x

The latest industry news to your inbox.


I'd like to hear about marketing opportunities

    

I accept IQ Magazine's Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy

ASA says resale advert ruling ‘sets a precedent’

The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has told IQ its recent ruling against Viagogo has “set a precedent” for secondary ticketing websites.

Last month, the watchdog upheld a complaint from anti-touting campaign group FanFair Alliance that the resale platform had misled consumers in two advertorials published on the NME website in 2023. The paid-for ads were entitled “The best gigs to see this summer at Hyde Park” and “A beginners guide to getting Taylor Swift ‘Eras’ tour tickets. How to avoid the scammers and secure tickets.”

FanFair Alliance complained to the ASA, saying it understood the resale of tickets through resale websites like Viagogo was prohibited by the events listed.

Viagogo hit back, arguing it simply stated that tickets for the events were legitimately available on its marketplace and believed there was nothing in the ads which implied it was an official primary ticketing outlet. But the ASA rejected its argument and said the adverts must not appear again in the form complained of.

Speaking to IQ, the ASA’s Freddie Alcock says the case was relatively straightforward.

“The ruling is to protect consumers, ultimately, but also set a precedent going forward that you can’t omit information around the sale of these tickets”

“The reason they were misleading is because both events quite clearly stated in their terms and conditions that tickets bought on secondary ticketing platforms wouldn’t be valid,” he says. “We operate what we call ‘reverse burden of proof’, in that it’s on the advertiser to prove why something isn’t misleading, or to substantiate a claim they made – and Viagogo weren’t able to provide what we felt was substantial evidence that neither ads misled.

“The ruling is to protect consumers, ultimately, but also set a precedent going forward that you can’t omit information around the sale of these tickets. And to be fair to Viagogo, they have complied with it and removed both advertorials.”

Viagogo said it was “disappointed” by the ASA’s ruling, insisting it is “a safe, secure and regulated global online marketplace, and we are fully compliant with the law in all markets in which we operate”.

“We exist to get fans into live events and oppose anti-consumer actions taken by event organisers to restrict purchasing and resale options in an attempt to control the market. These measures ultimately harm fans by limiting choice, flexibility, and access.”

The company told the ASA that less than 1% of customers were denied entry to events after having purchased a ticket on its platform, and operated a guarantee so that if a customer was not admitted they would be entitled to a refund. But Alcock says that was not relevant to the complaint.

“It’s on our radar that a lot of events now say that resale tickets are only valid through a fan-to-fan exchange”

“That’s irrelevant to the problem here,” he says. “The problem here is that it does clearly misleadingly imply that tickets are valid. And [Viagogo’s] response, to be fair, was ‘Okay, we disagree, but we respect the ASA and its view.’

“We understand that [secondary ticketing] companies are allowed to operate – everyone has their views on that and it’s not for us to talk about. All that we’re concerned about is that, when they do advertise, they make sure that they don’t omit any information that could be considered important for the consumer to know upfront.”

Alcock says the regulator anticipates similar complaints to become more commonplace as artists increasingly seek to control where tickets for their shows can be resold.

“I think this ruling preemptively speaks to that issue,” he says. “It’s on our radar that a lot of events now say that resale tickets are only valid through a fan-to-fan exchange, or whatever. So hopefully this ruling serves as a reminder.

“Our main goal here is to protect consumers. We’re very conscious of the fact that someone’s buying a ticket for one of these events, one, they’re expensive and two, they might have to travel to it and pay for a hotel. There’s a lot that goes into someone deciding to go to one of these events.”

The ASA previously took action in 2018 alongside the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) around secondary ticket sales websites failing to properly disclose fees for tickets upfront.

 


Get more stories like this in your inbox by signing up for IQ Index, IQ’s free email digest of essential live music industry news.

ASA rules Viagogo misled customers in NME ads

UK watchdog the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld a complaint against Viagogo, ruling the resale platform misled consumers in two advertorials published on the NME website.

The first paid-for ad feature, headed, “The best gigs to see this summer at Hyde Park”, appeared on 16 June 2023, and listed five shows scheduled to take place at BST Hyde Park, along with text stating: “Fans can buy and sell tickets for [name of artist performing] at global marketplace, Viagogo, here”.

A second advertorial, seen on 20 July 2023, was headlined, “A beginners guide to getting Taylor Swift ‘Eras’ tour tickets. How to avoid the scammers and secure tickets”. It included text, which stated, “To purchase resale tickets as safely as possible, fans should avoid buying tickets via social media… Your best bet is ticket marketplaces like Viagogo, which connects ticket sellers with fans via a safe platform… Fans can buy and sell tickets for Taylor Swift at global marketplace, Viagogo here”.

Anti-touting campaign group FanFair Alliance complained to the ASA, saying it understood the resale of tickets through secondary ticketing websites like Viagogo was prohibited by the events listed in the ads.

