Live Events Ticketing: Resale and Pricing Practices

Statement

The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on Monday 13 January.

“With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a Statement about ticketing in the live events sector.

In the words of the musical ‘Hamilton’, there is nothing quite like being

‘in the room where it happens’.

I would hazard a guess that every single one of us here can remember the first time we went to a live event. My first rugby international was Wales versus Scotland at Murrayfield aged 12—the food was terrible. My first live gig was U2’s ‘The Joshua Tree’ at Wembley arena. These moments of shared passion are part of what makes us the people we are. As Gloria Gaynor said,

‘There’s nothing to compare to live music, there just isn’t anything’.

No wonder live events are so highly prized.

But for far too long, ticket touts have leached off fans’ passion. In the past, it was spivs in long raincoats at the gates. Nowadays it is a trade made all the more pernicious by the internet, which enables modern-day touts, hiding behind multiple false identities, to hoover up tickets and sell them at vastly inflated prices. It is indefensible. It trades off other people’s hopes and does not return a single penny to the artists, the performers, the venue, the industry or the sport. We said we would tackle this, and that is precisely what we are doing.

On Friday, the Department for Business and Trade and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport published a consultation on the resale of live event tickets and a separate call for evidence on pricing practices in the live events sector. It is not a consultation on whether to act; it is a consultation on precisely how we should act. The UK has a world-leading live events sector. Our artists, festivals and venues bring joy to audiences across the country. Last year, the sector employed over 200,000 people, contributing to local economies up and down the country, from stage technicians and sound engineers to venue staff and promoters. Every event—whether a major stadium event or an intimate gig at a grassroots venue—injects life into local communities and economies, supporting small businesses and generating significant revenue for our towns and cities. It is musicians, performers and athletes who make the events what they are and who create the value that sits behind them, not the ticket touts.

Live events are a catalyst for creativity, too, where artists have a platform to hone their craft and relate directly to audiences, as well as to earn a living. Live performances create unforgettable shared experiences that transcend cultural and social boundaries, uniting communities up and down the country and shaping our national identity. However, too many fans are missing out on opportunities to experience those live events. Put simply, the ticketing market is not working for fans.

The Government recognise that a well-functioning ticket resale market can play an important role—for instance, allowing those who cannot attend an event to give someone else the opportunity to go in their place. But far too often tickets are listed on the resale market at extortionate prices, many multiples of the face value. Just one example: standing tickets for Charli XCX’s current UK tour were originally priced at £54, but they have been listed on ticket resale sites for as much as £400. That is enough, as she herself would put it, to ‘Shock you like defibrillators’.

So-called scalping is the work of organised touts, who systematically buy up tickets in bulk on the primary market then resell them to fans at hugely inflated prices. The Government are committed to putting fans back at the heart of live events and clamping down on unfair exploitative practices. In doing so, we want fairness for fans and an economically successful live events sector. We made a manifesto commitment to act on this issue, and that is precisely what we will do.

That is why we have launched a consultation as the first major step towards delivering on this ambition. We want to act in an effective and responsible way, ensuring that any new protections work for fans and the live events sector. The consultation outlines a range of potential options to address ongoing problems. We are revisiting the recommendations from the Competition and Market Authority’s 2021 report on secondary ticketing that were not taken forward by the previous Government. They include a licensing regime for resale platforms, new limits on the number of tickets that individual resellers can list, and new requirements for platforms to ensure the accuracy of information about tickets listed for sale on their websites.

We are also keen to tackle scalping—that is to say for-profit resales of tickets above face value. That is why we are considering a statutory price cap on ticket resales, as seen in many other countries. Its purpose would be to break the business model of organised touts by prohibiting resale at vastly inflated prices. In the consultation, we ask how a price cap should be designed and implemented, so as to deliver a genuine sea change in the ticketing landscape to the benefit of fans and the live events sector, and whether it should be face value only, or plus 10%, 20% or 30%.

