Nice people thread part 3- Nice as pie

PasturesNew

I saw on the telly the other week that you didn't need to go through all this rigmarole at all - you can simply track down an Olympics tickets website in another country and buy through there, without all the faffery.

Wheezy_2

PasturesNew wrote: »

I saw on the telly the other week that you didn't need to go through all this rigmarole at all - you can simply track down an Olympics tickets website in another country and buy through there, without all the faffery.

What a novel idea. A website where you buy a ticket for a certain Olympic event.

I haven't really followed the whole ticketing saga, but it seems to be a bit of a shambles and what's the reasoning behind turning it into a lottery?

chewmylegoff

PasturesNew wrote: »

I saw on the telly the other week that you didn't need to go through all this rigmarole at all - you can simply track down an Olympics tickets website in another country and buy through there, without all the faffery.

that is true to a certain extent, but they only passed on tickets to "official resellers" in other countries for the less popular events, so you wouldn't have been able to e.g. go and buy a ticket to the mens 100m final on a website in germany on a first come first served based.

the stats look very fishy to me. 1.9 million people applied for tickets in the olympic ballot. it appears that about 4.3 million tickets have been allocated but 1.2 million people got no tickets at all.

so 700,000 people got an average of over 6 tickets each, and 1.2 million people got an average of 0 tickets each. (or an average of just over 2 tickets for all 1.9 million applicants...hmmm).

bit odd, i suppose it just reflects that most people only applied for the popular events, and you had to apply for absolutely loads of stuff to stand a realistic chance of getting anything.

chewmylegoff

actually it looks like only 3 million went in the ballot - so adjust that to an average of over 4 tickets each for those who got them.

SingleSue

I would have loved to have been able to view at least one of the events at the Olympics but the lottery aspect of the ticketing put me off, if I want a ticket, I want to pay for it there and then when I know I have the pennies in the account not some obscure date in the future.

Oh well, it will be watching it on the telly again....

chewmylegoff

SingleSue wrote: »

I would have loved to have been able to view at least one of the events at the Olympics but the lottery aspect of the ticketing put me off, if I want a ticket, I want to pay for it there and then when I know I have the pennies in the account not some obscure date in the future.

Oh well, it will be watching it on the telly again....

i think the ballot was the only way they could reasonably do it - imagine the chaos if they had tried to just put them on general sale at a specific time - it's bad enough when they do that for a single event on its own!

you will be able to buy tickets there and then eventually, but by the looks of things, only if you want to go to a football match!

PasturesNew

Watch it on the telly if you're that interested. You get a better seat and better view, no queueing, your own loo - and you can wear your comfy slippers and order in a takeaway.

Spend the saved money on a whole/proper holiday rather than some 3 minute event hundreds of miles away, where it might rain anyway

GDB2222

chewmylegoff wrote: »

actually it looks like only 3 million went in the ballot - so adjust that to an average of over 4 tickets each for those who got them.

Presumably, if you applied for tickets for say archery, you could easily get all you applied for. Perhaps people want to go to every day of that event, or perhaps they over-ordered thinking they wouldn't get all they asked for? I don't think it's wildly fishy.

LydiaJ

On RM at the moment:

This house which is being sold by an agent with two employees who disagree about what the listing should say, I think. :rotfl:

Or what about these? 3 houses, all identical unextended 1960s-70s houses, on the same street. Can anyone see a reason why this one is £370k, this one is £345k and this one is £330k? Just some sellers being more or less serious about selling, or something that makes the more expensive house actually more valuable?

Also, what on earth is going on with the "available - sstc - available - etc" oscillation of this house?

And has anyone heard of the sort of thing that's going on with this one? It's being sold by Oxford City Council, who want the purchasers to pay their seller's fees.

JonnyBravo

PasturesNew wrote: »

Watch it on the telly if you're that interested. You get a better seat and better view, no queueing, your own loo - and you can wear your comfy slippers and order in a takeaway.

Spend the saved money on a whole/proper holiday rather than some 3 minute event hundreds of miles away, where it might rain anyway

I can listen to any music without going to a concert, see any comedy I want without going to the show, see most sporting events without buying a ticket.

I realise it's not just opinion that's makes us different, it's also genetics playing a large part in some cases, but I honestly feel sorry for you that you don't feel the joy of interaction of seeing something first hand with lots of like minded people.

It's something I enjoy massively, and whilst there may be a few convenience benefits sitting on ones sofa, it is simply incomparable in my eyes.

I hope this doesn't come across as too patronising, its said with an honest interest.