2018 PDC World Championship- Alexandra Palace, London-14th December 2017- 1st January 2018

[BlueSpark]

Routs anaologies are legendary.

You saying that is like the time I beat Adrian Lewis at darts

[Murphio]

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/1 ... n_tickets/

But it's ok when they do it to darts fans with Barry Hearns blessing.

Exactly what sites are you referring to which resell 'touted' tickets with Barry Hearn's blessing? What is the markup?

[Rout]

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/1 ... n_tickets/

But it's ok when they do it to darts fans with Barry Hearns blessing.

Exactly what sites are you referring to which resell 'touted' tickets with Barry Hearn's blessing? What is the markup?

They are pdc 'partners'. I'm afraid to say I don't know the exact details of the arrangements, murph...

[Murphio]

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/1 ... n_tickets/

But it's ok when they do it to darts fans with Barry Hearns blessing.

Exactly what sites are you referring to which resell 'touted' tickets with Barry Hearn's blessing? What is the markup?

They are pdc 'partners'. I'm afraid to say I don't know the exact details of the arrangements, murph...

How much extra on top of the face value could you expect to pay in general from one of the partners? Are we talking commission, admin fee type arrangements or taking the piss?

[Rout]

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/1 ... n_tickets/

But it's ok when they do it to darts fans with Barry Hearns blessing.

Exactly what sites are you referring to which resell 'touted' tickets with Barry Hearn's blessing? What is the markup?

They are pdc 'partners'. I'm afraid to say I don't know the exact details of the arrangements, murph...

How much extra on top of the face value could you expect to pay in general from one of the partners? Are we talking commission, admin fee type arrangements or taking the piss?

They are resale tickets. Someone has bought a ticket and is selling it to someone else. Sometimes at face value with good cause. Sometimes because its been bought simply to resell at a profit. With the partners taking a fee for each sale. And given that the pdc aren't going to be in the habit of partnering up with people for nothing, then it stands to reason to deduce the pdc are gaining from the partnership.

It needs banning.

[Murphio]

http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/1 ... n_tickets/

But it's ok when they do it to darts fans with Barry Hearns blessing.

Exactly what sites are you referring to which resell 'touted' tickets with Barry Hearn's blessing? What is the markup?

They are pdc 'partners'. I'm afraid to say I don't know the exact details of the arrangements, murph...

How much extra on top of the face value could you expect to pay in general from one of the partners? Are we talking commission, admin fee type arrangements or taking the piss?

They are resale tickets. Someone has bought a ticket and is selling it to someone else. Sometimes at face value with good cause. Sometimes because its been bought simply to resell at a profit. With the partners taking a fee for each sale. And given that the pdc aren't going to be in the habit of partnering up with people for nothing, then it stands to reason to deduce the pdc are gaining from the partnership.

It needs banning.

So you don't know. And charging a £1 admin fee, for the sake of a argument, is no differrent to adding 700 quid onto the price of a concert ticket - even though your company and its business model requires you to block buy tickets with no guarantee of resale. Thanks..

[Rout]

I reckon if the pdc started murdering creditors there'd be people on here willing to applaud the pdc for handling it's finances in a progressive and modern way

That one was for you aswell BS

[Murphio]

I reckon if the pdc started murdering creditors there'd be people on here willing to applaud the pdc for handling it's finances in a progressive and modern way

That one was for you aswell BS

I take every case on its merits. I totally disagree with Nik's posts that darts tickets are fair game for the capitalist market. Darts is a working man's game played and followed by working class people. Heaven forbid it treads football's path and you require a second mortgage for a season ticket. You put no meat on the bones of your argument though.

You either won't, or can't, tell us what the PDC's partners charge to resell their tickets. I am genuinely on your side if there is a wholesale ripping off of darts fans. But I can't go along if you are actually arguing that adding a small percentage is the same thing. That is how our entire economy works. You are employed? Well you sell your labour at a profit for you. People make profit; the moral argument begins and ends with how much profit is justifiable. But you can't or won't tell us that.

[Rout]

You're looking at it too narrow.

It's not about the small few quid the company charge or the small amount the pdc makes from it.

It's about the whole concept of legal touting and resale websites being used as a tool for people to run businesses with the sole purpose of buying in demand tickets before a genuine punter does and then asking that genuine punter for twice the value or more.