There is one other aspect—we might call it ‘the Oasis moment’—on which we are seeking evidence. The live events sector has adopted new approaches to selling tickets in recent years, including the use of new pricing strategies, and technologies such as dynamic pricing. I want to be absolutely clear: not all dynamic pricing is harmful. Fans often take advantage of early-bird tickets and last-minute price reductions—that is absolutely fine and we have no intention of stopping it. The key thing is that fans are treated fairly and openly, with timely, transparent and accurate information presented ahead of sales.

To better understand these changes and the challenges faced by fans, we are publishing a call for evidence on pricing practices in the live events sector. The consultation and call for evidence will be open for 12 weeks. We strongly encourage all interested stakeholders—fans, artists and performers, ticketing platforms and the wider live events sector—to respond. Once the consultation is complete, we will decide on next steps, but the House should be no doubt that we intend to act.

We have a world-class live events sector in the UK, but we do not have a secondary ticket market to match. In the words of T. Rex:

‘It’s a rip-off

Such a rip-off’.

To the fans, the performers and the touts, let me be crystal clear: we will clamp down on unfair practices in the secondary market. The question is not whether but how we improve protections for fans. I commend this Statement to the House”.

13:08:00

My Lords, we appreciate the Statement from His Majesty’s Government. As the Minister in the other place said, the Department for Business and Trade and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport have launched a consultation on the resale of live event tickets. That consultation will consider a cap on the price of ticket resales, increasing the regulation of ticket resale websites and apps, and strengthening consumer protections. All noble Lords will be aware that the resale market plays an important role in supporting artists, fans and venues. Authorised resellers can provide a safe and secure way to transfer unwanted or unusable tickets, which ensures that seats are not left empty at venues and that those who cannot attend events any more are not left out of pocket. This is a mechanism which would seem to be sensible and which we can all support. Indeed, His Majesty’s Official Opposition, when in government, launched a review of secondary ticketing, led by Professor Michael Waterson, in 2016. We passed the Breaching of Limits on Ticket Sales Regulations 2018, which banned ticket touts from using automated software to avoid security measures designed to help fans see their favourite musicians and sports teams at a fair price. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 required resellers to inform buyers of the true price of tickets, which should allow fans to make informed and educated decisions on what they choose to purchase. Much was done to protect fans and supporters from unfair practices in secondary ticket markets. Although protecting consumers from bad practice and exploitation is critically important, we should also remember that secondary ticket markets are not new and are no different from other types of secondary market that exist in many different sectors. The consultation proposals announced in the Minister’s Statement in the other place consider imposing price caps on secondary ticketing. This may, prima facie, sound like an attractive proposal but His Majesty’s Official Opposition are concerned about this increasing the likelihood of a black market emerging. Price caps in other countries have been known to lead to shortages in the availability of goods subject to them and tickets are no different. That view has been supported by the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which has warned: “Draconian regulation, targeting only the secondary market, will only mean more tickets changing hands in informal settings without the same protections that exist in proper marketplaces”. Rob Wilson, a professor of applied sport finance, has said: “There is little doubt that a cap on resale prices will lead to an explosion of underground activity as punters seek market value for their purchases and the flexibility to buy and sell when and how they wish”. If the proposal for a cap on secondary ticket prices were introduced, what safeguards and extra precautions would the Government take to prevent a rise in scammers and black market ticket reselling? Another concern we have is the proposal for a ticket resale cap. The issues with such a policy were very well evident at the Paris Olympics, where the restrictions on the resale of tickets meant that many event venues had empty seats. This not only impacted the Olympic venues themselves but meant that many fans could not participate and enjoy seeing their nation compete in a sport that they love following. This is not the right time to go back over the national insurance contributions debate, but one has only to read Hansard to see that many noble Lords are greatly concerned about the impact that measure will have on the live music and sporting industries. At a time when these sectors already face potential negative headwinds, many of the proposals in this consultation could have further significant and detrimental effects on the venues, not to mention on the fans. We very much hope that the Government will proceed with a measured approach and carefully consider how such proposals as outlined in this consultation will affect music, sporting venues and, crucially, those who derive so much fun and enjoyment from attending these events.

