Oral evidence: Live Music, HC 733

Oral evidence, 5 September 2018.

I

Lucinda Brown, Venue Business Manager, Islington Assembly Hall; Stuart Galbraith, Chief Executive, Kilimanjaro Live; Andrew Parsons, Managing Director, Ticketmaster; Adam Webb, Campaign Manager, FanFair Alliance.

Chair

Good afternoon and welcome to this session of the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. Today’s session is the first hearing we have had as part of our new inquiry into issues relating to live music. We wanted to start off by returning to the issue of ticketing, secondary ticketing and abuses in the ticketing market. This was something that the Committee last looked at in late 2016, early 2017, as the Digital Economy Act 2017 was going through Parliament. Previously the Committee looked at this issue probably a decade or so ago as well. It is an important issue, and one that lots of consumers of tickets feel very strongly about. I am pleased to see as well that we have two of our parliamentary colleagues in the gallery—Sharon Hodgson and Nigel Adams—who have worked very hard on promoting the issues around the abuses of the ticketing market. There are many people in the room who have been active campaigners on this issue as well and we welcome you to today’s session. If I could turn first to the witnesses and ask for your view on the progress that has been made so far—since the end of 2016, early 2017—with the passing of new legislation and the investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority into the selling of tickets. Perhaps, Adam Webb, if you could start off for us, and give us a sense of what progress you think has been made so far and what are the live issues that need to be addressed now.

Adam Webb

From when the Committee met in November 2016, which I think was a very revealing session for everybody, quite a lot came out about how dysfunctional this market was and what the problems were. Certainly when we were looking at it, there was very little compliance with the law and huge issues for artists. Obviously campaigns came out from the music industry, many from the music management community, but it was a sort of wider coalition of the willing. It is very difficult to stop the touting of your tickets; not impossible, but very, very difficult to do, and an absolute nightmare for fans as well. Again, it was a market that suited ticket touts and suited the platforms. There have been massive improvements for a variety of reasons, I think primarily because of enforcement, the work of the CMA, the work of National Trading Standards and pressure from Government. The key changes we have seen are that artists are able to protect their tickets better, so you are seeing artists like Arctic Monkeys, Ed Sheeran, Iron Maiden, Public Service Broadcasting—lots of different artists, and they can use the terms and conditions now. They have a lot more power. They can help keep the tickets off certain secondary sites or those that comply with the law. We are seeing a new kind of secondary market take root. The four sites that everyone was discussing before when talking about the secondary market were Viagogo, StubHub, GetMeIn and Seatwave. Obviously two of the sites are going to be closing down. One of the sites has lost its two major contracts at the O2 and Wembley Arena, and I think in its place we are seeing a new kind of secondary market. I think all of the primary ticketing companies now are offering a capped retail service—or they are going to offer a capped retail service. There is more technology moving into the market as well. There have been a lot of improvements. There are some key issues to address still to get it over the line and get it to be where we want it to be, but I think there has been a big improvement.

Chair

Andrew Parsons, we will have some questions about the changes in your business, but the CMA investigation—obviously it has insisted that companies comply with the consumer protection legislation. The dispute with Viagogo is because they are not complying with that. Do you think having rogue operators in the market is going to make it harder for everyone else to comply with the law, or do you think it is a question of just more rigorous enforcement? Do you have concerns that in an online world it will still be quite easy for people to try to get around the rules, even though some companies are trying to comply with them?

Andrew Parsons

My name is Andrew Parsons. I am the Managing Director of Ticketmaster in the UK, just to introduce myself. We have around about 500 staff across the UK with offices in London, Manchester, Stoke and Glasgow. I have been with the business for just over 20 years, so starting back in the contact centre, customer services—back when I was at university, at college. The closure of our two retail sites has very much been met with positivity right across the industry, the clients that we work with, artists, managers, promoters, producers, venues—really the industry at large. There has also been some fierce criticism from brokers, touts, and the resale industry, which was probably to be expected. Our view is that the CMA has shown itself to be a very competent regulator in this space. We have engaged with it thoroughly throughout our own journey, and we have made no secret of the fact that we have had some concerns about the move towards offshore, which the internet obviously means is likely to be able to happen. Indeed, we supplied some additional evidence that made plain the move of a great degree of the traffic from UK-based sites to offshore. That clearly still remains a concern, but, as I say, we have confidence in the CMA’s ability, and certainly, given the recent announcement, its intention to see it through.

Chair

Lucinda Brown, as an operator of a venue, perhaps you can give us your overview as to what the venues are doing now to address the concerns, both of artists and of fans, about preventing and stopping the abuse in the secondary ticketing market, which was not only ripping fans off, but also changing the environment and the nature of live venues as well.

Lucinda Brown

Absolutely. The advances in technology have enabled us all to address those problems in a different way. As a venue, we are often on the frontline receiving the emotional distress of fans that ticketing companies and promoters maybe don’t see so much. As Islington Assembly Hall, we decided that we wanted to be part of the solution to stopping touts and secondary ticketing by making the decision to go with DICE, which is a digital ticketing company. In the short time we have been with them, we have noticed a dramatic difference in even our business, because before when a show was sold out, we would be at 75% capacity. As a small venue, it is one of the most distressing things: you are losing your bar sales, which is the thing that keeps you afloat in your business. With our change to digital ticketing, we have noticed that we are at 90% capacity on a sold-out show, which is where obviously all venues just want the customers to come in, the customers who are buying the tickets to be in the venue. In this short space of time it has really improved, so we hope that everybody else will engage with a solution like this.

Chair

Do you think it is a viable solution for smaller venues? Obviously, your capacity is about 800.

Lucinda Brown

We are only small; we are only an 890 cap. This is the smallest venue I have worked at. It is absolutely a solution for smaller venues. It is very easy to work with. The fact that all the other ticketing companies are having resale within their ticketing platforms is following the line that DICE have started with their waiting list, which enables fans to buy tickets from other fans who cannot go, and also ticket transfers, which is what we get asked as a venue every day: how can I give my ticket to my friend? No, you cannot because we suspect you will be touting those tickets. With the capacity of a digital solution they can do that and we can know who they are, and if there are any problems in the venue we can identify that customer and support them.

Chair

Stuart Galbraith, we have heard obviously that the big name stars, the people who you work with, have insisted on a different approach to selling tickets for their events. Again, is that something that is open to all in the industry or do you have to be a big name to be able to make those sorts of demands on the ticketing industry and on the venues?

Stuart Galbraith

At this point in time, we are still waiting for technology to catch up to the point where something can be applied at any scale. Obviously, our most recent and high-profile example is with Ed Sheeran, but we were afforded the opportunity to do that because of the scale of the tour. We had a million tickets that were going out into circulation and we had finance and we had resourcing to enable us to run a system that was largely manually based and very labour intensive but did work. It worked very well. In answer to your question, can I apply that to every tour that we do at every scale? The answer is no, not at this point in time.

Chair

Do you think that for many artists who are committing to a tour, there are costs involved in that tour, so you have to do whatever deals you have to do in order to cover your costs and try to make the tour pay? The way that you sell tickets and distribute them is one of those areas where you might have to compromise.

Stuart Galbraith

Yes, absolutely, because the fact is that, if we are playing a show in a theatre, we do not have the finances to employ the number of staff for the labour-intensive operation, for instance, that we conducted for the Ed Sheeran stadium tour. What has become evident, though, is that with the majority of the secondary industry, even before the announcement of the closure of GetMeIn and Seatwave, there was a new level of co-operation coming back from certainly StubHub, Seatwave and GetMeIn where we could request and they would comply, as opposed to us having to dictate and enforce. We can bring to bear a level of control now on theatre and arena tours by having co-operation, but where co-operation is not available it is still very difficult.

Chair

Do you think that there should be more transparency for buyers to understand what the sources of the tickets are? Tickets may be released in bulk by the promoter or by the artist to the vendor as part of a deal that they have come to and, therefore, that could have a big influence on setting the price for those tickets. Do you think fans should know whether the tickets they are buying are tickets that have been released by the artist or tickets that have been released through the venue?

Stuart Galbraith

Certainly, our company’s objective in our ticketing strategy is to sell as many tickets as possible and put as many tickets as possible into the hands of customers at face value. To that end, we run a wide distribution model. We sell tickets or make ticket allocations available to as many different outlets as we possibly can, and then obviously we benefit from the marketing input that we get from those in return and it helps amplify the profile of the tour. The problem we face is that if a rogue company or a company refuses to co-operate, at this point in time, because of the non-compliance on the detail of listing tickets under the CRAs—in other words, if a ticket has been blatantly sold at above face value, if it does not carry seat, row and block information or its unique ticket number, we are powerless because we cannot identify where that ticket came from or, indeed, the exact detail of that ticket to enable us to cancel it and then put it back in the marketplace at face value.

Chair

Andrew Parsons, with your business, to what extent is doing deals with artists and acquiring large volumes of tickets from the artist an important part of the way in which Ticketmaster makes money?

Andrew Parsons

It is of critical importance, yes. It is a very competitive marketplace. It is what is referred to as an allocational market here within the UK. Venues tend not to hold 100% exclusivity rights over ticketing. That means that they can be sold through a variety of different sources. In many respects, we compete as a client at a venue level to be able to win business but, in reality, we compete every day to try to be selling as much as we can and to be able to do a good job for the client—to be able to be getting those tickets into the hands of fans such that we are able, yes, to see as much primary ticketing as we possibly can.

Chair

For a major venue, what sort of percentage of your ticket allocation do you think you might acquire through doing a deal with the promoter or the artist for a major concert?

Andrew Parsons

It is one of those things where it really is difficult to say, because it does genuinely vary so much right across the board. I think that most venues in the music market anyway—and it does vary from segment to segment, just to make everything even more interesting—would typically seek to be holding on to around about 50%; 50% to 60% would be held on to by the venue and the promoter would administrate the rest of that.

