When I need to take an airline flight, or even resolve an issue with an airline ticket I already bought, there are any number of organizations or individuals I can contact for help. I can call the airline, of course, but I can also browse available fares on the web, I can call a travel agent, I can even subscribe to an automated e-mail system to let me know when my desired itinerary drops in price. And any of these individuals or systems can quote me a price, view available seats, and make the sale.
But when I want an enjoyable night out at some cultural event (one I know about, or a new experience I don’t yet know I want), who do I contact? I read the newspaper for tiny event listings or hyperbolic advertisements. I sift through my various culture junk mail stacks. I ask my friends. I call a few larger venues on the off chance that they’re presenting something I’d like to see. And even once I find an event or activity, I have to figure out who can sell me a ticket and when they’re available to do so.
In an industry that, like the airlines, is all about perishable capacity (vacant seats or available exhibit times scattered around the city, that will become worthless at the moment the event or the flight takes off), it’s odd that someone hasn’t succeeded at distributed ticketing, or an agent-based approach to cultural experience.
I know some will claim Ticketmaster as one such service, with access to tons of ticketed events. But Ticketmaster is a transaction service, not a concierge, and many nonprofit events are not included among their inventory. Plus, a centralized system like Ticketmaster is quite different than a distributed system, where multiple players have access and authority to sell.
The beauty of a distributed ticketing system, such as the airlines constructed decades ago, is that anyone in the system can sell anyone else’s product. If I want to go to New York, the airline database can offer me options on dozens of airlines, not just one. And if I’m stuck in New York, my travel agent can help get me out on the next available flight, regardless of carrier or airport.
Certainly, there are technological and cultural barriers to such a system for the arts. But at least the technological barriers are quickly dissolving as other industries build the necessary infrastructure.
So why, in the next five years, couldn’t my local performing arts center become my personal agent of cultural experience — offering me not just events in their venues but also experiences scattered around town, on other ticketing systems? Or, why couldn’t my local professional theater sell me tickets during intermission to a comparable event at another theater? Why couldn’t there be cultural agents there or elsewhere that can recommend and sell cultural events that match my purchase or preference patterns — in clubs, or bars, or concert halls, or black box theaters, or museums, or community centers?
A distributed information and sales capacity could enable entrepreneurs, cultural mavens, and even individuals with a love for connecting people and art to change the way we find, consider, and purchase cultural experience. So, what’s holding us back?
Someone must be attempting this somewhere (or tending the wounds of their past attempt). If you know, tell me.
Cindy Ballaro says
Several years ago I was working with a symphony and this idea came up – provide a ”concierge-type” service to people who signed up as WANTING such a service. The general idea was to charge an annual fee, the patron would fill out a ”likes/dislikes” profile, and in return the symphony would contact the patron when something was coming up that they might be interested in. The symphony would also arrange small group get-togethers for the patron if they provided us with email addresses. After many committee meetings discussing this and other options, it was deemed way to time consuming.
Since then I’ve wondered if such a service would work as a ”for-profit” business. Guess it would be more like the travel agent scenario, or even perhaps a ”membership” type service. I also am wondering if anyone out there has tried this, and if so, what their experience has been. I think it’s a great idea!
Jan Yager says
What a fabulous idea. If modeled after sites such as Travelocity.com’s “Last Minute Deal” your search can even be narrowed to interests and budget [including the many wonderful FREE events held at non profits].
The closest I have seen of that is the email Phillyfunguide.com that does a weekly alert of 1/2-price tickets at a handful of cultural institutions. I consider it my weekend menu and I and my family has attended numerous events at places we had not ventured to before because it was now affordable.
Frank Chiachiere says
This is a great idea. What’s holding us back? A few thoughts:
First, scalability is a big issue. I think the technological barriers are bigger than they seem at first blush.
For example, unlike airlines, seating configurations for cultural events vary wildly. One reason Ticketmaster has been able to maintain a monopoly for so long is that inputting the seating charts for every event at every arena is time-consuming and unprofitable. You would have to restrict it to general-admission events to get around this.
Airlines are a hard analogy, too, because the services are interchangable: most people don’t care which airline they get booked on, as long as it gets them there cheaply. Not true of cultural events. You’d want your “cultural concierge” to have a high degree of knowledge of each event, to help guide people to the right one. That’s harder than it is in the travel industry. Europe is basically the same as it was in 1995. But the offerings at your local repertory theater are vastly different.
There are also some behavioral barriers to be overcome. Except for a few “culture vultures,” (i.e., the kind of people who read this website), many people don’t make decisions this way for cultural events.
Movies are the big exception:
“I feel like seeing a movie tonight.”
“Okay, let’s see what’s playing!”
Because movies are all about the same running time and offer a similar experience (and you have many options at a single multiplex), they can be thought about this way. Not true for many other cultural events. Even sporting events. So that behavior would have to change.
Finally, given all these barriers, there would have to be a comfortable margin for the middlemen, meaning the cultural institutions would have to be okay giving the tickets away cheaply. That’s not a dealbreaker, since, as you mentioned, we’re talking about “perishable capacity,” but it would have to be done in a way that wouldn’t cannibalize existing full-price tickets sales. Perhaps this is a way to re-invent the traditional subscriber model as a “customer loyalty” reward, like frequent-flyer miles.
Reid McLean says
I’ve always thought that something like this was a good idea, and as technology improves it does become more feasible. You are talking a phone set-up and a web set-up, though, so significant investment and overhead. Several issues with organizations allocating tickets to “competitors” too, so maybe an independent service is the route to go.
And if I was at an existing arts organization I would get my internal house in order first. I’m not convinced that arts organizations do enough “concierge” work with their existing offerings and audiences. In fact I know that they don’t.
