Summer Economic Observation: Concert Economy1
The summer performance market continues to heat up, and with it, consumer disputes related to ticketing also occur frequently. On the afternoon of July 15, the Jiangsu Provincial Consumer Protection Commission publicly interviewed 12 entertainment performance business entities, including ticketing platforms such as Damai, Maoyan, and Ferris Wheel, as well as Beijing Guochao Yuedong Culture Technology Co., Ltd., and Nanjing Youling Culture Media Co., Ltd. , Beijing Times Cube Culture Media Co., Ltd. and other organizers were invited to attend the meeting. Among them, Jiangsu Consumer Protection Association named vote planet and show action with a passive and evasive attitude, and the organizers of Tao Zhe's Tianjin concert, Xiao Jingteng's Guangzhou concert and Hu Yanbin's Suzhou concert did not come to participate. The focus of this interview was on issues related to performance ticket refunds, such as inconsistent refund policies, excessive handling fees, and rejection of legal refund requests. The Jiangsu Consumer Protection Committee requires all entities in the theatrical performance industry to standardize ticketing order and proactively Optimize refund rules and provide more user-friendly services.
In fact, since last year, issues such as difficulty in refunding concert tickets and excessive handling fees have become hot topics of public opinion from time to time. A senior practitioner in the ticketing industry told Nandu reporters that in fact, the refund mechanism for live performances will only begin in 2023. The formulation of the rules is more jointly decided by the organizer, the brokerage company and the local cultural and tourism department. The ticket sales platform is in this area has very little say. The collection of refund fees is actually, to a certain extent, the best "compromise plan" after competing for the interests of all parties.
The Consumer Protection Committee named and criticized the organizers of Tao Zhe, Xiao Jingteng, and Hu Yanbin’s concerts
It is reported that the Jiangsu Consumer Protection Committee’s notice shows that the ticketing platform is required to assist the Consumer Protection Committee in interviewing relevant organizers. Damai, Maoyan, and Pingniu assisted as required. The Consumer Protection Committee invited relevant organizers to participate in the interview, but Piaoxingxing and Xiudong were passive and refused to assist the Consumer Protection Committee in sending letters to relevant organizers and operators.
In addition, Tianjin Rolling Stone Cultural Development Co., Ltd., the organizer of Tao Zhe’s concert in Tianjin, Kailule Cultural Development (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., the organizer of Jam Hsiao’s concert in Guangzhou, and Shanghai Magic Cube Pan-Cultural Performing Arts Co., Ltd., the organizer of Jam Hsiao’s concert in Guangzhou , Shanghai Aimixuntu Culture Media Co., Ltd., Anhui Bowen Entertainment Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Rosenery Culture Media Co., Ltd., Nanjing Youyouxing Culture Communication Co., Ltd., the organizer of Hu Yanbin’s concert in Suzhou, did not attend the meeting.
It is reported that the Jiangsu Provincial Consumer Protection Commission has notified five major problems existing in the performance service market found in this investigation: First, unreasonable refund policies for performance tickets, such as inconsistent refund policies and excessive liquidated damages for consumer refunds. The setting of high and refund levels is unreasonable. Second, tickets are one-size-fits-all, and "non-refundable" implies a rights imbalance trap. For example, many ticketing platforms or organizers refuse consumers' legitimate requests for refunds, and the rights and obligations of organizers and consumers on the issue of refunds are unequal. The third is the problem of incomplete implementation of platform obligations, such as the ticketing platform not clearly marking operator information, service agreements and other format contracts being hidden and difficult to find. Fourth, secondary ticketing platforms have problems such as inconsistent refund policies and opaque merchant information. Fifth, there are many unfair format clauses in the agreement. For example, the agreement sets too broad exemption clauses and lower liability limits for the platform. The collection and use of minors' personal information does not comply with legal regulations. It circumvents the "stop illegal advertising" of online platform operators. "" and other statutory regulatory obligations and jurisdiction agreements have increased the cost of consumer rights protection.
It is still difficult to refund tickets due to force majeure factors
Since the outbreak of the concert market last year, consumer disputes over ticket refunds have appeared frequently. Recently, consumer Ms. Shao purchased two tickets for Andy Lau's Shanghai concert for her parents on the Damai platform, totaling 2,760 yuan. However, a few days before the performance, her grandfather suddenly became critically ill and was hospitalized. Her parents were unable to travel from Nanjing to Shanghai to watch the concert, so they requested Refund according to "Force Majeure". After
provided a series of supporting materials such as diagnosis certificates, medical records, and examination sheets required by the platform as required, the platform informed the concert organizer that the concert organizer did not explain the reason, but stated that full refunds would not be supported on the day of the performance.In the subsequent communication, Damai Platform and the concert organizer Shanghai Xixin Culture Communication Co., Ltd. both stated that the other party was responsible for handling refunds. The staff of the Shanghai Cultural Tourism Dispatch Center even replied to her that after communicating with the organizer, the organizer had not received any information from Damai. The platform office received Ms. Shao’s refund request.
After many twists and turns of refund communication, Ms. Shao finally succeeded in refunding the ticket, but neither the organizer nor the platform gave her a reasonable reply as to why she had previously refused to refund.
Ms. Shao’s experience is not unique. Previously, some netizens revealed on social platforms that they could not go to JJ Lin’s concert due to the death of their father, but Damai platform did not refund tickets. Finally, after the incident fermented, Damai refunded the ticket.
Another netizen suffered a sudden leg fracture the day before the concert and was unable to attend the show. After contacting the platform to request a refund, the platform refused to refund the ticket because it exceeded the refund time and there was no feedback channel.
