unless legislation or another way to prevent them is introduced. The reason for doing the literature review is to identify key themes which will create the basis of the research.

The key authors used are Campbell and Keeghan (2007), who wrote a research report on ticket touting for the government, and the Department of Culture, Media and Sport Report (2008) which is the official government response to Campbell and Keeghan. References will also be drawn from Happel and Jennings works from 1995, 2002 and 2010.

2.2 Current Definition and Perceptions.

The Department of Culture, Media and Sport (2008,) found there is no consensus as to whether: Touting means all reselling of tickets, all reselling not authorised by the original issuers, or only the less reputable activities. (DCMS, 2008, p.2).

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 15

This section will discuss ideas that other authors have previously used to define what touting is, and will then discuss fan, artist and industry professionals perceptions on the subject.

Cloonan (2009) and FindLaw UK (2012) both describe touting similarly as an activity where a person or organisation buys tickets for an event with the intention to sell them on for a profit. Sutton (2007) and Happel and Jennings (2002) state that the ticket market is a huge market with tons of small players, ranging from global to the local and that everybodys getting into the act (Sutton 2007). Page (2006) describes touting As a secondary market that achieves huge revenues for the black economy at the expense of the primary market. (Page, 2006) Courty (2003) classes brokers and scalpers individually, he describes brokers as bona fide businesspeople (p.174) whereas scalpers are unlikely to be licensed. Some people, however, think of touts as dishonest people. This includes Morris (2013) who describes touts as a dodgy looking bloke, Sosickwitityo (2009) continues to describe touts as a dirty term which tells of the sketchy characters that would hang around stadiums. Chris Bryant, MP, concurs, describing touts as parasites who target the legitimate interests of fans (cited in Ward 2011, p.15) and Europe Economics (2009, p.23) refer to touts as dubious. The DCMS report (2008, p.11) describes touts as shady characters whereas Happel and Jennings (2002, p.447) labels them as evil

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 16

manipulators. Spitzer (2000) describes the alliance between box office workers and ticket brokers who conspire to shut out real fans from being able to get a ticket as unholy and illegal. Whoevers opinion is closer to the truth remains to be seen and the objective of this dissertation is to create an understanding of touts and the services they provide.

2.2.1 Fans views

Fans are the people who buy the tickets; the ones who struggle at 9am to purchase tickets for high demand shows, the ones who miss out and the ones who can be driven to such measures as going to a tout for a concert ticket. According to the DCMS Report (2008) some fans see touting as a valuable service, a godsend (p.3) to those who are desperate for tickets to a s old out concert, and to those who find themselves unable to use their tickets or acquire refunds for them.

A focus group directed by Campbell and Keeghan (2007) described touts with the characteristics of A dodgy little bloke with a cap to cover his bald head (p.22). Other replies they received stated its basically a chap like me trying to make a buck selling on the internet (p.23). In their research, the public did not regard touts and secondary selling websites the same. Consumers considered the term tout to be an offensive one, suggestive of someone whose operation might be shady manipulative, dishonest, even criminal (p.21). It was also found, however, that those individuals, who complained about touts, still believed that he should be free to sell on tickets for his own gain. This seems

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 17

to be a common opinion from fans, who feel they should be able to sell on their own tickets, If I buy a pair of shoes and I dont want them anymore, I can resell them. How is this any different than re-selling tickets? Hollatz (Cited in Peraino, 2012, p.12). Cunningham agrees The second-hand car market is able to operate without paying Ford a tax every time a car is resold, he continues to say that the secondary market is effectual and for the benefit everyone except the entrenched dinosaurs who are searching for substitute revenue streams to replace the drop in CD revenue (cited in Guardian, 2008). Some consumers find palpable enjoyment in tracking and sourcing tickets, especially rare or high-demand tickets with no care for the final expenditure (p.7) which is confirmed by Leaman (cited in Sisario 2010) who says I have money. So if I want to come to a show, I want to be up front and I dont care if it costs $100 or $1,000. Cameron (2011) says that fans are willing to use touts because the presence of risk and uncertainty (p.6) of missing out on a meaningful social event (p.6) can provide encouragement to pay more for a ticket. This is further verified by Becker (1991) who suggests concert attending can become habitual, and as habit increases, the pressure to do so with friends increases. This could explain why a certain band, venue or night, will see the same people attending. Consequently it questions whether fans are willing to pay excessive amounts, just because their friends do as to not miss

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 18

out. The Campbell and Keeghan report (2007, p.8) did find however, fans feel that misrepresenting and/or selling tickets you dont have, is either illegal or immoral. In a poll run by BBC, 36.18% of respondents believed it was necessary for the government to legislate touts, in contrast to 63.82% who believed it was the music industrys responsibility (Briggs, 2007). It is for these reasons, that this dissertation will discuss fan definition and perception of touts, for clarity on this issue; because opinion is divided on what the public think is acceptable.

2.2.2 Artist views

Artists publically make a stand against touts, many UK artists joining in the support of the bill proposed by Sharon Hodgeson against touting, although it seems not all are so in favour. Gbenga Adelekan (Metromony) says ticket touting is a disgrace. That if it's genuine it's cool to do but those who pretend to be genuine and bulk sell tickets, are uncool. Marina (and the Diamonds) agrees saying its totally disgusting (Crookes, 2012). Garth Brooks also agrees, and was quoted saying Ive seen the show, its not worth it when told $50 tickets to his show were being sold at $500 (Carey, 2007). In 2008, Nine Inch Nails were allocated 10% of tickets for their shows for an upcoming tour, in attempt to stop touts, they sold them in a pre-sale, with fans names printed on the ticket, and needing ID to access them (Kreps, 2008). Some artists, however, are blas about the subject. According to Fogel (Cited in Sisaro, 2009) some artists will hold back tickets from sale and deliver them

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 19

to the secondary market, they are sold directly to brokers because artists make more money that way. Leslie and Sorensen (2010) confirm this, saying that artists typically receive an allocation of tickets, which they can distribute as they wish and that artists occasionally sell their allocation via a broker into the secondary market. This is further upheld by Smith (2009) who claims that virtually every major tour involves some official tickets, priced and sold, as if they were offered for resale by fans or brokers, but are set aside by the artists and promoters, he mentions that this includes tours by Bon Jovi, Celine Dion, Van Halen, Billy Joel and Elton John. In 2012, leaked documents by Channel 5 show documents which display ticket allocations, and those allocated for artist hold for a Justin Bieber concert were found for sale on Ticketnow, priced at $200+ and that from a 14,000 capacity venue, only 1,001 tickets were on public sale (Williams, 2012). Similar documents were released for a Taylor Swift tour, where almost 12,000 tickets were allocated before public sale (Williams, 2009). In 2011, a leaked rider from Katy Perrys 2011 declares that promoters may be required to hold back tickets, for Katy Perrys team, to resell to fans through the secondary market (Complete Music Updates, 2011), so if legislation to stop only allocations was implemented, a larger number of tickets would be available for fans, but also for touts, which implies the need for greater legislation or internal regulation.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 20

2.2.3 Music Industry Views

The music industry believes it is the governments responsibility to regulate the secondary sales market. Chair of the Concert Promoters Association, Ballantine (cited in Briggs, 2007) says that the music industry wants legislation that disallows the reselling of a concert ticket for commercial gain , he describes the government as putting their head under the duvet and hoping that this is just going to go away. Director of T in the Park, Ellis, agrees; stating that every entertainment organisation in the UK needs this, we can't all be wrong, we can't all be barking up the wrong tree (cited in Briggs, 2007). Even the DCMS report (2008) says that event organisers sense they have now done as much as they can to avert ticket resale and that the time has come for the Government to step in, either to ban it, or to cap the profits which can be achieved. Harvey Goldsmith, a UK promoter, agrees and was quoted as saying: Its a few people out there taking advantage of the massive demand for live music, and exploiting the British consumer. It's unscrupulous, illegitimate and a total rip-off (cited in Lowery 2007) He continues, describing how promoters work to make concerts affordable, before these people come along and fleece the punter for massive profits... It's illegitimate profiteering and it should be made illegal, full stop (cited in Lowery 2007). An undercover documentary was filmed in ticket reseller company, Viagogo, in

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 21

2012, opened the worlds eyes to ticket touting, a few years before, in 2008, CEO of Viagogo released a statement: We agree that rogue operators should be dealt with. But it woul d not make sense to ban a necessary industry due to a handful of disreputable companies. In 2007, 97% of ticket sellers on Viagogo sold 10 or fewer tickets, so we are clearly not facilitating touting. About 50% of tickets sold on Viagogo in 2007 were sold at or below face value Baker (cited in Guardian, 2008). Since the revolutions made in the Viagogo Documentary 2012 prove that to be false; the Association of Independent Festivals (AIM) have created an antisecondary ticketing charter to try to combat the secondary market, but consists of only 55 signatures (Ingham, 2012). Some industry professionals uncovered the lies being told to fans, regarding how they operate in relation to touts. Joe Freeman, Senior Vice President of TicketMaster says that TicketMasters "Marketplace" pages only rarely list tickets offered by fans. The vast majority of tickets are sold by the artists and their promoters with the cooperation of Ticketmaster, which contradicts many previous statements by music industry professionals (Smith 2009), and according to managers of top artists and Ticketmaster executives, TicketMaster routinely offers to list hundreds of the best tickets per concert on one of its two resale websites, and divides the extra revenue with the artists and promoters, which can amount to more than $2 million on a major tour (Smith 2009). Referring to a concert in which Bob Dylan, in an attempt to stop

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 22

tickets being touted, only made tickets available to buy at the box office at the venue on the day of the show, Lefkowitz from Goldenvoice called the move a throwback to another time (Eisen 2010).