My Lords, unlike the Conservatives, with their somewhat lukewarm response, we on these Benches very strongly welcome the Statement, not least because it is a clear promise of action. We welcome the words of the Minister in the other place, Chris Bryant, that “the House should be in no doubt that we intend to act”. To date, there has been too little action to address concerns that have been raised over very many years. Twenty years ago, in the other place, I asked the then Labour Government what they planned to do about widespread concerns about ticket touting. I waited until 2006 to get an answer, which was to call on the industry to find a voluntary solution to ticket touting. After four so-called summit meetings, very little was achieved. More recently, the same voluntary approach was adopted by the then Conservative Government, who said in response to the CMA’s report and recommendations in 2021: “The Government believes in the power of competitive markets to give consumers choice and flexibility”, and concluded that “it is too soon to conclude that the only way forward is further legislation focused on this market”. The voluntary approach has not worked. There have, of course, been some improvements over the years—measures restricting the use of bots have been referred to already—but overall, Governments of all persuasions have failed to seriously address these issues, despite the growing concerns of fans, artists, event promoters, live venues and many others. With the Government doing little, many in both Houses have pressed for action. I pay particular tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, who, together with my noble friend Lord Clement-Jones, has doggedly raised concerns and, more importantly, offered solutions to the ticketing and touting issues that are now at last being covered in the consultation. It is no wonder that the Statement—a statement of intended action—is so widely welcomed, including on these Benches. That is, of course, hardly surprising, since we supported amendments covering many of the points in the consultation paper during the passage of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. The FanFair Alliance, which also deserves praise for its dogged campaigning on these issues, has gone so far as to say that the suggested measures “are potentially game-changing”. The Statement sets out the issues to be addressed very clearly, but while it illustrates the Government’s intended direction of travel, I would have preferred, and wished for, greater clarity about some of the preferred options. I hope the Minister will provide more detail. What is the preferred limit on resale price? Are the Government in favour of a licensing system for resale platforms? Will they prohibit platforms from allowing sellers to list more tickets for an event than the seller can legally procure from the primary market? Will they make platforms strictly liable for incorrect information about tickets listed on their websites? There are two further issues. Not included in this consultation is dynamic pricing, which is to be consulted on separately. Although I welcome that it is only in relation to the live events sector, I regret that it is not part of the main consultation. Surely it would have been better for implementation if the two were considered alongside each other with the outcomes forming one plan of reform. Can the Minister explain why they are not? Given that we know that the separate consultation is to last 12 months, can she tell us when it will start and how the two consultations will work together? Finally, it is obvious that there is little point in new legislation unless it is rigorously enforced, but despite existing regulation on bots, for example, we know that there are still cases of them being used. We need tougher enforcement in this area. There are continuing concerns about the black market and even about our ability to deal with touts operating outside the UK. Can the Minister say a little more about plans for enforcement of both existing legislation and the new legislation that will arise following the consultation? Does she accept that a licensing system for resale platforms will be a great help in that enforcement procedure? Is she aware that various bodies, such as the CMA, will be involved? Trading standards departments will certainly be involved, yet in recent years there has been a significant drop in the number of available qualified trading standards officers right across the country. Trading standards and other enforcement bodies will require additional resources, including to recruit new staff to take on additional responsibilities. What assurances are there that funds will be provided to meet these additional needs? Will the new burdens principle apply, for example? Our current ticketing market is not working for fans, and voluntary measures will not solve the problems. We have waited too long for action, so we welcome the Statement and the promise of action. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