In fact, looking at the history of the development of the domestic performance market, in the early years, almost all large-scale live performances prohibited refunds across the board. The default rule in the industry was that live performances, especially concerts with huge initial investment, had a higher cost than general commodities. The strong timeliness, coupled with the current market environment of "demand exceeds supply", has resulted in the "scarcity" of tickets, so there is generally no refund mechanism.
Until 2023, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the Ministry of Public Security recently jointly issued the "Notice on Further Strengthening the Standardized Management of Large-scale Commercial Performance Activities to Promote the Healthy and Orderly Development of the Performance Market", which clearly mentioned that for large-scale commercial performances with more than 5,000 people Activities need to set reasonable tiered refund fees to protect ticket buyers’ legitimate rights to refunds.
html Concert ticket refund fees as high as 50% in 3 seconds have sparked controversy
Since this year, many top singers’ concerts have begun to set up tiered refund mechanisms, but the different standards of handling fees involved have also aroused objections from consumers.
html On July 16, some media reported that Ms. Bian from Changzhou, Jiangsu Province spent 1,590 yuan on Maoyan to grab an in-person ticket for Jolin Tsai’s concert and found that she had chosen the wrong venue. She immediately applied for a refund and still had 50% deducted. Handling fee. She said that it took less than a minute from placing the order to applying, which would not affect secondary sales, but it was unreasonable to have to deduct so much in handling fees.Nandu reporter checked Jolin Tsai’s concerts on sale on Maoyan and found that the refund mechanism at Hefei station has four levels according to the time from the performance, ranging from no handling fee, deducting 20% handling fee, deducting 50% handling fee, to Deadline for refunds. Tickets can be refunded free of charge 48 hours before the pre-sale begins, and the deadline for refunds is 4 days before the performance. The refund handling fee of
Quzhou Station is set to allow unconditional refunds without handling fees within 48 hours after the pre-sale starts. Then, conditional refunds can be made before 19:00 on July 19. The refund handling fee is 20%. Here After that, refunds will be stopped.
However, the official performance time of the Quzhou venue is July 27, which means that all ticket refunds are prohibited within 6 days before the performance, which is obviously more stringent than the refund time of the Hefei venue.
There are many shows in Shanghai. In addition to the common refund within 48 hours, refunds during other time periods are subject to a 20% handling fee. Refunds will be stopped 2 days before the start of the performance. The refund rules are more relaxed than those in the previous two cities. some.
can see that although it is the same concert by the same singer on the same platform, the refund fee ratio and the deadline for refunds are not uniform in different cities. When Nandu reporters checked the information of Jolin Tsai's three performances on Maoyan, they all saw relevant notices that the organizer has the right to decide the refund policy.
It is worth mentioning that the Jiangsu Consumer Protection Commission directly named the problems of concert organizers who did not show up in the announcement, including the common "non-refundable time" and "setting liquidated damages that are too high". ", "Restrict consumers from rescinding contracts in accordance with the law", etc. The
picture comes from the Jiangsu Provincial Consumer Protection Commission.
The refund mechanism is jointly decided by the organizer, the brokerage company and the cultural and tourism department.
Regarding the formulation of the refund mechanism, Lao Wang (pseudonym), who has been in the ticketing industry for more than ten years, told Nandu reporters that whether it is the refund fee ratio or the time limit for refunds, Generally speaking, it is indeed stipulated by the organizer, but to be more precise, it is actually decided jointly by the organizer, the singer's agency and the local cultural and tourism department. At the same time, local ticket purchasing and consumption habits will also be taken into consideration.
"Most of the time, the refund mechanism is actually negotiated by the organizer and the brokerage company under the conditions of the local cultural and tourism department. The ticket sales platform has very little say. In some places, the local cultural and tourism department even directly gave the refund mechanism There is a template for each organizer to follow, and this is usually in first-tier or new first-tier cities with relatively advanced administrative capabilities. At the same time, the organizer's refund plan will also be affected by the market. For example, the basic refund fee in this place is 30%. -50%, then the organizer would definitely not dare to raise it without authorization," he said.
Lao Wang recalled that since last year, the demand for refunds in the performance market has begun to increase, mainly because everyone’s enthusiasm for watching performances has exploded after the epidemic. “Actually, there will be a refund mechanism only after 2023. Live performance tickets are different from ordinary products. E-commerce products have obvious timeliness. If you refund the tickets before the performance, those tickets may not be resold. For example, some people only refund one ticket, and how can the ticketing company sell the "single" seats? We can’t even put it in stock.” Therefore, the setting of the refund mechanism can be regarded as a compromise after the game of interests of all parties, which can not only protect the interests of the audience to a certain extent, but also prevent the organizer from losing too much.
Lao Wang said that the refund mechanism for a concert requires a very large labor cost. "Now for a performance of about 10,000 people, the number of refunded tickets may be 2,000-3,000. From the ticketing company to the organizer, a lot of investment is required. "We need manpower to deal with this matter." In his view, the refund mechanism is more like the audience and the organizer each bearing a part of the loss in order to make the show go smoothly.
It is reported that the Jiangsu Consumer Protection Commission put forward four requirements during the interview with 12 performance business entities. It clearly pointed out that it is hoped that all entities in the theatrical performance industry will not think that the "seller's market" dominates and they can act arbitrarily. , don’t try to make the law accept the so-called “hidden rules”, don’t trample the spirit of the contract to nothing, let alone take the “new problems brought by new business forms” for granted. It is necessary to proactively optimize refund rules, provide more humane services, and balance the needs of ticket sales management and the protection of consumer rights. The refund handling fee must be reasonably determined and the refund charging standard must be transparent. At the same time, the scope of free refunds should be appropriately expanded, and refunds should be made appropriately after the platform reviews the evidence presented by consumers to reduce obstacles in practice.
Written by: Nandu reporter Xu Bingqian