It is clear that there is no universal definition of what a ticket tout is, this demonstrates the need for clarity. It is also clear that the reputation of touts is varied, and that this should also be clarified. The DCMS Report (2008) summarises, saying touting has very different meanings to different people, when considering that touting causes problems, there is a need for intervention to control.

2.3 Influencing Factors

The music industry is changing from a recorded industry to predominately live, and is continuously changing. Figures released by PRS in 2009 showed that live music, for the first time, earned more money than recorded music. Brennan (2010) says that the dynamic between the recorded and live sectors is changing and it is no longer clear which revenue stream is now more dominant. Krueger (2005) found, however, that the amount of concerts performed by a selection of artists* rose in the 1980s, plateaued in the first half of the 1990s, and declined from 1996 to 2003. With artists performing fewer shows without demand decreasing, tickets for shows sell out at an alarming rate. Mori (2004)

Artists selected by virtue of being the top revenue generators in the period 1996-1999 and having revenues in the surrounding periods.
*

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 23

found that over half (55%) of venues who have staged live music in the last 12 months, say their reason for doing so is customer demand and Mintel (2012b) found that live music is the factor which is most likely to encourage people to go out to nightclubs and that 25% would rather attend a live music concert than a nightclub.

The rise and ease of accessing the internet has changed the market for ticket touting in numerous ways. Ticket scalping has moved off the street and onto the computer (Wolohan 2006), Artigue agrees, but is in praise of on line touting, saying that the internet has revolutionized scalping, and changed it into a sophisticated white collar business that works for everyone (cited in Carey, 2007). STAR (2011) who are against touting, continue by saying a very high percentage of sales are now made over the internet and it has enabled the growth of the ticket re-sales market.

The live industry has benefitted in other ways which are less obvious. Social Media allows artists and their work to reach more people and ultimately gain more fans. In addition, with travel connections constantly improving, it is possible for fans to travel to shows which are not necessarily on the doorstep. Mintel (2012b) found that 85% of people would travel for over an hour to a concert, and Campbell and Keeghan (2007) found that the availability of cheap flights, transport and package deals has led to many travelling abroad to concerts, making a weekend of it (p.10) and creating an adventure (p.10). But this has created new moral problems for the UK industry, from

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 24

countries selling fake tickets to festival tourists to travel companies over emphasising accessibility to an event from the accommodation theyve provided. This creates an opportunity for touts to step in and sell tickets at unreasonable prices, when a promoter refuses entry due to illegitimate tickets.

Ticket prices have changed in recent years and this has affected touts. The DCMS Report (2008) says that promoters price tickets below market value to make them affordable to the general public, and that this was something they were proud of (p.13), Happel and Jennings (2002, p.459) continue, stating that the secondary market changes the delicate pricing mechanism arrived at by event promoters and team owners. A report by Krueger (2005) found in the 7 years from 1996 to 2003, the average concert price increased by 82%, which could be explained because artists are being paid more to perform while revenue per show increased by 60%. He also found that the number of shows performed by superstar artists declined by 18%. If an artist charges 200, and you see that those tickets are getting sold for 400, 200 is evaporating into an economy that we have no piece of , Fogel (cited in Sisario, 2009). It is unclear why ticket prices have risen at the rate that they have, Depken (2005) tries to answer this query as being due to the distinctive features of tickets for entertainment events, including the fixed supply and uncertain demand, a profit-searching event promoter will price tickets below market clearing to try to fill the venue. Sandall (2007) feels that the digital age can explain the growth in ticket prices; he calls it more than a coincidence

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 25

that as the consumers pay less for music, they become more willing to pay unprecedented sums to see them perform. He continues to say that in the 1980s, a seat at a concert by a superstar cost about the same as her album. By contrast, in 2006, you could have bought Madonnas entire catalogue for less than half of what it cost to see her perform at Wembley Arena, where the highest priced tickets were 160. Leslie and Sorensen (2010) found that on average, ticket prices in the resale market are 41% above face value, although brokers lose money on 26% of all tickets they sell.

The fans who buy tickets from a tout are usually not short of money according to Black (1968) who defines a scalper as one who sells at an advance over the price charged by the management (p.1652) and describes the prices that touts charge as extortionate (p.1652). Happel and Jennings (1995, p.1) agree, describing touting as a market of buyers whose time is in short supply but whose money isn't, Fogel (cited in Sisario, 2009) agrees comparing touting as a free for all and just a reality of society, no different to people illegally downloading music. However, Lebowitz (cited in Sisario, 2009) disagrees, and describes a concert ticket as someones spiritual life enhancing experience of art and not something people flip for the biggest profit.

Europe Economics (2009) proposed tickets in the primary markets might be under-priced because the artists or performers primary objective might be that of performing to a full house. Leslie and Sorensen (2010) agree saying

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 26

that ticket pricing is complicated because artists have a preference for selling out the event, because artists gain value from playing to a full house and it enriches the experience for fans. This is further proven by Sutton (2007) who said the promoter wants to ensure that all tickets are sold, and so prices the tickets below market value. Happel and Jennings (2002) agree further saying that if a promoter charges too much, they risk creating a public perception as price gougers (p.453), which could damage the promoters reputation and long-run box office sales. They also say that those consumers sitting in particularly good seats may buy the seats at a price below market value, but often spend so much on concessions that total profits are maximized. This suggests if ticket prices are lower, fans are more likely to buy merchandise after the event. Mintel (2012b) found that 36% people would pay extra for a ticket to a sold-out concert but that only 1 in 10 have bought a ticket through secondary avenues.

It is clear that ticket prices are rising but so is willingness to spend more, by slowly increasing ticket prices, touts could slowly be dispelled, however if theyre increased beyond market stretch; promoters are at risk of segmenting concert attendees to only those who can afford it. Sosickwitityo (2009) sums up, stating a ticket is only worth as much as you value it.

2.4 Future
Happel and Jennings (2002, p.460) suggest creating a system which allows tickets to be traded, but only through the promoters own website, a system

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 27

which in 2013, TicketMaster introduced into their website (Complete Music Updates, 2013b). Also in 2013, a system for ticket trading was introduced into twitter. @Twickets is a service created after a trend emerged of fans tweeting an artist to try to sell a ticket for that artists concert, and using twitter to advertise the ticket. Launched in 2011, twickets can boast 20,000 followers on its main site, with 5 more twicket accounts, specific to the type of ticket to be sold, i.e., theatre, music and more recently introduced, travel. Twickets will not allow any ticket to be sold over face value, and has since its creation, sold over 45,000 tickets (Sherwin, 2013). The ability to share tickets for sale at face value, in attempt to beat touts, could be successful, and could be the start of regulating the ways in which touts operate.

2.5 Conclusion
It is clear that there are no two demographic who can agree on the effect that ticket touts have in the UK. There are also large divides in each demographic dependent on individuals experiences with touts, therefore it could be beneficial to get more research on what each demographic believes touting to be.

It is also clear that opinion is divided in regards to who should legislate ticket touts. Those in the music industry believe the responsibility legislate stems from the government; the government believe it is a challenge for the music industry to handle.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 28

Ticket prices and what people are willing to pay is a grey area, with secondary sales websites selling above market pricings to numbers in the hundreds, therefore it could be useful to try to discover what the market will be willing to pay for live music tickets in the UK.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 29

3. Methodology. 3.1 Introduction

The purpose of this investigation is to apply previous research into a new framework, from which to gather new data about ticket touting at live events in the UK. The aim is to gather sufficient data, to analyse and provide an insight into ticket touting in the UK. This section will detail how the research was carried out and also the reasons why it was carried out in those ways; it will explain the pros and cons of data collection and evaluate the most beneficial method to use.

3.2 Data Types

Data was collected through primary research in the form of a questionnaire which contained questions that will produce both qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative methods are: Ways of collecting data which are concerned with describing meaning, rather than with drawing statistical inferences. What qualitative methods lose on reliability, they gain in terms of validity. They provide a more in depth and rich description (Ituma, 2011) Qualitative data is collected through open ended questions where the respondent is able to reply in detail and can share opinions on certain matters;

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 30

it allows respondents to share their true feelings about a subject without having to choose a pre-determined answer from a list. Quantitative data is empirical research where the data is in the form of numbers (Punch, 2005, p.3). Quantitative questions involve closed questions which provide a limited choice of answers, which can be described and manipulated numerically and used to construct graphs and tables (McLeod 2008a).

For the purpose of this research, a combination of both methods was used. I believe there is value in consciously combining both qualitative and quantitative methods in what is referred to as a "mixed methods" approach (McLeod 2008b). By using both qualitative and quantitative methods in one questionnaire, the validity of the findings can be increased; this is because it allows the question to be examined in different ways (Frechtling, Sharp & Westat 1997). It can also help to understand the findings, using quantitative questions to find out what the change or trend is, and using qualitative to discover why such trends or changes happened (Washoe County School 2012).

3.3 Data Collection Methods and Sampling.

The questions on the questionnaire were chosen from the theoretical

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 31

framework created in the literature review, where it became clear where there was a lack of research, or where more research could be useful to the subject.

