1 

 

 United States of America

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

 WASHINGTON, DC 20580

Opening Remarks of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter1

As Prepared for Delivery

“That’s the Ticket”

An FTC Workshop about Online Ticket Sales

June 11, 2019 

Good morning, everyone! And thank you, Mamie [Kresses], for the kind introduction. It 

is my pleasure to welcome you to the Federal Trade Commission’s workshop, “That’s the 

Ticket,” where today we will examine consumer protection issues related to the online 

advertising and sale of event tickets. So welcome to everyone here with us at the Constitution 

Center and to all of you joining us through the FTC’s live webcast. 

In the United States, our love of live entertainment burns brightly, despite the digital age, 

or perhaps because of it. A research firm estimates that consumers will spend about $10 billion 

this year for online tickets to music concerts, sporting events, live theater, and other exciting, inthe-moment events.2

 At the FTC, we understand the thrill of the chance to see a favorite artist or 

to be in the stands for that important rivalry game. But for many consumers the experience can be 

tainted by disappointment and frustration: not getting a ticket despite going online the very 

moment sales open; sticker shock at the total price after fees are added; finding out that you paid 

more than you had to; or getting your heart crushed if you never get a promised ticket. 

Let me share a personal anecdote to set the stage. Recently, I took my very dramatic and 

theater-loving four-year-old daughter, Eloise, to see Stephen Sondheim’s classic tale, “Into the 

Woods.” Among the many memorable lyrics of that show are “Sometimes people leave you / 

Halfway through the wood / Others may deceive you / You decide what’s good.”3 And, of 

course, “nice is different than good.”4 As I sat and listened to the lyrics I was very much 

reminded of my prior effort to purchase tickets to a live event. 

I wanted to go see a comedian’s set downtown. I looked up the tickets, coordinated times 

with my husband and others, identified a babysitter, made sure we could budget for the expense, 

and went through the online booking process. When I got to the final purchase screen, I did a 

1 The views expressed in these are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Trade Commission 

or any other commissioner. 2 IBISWorld, Online Event Ticket Sales in the U.S.: Market Research Report (Mar. 2018), 

https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-trends/specialized-market-research-reports/online-retail/lifestyleservices/online-event-ticket-sales.html. 3 Stephen Sondheim, Into the Woods, Act II. 4 Stephen Sondheim, Into the Woods, Act I.
2

double take—the all-in price was almost a third more than the listed price for the tickets I had 

selected. At that point, I was committed, so I grudgingly clicked purchase. Then, two weeks 

before the event, with no explanation, my tickets were unceremoniously canceled. That the 

process left me feeling more like a scorned witch than like Cinderella. I honestly did feel 

deceived about halfway through the wood. And the process was quite clearly neither nice nor 

good.

Some of the problems experienced by consumers in connection with the online event 

ticket market reflect traditional consumer protection concerns, while others raise issues unique to 

online tickets. For all of these problems, improving and protecting consumer confidence in the 

online event ticket marketplace is not only about laws and law enforcement but also about the 

industry’s commitment to ensure that ordinary consumers have reasonable access to tickets, as 

well as clear, complete, and truthful information about what they are buying.

The FTC’s interest in promoting a competitively functional and consumer-friendly 

marketplace for event tickets is shared by many: by Congress, which in 2016 enacted the BOTS 

Act to restrict the use of bots in buying up tickets in the marketplace5; by numerous state 

legislatures that have put in place, or are considering, new or revised legislation to address the 

online event tickets market in some fashion; by state attorneys general who have taken action 

against unlawful practices in the tickets marketplace; by a diverse array of industry members—

who have given staff a lot to think about in the weeks leading up to today’s workshop; and, 

finally, by consumers themselves. As you may know, the FTC received thousands of consumer 

letters in response to the call for comments in advance of today’s workshop.

At the outset, I want to thank the GAO for its comprehensive report on the event tickets 

market, published last April, which noted consumers’ difficulty in buying tickets to high-demand 

events at face value, the lack of transparency in fees charged by primary and secondary sellers, 

and the deceptive marketing practices of some industry players.6 Today’s workshop will examine 

these and other consumer protection issues in the tickets market as well as what steps should be 

taken to make this marketplace more transparent and consumer-friendly. 

Here is a brief run-down of the day. To start, we will hear from Eric Budish, Professor of 

Economics at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Economics. In addition to his 

scholarly work on market design in various industries, Dr. Budish may be familiar to many of 

you from his appearance in the December 2017 Freakonomics podcast episode on the eventtickets market. I trust that his remarks today will be both enjoyable and thought provoking. 