Chair

Obviously, there will be a lot of interest in the way pricing is set for concerts and venues. A lot of our work in the past has looked at abuses and massive inflation of ticket prices in the secondary market. As reforms kick in, there will probably be more of a focus on the price of tickets going into the primary market. Do you think fans should know whether they are buying a ticket that has been released by the artist or whether it is a ticket that is being sold by the venue?

Andrew Parsons

In terms of how the price is set for that?

Chair

Just in terms of knowing whether the ticket they are buying is a ticket that has been issued by the venue or a ticket that has been released by the artist to Ticketmaster to sell on their behalf.

Andrew Parsons

Sure, sorry, yes. I do think that is one of the things Adam highlighted earlier. One of the great positive things that have come out of the legislation, and the light that has been shone on lots of these things, is that greater efforts are being made to be highlighting the official points of sale. That is one of the things that FanFair has done very, very effectively with the Music Management Forum, MMF. There has been much greater effort to be able to establish who those primary sellers are and who you should be looking to go to. STAR, the Society of Ticket Agents and Retailers, is obviously also offering an official kitemark for that, which we always try to be able to point to. I think there is a greater degree of transparency now than perhaps there once was, but I am sure there is more that can be done.

Chair

Is that something that Ticketmaster would consider doing, giving that additional information to the purchaser?

Andrew Parsons

As to where the tickets have originated from?

Chair

Yes.

Andrew Parsons

We do in a sense in that, by virtue of GDPR, we share whom the data is, whom we are offering the opportunity for the data to be shared with, so in a sense we do, but yes.

Chair

Yes you will or yes you do?

Andrew Parsons

We do in relation to GDPR now.

Chair

Yes, but I am talking about obviously the relationship with the artist. If we are saying, “We have tickets for a Robbie Williams concert and the tickets that we are selling are tickets that we have acquired from the artist, and the price we are selling them at reflects the deal that we have done with the artist to sell these tickets”, is that information you think Ticketmaster would be prepared to supply to your customers?

Andrew Parsons

The source of where we established that deal with for whom we are making the tickets available?

Chair

Yes.

Andrew Parsons

I genuinely have never considered it. Perhaps, yes. In terms of price, just to be clear, we have no influence or control over price in those instances, regardless of what the source would be. Typically, the price would be the same across a venue or a promoter. The price that we are being charged would typically be the same within each of those areas.

Chair

It is something that would demonstrate transparency as to where the tickets are coming from but also show that the price of the tickets reflects the promoter’s or the artist’s view of what their tickets should be. In some ways, the price being sold through a company like yours could not be blamed necessarily on your margin, but on an understanding that that is the ticket price that has been set by effectively the artist working with the vendor.

Giles Watling

I was interested in another aspect, which has probably grown over the years. Recently, there has been some legislation to deal with it. It is the use of bots, which I imagine is a way of instantly buying as the primary source. Tickets go on sale. They can buy a whole load of tickets, a whole raft of tickets, and then withhold them and sell them at an inflated price. There has been legislation recently—I believe in July—to control this. Has that made any difference? Andrew, I think I will go to you with this one. Have you noticed a difference in what is happening?

Andrew Parsons

It is certainly an issue, and remains an issue. Ticketmaster has campaigned long and hard in this area, as I hope would have been well documented. We have been looking into it just in the run-up, too, and we experienced 20 billion—which is just an insane number—attempted attacks over the last year across all of our global sites, so through the last 12 months. As an issue, it is absolutely enormous so we very much welcome the legislation that there has been in this area. I do think that it is probably too early to tell at this stage how effective that will prove to be. The Government said they want to be able to review that in another 12 months’ time to look more fully at the effects.

Giles Watling

Do you think it will need another year?

Andrew Parsons

I think it will need that sort of time to be able to see whether or not we can see any kind of meaningful results from it.

Giles Watling

Have you identified attacks since the legislation in July?

Andrew Parsons

Yes, very much so, yes.

Giles Watling

Billions?

Andrew Parsons

Over the last 12 months—that is the 20 billion number. Yes, for every major sale it is still to varying degrees a problem.

Giles Watling

Have you been able to identify the source of these bots and have you been able to involve the police?

Andrew Parsons

It is very difficult because where we are able to identify them we block them because we do not want them to be accessing the site, so it does make it difficult to be able to determine location. Thus far, we have not been able to report anything, no.

Giles Watling

What you are telling me is that we are on the back foot on this one and we need to take further action, or that we need to wait until we get a report?

Andrew Parsons

Yes, our feeling is we need to see through what has been put in place thus far and see what the effects of it can be, but at the moment it is difficult to be able to report direct experiences and anything to point to at this stage, yes.

Giles Watling

Do you have any suggestions or ideas about how we can begin to get to grips with that—something that perhaps we have not considered already?

Andrew Parsons

Honestly, it is difficult. It does go back to where it is across borders, as the internet is. It is very difficult to see, so I think being vigilant and being very clear about what the law is in that regard should be a deterrent of sorts you would hope. Yes, it is difficult to be able to comment beyond that, I am afraid.

Paul Farrelly

Again it is, Andrew, really. I should get my pension from this Committee because I just dragged out our report from 10 years ago on ticket touting. I was just going back to Ticketmaster’s evidence. In fact, one of the witnesses then was Paul Williamson, who is an old Labour Party friend of mine, who then went on from Ticketmaster to do a really good job at the London 2012 Olympics and the Rugby World Cup in 2015.

Andrew Parsons

Indeed, he did.

Paul Farrelly

In the evidence given 10 years ago, Ticketmaster could not have been clearer, “The principle is already in place in UK law for football matches and the 2012 Olympics, and we strongly argue for similar legislation outlawing the unauthorised resale of tickets for all events”. Then what changed was that Ticketmaster, having wanted to throttle the secondary ticketing outlets, got into the market, and just as we have come back from holidays now you are doing something completely different. Could you explain Ticketmaster’s changes of mind and perspective over the last 10 years and the reasons for them?

Andrew Parsons

Happily, yes, just the 10 years. As I run the Ticketmaster UK business, which I tried to make clear, from our side and from my position, our role is always first and foremost to try to support clients who are looking to get tickets directly into the hands of fans every day. That is what a Ticketmaster business does first and foremost and that has always remained the case. Since the legislation and that very bright light that it shone on many of these issues, and the terms and conditions that that made available, there has been even more of a landmark shift—a seismic shift—from artists seeking to take advantage of that and to take greater steps to limit resale within the market. We have always played a big part within that and we have had technology to make that available. Iron Maiden, the example that Adam cited just a moment ago—you do not mind if I call you Adam in this setting, do you?

Adam Webb

No.

Andrew Parsons

It is a piece of technology that we had, paperless, credit card entry, which denies touts the ability to resell. This has always been a very, very important part of our business. We have listened to the campaign that has grown in pace, listened to the artists and clients that we work with—ultimately the fans who buy tickets from us. They have been very clear on the need for a fan-to-fan ticket exchange and that is what we have announced that we will be launching later this year.

Paul Farrelly

Damian in a few moments wants to get into the nitty-gritty of your market-pricing platinum mechanism where maybe the technology is allowing you to catch up, but what happens then if people buy tickets from you as a primary seller and then try to sell them for a much higher price on the likes of Viagogo? What happens then? Will they still be able to do that?

Andrew Parsons

That remains a very real threat. Just as before, we have a variety of tools, services and technologies that we have been expanding, to try to work with clients whose aim is to limit resale in the ways that we described. We engage with artists in particular to talk about what some of those tools might be. Paperless is the credit card entry system that we used on Iron Maiden. Just very, very recently we announced a series of shows that we have been working on with an artist called Four Tet—he is a DJ producer and has a residency of floorshows at the Brixton Academy—which will be wholly mobile ticketed. That digital route forward in the long term seems to be the way that we will address the issue of touts being able to exploit fans and access tickets. At the moment, that will continue to be a possibility.

Paul Farrelly

Why? You are a major force in the market. Clearly, you have to discuss the terms with your performers, but isn’t it possible for you to take not just an initiative piecemeal but wholesale—like Mr Galbraith took with Ed Sheeran—to make it clear to people who buy tickets through you that resale can only happen through your new mechanisms, otherwise people run the risk of not being allowed into the venue?

Andrew Parsons

That final position I think we can all see would be a position for the artist to take. Where I very much support the view is that we want to get to a point where more and more we take away the pieces of paper that enable people to very easily move them on—for them to be very easily touted—and to move to a digital world where we are able to exercise controls in conjunction with the artist, manager, producer, event organiser, whoever that might be, and their wishes. I do absolutely agree that technology is going to be the solution to this. We are already seeing it now and I think it will go further in that direction, absolutely.

Paul Farrelly

Can I ask the rest of the panel in turn what you think of Ticketmaster’s latest initiative?

Stuart Galbraith

We welcome it wholeheartedly. Ticketmaster is reacting to the UK marketplace specifically, and indeed its policy elsewhere in the world is different where the view on secondary is perhaps different, for instance, in the US. It is reacting to public pressure campaigns and now legislation that has been enacted. To put it bluntly, we are starting to clear up the acne that has blighted our industry, and I think that we are coming to the point where we just have one major boil left to lance.

Paul Farrelly

Which is?

Stuart Galbraith

Viagogo.

Paul Farrelly

I thought you might say that. Adam?

Adam Webb

Yes, I agree with that. Again, going back to the original Committee in November, at that point there was probably a risk that the UK market could be turning to be more like the US market. I think that in the US market ticket touting is absolutely endemic. It is beyond hope. What has happened now is not only with Ticketmaster but also with Access launching their marketplace, which is coming in in quarter 4 as well this year, and what we are seeing is a change in the UK market. In Europe it is going to be different. It is not going to be for profit resale; it is going to be consumer-friendly capped resale. That is a big market shift.