A questionnaire is a general term to include all techniques of data collection in which each person is asked to respond to the same set of questions in a predetermined order (DeVaus, 2002, citied in Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2003). The questionnaire was posted online, because as the majority of tickets are now sold and traded online, it would seem that it is a credible source of target participants for this study, another reason for posting online is that, the anonymity of being online, introduce s a disinhibition effect which means people feel less vulnerable because theyre in a comfortable environment, and also because social cues are not applicable online: This significantly reduces respondents perception of social

boundaries, presumably resulting in greater freedom of expression Rossow (2010, p.2). In 2012, opinions and experiences about music and movies were the most shared on social network sites than any other opinion topics (PEW Research 2012), this included sharing opinions and experiences of ticket touts, the questionnaire will be shared amongst social media sites for this reason.

The advantages of using an online questionnaire is that the questionnaire is more likely to go to the target, as most people respond to their own mail on a personal computer (Saunders et al, 2003) unlike postal questionnaires which

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 32

can be identified as junk mail. In 2012, 80% of the UK had internet access in their homes (Office for National Statistics 2012a) which equates to over 21million households. With an average 2.4 people living in each household (Office for National Statistics 2012b) the potential reach for this questionnaire could have been 50million+. An online questionnaire was used because they can be sent to very large samples which are geographically dispersed, but because this study is based in the UK, measures were enforced to try to ensure the majority of the respondents were be from the UK. The ideal sample size was 200 respondents; this allowed a large number of samples and provided an insight into ticket touting opinions. A sample size of 200 allowed a 7 per cent error margin (Hunter 2010). Another advantage of an online questionnaire is that the data can be automatically processed and compared, they are quick to create and distribute and can be done when a person has time to spare, unlike a telephone survey which can be inconvenient.

However there are some disadvantages of an online questionnaire, which are that they only attract computer literate respondents and those with access to a computer. Online questionnaires can have a low response rate, usually between 20/25% caused by perception as junk mail. They are also impersonal and some questions can be unclear, but cannot be clarified by the researcher.

3.4 Target Audience

The study was aimed at 3 main demographics. The first of these are artists, the literature review exposed artists as split in opinions of touting and will

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 33

provide an up to date understanding of opinions. The second demographic was promoters, these are the people who watch their income dwindling by the presence of touts and they are expected they have unique opinions about touts. Both of these demographics interact in both professional and social roles and may have varied experiences, both will be reached online via social media, the questionnaire will have a question for the respondent to state their position in the industry, if they have one, to enable ease when comparing results. The final demographic will be the general public, with no particular characteristics, exclusive of age and living in the UK, the study will primarily directed at those aged 18-24, this is because those are most likely to attend live events (Nielson, 2012). Every music concert or sports game or theatre show attracts a different audience, but each of these attract touts, which assumes those who attend such shows have encountered a tout in one way or another and doesnt solely affix to a certain demographic.

3.5 Data Analysis.

The data is presented in the results section. Questions containing quantitative data is presented in both graphs and pie charts, dependent on which shows the information most clearly, including an explanation. The two questions that involved qualitative data are presented in themes. When a common idea or word was submitted by the respondents, this became a theme, which grouped together similar ideas.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 34

4. Results.
4.1 Results
The Questionnaire consisted of 16 questions and the results of these are as follows. The questionnaire received 203 respondents but because the questions were not marked as required the number of respondents varies per question, and one of the questions (number 5) was multiple choice and the number of answers given for this question is 425.

Figure 1: Gender of participants

The gender split in the questionnaire was 45% male to 55% female which means the split was almost even.

Figure 2: Age range of participants

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 35

The majority of the respondents were between 18-24, with the second biggest segment of respondents being aged 25-34. The lowest amount of responses came from respondents aged 50+.

Figure 3: Number of participants emplyed in the music industry

The results show that almost of respondents (73%) do not work in the music industry, subsequently 27% do.

Figure 4: Career of participants

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 36

The results show the majority of respondents, who previously indicated they worked in the music industry, were neither artists nor promoters. The other section, revealed only one occupation which a large amount of respondents were employed in, which was manager / management. Other responses included, journalist, radio plugger and photographer.

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 "dodgy guy with Someone selling A secondary Someone who a cap selling tickets on selling website genuinely cannot tickets outside a websites such as such as viagogo attend an event venue" ebay
Figure 5: Definition of ticket tout

Number of respondents

Other

Of the answers, the largest opinion given was that touting is a dodgy guy with a cap selling tickets outside a venue which received 172 answers (85% of respondents), closely followed by someone selling tickets on sites such as ebay which received 131 of the answers (65%). Only 7 answers (4%), indicated touting to be Someone who genuinely cannot attend an event and wishes to. Under the other category, the main response given was all of the above.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 37

80 70 Number of respondents 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 6: The music industry should regulate itself instead of relying on government intervention

Answers available on scale from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5). There was a unanimous decision regarding whether ticket touting is bad for the music industry, with 132 respondents (55%) choosing number 1 or 2, strongly agree and agree, and only 4 respondents (2%) choosing option 5, strongly disagree.

70 60 Number of respondents 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5
Figure 7: Ticket touting is bad for the music industry

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 38

Answers available on scale from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5). The majority of respondents (62, 31%) chose option 2, (agree), with a slightly lower amount of respondents choosing 1, strongly agree, (26%). Only 8 people (4%) strongly disagree with the statement and think the government should regulate the music industry.

Question 8 - Have you ever personally bought a ticket to sell it on for a profit?
There were no set answers for this question, respondents write what they choose. The main themes that come across will be described. No 108 respondents said no / nope / N/a, with no opinion attached, and there were 9 others also said no but with opinions on the matter, these vary from I strongly disapprove of it to I have thought about it.

Yes Only 18 respondents confessed to selling tickets for profits. The replies from those who said yes to having sold tickets for profits were split. Some responses given indicated that the respondent has sold tickets, but not with the intention to make a profit, for example There have been times where I have had to sell a ticket, but it has always been at face value and at most with the booking fee on top whereas other responses openly agreed to selling

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 39

tickets for profits, for example Spice Girls Tickets. Bought for 60 odd. Sold for 400 each.

Figure 8: Have you ever bought a second hand ticket?

110 (55%) of people said they have bought a second hand ticket, and 91 (45%) say they havent, this is almost a half and half split.

Figure 9: Did you know promoters and artists allocate tickets to secondary websites before they are released to the public?

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 40

The majority of respondents (112 respondents, 55%) did know this activity happens, as opposed to 90 respondents (45%) who didnt.

Question 11 - Do you believe this should be allowed?

There were no set answers for this question, respondents write what they choose. The main themes that come across will be described. Yes - The main themes for these reasonings included: Less traffic to primary sites. The idea behind this is that with a number of different sellers, traffic is dispersed amongst other sites, reducing traffic on a certain site in periods of high demand.

Less chance of the tickets being fake. If promoters are sharing tickets amongst other sellers, it is thought that the likelihood of buying a fake ticket from that site is minimised. Its the artists choice.. its their tickets. One idea that was shared often was the idea that the artists still need to make money and if allocations such as this will help them do that, then its okay, the tickets are for their performance and they should be allowed to do what they like with them.

No. A main idea which came from the responses was such allocations are unfair

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 41

and the prices charged by secondary sites were ridiculous. Responses varied from Ripping off your fans by allocating secondary sites tickets is disgusting and should be illegal, as the artists themselves are taking part in illicit activities. Technically the artists themselves are acting as touts. How can we trust in the music industry if they are not helping themselves? to Seems a bit pointless.

Depends on their practices. Many respondents said that If this means websites that are able to sell the tickets for a fair price, I dont see the issue. But if they sell them to sites that make a profit on the price of tickets, I dont agree and also said that its okay as long as the artists get a fair share of the moneys.

Figure 10: Do you think such allocations is touting?

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 42

The majority of people (61%) do think that allocating to secondary websites is touting
80 70 60
Number of respondents

50 40 30 20 10 0 0 - 10 11 - 20 21 - 30 31 - 50 51 - 100 101 + Not Sure / Cant Remember

Figure 11: What is the most you've spend on a concert ticket?

The majority of respondents had previously spent between 51-100 on a concert ticket, with a spend of 31-50 closely behind. Only 1 person had spent 0-10 on a concert ticket.

80 70 60
Number of respondents

50 40 30 20 10 0 0- 10 11 - 20 21 - 30 31 - 50 51 - 100 101+
Figure 12: What are you willing to spend on a concert ticket?

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 43

The results here are very similar to those in the previous question, suggesting that people have previously bought tickets which are at their price limit. The highest amount of respondents chose 51-100 as the most they would spend on a ticket, with only 2 fewer people stating they would pay 31-50.

Figure 13: Do you think ticket resale prices should be capped?

The majority of respondents, 171 people, thought that ticket resale prices should be capped, as opposed to 31 who think they should not.
120 100
Number of respondents

80 60 40 20 0 0 - 10% 11 - 15% 16 - 25% 26 - 35% 35 - 50% 51+%

Figure 14: Capped to what percentage above face value?

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 44

The majority of respondents wished that ticket resale prices should be capped at 0-10%, with only one respondent suggesting the cap should be 51+%.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 45

4.2 Comparative Results

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Artists Fans Promoters 1 23% 31% 85% 2 38% 32% 15% 3 28% 25% 0% 4 10% 9% 0% 5 0% 3% 0%

Figure 15: Ticket touting is bad for the music industry

Answers available on scale from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5). This shows that promoters were the group who most strongly agreed that touting is bad for the music industry. Artists selections were consistently spread over options 2, 3 and 4. The only group to select option 5 (strongly disagree) was fans.
35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Artist Fans Promoters 1 19% 26% 29% 2 28% 29% 29% 3 33% 27% 29% 4 14% 12% 14% 5 9% 4% 0%

Figure 16: The music industry should regulate itself instead of relying on government intervention?