Following Dr. Budish’s keynote address, we begin with our first panel discussion, about 

bots and the BOTS Act. Bots allow unscrupulous buyers to manipulate ticketing platforms to 

hold and buy large volumes of tickets, thereby gaining an outsized advantage over ordinary 

 5 Better Online Ticket Sales Act of 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-274, S. 3183 (Dec. 14, 2016). After the GAO report was 

released, the FTC received Congressional requests to take action against deceptive and unfair practices in the event 

ticket industry related to hidden fees, speculative ticket sales, and misleading resale sites. See Letter to Chairman, 

Joseph J. Simons from Congressmen Frank Pallone, Jr. and Bill Pascrell, Jr., June 20, 2018.

6 Government Accountability Office, Event Ticket Sales: Market Characteristics and Consumer Protection Issues 

(Apr. 2018) (GAO-18-347), www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-347 (“GAO Report”).
3

consumers—meaning that the only way for many consumers to get tickets to high-demand events 

is to purchase them from resellers at a substantial, and sometimes exorbitant, markup.

Congress responded to this issue by passing the Better Online Ticket Sales Act, which as 

Mamie noted is particularly dear to my heart, and is affectionately known as the BOTS Act. The 

BOTS Act outlaws the use of bots that game the ticket system. Specifically, the BOTS Act makes 

it illegal to use bots to get around ticket purchasing limits—a tactic usually deployed to buy up 

tickets for resale at a steep markup. Importantly, the BOTS Act made it illegal not only to use 

bots to buy tickets but also to sell tickets acquired in violation of the statute if the seller 

participated in the illegal purchase or knew, or should have known, that the tickets were acquired 

in violation of the law. Both the FTC and state attorneys general have enforcement authority 

under the BOTS Act.

The law is an important step; effectively enforcing it is the next challenge and 

opportunity. I am pleased that this first panel includes experts from the technology sector, the 

primary and secondary markets, industry self-regulation, and the New York Attorney General’s 

office. Each of these sectors must play an important role in thwarting unlawful bots—from outsmarting the bots themselves, to deterring those who turn a blind eye to selling tickets obtained 

by bots, to law enforcement against bad actors. I look forward to the panel’s digging deeper into 

how to address these incursions into the tickets market.

The next panel of the morning will examine other consumer protection issues 

surrounding ticket availability. We look forward to a frank discussion of the panelists’ 

perspectives on the pros and cons of initiatives such as fan club and credit card pre-sales, 

dynamic pricing, different digital ticketing models, and mechanisms to manage, limit, or expand 

the transfer of tickets. 

After lunch, the first panel of the afternoon will look at how primary and secondary ticket 

sellers disclose their ticket pricing and fees to consumers. At the FTC, we hear complaints from 

consumers and Congressional leaders about the masking of event ticket prices, often hiding 

service fees or other fees until late in the transaction.7 This is also an issue that GAO looked at 

closely. What they found is not pretty. GAO’s sampling confirmed that many primary and 

secondary platforms fail to clearly display mandatory fees that are added to the ticket price. 

While some sellers disclose complete prices early on, or give customers the option to “toggle” to 

the full price, others never disclose these additional fees until late in the purchasing process. The 

worst sites do not display the fees until after consumers enter their credit card information. Some 

sites display fees in a significantly smaller font than the ticket prices. And these fees are often 

substantial—in many instances as much as 30% of the ticket price.8

 7 After the GAO report was released, the FTC received Congressional requests to take action against deceptive and 

unfair practices in the event ticket industry related to hidden fees, speculative ticket sales, and misleading resale 

sites. See Letter to Chairman, Joseph J. Simons from Congressmen Frank Pallone, Jr. and Bill Pascrell, Jr., June 20, 

2018.

8 GAO found that primary and secondary market ticketing companies charge total fees averaging 27 percent and 31 

percent, respectively, of the ticket’s price. A single ticket could have multiple fees, including “service fees,” perorder “processing fees,” and a venue’s “facility fee.” While most primary ticketing companies offer free delivery 
4

If you peruse the comments received in advance of today’s workshop, you will see some 

real dissatisfaction with the way consumers are informed of the total cost for tickets. It’s not just 

me! I want to share an excerpt from one comment that I think sums up that frustration:

If listing the total price . . . is liable to reduce sales, then misrepresenting the price is

a deliberate tactic to deceive a shopper and snare them with a higher price tag once 

they’re already, proverbially, at the front of the check-out line. I’ve never gone 

grocery shopping and been hit with a “soup packaging fee” after I’ve scanned my 

Campbell’s cans, or a “semolina macaroni product-drying surcharge” once I’m ready 

to pay for my linguine.9

Hiding fees until near the end of the transaction not only feels deceptive, as this comment notes; 

it also makes it nearly impossible for consumers to comparison-shop. I understand that our 

panelist, Professor Ellison, has studied drip pricing across various industries, so I welcome her 

insights on pricing disclosures in the ticketing industry. 