My Lords, as has been noted by the noble Lords, Lord Effingham and Lord Foster of Bath, on Friday, 10 January, the Department for Business and Trade and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport published a consultation on live events and the resale of tickets, and a call for evidence on pricing practices in the live event sector. Tackling the resale market was a manifesto pledge and I am grateful for the noble Lord, Lord Foster of Bath, noting and reminding us of the work over many years by Members of your Lordships’ House. I am also grateful for the broad support for these measures from the noble Lord, Lord Foster, and for the support of the Opposition—albeit caveated—from the noble Lord, Lord Effingham. I hope I can respond to the noble Lord’s concerns as I go through my speech. The UK has a world-leading live events sector, which is the heartbeat of the UK’s cultural and economic landscape. It employs, as noble Lords will be aware, over 200,000 people and contributes to local economies and communities up and down the country. Live performances create unforgettable shared experiences, uniting communities up and down the country. However, too many fans are still missing out on opportunities to experience these live events, because ticket marketing, as noble Lords will be aware, is not working for fans. We agree with the noble Lord, Lord Effingham, that a well-functioning ticket resale market can and will play an important role in redistributing tickets between genuine fans. Far too often, however, we see tickets being listed on the resale market at extortionate prices—many times the original price in the primary market—which removes tickets from the ability of legitimate fans to buy. It is not a question of legitimate fans buying tickets they cannot use and needing to get their money back by reselling their tickets; what we are talking about here, and we need to be clear about this, is the work of organised touts—big business buying up tickets in bulk on the primary market, solely to sell on to fans at hugely inflated prices. These people are not only denying true fans the opportunity to buy tickets on the primary market, they are pocketing any profit for themselves. Very little of the additional revenue goes to the live music sector. This Government are committed to putting fans back at the heart of live events and clamping down on unfair, exploitative practices in the secondary ticketing market. In doing so, we want fairness for fans and an economically successful live events sector. We have launched this consultation as the first major step towards delivering on this ambition. The consultation outlines a range of options to address problems in the resale market, including a statutory price cap on ticket resales, a licensing regime for resale platforms, new limits on the number of tickets individual resellers can list, and new requirements on platforms to ensure the accuracy of information about tickets listed for sale on their websites. We also want to understand whether there is scope for the primary market to do more to prevent touts getting hold of tickets in the first place. In response to the question from the noble Lord, Lord Foster, on whether the Government have a preference on where that price cap would land, we are open through the consultation to hearing from a range of stakeholders and we do not have a preference on that. The noble Lord, Lord Effingham, suggested that it is possible that the price cap could lead to an increase in unregulated activities, scams and a potential increase in black-market sales. We have launched a consultation to learn from the experience of other countries introducing measures such as price caps on the resale of tickets. The ticket marketing is broken for fans, in our view; doing nothing is not an option. The measures will be intended to ensure that revenue flows to the sector, including the venues and artists, and not to the touts. The noble Lord, Lord Foster, asked about enforcement. I absolutely recognise the importance of enforcement of consumer protection legislation, and the consultation seeks views and proposals to make this more effective for ticket resale. In many areas, there are successful enforcement measures taking place. For example, in May last year, following an investigation by trading standards, notwithstanding the point the noble Lord made about trading standards officers, four people were sentenced to a combined total of six years and five months in prison, with substantial fines, for criminal activity in relation to ticket touting. Prosecutions such as these send a message to the ticket touts. We hope the consultation will allow us to strengthen the enforcement of consumer protection legislation, as well as making it more difficult for touts to operate. There were a number of other questions the noble Lord raised to which I do not have the answer now, but I will write to him. There was a question around dynamic pricing more generally. For our live events industry to be successful and sustainable over the long term, we believe that fans, artists and organisers all need to feel fairly treated, so, where dynamic pricing is used, it must be done in a way that is compliant with consumer protection law. We are also issuing a call for evidence on pricing practice across the live events sector to better understand the changes adopted by the sector in selling tickets in recent years, including the use of new pricing strategies and technologies, and how these impact on the experiences of fans. It is important that fans are treated fairly and openly, with timely, transparent and accurate information presented ahead of sales. We are seeking evidence on how the ticket pricing system for live events generally works in UK, if and how consumers are being impaired by lack of transparency in this area, and whether new business models and technologies are creating new risks for consumers or gaps in the consumer protection framework. The consultation and call for evidence will be open for 12 weeks. It is closing on 4 April. We will then decide on next steps, but be in no doubt that we intend to act. I look forward to hearing Members’ views in the debate today and also, hopefully, through the consultation period. For too long, fans have been excluded from seeing the artists and shows that they love, due to organised touts. This Government are determined to clamp down on touts. The question is not whether but how we improve protection for fans.