Paul Farrelly

Lucinda, I know you have your own model, but what is your impression?

Lucinda Brown

Yes, like the rest of the industry we all massively welcome it. It is brilliant. What you said earlier was interesting, that people should only be able to resell to the place that they bought it. That would be a fantastic solution. There would not be inflated prices where fans are being ripped off and artists are being ripped off. This is great news for all of us.

Paul Farrelly

One final question: I have long given up trying to get tickets for some major performers like Bruce Springsteen and just rely on friends who are more adept at it and have more time to get them for me, because I just see the impossibility with the bots and the rigged market and distribution place. Andrew, what measures do you take with your current model to improve availability by tackling bots and super sellers who try to snap markets up and then offer them all over the place at inflated prices?

Andrew Parsons

Various tools. We have an artist services team within the music space. That works with artists specifically to try to determine what the best way is for them to take their tickets to market in consultation with them. I am not sure how much the Committee will have heard of the Verified Fan product that we brought to market.

Paul Farrelly

We have seen your evidence.

Andrew Parsons

Yes. That is specifically seeking to address that particular issue of the frustration around on sale in particular. For those who may not be familiar, it basically means that it is an invitation-only presale. The artist and the event organiser invite people to participate in that presale.

Paul Farrelly

They get priority?

Andrew Parsons

They get priority. They go very broad and wide with it to make sure that they get to as many people as possible and, as a minimum, get into the artist’s core fan base so that they are able to participate in that. Then we have a series of algorithms and work that we are able to do to remove the bad actors from those lists. We take out those that we can clearly see show evidence of being likely to be touts or bots. That means that the presale that we then go out to is able to get to genuine fans in that first instance. It is initiatives like that that will hopefully ensure that fans get the best opportunity to get the seats first.

Chair

We have a few people who want to come in; first, Brendan.

Brendan O'Hara

I have a question for Andrew. What is the relationship between Live Nation and Ticketmaster?

Andrew Parsons

Ticketmaster is a part of Live Nation Entertainment.

Brendan O'Hara

Okay. Live Nation and Ticketmaster are global venue owners, concert promoters, artist managers, ticket vendors and, until very recently—or technically still are—major secondary ticket retailers. Do you think that is a conflict of interest and do you think that is in any way good for consumers?

Andrew Parsons

I am the Managing Director of Ticketmaster UK so I can speak for the ticketing component piece of that. I do believe that it is a very, very, very competitive market, which ultimately I suppose is the root of your question—it is more competitive here than anywhere on earth. In the UK ticketing market, there are new entrants. Literally, there is a technology hub here so there are new entrants to the market all the time and it remains a very, very competitive market space.

Brendan O'Hara

You can understand why it would not feel very competitive when there is one massive player that are venue owners, concert promoters, artist managers, ticket vendors and secondary ticket vendors. It does not feel very competitive. If you are an ordinary fan trying to seek a ticket, we either go through you or we have to find a very circuitous route somewhere, don’t we?

Andrew Parsons

It genuinely is a very, very competitive marketplace. Just looking here, we pitched and would have loved to be working with Lucinda. We are not able to. There is a different technology provider in place there at the moment. We are fortunate enough to be able to sell some of Stuart’s tickets. We do not sell all of them by any means. He has a preferred relationship with another supplier. Adam mentioned Access, which is a major supplier here that is launching its own fan exchange, I gather, later this year. There are lots and lots of suppliers within the marketplace, which I think shows more than enough evidence that it is a very, very competitive market within ticketing.

Brendan O'Hara

Do you think that the UK currently has a healthy ticket market?

Andrew Parsons

I think that it is very, very competitive, yes.

Brendan O'Hara

Is it healthy? Is it good for consumers?

Andrew Parsons

In that it is competitive, yes.

Brendan O'Hara

You are on record as saying that closing Seatwave and GetMeIn was part of a long-term plan. Is that correct?

Andrew Parsons

It is correct that I said it, yes.

Brendan O'Hara

You stand by that?

Andrew Parsons

I do, yes. Just to explain, we acquired a Seatwave business that we knew provided us with the technological means across a number of different markets that we would ultimately be able to integrate into our Ticketmaster offering, which is what we are doing later this year. That has been over a year in the making. Lots and lots of hard work has gone into that. We have effectively rebuilt out the entire front end of our website, and every means of how you interact with us as a customer has been redesigned and rebuilt. It was always our goal to bring those together on the seating map to offer greater choice, both resold tickets and other VIP, primary. We think all of the options should be available to offer the fan as much choice as possible, and that is certainly what we have been working towards.

Brendan O'Hara

Why then did the CEO of your parent company, just 18 months ago, say that there were still hundreds of millions of dollars in secondary? Are you asking us to believe that you bought Seatwave less than four years ago in order to close it down?

Andrew Parsons

That is not what I said, in fairness. It was that we were looking to use that technology that was best able to harness to integrate with our Ticketmaster business. What we have listened to here is that there was a very clear and different market need within the UK. The campaign had been here for some while but had grown considerably, and the efforts to ensure that artists and music managers were participating in this, were more than ever to ensure that they were limiting resale in ways that we have played a part in with our own technology. We have been at the forefront of a lot of these initiatives to limit resale for quite some time. It is difficult to get that message across when you did own two of the perceived big four sites. I understand that was a tough sell, but we have been part of trying to be an answer to the issue of resale for quite some while. This is a logical end to that for us.

Brendan O'Hara

Isn’t the reality that the court of public opinion and campaigns by the Daily Record and Mark McGivern have shone a light in places that you did not want a light to be shone, and that you have been dragged kicking and screaming to this position and you are trying to spin a positive way out of it? The reality is that this is where you have ended up because, as I say, the light has been shone by campaigners on places where you did not want it to be shone.

Andrew Parsons

I think that primary ticketing has always been absolutely at the heart of what we do. It is what all of my teams are focused on every day of the week. That is our absolute main objective and has always been the case. I understand the focus that those resale businesses received. We understand the frustrations that fans have had with those businesses. That is why we are very pleased that we have been able to move forward with a new fan-to-fan exchange model. It is going to be very, very easy for fans to use. It is going to be built right into the heart of the account. We think that it is going to be a really positive move for the industry.

Brendan O'Hara

Finally, for many years Ticketmaster has had a commercial relationship with touts who were allowed or encouraged to harvest huge amounts of tickets. We hope that is coming to an end. What measures have you put in place to ensure that these former clients of yours can no longer have those tickets in that vast amount to sell on other secondary sites?

Andrew Parsons

In that sense, nothing has really changed in that we have always been in the business of protecting that primary inventory wherever we could. We block bots in their billions, as I mentioned. We work with technology—like the paperless solution that we mentioned earlier—to ensure that we can remove transferability by linking a ticket to a credit card or solutions like the Verified Fan opportunity that I mentioned earlier. Limiting touts’ ability to access tickets has always been an important part and will continue to be so.

Brendan O'Hara

You have never encouraged touts? You have never made it easier for power sellers to harvest Ticketmaster tickets? For people like Andrew Newman, Alpha Group Services, White Widget—they have all broken through your safety or security system in order to harvest tickets. You had no commercial relationship with these people?

Andrew Parsons

In the sale of primary tickets, absolutely not, no.

Brendan O'Hara

No, in the sale of your tickets. How did Andrew Newman or Alpha Group Services or one of these other people become these power sellers, these harvesters of vast amounts of tickets? Given that, if I am correct in what you are saying, they can still do that under the new system, nothing will be put in place to stop these touts, these—what would you call them?—clients or whatever, harvesting tickets in this number.

Andrew Parsons

I have tried to be very clear that we have always sought to protect the imagery so that they could not buy from us. In fact, while we are a large player within the UK market, they could have bought from a number of other sources at any given time. The fact that we do everything possible to ensure that we sell tickets directly, and to get them into the hands of fans wherever we can, was and remains the case.

Brendan O'Hara

If I was a large deal tout, essentially the closure of GetMeIn and Seatwave would have minimal effect on my business. I will just sell them on whatever secondary—I can still access the source of the tickets. Is that what you are saying?

Andrew Parsons

What I am saying and trying to be clear about is that we have always sought to work to ensure that we get tickets directly into the hands of fans, and we will continue to do so.

Simon Hart

More of the same. Sorry to go back to Andrew, but just picking up on that point. It seems to me odd, though, despite all of these measures that you have talked about, that—I may have this wrong, please correct me—there hasn’t been a single time when you think you have established sufficient evidence to so much as take one tout to the police or to have anything that resembles a case that you can produce. Is that true? If it is then it might suggest that your systems are pretty inefficient.

Andrew Parsons

In terms of being able to take it to the police, I think the Committee member was talking in relation to bots. That is something that if we were ever able to establish then we absolutely would.

Simon Hart

Just to interrupt on the bot point, are your systems, therefore, incapable of picking up unusual or unacceptable or illegal behaviour in a bot activity? You painted quite an interesting and thorough picture and yet the only bit of it missing is that it apparently does not have any effect on anybody anywhere, and nobody has been stopped doing whatever it was they were doing before, which has a negative impact on the industry. It sounds like a perfectly working machine that doesn’t actually do anything.

Andrew Parsons

It works to be blocking bots every day of the week. It has to be able to. In that regard it is very, very effective. The means of them being able to identify the source of that is very complex and I would be happy to try to offer you a little bit more detail and background to this, as to some of the complexities relating to that.

Simon Hart

Does it not pick up on common themes, for example, names?

Andrew Parsons

Only if we let them purchase, and that is the point that I was trying to make earlier. Our business revolves around blocking those bots—that is our absolute focus—so that they cannot purchase tickets wherever possible. In so doing, we are not then able to capture any details because you are blocking them from accessing systems.

Simon Hart

Again, I apologise if you did explain it earlier, but do you have any information you can give us on the proportion of bot attacks that get through versus the proportion of bot accounts that don’t? You talked about 20 billion—

Andrew Parsons

20 billion in the last 12 months.