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 46

Answers available on scale from strongly agree (1) to strongly disagree (5). This shows that promoters were the only group to strongly disagree with the statement and that they were equally split in opinion regarding option 1, 2 and 3. Artists were the group most likely to select option 3 (neutral). The highest percentage of fans selected option 2 (agree).
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Yes No Artist 66% 33% Fans 51% 48% Promoters 57% 42%

Figure 17: Have you ever bought a second hand ticket?

Artists are the group most likely to purchase a second hand ticket, closely followed by promoters. Fans are the least likely to do so.
120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Yes No Artists 85% 15% Fans 85% 15% Promoters 100% 0%

Figure 18: Should ticket resale prices be capped?

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 47

Artists and fans believe equally that ticket resale prices se capped, at 85%. 100% promoters believe that ticket prices should be capped.
120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% "Dodgy Guy With A Cap Outside a Venue" Artists Fans Promoters 90% 83% 100% Someone selling a Ticket on Ebay 57% 66% 57% Secondary Selling Website such as Viagogo 42% 48% 28% Someone who genuinely cannot attend an event and wishes to 0% 4% 0%

Other

4% 8% 0%

Figure 19: Definitions of a ticket tout

This shows that promoters are the most likely to define a tout as the guy who stands outside of their shows. Only fans believe that someone selling a ticket who genuinely cannot attend an event is still a tout. Fans, Artists and Promoters equally think that someone selling a ticket on eBay is touting.

Student ID 21009185
90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Artists Fans Promoters Yes 8% 7% 15% No 52% 57% 85% No Answer 36% 37% 0%

P a g e | 48

Figure 20: Have you ever bought a second hand ticket?

The highest percentage of people who had bought a second hand ticket is promoters, but they are also the group with the highest percentage who denied ever selling a ticket. Artists and Fans answered similarly.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 49

5. Discussion.
5.1 Introduction
This section will deliberate the answers found in the questionnaire, and compare them with the previous research that was outlined in the literature review. This section will be split into sections based on each question asked although some thoughts will be relevant to more than one section. The first four questions will not be discussed, this is because these questions such as gender and age and do not have any input towards finding out the dissertations aims.

5.2 Question 5: Which of the following to you consider a ticket tout to be?
85% of respondents described a tout as the dodgy little bloke with a cap selling tickets outside a venue, which is consistent with the definitions by Cambell and Keeghan (2007), Morris (2013) and Sosickwitityo (2009). This suggests that though technology and ways to sell tickets have developed past selling outside a venue, the majority of people agree this is still how a tout should be defined. The findings of the current study, however, do not support the previous research from Campbell and Keeghan (2007) which says fans dont consider internet sellers to be touts, because 66% of fans believe selling on eBay is touting, in comparison to 57% promoters and artists who think so. 48% of fans

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 50

believe that companies who resell tickets are touts. This could be because in the 6 years since the Campbell and Keeghan study, the rise of internet ticket resale companies has generated a lot of media attention and knowledge about scams which can generate from internet ticket resellers has increased. Promoters were the largest group of people that selected dodgy guy with a cap outside a venue, this could be because they have to deal with touts outside their shows and they understand the difficulties and problems that they cause. However, promoters were the group with the highest percentage admitting to selling tickets, this finding is in agreement with those of Smith (2009) which suggested that promoters sell tickets to boost profits and fill venues. If this is correct; it could be assumed that government legislation is necessary to cease internal touting, because the music industry is too involved in secret allocations, which need to be stopped by an external force.

5.3 Question 6: Ticket touting is bad for the music industry.

The majority of respondents selected option 1 or 2 (strongly agree or agree) for this question; which shows that whether the respondents take part in touting or reselling or not, they understand it is bad for the music industry. Of those respondents who selected option 1 or 2, 54% of them had previously bought a second hand ticket, this suggests that people know what they are doing is bad, and are still willing to do such activities. This reiterates the arguments mentioned by Hollatz (2012) and Cunningham (2008), in which other industries have secondary markets which work perfectly well, without

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 51

having to pay the manufacturer and why should the music industry be any different. Both fans and artists had similar opinions regarding whether touting is good or bad for the music industry, with between 20% and 40% of both selecting option 1,2 or 3 (strongly agree, agree, neutral). Promoters, however, feel more strongly about how bad touting is for the industry, with 85% respondents selecting option 1, and the remaining 15% choosing option 2. This could be because promoters are the people who price and try to sell tickets fairly, to watch them being sold outside the venue for much more money on the night of the show.

5.4 Question 7: The music industry should regulate itself instead of relying on government intervention
When asked if the music industry should regulate itself, over half the respondents (57%) selected strongly agree and agree (see figure 7); this is consistent with, although with a slightly lower percentage, than the results revealed in a study by the BBC in 2007, in which 63.82% believed the music industry should regulate itself. This slight decrease could be due to the 6 years between the two research projects being undertaken, in that time public knowledge of the subject could have increased, it could also be because the university where this research took place specialises in Music Management, and these students benefitted from knowledge of the industry, which could be more than the average persons. Another possible reason for this could also be

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 52

that there is now more exposure on the way touts operate and more people understand the problem that touts can be and wish for the music industry to regulate against them. Also according to figure 7, when asked who should regulate the secondary ticket market, a large amount of respondents (27%) chose neutral, this suggests either people need more information/knowledge on the subject to make an informed and final decision, or that they think both the government and the music industry should work together to create a solution to touts.

5.5 Question 8: Have you personally ever sold a ticket for a profit?
There were no pre-defined answers for this question and responses for this question varied, in a broad scope there were only two answers received, yes and no, with a greater amount of people saying no. Upon closer analysis of the answers, a number of themes emerged. Of those who had replied no, responses varied from I strongly disapprove of it to I have thought about it. A number of respondents expressed their opinion and wished people would not re-sell tickets because it exploits the artist and the person buying the ticket. This is the same idea as that of Harvey Goldsmith, who described touting as exploiting the British consumer, (Cited in Lowery 2007). Alongside those, were people who have thought about touting, and some respondents who admitted to knowing people who have touted and made a profit, but unfortunately did not offer an opinion on what they thought of their acquaintances activities.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 53

The respondents who admitted to selling a ticket, were also split in opinions regarding what is acceptable in touting. Answers received varied from never for a profit, I only ever sold genuine tickets for shows I could not attend (at face value), which, according to the results from question 5 (see figure 5), only 4% of respondents describe as touting. Some respondents, however, answered as though boasting of their successes as touts; I regularly buy tickets to sell on via eBay. I always start at what I bought the ticket for and never expect more but typically make up to four times face value, which, also according to results from question 5, 65% respondents feel is touting, in agreement with Simon Dempsey, a ticket tout who suggests those who sell on eBay are the real criminals of touting (Cited in Bain 2012).

5.6 Question 9: Have you ever bought a second hand ticket?

The amount of people studied who had bought a ticket from secondary avenues was higher than expected, with half of people asked, admitting purchasing such tickets, in comparison to the 10% found by Mintel (2012a), this could be because the research questions were majorly answered by people aged 18 24, which is the demographic most likely to attend a concert (Nielson, 2012) and Mintel did not specify the range of ages used in their research. This study found that artists are the most likely to purchase a second hand ticket, followed by promoters. Fans were the least likely to purchase a second

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 54

hand ticket, this could suggest that promoters and artists have a stronger desire to see certain acts which they may have previously worked with, which drives them to purchase tickets from secondary avenues. Another possible explanation for this is that fans are more pro-active when it comes to buying tickets as soon as they are released, or simply have less desire to get a ticket from a tout and secondary websites. Fans aged 18-24 were the age group most likely to purchase a second hand ticket, whereas those under 18 are the least likely, this could also be because 18-24s are most likely to attend concerts (Nielson, 2012), this study found that females are more likely to purchase a second hand ticket than males.

5.7 Question 10: Did you know artists and promoters can allocate tickets to secondary websites before they are released to the public?
More people knew this happens than expected, with just over half of respondents claiming they know this. Although there are no figures in regards to how many promoters do this and how many people actually know about it; previous literature suggests it is a secret business, hidden in paperwork unreleased to the public. This research however, suggests this is a more transparent business and people are still not discouraged from buying secondary tickets. 85% promoters knew these placements happened, which upholds the ideas of Smith (2009), Williams (2009) and Complete Music Updates (2011), that

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 55

promoters allocate tickets to secondary avenues. In contrast, only 57% of artists knew this business happened, which could suggest that if this is done, it may be, without artists consent. 67 respondents (33%) who knew this business happens, have bought a second hand ticket, this is fuelling the desire for promoters and artists to continue this business, because they know the tickets will still sell, it does mean, however, that internal regulation seems unlikely because many internal figures are caught up in this industry, and may be unwilling to stop their practices.