13:26:00

My Lords, I warmly welcome today’s announcement and congratulate Chris Bryant on piloting the consultation legislation through Parliament. I declare an interest: I have worked passionately on this for 15 years with Sharon Hodgson, the excellent Labour MP, as co-chair of the APPG, and ending up as her frenemy on Times Radio couple of weeks ago— such is the way we work together. I totally share the commitment by the Government to better protect genuine fans through legislation, and I support them. I have a few quick questions, but first I will say to my noble friend on the Front Bench that I do not believe that the Paris Olympics was a fair comparison. We did ban secondary ticket sales in the London Olympics 2012 and we managed through other measures to completely fill it. It was a phenomenal success, both at the Olympic and Paralympic Games, in demand for seats. It was done with very strict regulation—legal requirements—not to allow the secondary market, which was criminalised for the tickets. The only seating that was a problem in Paris—and it was: I was there—was for the athletes. It is very difficult to determine how many seats should be left for athletes. They train, they go home, they do not necessarily decide whether they are going to be there, and that does lead to seats being left. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the secondary ticketing market. I have three quick questions. Seeing how many excellent consultation exercises have landed in the long grass over the past 15 years—being hijacked, frankly, by modern-day ticket touts using bots, who have been very effective and put a lot of money behind their efforts—can the Minister promise primary legislation as soon as possible after this? I hope it will be in this Parliament, I hope it will be before I leave this House and I intend while I am here to work exceptionally hard to see that it is on the face of the legislation. My number two question is: will attention be given to more details of the cap than have already been given today? Should it be face-value only? That, for example, is what the Principality Stadium does for Welsh rugby union matches. Or should it be a fee plus 10% to 13% for, say, administrative costs? That is the kind of range we should be consulting on. I would like to ask the Minister whether she agrees. Finally, many modern-day ticket touts unfortunately move abroad—they are multi-billion pound organisations that are based overseas—and legislation has to be supranational in this context. We have to think about that very carefully in this consultation period. Any crackdown on the black market has to be fully enforced. It is the terms and conditions that are abused time and again. That is illegal but, unlike in the current situation where prosecutions are few and far between, we cannot go through this consultation exercise without significantly reflecting on the fact that we have a prosecution service that can tackle this problem. We are talking about the future of true fans, many of whom travel the length and breadth of this country with their families, only to find that someone has swept the market with bots and printed forged tickets in order to satisfy the relationship with the secondary market, such as viagogo and Seatwave. They have to go home deeply unhappy, with little recourse in respect of their tickets, having travelled across the country to go to an event in their diary that was most important to them and their family. This is the time for action, and I am delighted that the Government have come forward with measures along these lines.

Having spent many weeks on opposing sides on some of the aspects of the Football Governance Bill, I am delighted to be able to agree with the noble Lord on the importance of these measures. I particularly note, as did the noble Lord, Lord Foster, the long-standing work the noble Lord has done over many years. I will endeavour to answer as many questions as possible, and I will come back on others that I do not get the chance to cover. The noble Lord asked about legislation. We are clear that this issue may require additional legislation, and we will look to do that as soon as possible, potentially in the second Session of this Parliament. We are clear that taking a view on where we would land on a cap could lead to accusations that we are pre-empting the consultation, but we are keen to hear views, and I have heard the noble Lord’s point on that very clearly. The point about touting based overseas is an important one. We want to make it easier for enforcers to tackle breaches of the law, and the consultation explores options for achieving that. We know that many touts target UK fans while operating abroad, and that will be an important factor to consider in the design of any new measures. However, that issue is not exclusive to ticketing, and enforcers such as the CMA and trading standards are empowered to take action against traders outside the UK. The reformed consumer enforcement powers in last year’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act will empower enforcers to impose penalties on or directions against traders that target UK consumers, regardless of where they are based.