Simon Hart

Have you any way of calculating what proportion—the success rate is what—

Andrew Parsons

To be quite clear, there lies the difficulty effectively in that if there is a potential bot attack, our job—and it is something of an arms race—is to block that bot because we don’t want them to access our systems. If they are able to get through, almost by definition, we have been unable to identify them as a bot and that makes it very difficult. That is part of the issue that I was trying to explain. It makes it difficult to be able to identify them because everything—

Simon Hart

No other warning signal comes up when a bot has got through the system that suggests to you that there might be multiple purchasing of a very similar pattern? That does not come up on the radar at all?

Andrew Parsons

If we knew that they were a bot we would block them because that is our absolute aim.

Simon Hart

Sorry to labour this point, but if it is a bot presumably it is behaving arguably in a non-human way for the purposes of doing stuff multiple times—

Andrew Parsons

Correct, being able to move more quickly around the site.

Simon Hart

You say that once that bot gets through you don’t even know it has got through and yet there might be multiple purchases going on that you don’t see. How does that work?

Andrew Parsons

If we were able to identify, in just the way you describe, that there was something that looked like a bot, we would prevent it. We would deny them access, so they would not be able to purchase. The difficulty lies—and this is an ongoing issue for many, many industries, not just ticketing—in being able to invest in technology to understand who those bots are and prevent them, because that is our ultimate aim, of course. That is the threat to a genuine fan being able to buy that ticket. If we were able to identify, if we are able to see behaviour that exhibits patterns that that is a bot, we have software that will block it. If we are not able to identify it, by definition, it is difficult to then know afterwards whether or not that was a bot, because if we knew they were a bot we would have blocked them.

Chair

Thank you. Can I just confirm for the record, you mentioned some figures there about the number of—

Andrew Parsons

Global attempts.

Chair

Global attempts. Could you repeat those once again?

Andrew Parsons

20 billion global bots over the last 12 months.

Chair

What is the volume of global tickets sales on Ticketmaster in a year?

Andrew Parsons

I will be happy to follow that up with the Committee afterwards. I don’t have them off the top of my head but we do report the numbers.

Chair

If blocking a bot completing a transaction—I would be interested to know how many transactions successfully take place on the site because 20 billion seems like a huge number. It would suggest that every hour of every day there are thousands and thousands of bots seeking to buy tickets from Ticketmaster. It is just an enormous number.

Andrew Parsons

It is an enormous number, yes.

Chair

I would be interested to know what bot attacks would contribute as a proportion of your total traffic.

Andrew Parsons

I would be happy for us to follow up on that.

Chair

Thank you.

Clive Efford

It is that issue but I won’t labour it. I want to understand a little bit more why you cannot identify who is behind it or what is the address that is behind these bot attacks. Isn’t it more efficient for you to close them down and report them to the appropriate authorities than to just keep trying to dead bat them all the time?

Andrew Parsons

I would be at the risk of repeating myself from before but—

Clive Efford

I am not sure you are because the question is slightly different, in the sense that you evaded the question in my opinion about identifying the source of the attack and dealing with that. I am not sure that you are right that you cannot identify where those attacks are coming from in every instance.

Andrew Parsons

As I said, our absolute aim is to try to be able to ensure that we block those from attacking sites—

Clive Efford

You are not able to find out who they are? That is what we are being told, is it?

Andrew Parsons

Yes, if we could we would absolutely—nobody stands to benefit more than us from being able to make that go away. It is a huge problem for us. We would love to be able to identify them and, as has been made clear, within the UK we stand to benefit from—

Clive Efford

I assume you want to move on, Chair, because we have been on this point for a long time, but Stuart Galbraith would like to come in.

Stuart Galbraith

If I may, I was going to give you my experience based on our most recent case study, which was the Ed Sheeran tour where, as well as asking the ticket agents to put in their normal defences against bots, we were very aware that the legislation that was referred to earlier on at the start of this question wasn’t specifically just about bots. It was about the use of all technology, including computers and multiple purchases and so on. What we did on the Ed Sheeran tour is we actually received data from all of the ticket agents that we then went through manually, and by going through it manually we were able to identify nearly 10,000 multiple purchases that had slipped through the defences of all of the agents, and not just Ticketmaster but other major ones as well. We then cancelled those because it was very, very obvious that they were breaching our terms and conditions and also breaching the new Digital Economy Bill. It is just to offer an insight. I don’t think you should necessarily be red herring too much by bot. It is the multiple use of computers as well. The only way to pick that up is by very, very laboriously manually checking all the sales records.

Clive Efford

Just one other question for Mr Parsons, following on from the advice about platinum tickets. Do you ever advise event organisers or artists about the best strategy to maximise profits from tickets? Do they ask for your advice as an expert in the market?

Andrew Parsons

How to—

Clive Efford

The best strategy for selling their tickets.

Andrew Parsons

Yes, very much so.

Clive Efford

They come to you for advice about what prices are likely to succeed on your website. Do you advise them in those circumstances about whether they should allocate all the tickets at once or do so in a phased process?

Andrew Parsons

If asked we would always recommend that the most transparent method is the best, yes.

Clive Efford

What does that mean? Sorry, I did not understand that.

Andrew Parsons

Your question was about what we would recommend.

Clive Efford

Would you advise that they phase in the sale of those tickets, or would you recommend that they are all allocated on the website at once?

Andrew Parsons

The latter.

Clive Efford

Thank you.

Chair

Ian, do you have a question on this?

Ian C. Lucas

It was actually about this vertically integrated market that exists within Live Nation and the relationship with Ticketmaster and Live Nation. If Live Nation is a venue would it only use Ticketmaster to sell tickets for that venue? Is that how it works?

Andrew Parsons

You would think so, wouldn’t you? No. It is very similar to the other venues within the UK, in that there are a proportion of tickets that are made available for the venue, so the venue has what is termed a house allocation, a venue allocation, which it controls the rights to sell and distribute. Then the promoter typically has access to an allocation that they have the rights to, and that is the same at a Live Nation venue.

Ian C. Lucas

Why is that? Why isn’t it the case that all tickets at a Live Nation venue are not sold by Ticketmaster?

Andrew Parsons

That is by virtue of how the market in the UK has evolved.

Ian C. Lucas

I am really impressed by Lucinda who has been sitting quite quietly at the end here because it seems to me that in Islington they seem to have found a solution.

Lucinda Brown

It is not a 100% solution because there are so many stakeholders. We are only a small player. We are not a multinational. We cannot dictate to the market where the tickets are sitting, so sadly we only hold 50%, unlike the Live Nation venues that hold 65% and they don’t release. We release because we are a small player. We are still vulnerable to touts because of this whereas—

Ian C. Lucas

With your DICE arrangement, essentially you have one supplier or one sales person, one company. You need to contact DICE if you want a ticket but—

Lucinda Brown

No, we are not 100% DICE because the promoter will decide where the tickets get allocated. As a venue we have a small stake and we have a say. An ideal situation is that we do 100% but, as Stuart said, there are various marketing options that different companies offer. Everyone’s dream is to sell out every show, so to do that we need everybody’s support. We need more co-ordination together and we all need to work together as a venue, the ticketing company, the promoter, and so there are, sadly, different people who sell for us. It isn’t an assembly hall.

Ian C. Lucas

Is it because the artist and the promoter want something different to what you want that this cannot be delivered?

Lucinda Brown

We are not co-ordinated enough as an industry. We don’t work together enough and, yes, we all have different demands financially.

Chair

Just some round up questions from me on this segment. First, Andrew Parsons, could you tell me what the financial impact on your company is in the UK to closing down your secondary ticketing platforms?

Andrew Parsons

Very limited. If we didn’t submit it we have certainly been quite public around the fact that they were loss-making businesses through last year, so in that sense I think we would rather consider the fact that the industry as a whole has moved in this direction, such that we want to be doing more and more to work with artists in this area who seek to limit resale, and that is definitely the right direction for us.

Chair

Yes. Some might say in that case to close down GetMeIn and Seatwave is less of a statement of principle but just a business transaction—to close down two businesses that are losing money rather than allowing them to continue to trade.

Andrew Parsons

It was important for us to establish a principle whereby fans could have an exchange mechanism, and that is what we have been working towards being able to build out, and we will be launching it later this year.

Chair

Is your company going to be involved in the secondary ticketing business in other markets around the world?

Andrew Parsons

We have been quite clear that it is the UK and European sites that have closed down.

Chair

You will still be very actively involved in secondary ticketing in the US?

Andrew Parsons

It is difficult for me to talk specifically for the US but yes, there is no suggestion of a change there.

Chair

Why do the principles that apply in Europe not also apply in America to your company?

Andrew Parsons

It is a little difficult for me in that I am managing director of Ticketmaster within the UK. I would be speculating somewhat if I start to talk about what is happening in other markets but I did mention they are very, very, very different markets, which operate in very different ways.

Chair

It is just that one company is making a statement of principle saying, “This is what we believe in. This is what we are going to do”. They tend to do it the same way everywhere rather than saying, “We believe that in Europe where we have loss-making businesses we are going to close, but in America, where we have highly lucrative businesses that do the same thing, we are going to keep them open”. That does not really sound like a statement of principle.

Andrew Parsons

I don’t think there was a question there.

Chair

I can help you a bit further. I am quite clear. I am asking: would you agree? Do you recognise the statement as a principled position or is it just simply a commercial one?

Andrew Parsons

I am very proud of the fact that we have been able to make a decision that was right for the UK market, and the fans here have been very clear in their call for a fan-to-fan exchange. The artists’ community here has really come together on this issue in a way that I don’t think it has necessarily around the rest of the world at quite the same level, so it is different here. Good businesses recognise change, what their clients are asking them for, and what clients are working for. I am pleased that we have been able to change it.