I think the event organisers need to act more ethically in how they deal with this. The absolute bare minimum I would expect is for them to disapprove of it. Whereas many (like in the example that started this debate) are now going further to protect fans by using a name match system or other methods to try and ensure the fans that buy the tickets are the ones wanting to go.

Instead of disapproving of this, the pdc are visually encouraging it by partnering with the sort of sites that are heavily used for this practice.

It's not something I've dreamt up, this being against legal touting thing. In the non sports entertainment world it's a long ongoing controversial matter that many high profile people have condemned. Particularly in the music world.

[Rout]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... onomy-bill

[Murphio]

You're looking at it too narrow.

It's not about the small few quid the company charge or the small amount the pdc makes from it.

It's about the whole concept of legal touting and resale websites being used as a tool for people to run businesses with the sole purpose of buying in demand tickets before a genuine punter does and then asking that genuine punter for twice the value or more.

I think the event organisers need to act more ethically in how they deal with this. The absolute bare minimum I would expect is for them to disapprove of it. Whereas many (like in the example that started this debate) are now going further to protect fans by using a name match system or other methods to try and ensure the fans that buy the tickets are the ones wanting to go.

Instead of disapproving of this, the pdc are visually encouraging it by partnering with the sort of sites that are heavily used for this practice.

It's not something I've dreamt up, this being against legal touting thing. In the non sports entertainment world it's a long ongoing controversial matter that many high profile people have condemned. Particularly in the music world.

I'm looking at it too narrow? Seriously? You are lumping the PDC using ticket resellers - who may or may not add on modest percentages - in with those putting huge profit margins of 800 per cent or more on top of ticket prices. Your argumemt is utterly ridiculous. It's akin to saying pay day loan companies, which charge 5000 per cent apr, are no different than your local credit union which charges one per cent because they both 'profit' on the deal.

I asked you to tell me the profit margin on PDC tickets and you either can't or wont. That is the crux of the debate. You say you have a job; well in that case you sell your labour at a profit. Your employer then sells your labour to the customer at a profit. Like it or not that is how our economy works. Give me the figures and I will genuinely join you in condemning them if they are too wide.

[Rout]

You're looking at it too narrow.

It's not about the small few quid the company charge or the small amount the pdc makes from it.

It's about the whole concept of legal touting and resale websites being used as a tool for people to run businesses with the sole purpose of buying in demand tickets before a genuine punter does and then asking that genuine punter for twice the value or more.

I think the event organisers need to act more ethically in how they deal with this. The absolute bare minimum I would expect is for them to disapprove of it. Whereas many (like in the example that started this debate) are now going further to protect fans by using a name match system or other methods to try and ensure the fans that buy the tickets are the ones wanting to go.

Instead of disapproving of this, the pdc are visually encouraging it by partnering with the sort of sites that are heavily used for this practice.

It's not something I've dreamt up, this being against legal touting thing. In the non sports entertainment world it's a long ongoing controversial matter that many high profile people have condemned. Particularly in the music world.

I'm looking at it too narrow? Seriously? You are lumping the PDC using ticket resellers - who may or may not add on modest percentages - in with those putting huge profit margins of 800 per cent or more on top of ticket prices. Your argumemt is utterly ridiculous. It's akin to saying pay day loan companies, which charge 5000 per cent apr, are no different than your local credit union which charges one per cent because they both 'profit' on the deal.

I asked you to tell me the profit margin on PDC tickets and you either can't or wont. That is the crux of the debate. You say you have a job; well in that case you sell your labour at a profit. Your employer then sells your labour to the customer at a profit. Like it or not that is how our economy works. Give me the figures and I will genuinely join you in condemning them if they are too wide.

Did you read past the first sentence? Id just be repeating myself to respond properly.

So Ok I give up you are quite right. Event organisers should be seen to encourage it's tickets to be purchased solely to sell on at much higher than the face value of the ticket. Noone cares about it. Its not a relevant topic at the moment at all. You win.

[Dannyboy]

You're looking at it too narrow.

It's not about the small few quid the company charge or the small amount the pdc makes from it.

It's about the whole concept of legal touting and resale websites being used as a tool for people to run businesses with the sole purpose of buying in demand tickets before a genuine punter does and then asking that genuine punter for twice the value or more.

I think the event organisers need to act more ethically in how they deal with this. The absolute bare minimum I would expect is for them to disapprove of it. Whereas many (like in the example that started this debate) are now going further to protect fans by using a name match system or other methods to try and ensure the fans that buy the tickets are the ones wanting to go.