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend the Minister for bringing this forward, and I welcome what is there. Until three and a bit years ago, I chaired National Trading Standards, and we were involved in trying to pursue some of precisely these cases. My question is simple: do the Government recognise the need for equality of arms in respect of those responsible for enforcing these new regulatory new arrangements, given that these are potentially multibillion-pound operations, sometimes operating overseas? It is quite difficult for either National Trading Standards or an individual local authority trading standards to pursue cases, given that heavy court costs will often be involved.

My noble friend raises a critical issue. This is about major ticket touting, which is incredibly well organised and heavily financed. The issues that have been raised are ones we will want to explore through the consultation, because there is no point in our having stronger laws unless they have an effect. We are clear that we need to act on ticket pricing, and that cannot just be words; there has to be action.

My Lords, I welcome this initiative. Can the Minister assure the House that the consultation and eventual legislation will stretch to cases where it is the seats that are owned rather than the tickets, and the seat holders are putting the seats up for resale? At the moment it is impossible to get tickets through the Albert Hall for the Last Night of the Proms because the programme has not yet been devised, but online you can pay £13,000 for a single ticket. But don’t worry: if you cannot run to £13,000 then for £450, if you move fast, you can get a restricted-view ticket. I ask the Minister to reassure me that this sort of resale will be included.

Mindful that your Lordships’ House is going to be debating the Royal Albert Hall Private Member’s Bill, if not next week, then the week after, I raised this issue myself. On debentures, we are consulting on a range of measures, including a price cap on the resale of tickets for live events. We will consider all views in determining the best route forward once the consultation is concluded.

My Lords, it is time to take action to protect fans from extortionate ticket prices and the illegal practices that are now the hallmark of the secondary ticket market, with the profits going to ticket touts rather than to the artists and performers at live events. As shadow Minister for Music and Tourism, I was pleased to put forward this policy on capping resale of live event ticket prices for the Labour manifesto. So I welcome the Government’s consultation on this policy and the call for evidence on pricing practices in the live events sector. I must say that my actions followed years of campaigning by the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, my friend Sharon Hodgson MP and the FanFair Alliance, which has done sterling work on this. However, as my friend the Minister, Chris Bryant, said in the Commons, it is not a consultation on whether to act; it is about how we should act. I too feel that enforcement is essential in this crackdown on the black market for ticket sales. We saw so few investigations and prosecutions taking place under the previous Government. Will my noble friend the Minister and the DCMS team take that challenge on board, as other noble Lords have asked?

Absolutely. I mentioned in a previous response that there was a successful prosecution relatively recently. Without prosecutions, without teeth and without action, all the work by Members of this House, including my noble friend and others who have been campaigning for years to address these issues, will have been in vain. I am clear, as my noble friend indicates, that this needs to lead to clear action.

My Lords, I am going to break the cosy consensus here. The Conservative Party always used to be, and perhaps still is, the party of markets and economic freedom, so I am going to say what I think a lot of Conservatives might still think, which is, I am afraid, that this is a silly idea and the price of a sporting event or a Taylor Swift concert is nothing to do with the Government and can safely be left to the market. Does the Minister agree—I suspect she does not, but I will ask her anyway—that the best way of avoiding the problems we have been discussing is to deregulate, legitimise secondary markets and allow individuals who want to participate in cultural events to decide how much they want to pay for them and get access to them accordingly?

The noble Lord correctly identifies that I am not going to be in agreement with his views. There is a difference between a market that acts fairly and one that does not. All UK Governments look at competition markets to make sure that they are legitimate and fair. What is happening at the moment with the ticket resale market is not fair and does not reflect the ability of individuals to see the shows or live events they want to see, nor does it give money back to the artists and venues. So although this is very much about people accessing tickets at a fair price, it is also about making sure that people do not skim off huge profits through the illegitimate means that we want to regulate. I could not disagree more with the noble Lord.