5.8 Question 11: Do you believe this should be allowed? There were no pre-defined answers for this question and responses for this question varied, in a broad scope there were three answers received, yes, no, and no opinion / not sure, with the greatest amount of people saying no. Upon closer analysis of the answers, a number of themes emerged. From those who believe allocations should be allowed, their reasonings can be grouped into the following ideas: less traffic to primary sites, less chance of the tickets being fake, and its the artists choice.. its their tickets. Less traffic to primary sites: the ideas behind this are that, if allocations mean there will be more websites to handle the traffic when demand for tickets is high, there may have been a misunderstanding in this question and respondents did not realise the tickets were to be sold at premium prices at the disadvantage of the fans, but if Fogel (cited in Sisario, 2009) is correct,

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 56

some fans would rather pay the premium than spend hours in queues for tickets. Less chance of tickets being fake: The respondents who responded as such may also have misinterpreted the question, but feel that if the promoter has allocated tickets to a website, the chances of purchasing fake tickets are significantly reduced. Its the artists choice... its their tickets: This idea was best concluded in this quote They have to protect their own interest, so if allocation guar antees an income to cover their costs then its their choice. This upholds what Smith (2009), Williams (2009) and Complete Music Updates (2011) suggest in that artists will allocate tickets to cover their living costs. If this interpretation is correct; when these findings are compared to those of Krueger (2005); who said that the average concert ticket price has increased by 82% and revenue per show have increased by 60% since 1996, could suggest that promoters are not paying artists a fair amount for their performances, who resort to placing tickets onto secondary websites.

Of the respondents who said this should not be allowed, the main theme was the prices were too high and that it was unfair on the fans. One quote summed up the feelings of those who think this, It makes it extremely unfair for the genuine fan who wants to buy a ticket but cant or has to pay a huge over the top price to see their favourite artists perform!! This infuriates me!!

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 57

The final idea that came from respondents was not sure / no opinion, those people who do not know enough about the subject, or feel it is okay in some terms and not in others. How artists and promoters distribute tickets is a matter for them to decide, but they should be honest with fans that they have done so. Many are currently doing it behind the scenes, and fans using secondary sites think theyre buying from other fans, so while they might not like paying more than face value, they dont blame the artist. This is deceptive; if it was completely transparent, then very few artists would do it, as they would know that they would alienate their fans. These respondents agree with Marina when she says if its genuine, its cool to do, if its not genuine, its uncool (cited in Crookes, 2012). It also means that fans wish artists and promoters were honest about their tickets if they have nothing to hide.

5.9 Question 12: Do you think such allocations to secondary sites is ticket touting?
The majority of respondents answered yes to this question, with 61% believing this is ticket touting. However, when asked in question 5, if websites selling tickets was touting, only 48% thought it was, this could mean that more education regarding ticket touting could be beneficial for the public to help create a universal definition which is needed before any regulation or legislation is created.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 58

5.10 Question 13 and 14: What is the most you have ever spent on a concert ticket? What is the most you would spend on a concert ticket?
The amount of people buying tickets priced between 31 - 50 and 51 100 were closely matched and these were the most selected options with 70% respondents choosing one of these options. 21 responders (10%) have spent 101+ on a ticket and 14 of them had bought a second hand ticket, this could suggest the other 7 tickets had a face value of over 100 and the market for that artist was stretchable to that extent. This agrees with Sandalls (2007) theory that ticket prices are rising and people are willing to spend a lot of money, to see an artist perform.

This study found that the age group to spend the most on tickets is those aged 50+ with an average spend of 75, promoters spent the least with an average spend of 32.

5.11 Question 15 and 16: Should ticket resale prices be capped? Capped to what?
Leslie and Sorensen (2010) found that on average, ticket prices in the resale market are 41% above face value; however the majority of respondents in this study suggested that ticket resale prices should be capped at 0-10%, which suggests that although respondents wish resale prices were lower, they are still happy to pay the raised asking prices, this is proven every time a ticket is

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 59

purchased above original price on a ticket resale website, Mintel Research (2012a) found that 36% people would pay extra for a ticket to a sold-out concert but their research did not inform how much those people would be willing to pay. This corroborates with Becker (1991) and Sosickwitityo (2009) in that a ticket is worth as much as one values it, and a friend at risk of missing out, will value one massively and pay the raised prices. Only 3% of respondents agreed with Leslie and Sorensens (2010) findings, by suggesting ticket resale prices should be capped at 31-50%. 85% people researched believe ticket resale prices should be capped, with the majority of respondents choosing the cap to be between 0-10% although 21 people have spent 101+ on a ticket which is above what a 10% cap would be on majority of tickets because this study found that the majority of tickets for popular events are priced between 31-100 and that people are still willing to pay that amount, which also confirms Sandalls study (2007 ) that fans are willing to pay unprecedented sums to see an artist perform live.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 60

6. Conclusion.
6.1 Limitations and Recommendations for future study.
The study did not have a pilot study, this put the questionnaire at a disadvantage, in that it was unknown whether the respondents would understand the questions presented, and if they would respond in the way intended. If a pilot study had been carried out, it would have been clear that question 10, could have been reworded for clarity, because there was some confusion, and in question 5, when asked to state their position in the music industry, 50% of respondents replied in the "Other" section and opted to write in their profession; as it was not included in the options provided. An occupation, regularly inputted was "manager. This option also caused problems when comparing the data, in the section 4.1 these responses have been included in the graphs, in section 4.2, however, they have not, and only music industry employees who selected artist and promoter were included. This could cause some errors in the information. If the research was repeated, it would be suggested to create a check box with "manager" to make comparing results more efficient.

If the study was to be repeated, it could be suggested that social media should not the sole place used to find music industry respondents and to gather information from such persons, specific email mail outs should be considered, this is to ensure more equal sized respondent groups.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 61

If the study was to be repeated, it would be suggested that instead of one questionnaire, 2 separate ones be created, one for fans and one for music industry, with slightly different questions on each, more specific to the target market. This would mean that questions would not have to be written in ways which non-industry participants may require, to understand their meanings.

The findings about promoters and the allegations towards them may be mistaken, because with a small sample size (only 7 persons); caution must be applied, as the findings might not be transferable to the real world.

6.2 . Conclusions
This study discovered that there is still large variation regarding the definition of ticket tout, the majority of participants studied did not see the rise of internet ticket sales as touting, and it was found that the main definition of a tout is still the person outside a venue buying and selling tickets on the day and night of the concert.

The majority of people surveyed thought that touting was bad for the music industry, this however does not stop some people from purchasing second hand tickets, because over half the respondents said they had bought a second hand ticket, and a handful had sold tickets for profit.

Internal regulation from the music industry was voted to be the most preferable way to control ticket touts from the results of the questionnaire, but

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 62

it was also found that, internally the music industry, is unorganised with many greedy players who profit off touting. Therefore it could be recommended that the government and the music industry work together to reach an agreement to regulate touts.

Lots of people purchase second hand tickets and will continue to do so, because touting was seen as an inevitability. The ticket resale market generates large incomes; they just do not reach those who deserve it, those whose talent is utilised and those who take the financial burden of the concert. A service, like Twickets therefore, could be the saviour of the live music industry, if neither regulation nor regulation is implemented, to create a nationwide platform for ticket resale. This service, would however, require government and music industry backing, to gain in popularity and ensure this became nationwide procedure for future ticket resale and purchasing.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 63

7. Reference List.
Bain (2012) Ticket Tout Interview the other side of the fence [online] Festival Mag. Available from: http://www.festivalmag.com/2012/10/10/ticket-toutinterview/. Accessed 06 April 2013 BBC News (2011) Reading Festival Police Given Extra Powers Again. BBC News, [online] Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englandberkshire-14554996. Accessed 05 January 2013 Becker. G (1991) Habit, Addictions and Traditions. University Of Chicago: Illinois. USA Bertram. D (2007) Likert Scales Are The Meaning Of Life. Briggs. C. (2007) Should Ticket Touting Be Illegal? BBC News [online] Available from: http://news.bbc.co.UK/1/hi/entertainment/6499721.stm. Accessed 10 February 2013 Black. H.C (1968) Blacks Law Dictionary. 4th Edition. West Publishing Co: Minnesota. USA Brennan. M (2010) Constructing a Rough Account of British Concert Promotion History. University Of Edinburgh: Edinburgh Camber R, Gysin, C & Robinson, M (2011) German tout with more than 23,000 worth of Olympics tickets fined just 435: Seller with 50 tickets claims he bought too many. BBC News [online] Available from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2181093/German-ticket-tout-travelledLondon-23-000-worth-Olympics-tickets-sell-fined-just500.html#ixzz2P8WXJbE4. Accessed 31 March 2013 Cameron. S (2011) E-Baying for Blood? Non-competitive Flexible Pricing in Entertainment Ticketing: Some Demand Side Evidence. Warwick University: Coventry. UK Campbell and Keeghan (2007) The Secondary Market for Tickets (Music and Sport Qualitative Research Report). Campbell and Keeghan. London. UK

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 64

Carey. P (2007) Scalping Goes Upscale: The Secondary Ticket Markets Online Revolution. [online] KnowWPC. Available from: http://knowledge.wpcarey.asu.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1439. Accessed 13 February 2013 Complete Music Updates (2011) Leaked Perry Rider Shows Insider Touting. [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from: http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/leaked-perry-rider-shows-insidertouting/. Accessed 17 February 2013 Complete Music Updates (2013a) Met Calls For More Regulation To Stop Ticket Crime [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from: http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/met-calls-for-more-regulation-to-stopticket-crime/. Accessed 09 April 2013 Complete Music Updates (2013b) Ticketmaster Launches Ticket Transfer Service [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from: http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/ticketmaster-launches-ticket-transferservice/ Accessed 17 February 2013 Cloonan. M (2009) Live Music And Music Policy: Some Initial Thoughts. University Of Glasgow: Glasgow. UK Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 c. 33. The Stationery Office: London, UK Courty. P. (2003) An Economic Guide To Ticket Pricing in the Entertainment Industry. London Business School: London. UK Crookes. D (2012) Artist views: For and against secondary ticketing sites. BBC Radio Newsbeat [online] available from: http://www.bbc.co.UK/newsbeat/17218577. Accessed 24 February 2013 Currie. D (2005) Collecting Primary Data. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development: London. UK Department of Culture, Media and Sport (2008) Ticket Touting. The Stationery Office: London. UK