Instead of disapproving of this, the pdc are visually encouraging it by partnering with the sort of sites that are heavily used for this practice.

It's not something I've dreamt up, this being against legal touting thing. In the non sports entertainment world it's a long ongoing controversial matter that many high profile people have condemned. Particularly in the music world.

110% agreed.

[WCDPA]

Whereas seemingly this year Lakeside tickets are sold to the punters at inflated prices ! To discourage resale at inflated prices ........because they are already inflated so no fekker would pay for them .

[Booji Boy]

Until it becomes illegal I could not give a shit.

I paid 200 for two tickets to see Nell Young and was more than happy to do it.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

[fling]

Ed Sheeran and his management have said umpteen times on all media platforms that the name on the ticket MUST match the ID of the person trying to enter, loads of people have been turned away because they are too stupid to read. It is an attempt by them to stop stupid people paying stupid money for a ticket and stop the re-sale of the tickets above face value. This fella paid £200 for a £50 ticket X 4 and bought them knowing full well that he would not be allowed in the venue, it says so on the actual ticket as well.

So to put it simply, some event organisers are pro-active about trying to stop their fans getting ripped off by those looking to simply purchase tickets, by having the name match system. Whereas some couldn't care less if the fans get ripped off, so long as all the seats get sold. And then you have some that couldn't care less if fans get ripped off, and actually encourage and endorse it by partnering with the websites or organisations that encourage/allow it and the original event organisers end up profiting off this practice.

Cheers for clearing that up, Nick

Eh?

Clearing what up?

In easy terms for you Routy: There are two types of ticket sales via these sites, there are the tickets that given to them by the promoter which are nameless and sold at face value plus admin fee in the same way that any box office sells tickets and charges a fee and has been that way for years.
The second type is the resale of tickets that have already been sold previously and are available at an inflated price and are usually named tickets with non transferrable on them, typically these are only bought by people who are desperate to buy the ticket at any price and are willing to take the risk of being turned away at the door.

I fail to see how companies and promoters who use people like ticketmaster et al are ripping people off, those people have the opportunity to buy tickets at face value direct from the promoter but choose to buy from a third party and pay more.

The event organisers should not be partnering up with websites that encourage legal touting.

Can you not see the difference between what organisers are doing in the case of Ed Sheeran, Glastonbury etc. . and what the PDC do?

One is trying to stop their tickets from being deliberately resold at a profit. One is actively encouraging it.

You could have bought tickets from the PDC or their partner seetickets.com for face value, final tickets were £54 including fee. Now if you chose not to buy them when they were released you will now pay viagogo £127 and if you are stupid enough to do that then you deserve to be fleeced.

Tickets still available from seetickets.com for all but semis and final all at face value flus a couple of quid fee, can't see what your issue is tbh, if you go onto ebay now you can buy one of the royal mint 20p dateless coins for £20 from one seller and the same coin for £6000 from another seller. If you are stupid enough to pay the £6000 without doing any shopping round then I say again, you deserve to be fleeced.

In bold. You must have a different version of seetickets website to me as there is nowt available after Xmas.

[Murphio]

You're looking at it too narrow.

It's not about the small few quid the company charge or the small amount the pdc makes from it.

It's about the whole concept of legal touting and resale websites being used as a tool for people to run businesses with the sole purpose of buying in demand tickets before a genuine punter does and then asking that genuine punter for twice the value or more.

I think the event organisers need to act more ethically in how they deal with this. The absolute bare minimum I would expect is for them to disapprove of it. Whereas many (like in the example that started this debate) are now going further to protect fans by using a name match system or other methods to try and ensure the fans that buy the tickets are the ones wanting to go.

Instead of disapproving of this, the pdc are visually encouraging it by partnering with the sort of sites that are heavily used for this practice.

It's not something I've dreamt up, this being against legal touting thing. In the non sports entertainment world it's a long ongoing controversial matter that many high profile people have condemned. Particularly in the music world.

I'm looking at it too narrow? Seriously? You are lumping the PDC using ticket resellers - who may or may not add on modest percentages - in with those putting huge profit margins of 800 per cent or more on top of ticket prices. Your argumemt is utterly ridiculous. It's akin to saying pay day loan companies, which charge 5000 per cent apr, are no different than your local credit union which charges one per cent because they both 'profit' on the deal.