Today, I want to issue my own call for the ticketing industry to fix this problem—and 

fast: Just as consumers can now comparison shop for the all-in cost of airlines tickets, which 

have their own inscrutable set of mandatory fees, we should be able to comparison shop for the 

all-in cost of tickets to live entertainment. I recognize that this is a classic prisoner’s dilemma: If 

just one seller moves to all-in pricing, it will lose business to the sellers who continue to hide the 

ball (to the extent there are competing sellers in the marketplace). But if industry doesn’t step up 

to address this problem with its own collective solution, then I believe that the government must 

explore a law-enforcement or regulatory solution. It took a rulemaking by the Department of 

Transportation in 2011 to bring the industry into compliance by tightening up its full-fare rule,10

but of course airlines were never subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction. The events-ticketing industry 

is, though, and consumer frustration with opaque and deceptive ticket pricing has passed its 

boiling point. Consider yourselves on notice.

Back to the formal agenda. The final panel of the day will discuss other ticketing 

practices that cause consumer confusion, including the practice of resale sites that deceptively 

mimic the official venue, artist, or event site. The panel will also look at practices around the sale 

of speculative tickets—tickets that resellers do not actually have and cannot guarantee they will 

get for the consumer. 

As many of you know, these are areas in which the FTC has brought law enforcement 

actions in the past, resulting in cutting-edge settlements with Ticketmaster and its affiliate, 

 

options, some charge additional fees for delivery of physical tickets. Most resale exchanges charge delivery fees 

even for mobile or print-at-home tickets. These additional fees often are disclosed late in the purchasing process. 

While some primary sellers disclose complete prices early on, GAO found that for most of the events it reviewed, 

consumers couldn’t figure out fees until selecting a seat, clicking through additional screens, creating a user name 

and password (or logging in), and clicking an “Order Details” icon. Also, for most of these events, the fees were 

displayed in significantly smaller font than the ticket prices. 

9 See Cmt. of Consumer Reports at 6, 7 (containing excerpts of individual consumer comments filed with the 

Commission).

10 See U.S. Department of Transportation, Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections, 76 Fed. Reg. 23110, 23142 

(Apr. 15, 2011).
5

TicketsNow, as well as TicketNetwork and its marketing partners. These settlements set new 

rules of the road for disclosing that a site is a reseller and prohibiting deceptive sales of 

speculative tickets.11 Unfortunately, some secondary market ticket sellers today continue to 

engage in similar deceptive or misleading practices, which Congress, consumers, and 

competitors continue to bring to our attention. So I am looking forward to getting the panel’s 

input on how to better ensure that consumers get truthful information on what and from whom 

they are buying.

That is the full rundown of today’s exciting agenda. As you know, our wonderful staff at 

the Bureau of Consumer Protection has put a lot of time and effort into making today a success, 

and I want to thank them for their great work. 

I want to leave you with one final observation. In addition to protecting consumers, our 

agency is tasked with promoting competition, and I would be remiss not to acknowledge that I 

have heard from so many consumers and industry participants about the unique and daunting 

competition challenges in the ticketing market. Although the FTC is formally divided into two 

distinct bureaus, these two missions are, I believe, highly intertwined and complementary. So 

although competition itself is not a part of today’s formal agenda, which focuses on consumer 

protection, if panelists—in the course of sticking to today’s agenda—identify hyperconcentration 

or anti-competitive practices as contributing to the consumer-protection problems we are 

discussing, I hope they will say so and help elucidate those connections. If the ticket marketplace 

is not functioning competitively, consumers will never be adequately protected.

We have much to cover, and I know everyone is eager to start the day’s discussions. With 

that, let me turn the floor over to Mamie to introduce today’s keynote speaker. Thank you.

 11 See FTC v. Ticketmaster, L.L.C., No. 1:10-cv-01093 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 18, 2010) (stipulated order); FTC press 

release, “Ticketmaster and TicketsNow Settle FTC Charges of Deceptive Sales Tactics, Refunds for Springsteen 

Concertgoers Provided; FTC Warns Other Ticket Resellers” (Feb. 18, 2010), https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/pressreleases/2010/02/ticketmaster-ticketsnow-settle-ftc-charges-deceptive-sales.