Viagogo denied the ads were misleading, arguing it simply stated that tickets for the events were legitimately available on its marketplace and believed there was nothing in the ads which implied Viagogo was an official primary ticketing outlet.

The company said that less than 1% of customers were denied entry to events after having purchased a ticket on their platform, and they operated a guarantee so that if a customer was not admitted they would be entitled to a refund.

“Furthermore, they explained that all additional information which related to a ticket for a specific event was clearly made available to consumers on the Viagogo website before a consumer purchased that ticket,” adds the ASA’s summary.

“We told Viagogo AG to ensure future ads did not mislead consumers by omitting material information regarding the entry restrictions”

However, the regulator concluded that the adverts were misleading and said they must not appear again in the form complained of.

“We understood that Viagogo operated a guarantee whereby anyone who was not admitted to an event was entitled to receive a refund and we acknowledged that only a small proportion of their customers had been refused entry.” concludes the ASA. “However, we considered that the prohibition of resale tickets, as outlined in both the BST Hyde Park and Taylor Swift Eras tour terms and conditions, was material information which was likely to affect a consumer’s decision to purchase tickets through Viagogo.

“Because the ads omitted material information about the validity of tickets purchased through Viagogo and the risk of the venues refusing entry to consumers who had purchased their tickets through secondary ticketing websites, we concluded that they were misleading.

“We told Viagogo AG to ensure future ads did not mislead consumers by omitting material information regarding the entry restrictions on tickets purchased through them and other secondary ticketing sites.”

Responding to the assessment, Viagogo spokesperson says the firm is “disappointed” by the ASA’s ruling.

“Viagogo is a safe, secure and regulated global online marketplace, and we are fully compliant with the law in all markets in which we operate,” adds the firm. “We exist to get fans into live events and oppose anti-consumer actions taken by event organisers to restrict purchasing and resale options in an attempt to control the market. These measures ultimately harm fans by limiting choice, flexibility, and access.”

 


Get more stories like this in your inbox by signing up for IQ Index, IQ’s free email digest of essential live music industry news.

Coronation Concert advert ‘misleading’, says ASA

The UK’s advertising watchdog has ruled that communication on a ballot for tickets to May’s Coronation Concert was “misleading” following complaints from the public.

The 20,000-cap concert was held outside Windsor Castle on 7 May this year in celebration of the coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla, and featured artists such as Lionel Richie, Take That, Katy Perry, Andrea Bocelli, Nicole Scherzinger and Olly Murs.

BBC Studios was responsible for organising the event and had contracted Ticketmaster UK to administer the public ballot for one of 5,000 pairs of tickets between 10-28 February 2023. Successful entries were drawn at random, with the winning entrants contacted and asked to accept the pair of tickets within 14 days.

Posts on the BBC and Ticketmaster websites stated that tickets were “not being allocated on a first-come first-served basis”.

However, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) launched an investigation after receiving 98 complaints from people who were unable to claim tickets, despite receiving an email saying: “Congratulations, you have been successful in the ballot for a pair of standing tickets to The Coronation Concert.”

It transpired that entrants who received the email had not in fact been successful in securing tickets, but had instead been selected to enter a supplementary round with an additional chance to get tickets.

Additionally, 56 complainants challenged whether claims the tickets would not be allocated on a “first-come first-served basis” were misleading.

“Although there was never any intention to mislead, we accept the ASA’s ruling”

The BBC said that since some tickets remained unallocated following two ballots, it decided to offer the remaining tickets to a third group on a first-come first-served basis due to “time constraints”.

Ticketmaster emailed further entrants on 25 April to claim the remaining tickets, with wording provided by BBC Studios. BBC Studios accepted the email was “not well-worded”, but said that the first two stages of the balloting process were followed, since it congratulated the recipient twice, before explaining that tickets in this supplementary round were being offered on a first-come first-served basis.

The ASA upheld both complaints and told BBC Studios and Ticketmaster UK to ensure future marketing communications “did not misleadingly imply that consumers had been allocated tickets if that was not the case”.

“We also told them to ensure that future marketing communications did not omit relevant material information that tickets would be allocated on a first-come first-served basis,” it added.

A BBC Studios spokesperson says: “Although there was never any intention to mislead, we accept the ASA’s ruling. Following two fully compliant ballots, a small number of unclaimed tickets were offered on a first come first served basis to unsuccessful ballot entrants.

“We also reiterate our apology for a poorly worded email, which implied applicants had already won tickets for The Coronation Concert. We have taken steps to ensure neither situation is repeated and can confirm that no successful ballot entrant from the first two rounds was denied the opportunity to attend the event.”

 


Get more stories like this in your inbox by signing up for IQ Index, IQ’s free email digest of essential live music industry news.