Chair

It has been driven by fan pressure.

Andrew Parsons

Fans and our clients and the campaign that has really brought us to this point, yes.

Chair

The fact that people do not use your secondary ticketing businesses because they lose money.

Andrew Parsons

As I said at the beginning, the changes to legislation have certainly been such that much of that has moved offshore.

Chair

The message to fans in America is if they stop using your secondary ticketing platform you might eventually close them down. Just to go back to something we touched on earlier as well on enforcements, how do you stop people buying tickets from Ticketmaster and then selling them on Viagogo? What you said was you do not have a mechanism to stop that at the moment.

Andrew Parsons

We have a number of different strategies that we talk to. One is similar to the model that Lucinda Brown mentioned earlier at Islington, where we are moving to a digital-only based ticket where we get to a point where we take away the pieces of paper and your mobile phone becomes your ticket.

Chair

That is the venue providing the solution for you. But do you design this?

Andrew Parsons

Yes, that is our solution, so to be clear that is a piece of technology that we own and operate as well on behalf of venues. A big part of our business is to supply that technology for buildings. The project I mentioned, albeit a step towards this direction, is something that we absolutely want to do lots more of, is to achieve just that. For the Fortec shows that we announced a few weeks ago, all tickets were sold by the verified fan process in the first instance, so we were able to take out as many of the bots and touts in that first round as we possibly could. Then all tickets were distributed in a mobile-only way so that we were able to take away some of the incentives for people to tout. We do definitely think that is the direction the market will go. Technology has to be the answer here, absolutely.

Chair

I can understand that but, if the venue is not either directly or in partnership with you deploying those technologies in place, at the moment there is not really anything you could do to stop someone buying a ticket from you and selling it on another third party site.

Andrew Parsons

It is certainly a complicated market and, yes, the allocational nature of it means that we do not always have that control—true.

Chair

Is there anything you think you could do to make that hard? Is there any investment you could make to make it harder for people? The intention of your announcement is if you buy a ticket from Ticketmaster you can only re-sell it through Ticketmaster. You cannot sell it on another platform. But it would seem that you might be able to without being detected, depending on the nature of the ticketing system at the venue when you get there.

Andrew Parsons

We already see a groundswell of venues and clients seeking to go in this direction, and many of them ask us the question every day of how can we take this approach forward. On digital ticketing—certainly through the next year, the next 16 months, I think there are going to be huge moves in that direction and—from small club level venues that we work with, the Music Venue Trust as a partner supplying them with technology—I can see absolutely from small venues upwards that that is going to become more and more the norm.

Chair

Going back to Stuart Galbraith’s comment on this, it sounds to me like at the moment, unless you have a perfect technological solution at the venue, you need a degree of human checking involved as well in order to make this work. That is what you said earlier. Do you have a further comment on that?

Stuart Galbraith

My only comment with regard to your question is that, for me, it is now about the enactment of the CRA because it is not necessarily Ticketmaster’s responsibility to control that ticket once it goes into the marketplace. At the moment, we are powerless as promoters and as distributors to then cancel that ticket because sites such as Viagogo do not comply with the CRA. The reason they are not complying is that the minute they do we will be able to identify the source of the ticket and cancel it. If I may be so bold, I think that is one of the reasons why Andrew perhaps made the commercial decision to close down his two secondary sites, because to comply with the CRA would have given us the tools to basically stop his business.

Chair

A final question from me on this, which is principally directed to Andrew. You gave that astonishing figure on the number of bot attacks. I would be fascinated to know what the global number of ticket transactions is at Ticketmaster. The Committee did a lot of work this year looking at the role of fake accounts and bot accounts disseminating harmful content and disinformation online, but clearly one of the big areas is what people call cyborg units—people who are controlling computers. In many ways they are replicating the work a bot might do but with human oversight. They are generating a huge volume of traffic from a particular place. Do you also monitor bulk buying of people operating computers from individual locations, who are in some way seeking to replicate the work of a bot but with a team of humans carrying on the work? We know there are many other issues online that are caused by people behaving in that way.

Andrew Parsons

The short answer is yes. We can see highlighted areas of IP activity in areas that should not really be exhibiting quite that level of interest in artist A. That would be someone who would be identified.

Chair

Would you take action against them, suspend their accounts?

Andrew Parsons

Yes. We would block it as if it was a bot.

Rebecca Pow

A quick point, and my apologies for being late, Chair, in the Digital Economy Act we have quite a lot of legislation now that should be helping. The Digital Economy Act 2017—so that is not very long ago—required a unique number to be listed on tickets. Is that happening and is that helping solve any of the problems we have been talking about? Stuart, would you like to quickly comment on that?

Stuart Galbraith

It is not something we have used yet but I have spoken to promoters that have used it and it has worked very successfully. It is something we are intending to roll out on our next major on sale.

Rebecca Pow

Andrew, are you using it?

Andrew Parsons

If our clients did request and ask, and if Stuart were to come to us saying, “This is something we would like to use across this tour” then absolutely.

Rebecca Pow

Is it a voluntary thing or should you be using it?

Stuart Galbraith

I believe it is voluntary.

Rebecca Pow

It is voluntary. Fine, but it sounds useful.

Stuart Galbraith

Again, it does still depend upon a secondary site complying with the second piece of legislation—the Consumer Rights Act 2015—and listing that ticket using the UTN because if they don’t we cannot identify the ticket.

Rebecca Pow

You touched on the Consumer Rights Act. Again, it looks like quite a useful piece of legislation and there was a report done on that by Professor Wolfson. He came up with the conclusion that it was a useful piece of legislation but it was not being enforced. Enforcement was lacking. Do you agree with that and do you think platforms should be doing more to comply with it?

Stuart Galbraith

I think, under pressure from the CMA, we have certainly seen more transparency in terms of the structure of ticketing and the use of fees. They have gone as far as they can without complete compliance, whereas—and I do not want to sound like a broken record—the one site that has not is Viagogo. We are very pleased to hear the CMA bringing for the very first time under, I presume, not just the Consumer Rights Act but also consumer protection law, they will be taking them to court. I think it is only once those actions are taken and penalties are then issued that we will see people comply.

Rebecca Pow

I am sure, Adam, you have something to add to that.

Adam Webb

There is a fundamental disconnect between how Viagogo view a ticket and how everybody else views a ticket. I think Viagogo, quite conveniently—because this is how ticket touts view a ticket—view it as a commodity. Terms and conditions do not count for anything and you can do with it as you wish. If you look at the small print of a ticket it does not really say that. We usually say it is a personal revocable licence and it is not for resale but there are Ts and Cs applied. Because of the enforcement of the law those Ts and Cs now have teeth. Like Stuart said, there is more co-operation now—certainly, with Ticketmaster and with StubHub—so that you can enforce those terms and conditions and it is great. Again, a lot of artists are now doing it. It is not a perfect medicine. It is very labour-intensive. It is not going to be for everything. It is possibly not even a perfect medicine for the consumer because there are issues, like checking IDs at the door and things like that. I think technology will probably alleviate some of those in the future but clearly, yes, Viagogo has a very different perspective on what a ticket is.

Rebecca Pow

Finally, this is a slightly wider question. If tickets are resold through a secondary market—and sometimes they can be sold for a huge amount of money—a great deal of money can be made. I believe the music industry does not get any of that extra gain. Is anyone addressing that? Lucinda?

Lucinda Brown

Receiving the gain?

Rebecca Pow

It is the extra gain so there is no requirement or no way, as far as I can see, for the industry itself, the life blood of all these tickets you are selling, benefitting from the benefits these secondary ticket touts are getting, or sites or however you would like to describe them.

Lucinda Brown

It is a huge problem.

Stuart Galbraith

To put it bluntly, if somebody has paid £1,000 for a ticket that had a face value of £100 then, in my opinion, that is nine shows they will not go and see, or if they were smaller shows and they were £20 tickets it is several dozen shows they will not go and see. It is sucking money out of the top of our industry and putting it into the pockets of investment funds and large institutions, which are now offshore and elsewhere. It means those monies also do not have PRS paid on them, so the songwriters and the creators of that art do not share in it and HMRC do not get their VAT return on it either.

Simon Hart

Back to Andrew on this. I am no expert on this but a quick Google search discovered a site called ticketbot.net where, if you buy the software, that would enable me to purchase 2,000 identities an hour for the purposes of ticket sales. Do your systems block that? Are you confident that your systems will prevent people like me buying that software that I could have done in the last 20 minutes in here?

Andrew Parsons

All I can be confident in is the huge priority focus and level of investment that we put in and how seriously we take it. It would be difficult for me to comment on any specific piece of software and how that works, without looking into it a bit more with a bit more detail. All I can really say is that it is an absolute priority and focus for us. We have nothing to gain by allowing bots to cheat our systems.

Simon Hart

Could you perhaps let us know on that specific question of ticketbot.net? Once you get back to the office could you let the Committee know if the systems block that out? It would be helpful to know that.

Andrew Parsons

Sure.

Clive Efford

Can I just ask Mr Galbraith—and others may want to comment—how much of a problem is the holding back of tickets by event organisers and artists to force up prices in terms of ripping off fans by forcing prices up? Is that a problem in the industry? Is that something you think also needs to be addressed? It is something that has been raised with us.

Stuart Galbraith

I am not aware of that and it is certainly nothing that our company does, to be quite honest. We are eternally grateful to get the tickets out in the marketplace and sell the damn things, because while we hold onto them we are at extreme risk.

Clive Efford

We had evidence from one individual who has written in saying they had bought a ticket early on, being told these tickets were scarce and more tickets became available in better locations at lower prices.