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 65

Depken. C. (2005) Another Look At Anti-Scalping Laws: Theory and Evidence. University of Texas: Arlington. USA The Economist, October 9th 2010. Volume 397. Number 8703 Earl. C (1996) In Praise Of Ticket Touting. Libertarian Alliance: London. UK Eisen (2010) Bob Dylan Beats Scalpers With Ticketless Show in San Francisco. Spinner [online] Available from: http://www.spinner.com/2010/08/20/bob-dylan-beats-scalpers-with-ticketlessshow-in-san-francisco/ Accessed 05 February 2013 Europe Economics (2009) Analysis of the Secondary Sales Market for Tickets for Sporting, Cultural and Other Events. Chancery House: London. UK FindLaw (n.d.) Ticket Touting [online] Available from: http://www.findlaw.co.UK/law/consumer/other_consumer_law_topics/500485.h tmlAccessed 11 February 2013 Frechtling J, Sharp L & Westat, Inc (1997) User Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations. Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication: National Science Foundation. Fried. J (2004) Admit Two: Pssst. Its Legal To Scalp. [online] Stanford Magazine. Available from: http://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=43637 Accessed 17 February 2013 Frith. S (2010) Analysing Live Music In The UK: Findings One Year Into A Three Year Project. University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh. UK Fraud Act 2006 c.35. The Stationery Office: London. UK Guardian (2008) Online Ticket Sellers Are Not Touts. The Guardian. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/17/internet.music. Accessed 31 March 2013 Hansard (2012a) HC 542. Col.62WH (13 March) [online]

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 66

Happel. S. and Jennings. M (1995) Economics Of Scalping. Wall Street Journal: New York. USA Happel. S and Jennings. M (2002) Creating a futures market for major event tickets: problems and prospects. Cato Publishing: Washington. USA Happel. S and Jennings. M (2010) The Eight Principles Of The MicroEconomic And Regulatory Future Of Ticket Scalping, Ticket Brokers And Secondary Ticket Markets. Journal Of Law & Commerce. Volume 28. Page 115 Hodgeson. S (2012) Anti-tout bill fails, but fight goes on [online] Sharon Hodgeson Online. Available from: http://www.sharonhodgson.org/tickettouting-private-members-bill. Accessed 10 February 2013 Hunter. P (2010) Margin of Error and Confidence Levels Made Simple [online] Six Sigma. Available from: http://www.isixsigma.com/toolstemplates/sampling-data/margin-error-and-confidence-levels-made-simple/. Accessed 31 March 2013 Ingham. T (2012) Radiohead, Orbital Sign Up To Anti-Secondary Ticketing Charter [online] Music Week. Available from: http://www.musicweek.com/news/read/radiohead-orbital-sign-up-to-antiecondary-ticketing-charter/052058. Accessed 17 February 2013 Ituma. E (2011) Data Analysis / Visualisation in Social Sciences. Current Challenges And Trends In Religious Studies. Available from: http://www.academicexcellencesociety.com/data_analysis.html Accessed 17 March 2013 Jowell. T (2007) Government Tout Summit Announces Ticket Measures. NME [Online] Available from: http://www.nme.com/news/nme/26319. Accessed 10 February 2013 Kreps. D (2008) Nine Inch Nails Plan Pre-Sale, Personalized Tickets for Upcoming Tour. [online] Rolling Stone. Available from: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/nine-inch-nails-plan-pre-saleersonalized-tickets-for-upcoming-tour20080429#ixzz2LAuDQCZ7 Accessed 17 February 2013

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 67

Krueger. A (2005) The Economics of Real Superstars: The Market For Rock Concerts In The Material World. Lawson. M (2008) Tout Le Monde. The Guardian. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/commentisfree/2008/jan/12/theatrenews.theatre?I NTCMP=SRCH Accessed 13 February 2013 Leslie. P and Sorensen. A (2010) The Welfare Effects Of Ticket Resale. Stanford University: California. USA London Olympic Games And Paralympic Games Act 2006 c.12 London: The Stationery Office Lowery A. (2007) UKs Top Promoter Slams Ticket Robbery Daily Mail Online [online] 13 December. Available from: http://www.dailymail.co.UK/money/bills/article-1617195/UKs-top-promoterslams-ticketrobbery.html#ixzz2GYRuJNCS Accessed 02 January 2013 McLeod. S (2008a) Qualitative Quantitative [online] Simply Psychology. Available from: http://www.simplypsychology.org/qualitative-quantitative.html. Accessed 18 April 2013. McLeod. S (2008b) Types Of Data [online] Simply Psychology. Available from: http://www.simplypsychology.org/Quantitative%20vs%20Qualitative.pdf. Accessed 18 April 2013. Metropolitan Police (2013) Ticket Crime Problem Profile 2013. Available from: http://content.met.police.uk/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=C ontent-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1 =application%2Fpdf&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3D%22892%2F 804%2FPodium+Report.pdf%22&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwh ere=1283606350147&ssbinary=true. Accessed 09 April 2013 Mintel (2012a) Music Concerts and Festivals Executive Summary. Mintel Group Ltd: London, UK Mintel (2012b) Nightclubs Executive Summary. Mintel Group Ltd: London. UK

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 68

Mitchell. B (2010) Ex-Students Admit Scam Tickets Site. The Independent [online] Available from: http://www.independent.co.UK/news/UK/crime/exstudents-admit-scam-ticketssite-2092092.html?origin=internalSearch Accessed 17 February 2013 Mori (2004) Live Music in England and Wales Executive Summary. Ipsos MORI: London, UK Morris. A (2013) Viagogo: The Return Of The Ticket Tout [online] Stand Against Modern Football. Available from: http://www.standamf.com/2013/01/16/viagogo-manchester-city-ticket-tout/ Accessed 11 February 2013 Music Law Updates (2009) Where Next In The Fight Against Ticket Touts? Music Law Updates [online] Available from: http://www.musiclawupdates.com/?p=162. Accessed 03 February 2013 Nielson (2012) Music Discovery Still Dominated By Radio, Says Nielson Music 360 Report [online] Nielson. Available from: http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press-room/2012/music-discovery-stilldominated-by-radio--says-nielsen-music-360.html. Accessed 20 March 2013 Office of Fair Trading (2005) Ticket Agents in the UK. Crown Copyright: London. UK Office for National Statistics (2012a) Internet Access - Households and Individuals, 2012. Crown Copyright: London. UK Office for National Statistics (2012b) Measuring National Well-being Households and Families, 2012. Crown Copyright: London. UK Page. W (2006) The Value is in the scarcity, but also in the convenience. Economic Insight. 08 October 2006. Issue 1 Page. W and Carey. C (2010) Adding up the Music Industry. Economic Insight. 04 August 2010. Issue 23 Peraino. R (2012) Its Just Like A Garage Sale [online] Lom-Tom. Available from: http://www.lhs210.net/assets/1/tom_tom/2011-

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 69

12_LHS_TomTom_022912.pdf Accessed 13 February 2013. Accessed 07 March 2013 Pew Research (2012) Social Networking Popular Across Globe [online] Pew Research. Available from: http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/12/12/surveymethods-43/. Accessed 11 April 2013 Punch. K (2005) Introduction To Social Research. Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Second Edition. Sage Publications Ltd: London. UK Reading Borough Council Bill [online] Available from: http://www.publications.parliament.UK/pa/privbill/0708/013/08013x--.htm. Accessed 31 March 2013 Robertson. J. (2008) Online Ticket Resales Benefit Touts Not Fans. The Guardian. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/politics/2008/jan/15/sport.musicnews. Accessed 13 February 2013 Rossow. A (2010) Unlocking Candor In Online Qualitative Research: The Power Of Online One-To-One. I-moderate: Colorado, USA Sale Of Tickets (Sporting And Cultural Events) Bill 2010- 2012 [online] Available from: http://services.parliament.uk/bills/201012/saleofticketssportingandculturalevents.html. Accessed 31 March 2013 Sandall. R. (2007) Off The Record. Prospect Magazine [online] Available from: http://www.prospectmagazine.co.UK/magazine/offtherecord/. Accessed 14 February 2013 Saunders, M, Lewis, P & Thornhill, A (2003) Research Methods for Business Students. Third Edition. Pearson Education Limited: Essex. UK Sisario. B (2009) Online Sales Make Tickets Hard To Get. New York Times [online] available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/arts/music/01tickets.html?_r=0. Accessed 12 February 2013

