I am at a loss as to why I am still paying booking fees for tickets when the tickets are to be printed at home. When I need to provide my own printer and ink and have no contact with an actual human I am wondering what exactly I am paying for? Am I being charged to use their internet-based booking platform? That would be like a shop charging you rent. I do not know how this is allowed. Is anyone else annoyed by it?
I also find it irritating, having to pay for doing the work that would otherwise be done by a paid person. Cinemas too ask for a fee for booking on line which becomes costly when one is booking for a whole festival. It is also quite time consuming and sometimes still requires a visit to the box office to sort out problems such as Paypal not working. Luckily the real persons at the cinema are very helpful but the cinema chain is still using its patrons to do the work.
Hi, I agree, there is no valid commercial reason, often the cost of regular mail for tickets is the same as print your own.Not all sites do it, Sydney Olympic Park doesn’t charge anything extra for print your own parking tickets.
I agree, have just booked four tickets for Circus at the Sydney Opera House for overseas visitors who are coming at Christmas. First option which was pre-checked was print your own. Would have had to print four separate pages, one for each ticket. I selected the Australia Post delivery option which does not cost anything, and I always use this if offered, unless I am making the booking within one week of the event.
I imagine that many of us agree it is another way to fleece more money from consumers. Is it more convenient? Sometimes. But aren’t we required to offer personal details too that can be misappropriated by others? And then we are required subsequently to deal with unsolicited emails all offering ‘hurry, don’t miss this stunning offer’ deals.
I prefer the old way, person to person!
Just because you print your own ticket doesn’t automatically make it free - they have to pay the licensing fees for the software to generate and send out the ticket so you get it in seconds. But most of the booking fee is probably their profit/markup. Most of the ticket price you pay never goes anywhere near the ticket companies, it goes to the venue, the star themselves, taxes, fees etc. Still booking fees are far too high.
I think it’s appalling to pay for a ticket you print at home.
Credit card charges have just been reduced and we should be pushing for this charge too.
We have a booking service called TICKETEK! You cannot get tickets for any show up here in Brisbane without going through TICKETEK. If you do not have a computer I guess you don’t go out. They charge for using cards to pay with, how else can you do it over the computer? The surcharge isn’t cheap either. In fact they charge you for everything but you have no option because the tickets are not available any other way. Monopoly? Just one more case of being forced into something you don’t want but others do.
CHOICE awarded Ticketmaster and Ticketek our coveted Shonky award in 2012 for their bewildering and exorbitant array of fees and charges.
I don’t know why anyone would willingly use them - their websites and apps are terrible and their fees are way out of whack. Competitors like Eventbrite beat them on price and convenience. But they seem to have some major venues on long-term exclusive contracts.
I too resent the Ticketec charges, went to a show at NIDA last week and Ticketec occupies their booking office. I find it hard to believe the owners of the venue could not operate it cheaper with their own staff. Outsourcing to save money is a myth, it is only a way of relinquishing control of your business.
Oft times we are forced to use them @viveka because they often are the only option if you wish to pre-purchase tickets!
Yes it drives me crazy, I think it is a ripoff.
Today I booked two tickets using my mobile, for a finals match at GIO Stadium. The tickets cost $20ea; I was then slugged an additional $5.50 by Ticketec to send the tickets to my mobile!!! What is that extra charge for?
As @AndyKollmorgen points out, “under the new legislation, it will be considered a surcharge if it looks like a surcharge”. Let’s hope this forces changes to Ticketec’s ‘delivery fees’, which are clearly as high as ever.
I think it should be made illegal to charge a fee if the consumer books online. A fee for what? They did nothing. As for paying for the software we are already paying for the ticket. They should be thankful they have customers. Maybe someone can start a petition and find out who we need to petition to get some kind of legislation through about this. I certainly would sign a petition. Would be good if choice could get behind pushing for this to go through. Let’s get these shonky people to stop.
Yep totally agree.Tickets to shows are so expensive that we have stopped buying them …the extra cost of booking fees tipped it over the edge price wise for us.
Is this the sort of thing that the Monopolies Commission deals with?
they don’t seem to, they DO. the biggest venues in all the major cities - the ones that host all major concerts and sports - are contracted to ticketek or ticketmaster. there is no other way to buy a ticket, even if you go to the venue in person you’ll still be dealing with ticketek/ticketmaster as the venue signs exclusive ticket sale rights to them.
My one & only experience with on-line booking. Our local Show was advertising 20% off and no queuing if you booked on-line with a company. I did, but the 3 charges for credit card, print your own & booking fee meant I only saved 48 cents. At the gate, I still had to join a long line, and it took longer to check my “ticket” than those who handed over cash (no card facilities). I vowed to do cash next time as the Show Society volunteers would get 100% of my contribution.
I purchased a ticket through Ticketek last night. Interestingly, the surchage was identical regardless of the ticket delivery method chosen. I could select from: e-ticket on my smartphone, print-at-home, collect at the venue, or sent via regular post. Each was the exact same $5.30 extra. Could there be any more telling evidence that it’s just a cash grab ?