Stuart Galbraith

Every concert and every tour is perhaps different because obviously as promoters, and with agents and artist managers, we are striving to match demand with supply. There is no point in us trying to play an artist in a 2,000 seat venue if we can play to 10,000 seats because we and the artist would be able to make more money and 8,000 more people get to see them. Equally, there is no point in trying to play a venue that holds 10,000 if we think we can only sell 3,000 tickets, for instance. In arenas you have the ability to start off at a small capacity. You will set your house at four and a half, you will build a business plan and you will do a deal based upon that and you will put the tickets out on sale. If it is the case that they sell very well, if you take examples of venues like the O2 or the NEC, they have a technical capability where you can then open up other blocks if you have demand. If you don’t have demand you leave that capacity as it is and you are grateful that you have achieved what you set out to achieve. There can be occasions where more tickets come into the marketplace after the initial on sale because we had more demand and you open up supply, but in a tour with a very hot ticket, certainly our policy would be to put all the tickets on sale as fast as you possibly can and sell the tickets. Between the point of on sale and the actual playing of the show there will be some releases, because when we go on sale we don’t know exactly what the technical term of the show is going to be and we may have a seat here that you cannot see from, for example. But then we find out the show has moved this piece of production and you can open up sightlines, or the mixer will be smaller or we will get licensing approval because the stage is slightly smaller than we anticipated and we can put more people on the floor. Then we will put those tickets in the marketplace. It is possible that tickets come back out later after the on sale because, if you are opening up a venue on a progressive basis, obviously you are adding tickets at the back of the auditorium so those tickets may be cheaper than the initial tickets you sold at the front of the auditorium.

Clive Efford

You described earlier the success in the arrangements you put in place for the Ed Sheeran concerts, but you did say that was not practical to apply right across the industry. What would be, in your opinion? To be clear, is regulation needed so that we can apply pressure across the entire industry, or do we need better enforcement? Is that practical with every instance? Does it become self-defeating if we regulate?

Stuart Galbraith

I think the ultimate result would be technologically based for us, whether that is blockchain or what comes after that. But at this point in time the implementation and actioning of regulations and Consumer Rights Act, Digital Economy Bill is the only incentive that we can see to enable us to try to pull back some control into what we believe is an out of control marketplace.

Adam Webb

Can I add one thing to that as well? Again this is linked to Viagogo not recognising terms and conditions and, therefore, being ultimately a company out of its market. At the moment Viagogo is allowed to dominate Google search results and this is becoming more and more of an issue. Clearly from the consumers who contact us, who contacted Claire Turner—she was here today with her Victim of Viagogo campaign—it is a key marketing channel for Viagogo. You search for most artists’ tickets and they sit at the top of the Google search. There have been some improvements in here. This time last year they were advertising themselves as official sites. They would put the artist’s name in the url so it was absolutely misleading. Google rolled out a certification scheme earlier this year—that again has had some positives—so that sites like Viagogo make a disclosure on their home page that they are a secondary site, so there is some more awareness there. But still in the advert itself because there is no overt text saying that they are a resale site, still at the start of the consumer journey you are still seeing people click through in the madness of a Friday morning ticket sale and they are getting duped. Again, worse than that, you have tickets like Ed’s, like Arctic Monkeys where the Ts and Cs are so that they are effectively going to be buying invalid tickets. Again, we have been in long conversations with Google and others about this but again, even with the developments of this week, it is just becoming extremely frustrating that we cannot get Google to budge. We feel like they are breaking their own AdWords guidelines on this as well.

Clive Efford

Is it fair on fans to rely on Google to be their consumer protector?

Adam Webb

I think Google in the world we live in is a trusted brand, and fortunately you have one of the world’s most trusted brands. People go there for ticket searches and you have probably one of the least trusted brands at the top of the search.

Clive Efford

Does that make them a trusted brand then if they are prepared to put Viagogo at the top of their list?

Adam Webb

It would be incredibly helpful if they could do something about that.

Chair

If Google is facilitating someone committing a fraud I would expect it to do something about it.

Adam Webb

Absolutely, yes.

Giles Watling

For everybody, except perhaps Adam—you touched on that earlier. I would imagine that the relationship an artist generally has with their fans and their supporters is a close one they want to encourage. They want to keep that alive and, as we all know, they want a venue that has a living, vibrant feel about it. The fans are going to be irritated, aren’t they, about secondary sales and all that engenders? But the artists must be kicking up as well because they want to keep that alive. They want to keep that atmosphere going. They are not going to take it very easily that there are people making profits and irritating their own fan base. You must have to respond to them all the time. Stuart, is this the case?

Stuart Galbraith

There are two aspects to this. One is, as you say, the money that is flowing out of the industry and it is not just the artists’ pockets because, prior to that, all the artists that play in stadiums and arenas played in theatres and clubs and pubs and they have all come up the same route. If that network is strangled, because we don’t have people going to it because they have spent money that has left the industry, the artist can see their successors are not going to have the same opportunity and people will not be able to discover new music and then grow with it. The vast majority of artists we and the fans work with we work with have been with us right from the very start and they grow up and people—as you have probably done yourself—have followed an act for many years. The second aspect of it is about applying terms and conditions that prevent resale—we now have artists that I am pleased to say are agreeing to take a hard line and we are turning people away. That is inconveniencing people who are coming to the show who at the end of the day are—

Giles Watling

The dynamic is the other way. You are getting the artist to agree the hard line rather than they—

Stuart Galbraith

We will suggest it or they will suggest it but, by mutual agreement, that is the policy we are now adopting with many tours. That means that customer who gets turned away—although it is a customer of Viagogo or a secondary tout or whatever—is still a fan of the artist. It is a fan of the artist that has paid way too much money to see them, and we want them to come in and pay the amount that the artist has prescribed and requested. We are inconveniencing that fan on the night and we are very aware of that, but we are trying to make that fan understand that, if a ticket cannot be resold and it is not allowed to be resold, they will not get in. On the Ed Sheeran tour we facilitated, “Right, that ticket is cancelled. You are now able to buy a ticket at face value and we will give you admission”. It is inconvenient to the customer because they then have to go back to the likes of Viagogo and claim a refund but ultimately, out of the 15,000 tickets we cancelled on the Ed Sheeran tour, 99% of them got in at face value and we saved them all a fortune.

Giles Watling

That is a good result. What about the pressure you are feeling, Andrew, from the artists?

Andrew Parsons

As I mentioned earlier, we have an artists’ services team, whose job is to engage with artists right from the outset to determine what the aims and objectives of the tour might be. Limiting resale is very high on the agenda in many instances, and we look to engage with them about what technologies we might be able to deploy in those instances, based on the size and type of venue they might be operating. That could be paperless, as we have done with Iron Maiden.

Giles Watling

You are responding to those pressures.

Andrew Parsons

Absolutely, and the artists’ managers themselves are increasingly aware, particularly in the UK, of the means they have at their disposal to be taking it on.

Giles Watling

Where is the MU in all this? Do they get a vote? The Musician’s Union.

Adam Webb

They signed our declaration, our FanFair Alliance Declaration so I think they are broadly supportive, yes.

Ian C. Lucas

If I could reinforce the points that Stuart has been making. I did a little bit of research this afternoon myself. I was quite astonished that a Paul McCartney ticket in Liverpool on a Viagogo site is £1,072. There was no indication, whatsoever, of what the face value of the ticket was and I was looking quite hard trying to find it. Obviously Paul McCartney is in a position where he does not need to worry too much about a loss of income personally but, clearly, the money that is going out of the venue, out of the people that are employed there, out of the country to somewhere, is massive. You obviously know that. Are those sorts of figures fairly standard in there?

Andrew Parsons

Adam will perhaps be able to give you more background information, but we certainly had examples of people that instead of paying £75 have paid up to £2,500, £3,000 or £4,000 per ticket, and that is for a ticket that clearly has stamped or printed upon it that, “This ticket is invalid if it is resold and will not gain admittance”. Yes, I think there are people that are squandering thousands of pounds, and on some occasions being duped out of thousands of pounds, because they do not know the cost of the ticket until they get past the transaction page.

Chair

That concludes the questions for the first panel but it sounds like, from what Lucinda and Stuart said, that if you are using an electronic ticketing system, and if the law is being enforced so that details of the ticket will be identified if anyone tried to resell it, you should be able to design resale out of the industry. That seems to be a clear way ahead and, from what Lucinda said and Stuart said, you are making it happen and it seems to be an example others can follow.

Lucinda Brown

Touts are always going to try to be ahead of the game but, right now, there is a solution that works and as long as people take it up it is there. We are using it and it is great.

Chair

That is great. Thank you very much. Examination of witnesses

I

Wayne Grierson, UK Managing Director, StubHub.

Chair

Thank you very much. I would like to start the second session. People in one or two moments we will have to go and vote and will be rejoining the Committee. We may have a vote in the House of Commons before 5.00 pm, so if we are still running we may have to pause for 15 minutes to allow Members to go and vote in the House. Mr Grierson, thank you very much for joining us. It had been our intention obviously to have a representative of Viagogo, Cristopher Miller. We had agreed that they would appear over the course of the summer. At 11.00 pm last night I received a letter from Viagogo saying that they did not feel they could appear in front of the Committee, as a consequence of the CMA’s investigation and the CMA’s decision to pursue action against Viagogo. They also referenced the legal action against Kilimanjaro Live as well. In response to Viagogo’s letter, I wrote back today to say we have taken advice both from the CMA and also from the in-house legal services here at the House of Commons. The CMA’s case is not sub judice. The court papers have not been issued. No date for a hearing has been set. There is no reason why they should not appear as witnesses in front of the Committee today. The reason I believe they have chosen not to do that is because they are concerned about incriminating themselves by anything they may say in the evidence that they give, but the basis on which Select Committees work is people are invited to come and tell the truth and if you have nothing to hide the truth will do you no harm. Viagogo has decided not to come and answer our questions. I think this sits as part of a pattern of evasion on their behalf. It is disrespectful to the House. It is even more disrespectful to the customers who have been the victims of Viagogo over so many years that they will not come and answer questions about the way their business works. The Committee will take further advice on Viagogo’s response. We are publishing today the letter I received last night, and our initial response, and we will publish any further correspondence in due course. To my mind, I think this underlines the many real problems that exist around this business and the message that comes from today’s hearing, even though they are not here to answer for themselves, is that if you want to be safe if you are buying tickets online do not buy them from Viagogo. It is not a reputable company. That being said, Mr Grierson, we are very pleased to have you here. We would like to start off. When we had the hearing in November 2016, which has been referenced, Paul Peake, for the legal team at StubHub represented the company. He said at that time, to a question I asked him, that he did not believe the company had a legal obligation to monitor the activity of sellers on their platform. He said, “By law, we are not required to police or monitor our site”. It would appear that StubHub no longer believes that to be the case. Could you explain why there has been this change in strategy from the company since November 2016?