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 70

Sherwin (2013) Twitter site 'Twickets' for fans to exchange gig tickets at face value beating web touts. The Independant [online] Available from: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/twitter-sitetwickets-for-fans-to-exchange-gig-tickets-at-face-value-beating-web-touts8517335.html. Accessed 19 April 2013 Sisario. B (2010) A Front Row Seat? Rock Fans Pay For Perks. New York Times. [online] available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/arts/music/23VIP.html?_r=0. Accessed 17 February 2013 Smith. E (2009) Concert Tickets Get Set Aside, Marked Up By Artists, Managers [online] The Wall Street Journal. Available from: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123672740386088613.html Accessed 05 February 2013 Smith. E (2012) Rapper's De-Light: Tupac 'Hologram' May Go on Tour [online] The Wall Street Journal. Available from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230481840457734824310984 2490.html Accessed 02 February 2013 Sosickwitityo (2009) The Economics Of Ticket Scalping And Its Effects On Modern American Culture [online] The Good Life Reviews. Available from: http://www.thagoodlifereviews.com/2009/05/06/the-economics-of-ticketscalping-and-its-effect-on-modern-american-culture/ Accessed 13 February 2013 Spitzer. G. (2000) Morgenthau, Spitzer Announce Ticket Scalping Indictments [online] Attourney General, Eric. T. Schnneiderman. Available from: http://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/morgenthau-spitzer-announce-ticketscalping-indictments. Accessed 11 February 2013 STAR (2011) Code Of Practice. STAR: London. UK Sutton. J (2007) Secondary Ticket Market [online] DocStoc. Available from: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/32138985/Secondary-Ticket-Market. Accessed 11 February 2013 Theft Act 1968 c.60. London: The Stationery Office

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 71

Ticketmaster Entertainment Ltd (2008) Ticketmaster Annual Report 2008. Ticketmaster: California, USA University of Reading (n.d.) Study Advice [online] University of Reading. Available from: http://www.reading.ac.UK/internal/studyadvice/StudyResources/Essays/stastartinglitreview.aspx#why. Accessed 04 February 2013 Ward. S (2011) Ticket Touting. House of Commons. Crown Copyright: London, UK Washoe County School (2012) Benefits of a Mixed Method Approach to Data Collection [online] What Now? Communicating Effectively About Prevention Data. Available from: http://www.washoecountyschools.org/edcollab/_drug/onlineevents/presentingd ata/id91.htm. Accessed 18 April 2013 WestLaw (1998) R v Marshall, R v Coombes, R v Eren [online] WestLaw. Available from: http://login.westlaw.co.UK/maf/wlUK/app/document?andsrguid=ia744cc64000 0013bfc5948b1cf64577canddocguid=I56DC16A0E42811DA8FC2A0F035533 7E9andhitguid=I56DC16A0E42811DA8FC2A0F0355337E9andrank=7andspo s=7andepos=7andtd=7andcrumbaction=appendandcontext=12andresolvein=t rue Accessed 17 February 2013 Williams. P (2009) Scalpers, Wealthy Get Great Tickets for Taylor Swift. News Channel 5 [online] Available from: http://www.newschannel5.com/story/11481431/scalpers-wealthy-get-greatseats-for-taylor-swift. Accessed 11 February 2013 Williams. P. (2012) Documents Show 'Bieber Is Scalping His Own Tickets'. News Channel 5 [online] Available from: http://www.newschannel5.com/story/19616981/documents-show-bieber-isscalping-his-own-tickets. Accessed 11 February 2013 Wolohan. J. (2006) Constitutional - Fans Upset with the High Price of Resold Tickets Seek Redress from the Courts. [online] Architectural Showcase. Available from: http://www.architecturalshowcase.com/articles/article.aspx?articleid=1285and zoneid=29. Accessed 11 February 2013

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 72

8. Bibliography.
Baron J & Budnick D (2011) Ticket Masters, The Rise of the Concert Industry and How The Public Got Scalped? Penguin Books Ltd: London. UK Bauder. D (2013) Showtime Gives Eagles Fans A Front Row Seat. New Haven Register [online] Available from: http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2013/02/15/entertainment/doc51 1d6bd8bda50968787190.txt. Accessed 17 Feburary 2013 Brooks. T. (2008) Sevens Organisers Promise To Thwart The Ticket Touts. [online] The National. Available from: http://www.thenational.ae/news/uaenews/sevens-organisers-promise-to-thwart-the-ticket-touts. Accessed 13 February 2013 Cainfrone. B and Connaughton. D (2004) Legal Issues Associated With Ticket Scalping. University Of Florida: Florida. USA Cochran, M & Quinn-Patton, M (2002) A Guide To Qualitative Research Methodology [online] Medicins Sans Frontieres. Available from: http://fieldresearch.msf.org/msf/bitstream/10144/84230/1/Qualitative%20resea rch%20methodology.pdf. Accessed 31 March 2013 Collinson. P. (2008) Time To Stamp Out The Touts. The Guardian [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/money/2008/aug/23/consumeraffairs?INTCMP=SR CH. Accessed 13 February 2013 Complete Music Update (2010) Festival Republic says Tout-Targeting a Success At Leeds Fest [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from: http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/festival-republic-says-tout-targeting-asuccess-at-leeds-fest/. Accessed 31 March 2013 Complete Music Update (2010) Scottish Politicians Try To Put Touting Back On The Agenda [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from: http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/scottish-politicians-try-to-put-toutingback-on-the-agenda/. Accessed 31 March 2013 Complete Music Update (2011) Secondary Ticketing To Be Discussed In Parliament [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from:

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 73

http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/secondary-ticketing-to-be-discussed-inparliament/ Accessed 31 March 2013 Complete Music Update (2011) Reading Festival Scammer Jailed. [online] Complete Music Updates. Available from: http://www.thecmuwebsite.com/article/reading-festival-ticket-scammer-jailed/. Accessed 31 March 2013 Doward. J (2008) How Boom In Rogue Ticket Websites Fleeces Britons. The Guardian. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/world/2008/mar/09/olympicgames2008.internet. Accessed 13 February 2013 England Cricket Board (n.d.) Ticket Touts Out [online] ECB Online. Available from: http://www.ecb.co.UK/ecb/touts-out,2176,BP.html Accessed 13 February 2013 Evans. J & Mathur. A (2005) The Value Of Online Surveys. Internet Research. Vol. 15, No 2 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Goldberg. B (2011) Guest Commentary: The Importance Of Ticket Brokers [online] Ticket News. Available from: http://www.ticketnews.com/features/Guest-Commentary-Theimportance-ofticket-brokers121119629. Accessed 13 February 2013 Guardian (2008) Online Sellers Are Not Touts. The Guardian. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/technology/2008/jan/17/internet.music?INTCMP=S RCH. Accessed 13 February 2013 Hansard (2012b) HC. 542. Col 60WH (13 March) [online] Jackson. N (2003) Opinions To Spare? Click Here. New York Times. [online] Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/03/technology/opinions-tospare-click-here.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm. Accessed 26 February 2013 Jones. R (2013) Viagogo Warns Of Rising Number Of Ticket Scams. The Guardian [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/mar/28/viagogo-warns-rising-ticketscams. Accessed 09 April 2013

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 74

Kerrang (2013) Ticket Resales: Should They Be Legal. Kerrang Magazine. Pg.10. Issue 1458, March 23 2013, London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (Amendment) Act 2011 c. 22. London: The Stationery Office Mann. S (2013) Met Police Calls For Ticket Tout Regulation. [online] London 24. Available from: http://www.london24.com/news/crime/met_police_calls_for_ticket_tout_regulat ion_1_1938923. Accessed 31 March 2013 Masnick. M (2013) Jealous Of Copyright Trolls, Entertainment Industry Looks To Move Three Strikes From Disconnect To Fines [online] Tech Dirt. Available from: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130210/02081221934/jealous-copyrighttrolls-entertainment-industry-looks-to-move-three-strikes-disconnect-tofines.shtml. Accessed 13 February 2013 Morrison. J (2012) 105 to see a play? Touts Are Pushing Theatre-goers out. The Guardian [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/stage/theatreblog/2012/apr/20/touts-pushingtheatregoers-out. Accessed 13 February 2013 Montgomery. J (2012) Does Tupac's Coachella Hologram Set The Stage For Deceased Performers? [online] MTV Online. Available from: http://rapfix.mtv.com/2012/04/17/tupac-coachella-hologram-encourage-deadperformers/ Accessed 02 February 2013 News Channel 5 (2012) Guide To Reading Ticket Documents. News Channel 5 [online] Available from: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/435883/justin-bieber-holdinstructions.pdf. Accessed 11 February 2013 News Channel 5 (n.d.) Taylor Swift Ticket Holds. News Channel 5 [online] Available from: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/439340/taylor-swifthold-docume nts.pdf. Accessed 11 February 2013 Pakinkins. T (2013) Viagogo Welcomes Met Police Secondary Ticketing Report [online] Music Week. Available from:

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 75

http://www.musicweek.com/news/read/viagogo-welcomes-met-policesecondary-ticketing-report/053669. Accessed 09 April 2013 Penman. A and Sommerland. N (2012) Ripped off by the One Direction cyber touts: Internet concert tickets scam costs fans a fortune. Mirror News [online] Avalilable from: http://www.mirror.co.UK/news/UK-news/one-direction-ticketsinternet-concert-1489073. Accessed 11 February 2013 Press Releases (1999) Spitzer Issues Report On Ticket Sales [online] Attourney General, Eric. T. Schnneiderman. Available from: http://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/spitzer-issues-report-ticket-sales. Accessed 11 February 2013 Reading Chronicle (2013) Kicking Out The Touts [online] The Reading Chronicle. Available from: http://www.readingchronicle.co.UK/news/roundup/articles/2013/03/02/87185kicking-out-the-ticket-touts/. Accessed 31 March 2013 Robinson. J (2008) Promoters Change Tune On Touts. The Guardian. [online] Available from: http://www.guardian.co.UK/business/2008/mar/09/musicnews. Accessed 13 February 2013 Rueben. A. (2013) Davos 2013: NBC Boss Backs Touting To Fill Olympic Seats. BBC News [online] Available from: http://www.bbc.co.UK/news/business-21192908. Accessed 13 February 2013 Scarlet Mist (2013) Reading Ticket Touts To Be Banned [online] Scarlet Mist. Available from: http://www.scarletmist.com/index.php/blog/80. Accessed 31 March 2013 Stock Market Watch (2010) The Secondary Ticket Markets Online Revolution [online] The Stock Market Watch. Available from: http://www2.thestockmarketwatch.com/newsletters/2010/02/25/the-secondaryticket-markets-online-revolution/ Accessed 13 February 2013 Vena. J (2011) Taylor Swift Gives Fans Front Row Seats In Sparks Fly Video. MTV News. [online] Available from: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1668842/taylor-swift-sparks-fly-musicvideo.jhtml. Accessed 17 February 2013