Julia Moore says
The Arts Council of Indianapolis (http://www.indyarts.org) has a service called TicketCentral, located in an arts-identified zone (the Artsgarden, itself a city landmark) of the city’s large, downtown shopping mall. It is staffed by knowledgeable Arts Council personnel and one can purchase tickets to a vast number of cultural events in the city from the same location. It did take quite a bit of effort and expense to set up, but the convenience and usefulness of the service is well worth it. I’m sure they would be happy to share their experiences with anyone who asks.
Frank Lackner says
The question is one of disposing of time-sensitive inventory at the rate that maximizes revenue (not necessarily number of tickets sold) prior to curtain. This is exactly like airline seats, hotel beds, and automobile rentals in concept, but not in execution.
Airlines have standardized aircraft, with differing routes, rate structures, and to a degree, seat configurations. Hotels are individual in character and location, but usually with a standardized set of amenities (bed type, etc). Car rentals are highly dependent on airlines and airports, but with standard car makes.
While it may appear that all of these are sold in a wide variety of formats, such as by airline, travel agent, website, each with multiple vendors, they are not. In my experience as a professional corporate travel agent, all the airline, hotel, car, and other services sold by travel agents are usually contained in one of three “GDS” (Global Distribution Systems): Sabre, Apollo, or (a distant third) Worldspan. While these were originated by airlines (respectively American, United, and TWA), they have long since been spun off as individual units. They great majority of airlines world-wide, most hotel chains of any note, and the great proportion of car rental firms subscribe to all of them. Thus their inventory is universally available.
These were originally only available to the airlines and to travel agents. With the rise of the Internet, Travelocity was generated by Sabre as an online sales tool; Orbitz was generated by a consortium of airlines. They still, however, rely on the same basic computer backbone from Sabre or Apollo. With the elimination of travel agent commissions, the crisis of 9-11, and the popularity of Internet sites, travel agents were largely put on the sideline.
What this is intended to show is that airlines, hotels, and car rentals, while sharing the time-sensitivity of theater tickets, also share the compexity of theaters with differing seating plans, price scales, etc. Yet they have managed to arrange a common GDS format that allows sale of their goods from any terminal systemwide and worldwide.
What would be required to expand this vision to performing arts venues?
1) There would have to be a conceptual shift on the part of performing artists and managers. At present, most believe themselves to be unique and irreplaceable. THEY are the only theater producing this version of Hamlet. While that may well be true, and may well be the greatest version of Hamlet yet seen, in the view of many theater-goers, the choice may be a) whether to go at all, b) competition with a musical, or an opera, or the symphony, or a film. Each of those is equally the best version of its performance. In short, the patron’s evening is unique, and the performance is a commodity to fill it. If managers can see their performances as commodities for sale, then a GDS can work. If each performance is seen as individually crafted for a select audience, it will not work, because the egos involved will not permit it.
2) There will be substantial computer programming to be accomplished, with the loading of seat charts, performance schedules, pricing scales, etc. Much of this has, conceptually, been overcome by the airline GDS systems. Software is not the major issue.
3) Finances will be a major issue, due to the great range of theaters from titans like the Metropolitan Opera and Lincoln Center to shoebox theaters operating on shoestrings. But, if Equity and the other unions can scale performers contracts to the range of theaters across the country, should it not be possible to scale the distribution system as well?
Funding the conversion to a GDS will take considerable cash, but the size of the project and the consequent benefits should attract major funders.
3) Standardization comes with a GDS, and that may well be an issue for a business frequently run on individuality. Standardization comes in many forms, from contracts to seating scales to computer codes. Theaters run on creativity and individuality, and this is as true in marketing as it is in the performance itself. To the extent that theaters feel their creativity threatened, the GDS concept will fail or falter.
4) Public perception will need to be changed, and this will take time and expense. Orbitz and Travelocity had major airline marketing and financial muscle behind them, and their success was neither instantaneous or assured. The sale of performing arts tickets is fractured, even at a local level, a substantial disadvantage.
The gorilla of ticketing is, of course, Ticketmaster, with some minor competing efforts from Tickets.com, Cyberseats, and a few others. As noted elsewhere, these are proprietary, not allowing sales of tickets for others on their sites, and frequently carry hefty sales charges. This proprietary distribution is very advanageous for them, if not for the business as a whole, and they will not give it up willingly. If however they sense either greater profit in cooperation or that they will be out-flanked by a new business model (GDS), they may see reason and cooperate.
Beyond those concerns, I find it curious, having worked in both the theater and travel businesses, the different tack taken on time-sensitive goods. Theater managers attempt to price their seats initially for what they think the market will bear, or their finances dictate, or their egos demand. As the date approaches, the tendency is to start introducing discounts, usually willy-nilly, concluding with half-price sales at the window, or just papering the house wholesale if sales are sparse.
Airline managers, taking advantage of their computers and the history of sales in a particular market, assume just the opposite stance. While they establish a price, they use a computer model to anticipate the demand for a given flight on a given day, based on time of day, day of week, relevant holidays, etc. They then START by discounting the price to try to build the demand. As demand builds, they remove the discounts, leaving the last passengers to buy the most expensive tickets. Called yield management, the goal is to maximize the revenue for a flight over the entire period that it is available for sale (331 days in the case of an airline).
Some few theaters are starting to experiment with yield management. Comined with a GDS distribution system, I believe firmly that all performing arts companies could radically raise their earned income. That, however, is dependent on swallowing a certain amount of pride, as noted in the comments above.
Michael Muhumuza says
The whole problem lies on one problem; perception by both the clients and the performing artists. The airline personnel have promoted their business and the clients have come to believe the importance of institutionalised ticketing, this is still lacking in the performing arts