Wayne Grierson

Thank you, Chair, for inviting me to give evidence. To echo your sentiment about Viagogo, from our position in the resale market, we believe it is an absolute disgrace, that they are discrediting the industry and the House, where they are not showing up to give evidence, given that they have a dominant position within the market in terms of the UK business. We are a UK-registered business, the company, as we are in the country; they are not. We have a vested interest in making sure that our consumers, or the consumers within the UK, are treated fairly. To answer your question specifically, the legislation as it was understood is that there is self-declaration for sellers. We have a Payment Intermediation Licence through Luxembourg where we have to do the checks. All business sellers on StubHub and all sellers on StubHub, go through a number of checks. They are checked against certain databases for fraud and criminality and they have to self-declare whether they are a business or whether they are a consumer seller. Through the CMA investigation, and the outcome of that, what constitutes a business seller has been defined, so now they have to be declared based on certain parameters. We would check and they have to be disclosed, and we would ask for certain information to ensure they are who they say they are—we will ask for documentation about the company and their passport information, so they are fully disclosed to the consumer, prior to the transaction on StubHub.

Chair

What steps does StubHub take to ensure that tickets being sold on StubHub are not tickets that are prevented from being resold?

Wayne Grierson

Mr Galbraith said that there is increasing collaboration between us and the promoters. We take a very specific view on it. What is the right benefit for the customer? What is the right outcome for the customer? Are they going to be affected? There is a grey area around terms and conditions. Two-thirds of our business is consumer sellers, and selling tickets to buyers that make a late decision in terms of their social calendars. What we do not think is fair are the unfair terms and conditions that are restricting the reuse and resale of tickets. So, 51% of the tickets on StubHub go below face value[1], so it is a good-value proposition, and 98% of sellers on StubHub are consumer sellers. They have committed to go to an event six to 12 months previously. They get to within one month of the event and realised they cannot go and that is when they register to sell on StubHub, trying to recoup some of that money they paid six to 12 months previously.

Chair

StubHub is the ticket partner for Anthony Joshua’s fight at Wembley.

Wayne Grierson

That's right.

Chair

In a situation like that, you have a contract with the promoter. If the promoter in that case has stipulated that tickets could not be resold on third-party sites, but they were being resold on StubHub, would you police your own site to make sure that could not take place, especially as you are the ticket-agent operator?

Wayne Grierson

As with the gentleman from Ticketmaster, we have anti-bot technology to make sure we protect who buys the tickets; we have ticket limits. We make sure that is enforceable as per the lines of the agreement with the rights holders. If the rights holders are looking to restrict resale or put some provisions around it, we will make sure that there is a commercial agreement as per the discussions in the prior session. We very much distinguish the events on StubHub.

Chair

Sorry to interrupt but could you explain what you mean there? You said, “We will make sure there is a commercial agreement”.

Wayne Grierson

Where there is a commercial agreement—you referenced the match with Anthony Joshua—where we are the primary distribution channel, just like at Ticketmaster, a primary channel, we would have a separate event. The separate event with StubHub would be defined as official. Any resale events would be clearly defined as a resale within the marketplace. Therefore, the consumer knows what they are buying from which seller.

Chair

The question I am asking is: how do you police what people do on the site? If the company is accepting that it does have responsibility for the way people behave on their site, you enforce the law on the sellers, so they have to show key information to the consumer about the tickets they are buying, but if the people who are using StubHub to sell tickets on are doing so in breach of conditions that have been set on the original purchase of the those tickets, so they could not be resold on a secondary ticketing platform, do you, StubHub, do anything to stop that happening?

Wayne Grierson

It depends on the terms and conditions that are specified.

Chair

If the terms and conditions are that this ticket is not available for resale and it is a major event and you may be aware of the fact that those are the conditions that have been set, what do you do to make sure that people are not breaching those conditions by selling? The reason that it is important is because it is not just the terms and condition of the contract, it is that someone may be purchasing a ticket that will be cancelled when they turn up.

Wayne Grierson

We believe that the consumer has the right to transfer a ticket. I am not a lawyer, so whether it is a licence, whether it is about who owns the ticket—speaking from a consumer perspective, people believe that once they own the ticket they have the right to either gift it, as a gift, as a present to a loved one or family member, or to resell it, based on their circumstances changing. I don’t think consumers understand—we discussed it here in the prior session—that the ticketing market in the UK is very fragmented and very complex. Therefore, for the person on the street who only buys probably one or two tickets, or goes to one or two events per year, it is very hard for them to comprehend how everything works. Your point to terms and conditions. As part of the CMA, we have to police and we have to do certain monitoring whereby if there are restrictive terms and conditions, and the event is live on StubHub, we have to present to the consumer what those restrictive terms and conditions are prior to any purchase. That is our responsibility.

Chair

You are saying that for someone who was purchasing a ticket on StubHub, where that ticket was being resold by the original purchaser, you would make sure that it says at the point of purchase that this ticket was banned from resale and that you may be denied entry if you purchase it?

Wayne Grierson

As part of the CMA agreements, and the undertakings that we have signed up for and in order to be fully compliant, that was one of the requirements. If there are any restrictions on use relating to that ticket, whether it is obscured view from section for example, then that is visible to the consumer before they buy that ticket.

Chair

And that would include whether the ticket was banned from resale.

Wayne Grierson

It is restrictions on use in terms of resale or anything that relates to that ticket. We have a duty to monitor and present that information to the buyer before they purchase and to show that in a durable medium in terms of paper, confirmation, post transaction so there is full visibility of what they are buying.

Chair

Just to be clear, things like restricted views relates to giving people proper information about the location of the seat they are buying?

Wayne Grierson

Yes, and also if there is any—as you have referenced—restrictions on resale. As I said, I believe we have a market-leading, FanProtect guarantee. Now others in the industry do not have the right market-leading FanProtect guarantees, so a transaction with StubHub is safe and secure and, if there are any issues with your transaction, you will get your full refund.

Chair

I believe you had a dispute last year with the O2 over selling tickets for a Metallica concert. Is that correct?

Wayne Grierson

Metallica. That is a fairly complex one because the terms of the ticket were changed post on sale. The tickets were introduced into the market and there was no information around whether there were any restrictions on use. The terms of that ticket then changed. Tickets had been sold where those terms and conditions were not visible and at a later point those terms were introduced. It was an inconsistent message to the consumer.

Chair

You were told by the O2, they identified the problem. The tickets that were not eligible for resale were being resold on StubHub and the problem continued. Is that not correct?

Wayne Grierson

No. The problem did not continue. As soon as it was made aware that there was a change in the terms and conditions post the initial on sale, the tickets were removed from the site. Then we worked with the O2 to ensure that the customers that were affected—because they were not aware of those changes in the terms and conditions, or they were not aware of those terms and conditions when they made the original purchase on the resale site—were able to get into the venue.

Chair

How many tickets for the Metallica concert at the O2 were sold on StubHub in breach of the terms and conditions?

Wayne Grierson

I don’t have that information to hand but I can absolutely follow up, post this.

Chair

It was more than 1,000, was it not?

Wayne Grierson

I don’t think it was more than 1,000. Again, I don’t have that number to hand. I can follow up to the Committee.

Chair

Again, this is where you have a relationship with the venue. There are terms and conditions that have been put in place, which say at a particular point that these tickets are not available for resale, and yet they are being sold on StubHub, or re-sold, even in breach of the terms and conditions that StubHub knew the venue had set.

Wayne Grierson

Maybe I did not explain; apologies. When that ticket for Metallica first went on sale, there were no terms and conditions saying there was a restriction on resale. At a later point, post the on sale—I think about four to five weeks—it was made aware that the artist and the bands wanted to restrict resale. At that point we removed all listings from StubHub. As soon as that was made known, we took the decision to remove the listings from StubHub. Then we worked with the O2 to say we need to find out: how do we get our customers into the venue in the absence of that information not being made known to them, or to the private purchaser, that they could not resell that ticket?[2]

Chair

Were tickets sold on StubHub, resold on StubHub, after that change was made, after people were notified?

Wayne Grierson

I can come back with the exact times, but as soon as we were notified there was a discussion, obviously, because this was new news. Then the action was taken to remove all listings relating to that event from the website.

Chair

I think it is really important because it is about the ability of a company like StubHub to monitor what is going on on the platform and to restrict sales where, actually, a tout is seeking to defraud someone by selling them a ticket that they know most likely will not be honoured when they turn up.

Wayne Grierson

There are business sales and consumer sales. Two-thirds of our business is consumer sellers, and they are not aware of the technicalities of terms and conditions.

Chair

Is that two-thirds by individual sellers or by volume?

Wayne Grierson

By consumer sellers, by volume.

Chair

So they are not necessarily the same thing because you can have a small number of sellers selling a large number of tickets.

Wayne Grierson

We have business sellers on StubHub. We are transparent. They are disclosed and visible on StubHub, but it is a very small part of our business relative to the industry. Viagogo is the majority market, the majority reseller, and we don’t agree with the practices and business operations they are operating by. Fundamentally, we are a responsible, committed ticket agent or option. We are fan-first. We are fully behind our FanProtect guarantee, and we continue to be compliant.