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 76

Wallace. W. (2011) How The Music Industry is Killing Music And Blaming The Fans. The Quietus. [online] Available from: http://thequietus.com/articles/06318-how-the-music-industry-is-killing-musicand-blaming-the-fans Accessed 14 February 2013 White. D. (2008) Murdoch Aide Joins Seatwave. The Telegraph. [online] Available from: http://www.telegraph.co.UK/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandteleco ms/2793194/Murdoch-aide-joins-Seatwave.html. Accessed 13 February 2013 Williamson. J and Cloonan. M (2007) Rethinking The Music Industry. Popular Music. Volume 26. Issue 02. May 2007. p 305 - 322 Wood. M, & Welch, C. (2010) Are Qualitative and Quantitative Useful Terms for Describing Research? Portsmouth University Business School: Portsmouth. UK Woods, P (2006) Qualitative Research [online] University Of Plymouth. Available from: http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/qualitative%20methods%202/qualrsh m.htm. Accessed 31 March 2013

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 77

9. Appendices
Appendix 1
Ticket touting at events, dates back to the times of ancient Rome, in the days of gladiator contests in the Coliseum, with the tickets situated closest to Caesar being the most sought after and highly priced, tickets to these events were regularly resold or bartered for a better view of the emperor Leffler (cited in Carey 2007). UK ticket touting was first seen in Shakespearean times when paper tickets to theatre shows were created, Happel and Jennings (2010) suggests the demand for such events, are on par with a modern day Hannah Montana concert, and those able to purchase a ticket, began to question the idea of purchasing more than one ticket, with the intent to sell the spares for a profit to their peers. In doing so, shaped what we see as modern day touts. Nevertheless, distribution methods have evolved slightly since the evolution of technology and the internet. Touting in the UK, became a bigger challenge when attending sports events gained popularity. The idea to purchase sorely sought out tickets, or for season ticket holders to sell off seats for games they couldnt attend, appealed to many. The act of selling football game tickets however became illegal with the introduction of the Criminal Justice And Public Order Act 1994, something which has not been replicated in the music industry.

Appendix 2
In the USA, ticket resale for sporting events is not regulated in all states and to try to stop the touts on his site, the CEO of the Pheonix Suns, Jerry Colangelo, set aside a designated part of his site on which touts could operate If you can't beat the scalpers, put them all in one place and let them compete (Cited in Happel and Jennings 1995, p.1). The first US legislation towards touting was in 1918 in response to limited-access shows (Happel and Jennings 1995).. As of 2004 there were 12 states with restrictions on resale,

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 78

and 38 states without any restrictions (Fried, 2004). However there is a trend of de-regulation: Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Missouri and New York repealed anti-scalping laws in 2007 (Leslie and Sorensen, 2010). Some states have legislation regarding selling above face value: Arkansas, Kentucky, and Michigan.

Appendix 3
The Sale of Tickets (Sporting and Cultural Events) Act 2011. A bill to regulate the selling of tickets for certain sporting and cultural events; and for connected purposes. BE IT ENACTED by the Queens most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1 Designation of events (1) A venue operator or event organiser may apply to the Secretary of State to have their venue or event designated under subsection (2). (2) Following an application (a) by a venue operator the Secretary of State must designate the venue covered by the application with the result that all sporting and cultural events held at that venue are designated events; (b) by an event organiser the Secretary of State must designate the specific sporting or cultural event with the result that the event is a designated event except that the Secretary of State may refuse to designate a venue or event, or may rescind a designation, in exceptional circumstances where the Secretary of State has reason to believe that designation is not in the public interest. (3) The Secretary of State must set out in regulations the designation scheme,

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 79

including (a) the form an application for designation is to take, (b) time limits on applications and the Secretary of States response; (c) a requirement to publish any designation; (d) any administrative fees to be charged to applicants which the Secretary of State considers proportionate to the costs of the running of the scheme; and (e) an appeal mechanism to challenge a decision on designation by the Secretary of State. (4) The Secretary of State may delegate any functions, powers or duties under this section. (5) A statutory instrument containing regulations under this section is subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament. 2 Offences (1) It is an offence for an unauthorised person to be concerned in the sale of a ticket for a designated event at a price greater than 10% above the face value of the ticket. (2) An unauthorised person is a person without written permission from the event organiser or venue operator to resell tickets at a price greater than 10% above the face value of the ticket. (3) Where the face value of a ticket is nil, the maximum permitted cost of an unauthorised sale or disposal is no more than reasonable postage costs. (4) In respect of the sale or advertisement for sale of tickets for designated and non-designated events (a) no person is permitted to be concerned in the sale of a ticket where the primary retailer has not yet released for sale tickets to an event, and (b) no person is permitted to be concerned in the sale of a ticket which they have not purchased from the primary retailer.

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 80

(5) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1), (3) or (4) is liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding Level 5 on the standard scale. (6) Where a person is found guilty of an offence under this section the prosecutor must consider whether it is appropriate to ask the magistrates court to commit the defendant to the Crown Court under section 70 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, with a view to a confiscation order being considered under section 6 of that Act. (7) Where a person is found guilty of an offence under this section and as part of the conduct constituting that offence that person purported to sell tickets for a charitable event, any monies recovered in relation to that offence should be paid to the relevant charity or charities. 3 Exemption for charities (1) Charities registered in accordance with the Charities Act 1993 (registered charities) do not require authorisation to sell tickets to designated events at a price greater than 10% above the face value of the ticket. (2) All functions and powers of the Charity Commission under the Charities Act 1993 apply for the purpose of investigating and sanctioning alleged or suspected misconduct or mismanagement regarding ticket sales covered by this Act. 4 Sale and disposal of tickets on the internet (1) A person does not commit an offence under section 2 only by virtue of making facilities available in connection with electronic communication or the storage of electronic data. (2) Where a person who provides services for electronic communication or for the storage of electronic data is notified that they are being used in connection with the commission of an offence under section 2, that person commits an offence under section 2 in respect of the continued provision of the services after a period of 24 hours. (3) Where a law enforcement agency or event organiser has notified a person who provides services for electronic communication or for the storage of electronic data that a ticket sale advertised or conducted via that persons

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 81

services is in breach of this Act, that person must comply with any requests by the law enforcement agency for information regarding the identity of the vendor and any other information relevant to the investigation of the offence. (4) Failure to comply with a request under subsection (3) is a summary offence, punishable by a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. 5 Voluntary code for refunding tickets (1) The Secretary of State must consult venue operators, event organisers and ticketing agents with the aim of establishing (a) a voluntary code regarding ticket refunds to consumers; or (b) an official ticket exchange facility for consumers. (2) The Secretary of State must lay a report before Parliament on the outcome of the consultations within 12 months of this Act coming into force. 6 Interpretation In this Actconcerned in the sale of a ticket and any reference to selling a ticket includes (a) offering to sell a ticket, (b) exposing a ticket for sale, (c) making a ticket available for sale by another person, (d) advertising that a ticket is available for purchase, (e) giving a ticket to a person who pays or agrees to pay for some other goods or services or offering to do so; event organiser means the person or persons responsible for organising and holding an event and receiving the revenue from the event; face value means the original price of a ticket, including the full cost of the ticket plus any administration or other fees incurred in its purchase from the primary retailer; primary retailer means a retailer responsible for selling tickets on behalf of, and at a price or prices agreed by, the event organiser or venue operator;

Student ID 21009185

P a g e | 82

sporting and cultural event and event includes all live entertainment, including but not limited to sports matches, live music events, theatre and other live performances which will take place or are taking place in England and Wales, and which have not concluded; ticket means anything which purports to be a ticket, including any item, tangible or intangible, which grants the holder entry to an event; ticketing agent means a person or company who or which sells tickets to events on behalf of event organisers or venue operators, or have in the past resold, or intend to resell, tickets to events either with or without authorisation from event organisers or venue operators; venue operator means the person or persons responsible on behalf of the venue for hiring out the venue for the holding of events by events organisers. 7 Financial provisions There is to be paid out of money provided by Parliament (a) any expenditure incurred under or by virtue of this Act by the Secretary of State, or by a government department, and (b) any increase attributable to this Act in the sums payable under any other Act out of money so provided. 8 Short title, commencement, application and extent (1) This Act may be cited as the Sale of Tickets (Sporting and Cultural Events) Act 2011. (2) This Act comes into force at the end of the period of 12 months beginning with the day on which it is passed. (3) This Act shall apply in respect of anything done whether in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. (4) This Act extends to England and Wales.