I asked you to tell me the profit margin on PDC tickets and you either can't or wont. That is the crux of the debate. You say you have a job; well in that case you sell your labour at a profit. Your employer then sells your labour to the customer at a profit. Like it or not that is how our economy works. Give me the figures and I will genuinely join you in condemning them if they are too wide.

Did you read past the first sentence? Id just be repeating myself to respond properly.

So Ok I give up you are quite right. Event organisers should be seen to encourage it's tickets to be purchased solely to sell on at much higher than the face value of the ticket. Noone cares about it. Its not a relevant topic at the moment at all. You win.

Yes I read past the first sentence and addressed the point that our entire economy is run on people making profit from goods and services. Sports Direct buys a lorry load of trainers and sells them retail to customers at a profit. Tesco buys milk and eggs from farmers and sells them at a profit. What is the difference in Ticket Master buying up a block of tickets and selling them on at a profit? Why should tickets be morally exempt and the manufacturer be forced to sell direct to the customer? Virtually everything we buy has been passed through someone else's hands who have taken a cut. The only question, for me, is how much profit they are making and if It's far too much then clearly that throws up questions.

[nikkiboy]

I reckon if the pdc started murdering creditors there'd be people on here willing to applaud the pdc for handling it's finances in a progressive and modern way

That one was for you aswell BS

I take every case on its merits. I totally disagree with Nik's posts that darts tickets are fair game for the capitalist market. Darts is a working man's game played and followed by working class people. Heaven forbid it treads football's path and you require a second mortgage for a season ticket. You put no meat on the bones of your argument though.
You either won't, or can't, tell us what the PDC's partners charge to resell their tickets. I am genuinely on your side if there is a wholesale ripping off of darts fans. But I can't go along if you are actually arguing that adding a small percentage is the same thing. That is how our entire economy works. You are employed? Well you sell your labour at a profit for you. People make profit; the moral argument begins and ends with how much profit is justifiable. But you can't or won't tell us that.

Check my post, seetickets.com charge a £3 fee on top of the face value, £51 tickets are £54 from them. Rout's procrastination is based upon one site, Viagogo which lists tickets other's have bought and want to resell. It has some of the most negative reviews and media coverage I have ever seen yet stupid people still use them, go figure.

[Murphio]

I reckon if the pdc started murdering creditors there'd be people on here willing to applaud the pdc for handling it's finances in a progressive and modern way

That one was for you aswell BS

I take every case on its merits. I totally disagree with Nik's posts that darts tickets are fair game for the capitalist market. Darts is a working man's game played and followed by working class people. Heaven forbid it treads football's path and you require a second mortgage for a season ticket. You put no meat on the bones of your argument though.
You either won't, or can't, tell us what the PDC's partners charge to resell their tickets. I am genuinely on your side if there is a wholesale ripping off of darts fans. But I can't go along if you are actually arguing that adding a small percentage is the same thing. That is how our entire economy works. You are employed? Well you sell your labour at a profit for you. People make profit; the moral argument begins and ends with how much profit is justifiable. But you can't or won't tell us that.

Check my post, seetickets.com charge a £3 fee on top of the face value, £51 tickets are £54 from them. Rout's procrastination is based upon one site, Viagogo which lists tickets other's have bought and want to resell. It has some of the most negative reviews and media coverage I have ever seen yet stupid people still use them, go figure.

The PDC should get shot of them as a partner in that case. Adding 3 quid onto 51 quid ticket... no problem with that whatsoever. I am presuming the company has bought a block of tickets with no guarantee of resale and you can see the benefits for the PDC.

[nikkiboy]

Routs anaologies are legendary.

You saying that is like the time I beat Adrian Lewis at darts

OK let's give you a better ananogy:

I want to book a hotel room, I normally use booking.com but I'll search on trivago instead.

The same room on the same dates varies between £40 a night and £160 a night depending upon the vendor, now when I arrive at the hotel I see that the "standard" room price is £75 and if I'd booked online with the hotel it would have been £50

If I paid a vendor £160 for that room who would have been at fault? I had the opportunity to shop around and pay as little as £40 but I chose a higher price. Under Rout's law the hotel is at fault for allowing a booking partner to charge more but also under Rout's law I would not have had the lower priced offer.

Yuo can also put the discount Premier Inn and Travelodge into this, if I book 30 days in advance the I can get a room for £19 BUT if I don't book early and try to book two days before it'll be £60 and on the day will be £90

Surely this is no different and like I said before it's called capitalism.