Julian Knight

Congratulations for turning up, by the way, unlike Mr Miller at the last minute. I was debating whether or not we should replace him—like they did with Roy Hattersley—with a tub of lard, but that is for Chair.

Wayne Grierson

I am glad I turned up. I dread to think what I would be.

Julian Knight

You have made some remarks about Viagogo. Do you think that they have a very cosy relationship with the likes of Google? I am thinking in terms of the fact that Google, as part of its terms and conditions, I believe, or its terms of trade, does not put fake items at the top of its search engines, fake items for sale; it says that it does not do that. However, if an item or a ticket is not for resale, why is that Google allows Viagogo to basically use its search engine in order to sell that particular item? What do you think is at play there?

Wayne Grierson

I think many businesses use Google as a search engine to promote whatever products they have and I think Viagogo are just a part of that. I cannot comment on any relationship.

Julian Knight

You said that Viagogo are a blight on the industry and here it is, right at the top of Google. Any listing you do—I have just done some listings here—they come right to the top of Google, and yet the items they are selling are effectively fake; they are not for resale. I know that you will have a relationship with Google, like everyone else, but is Google not also responsible for this situation?

Wayne Grierson

I would not want Google to set the policy. I think it is down to Parliament to set the policy.

Julian Knight

They set their own terms of trade. They say they will not sell fake items.

Wayne Grierson

I cannot comment in terms of Google’s position but I do go back to the point in terms—apologies if I don’t answer your question; I am happy to come back to it—

Julian Knight

I would prefer you did answer it.

Wayne Grierson

I just want to make the point again about the ability to resell or to transfer. Let’s be clear, TM-Plus, or the move for TM to close GetMeIn and Seatwave is resale in all but a different name. Yes, there is a price cap on the secondary listing, but we have seen in other markets than the UK—Mr Chairman referenced the US in terms of how that has progressed and Stuart referenced supply and demand in terms of marrying that up—and what we are concerned about is that primary prices will increase over time. Platinum Tickets is an example. If the price of the primary ticket increases, then the secondary ticket-price is going to increase. Again, the general consumer on the street does not understand about terms and conditions. They buy something that they believe they have the ability to resell, like any other commodity. I hate to use the word “commodity”, but if I bought a car from a garage, and the only place where I could sell that car was back to the garage, for them to market to their audience that they have, the opportunity for that consumer to recover the money they initially paid, is very limited. Therefore, I think that is where Google comes into play and how do you promote a consumer-seller’s listing that cannot go in order to try and resell? In my experience, I bought tickets to an event that I couldn’t go to. It was six months ago. I paid £80, not £180 because they were good seats. But I couldn’t go so I had to resell them. But I didn’t sell them for the price. I just recouped a fraction of that and that is because for me, my mindset is that I have already expensed that. I didn’t have that money in my pocket anymore, so whatever I get back now is a benefit, and that is what we see from consumers. We see consumers making decisions about their social calendars much closer to the event. People are buying about 30% of the tickets on StubHub within a month or a week of the event, and what we see is the more supply in the market for consumers and the pricing is coming down. It is really a good-value proposition for consumers.

Julian Knight

Isn’t there a fundamental point that, as you said at the start, Viagogo is a blight, and shouldn’t Google, as a company that likes to talk about its corporate responsibility—we get the press releases all the time—remove them from their listings, full stop? Should they not effectively block and effectively strangle Viagogo by not allowing them their listing?

Wayne Grierson

I would love nothing more than for Viagogo to exit the market, and that is not because there would be less competition, it is because it is the wrong competition. Even with GetMeIn and Seatwave closing, there is less completion in the market. We want competition in the market but we want operators to operate by the same set of standards that we are signed up to, with CMA undertakings, to make sure the consumer has a consistent experience wherever they go to buy a ticket within the UK.

Julian Knight

A couple more questions. You mentioned having a consistent experience. Viagogo—I have never seen this before—have a one-star rating on Trustpilot. I have never seen a one-star rating. I thought that was more associated with dodgy tarmacing firms and double-glazing sales. You only have a two-star, a two-and-a-half star rating. Some of the comments that have been made about your particular company, Mr Grierson, are “Efficient, yes” that’s good, “but what exploitative touts. They are not quite as bad as Viagogo. Why on earth do a venue like the Royal Albert Hall let these people have tickets?” Another one: “An awful customer service and they are not honest about any charges they make. They have changed the charges and I have had to pay out over half the price of my tickets”. Aren’t you ashamed of seeing that in terms of your customer services, your experience, and isn’t part of the problem something about the very transaction that is wrong here? The reason why people feel so mistreated by your industry—and to a certain extent, frankly Mr Grierson, your own company—is because this transaction is literally pilfering them; it is literally taking money out of their pockets. Isn’t it the fact that these particular ratings show your industry, even ones that seem to be much better off than Viagogo, needs fundamental reform and fundamental change?

Wayne Grierson

We take consumer feedback very seriously. I monitor Trustpilot every day. I believe our consumer service is the best in the industry. If I look at the US, we do not get to this size in terms of trust, in terms of how we do that. We have a call centre that answers every call within 20 seconds; 90% of the calls within 20 seconds. If you send us an e-mail, we will respond in 24 hours.[3] I think on those specific examples it depends whether you are a seller or a buyer. For buyers, 51% of the tickets go at or below face value[4], so we are not taking money; they are a good-value proposition. NFL tickets last year went for £4. There are people who cannot go who are enabling others to go. For sellers, this is where we see an issue. There are consumer sellers: the reason that we have such a high percentage of consumer sellers is that people do not sell a ticket every day, and 60% of the tickets that we see being listed in the market go on social channels, through communities, through Facebook connections, through my Instagram group. Therefore, I either list a ticket on StubHub or also share it to my community and, if that ticket sells and it is not removed from StubHub, the seller has entered into a contract to fulfil on that order. We have a dedicated team to make sure that every order on StubHub is delivered to the buyer. If there is any issue we have to come in and invoke our FanProtect guarantee, while we then have to go and find replacement tickets for our buyers so they can go into the event.

Julian Knight

Why do you have this rating of two stars? When you said that you believe yourself to be the best in the industry—I mean two stars out of five? We don’t like banks but, frankly, most people would probably rate their bank a lot higher than your industry. What is it about your industry? What it is about the things that you are doing well as an industry, right now, in terms of consumers that you think you need to change?

Wayne Grierson

People don’t generally talk about good news or take the time to report good news. We have a retail location that does meet our customers. We have a face to an e-commerce business, unlike many others, so we can interact. We get other feedback. We have our own measurements in terms of customer satisfaction scores. We do surveys for those who have contacted our contact centres, and they are very high, at 75% to 80% satisfaction. What you see on Trustpilot—and believe me, I look at this every day—the comments, we respond to. I ask the team to respond and look at every occurrence of those concerns so that we can get better and improve. So, are more customers going to increase the rating? I don’t know. But we have other internal metrics where we do surveys where we have an interaction to say, “How was your experience with StubHub?”

Julian Knight

I want to pick something up. You said that between 75% and 80% of customers are satisfied. Frankly, if I was running a shop and 1 in 5 customers left the shop miserable, I would not be running the shop for very long. What is it, though? You have ignored my question. What you said was how fantastically you communicate and discuss and do surveys and you have people respond. What is it about your industry that means that, frankly, you think it is acceptable to have a consumer feedback of that sort of pitiful level? What is it about your industry that is so wrong? What is it about your industry that needs to change?

Wayne Grierson

What needs to change is the rogue operators; the rogue operators need to be addressed. Enforcement, so that everyone operates to the same standard. That is what we have to get to. This industry has evolved. Regulation and the CMA outcome, the CMA review, is getting us to a level of transparency, which is fantastic for the consumer, and we are fully on board. But everyone is not to the same standard. That is the fundamental problem. People are experiencing different things. Viagogo are the majority share within the UK business for resale, therefore they are setting the tone, they are setting the negative sentiment, and we are wrapped into that, unfortunately. We differentiate because we have metrics and I know the external ones are very different from the ones I am telling you, but we have fraud at less than 0.1%;[5] we have customer satisfaction internally, we do surveys, we are engaged. Our head of global customer service, his mantra is Plus2, which is we go that extra step for our customer. This is disseminated across all functions. I know that is not transparent to the Trustpilot metrics you reference—

Julian Knight

But that is what your customers say.

Wayne Grierson

But we talk to every customer that we transact with. The ones on Trustpilot are just a sample. We talk to every customer within the business in terms of the transaction. We do a survey and we can get metrics and guidance and signals to say, “How is the sentiment for our customers within our business that transact?” and we have that, as well as external signals. We take many different signals to see where our position is.

Julian Knight

You still have not given me two or three things—whatever number—that you think the industry needs to improve on, and that you need to improve on.

Wayne Grierson

We need transparency across the industry, not just secondary but how many tickets are actually available. The previous panel referenced holdbacks and others, but the customer needs or wants to understand how many tickets are available for them to purchase. “Is there an opportunity for me to purchase?” “Can I gain access?” “If not, I may not even know that that event exists and I may only be aware of that one month, two weeks, prior to the event.” To answer your point, we need more transparency, which the CMA delivered, which we are committed to. The other thing is that everyone within the resale market has to abide by those same principles, not just the big three, or big four, but also those that are not playing by the board.

Clive Efford

Mr Grierson, if I went on your website to buy a ticket for an event, I would see the face value of the ticket, the location of the ticket, and the source, whether it is a business or an individual that is selling it—all the things that you are required to supply. You are owned by eBay. How much influence or control does eBay have over your company? What is your day-to-day relationship with eBay?

Wayne Grierson

We are a separate business unit. My head office is in the US. The head of the US, or global business, reports into the global head of eBay.