'Is the Olympics sponsored by Wonga.com?' blog discussion

ViolaLass

opaque wrote: »

But there you have shown that it is the same as any other event you might want tickets to. Peter is priced out because he doesn't want to or isn't able to spend more money. That is life.

They're both looking to spend the same amount - £300 over 2 events. The difference is that Johnny can afford to gamble more (by bidding for £1000 of tickets as opposed to Peter's £300). He therefore triples his odds of getting the tickets he wants.

It's not the same as other events - if I want a ticket to the opera, say, I save up until I can afford it and buy it, that's all. I don't gain from being able to afford to bid for three tickets to increase my odds of getting one.

opaque

You are both right but I mean you are missing out the best example of supply and demand that you get with the first come first served system that we avoid with the current Olympic system. That a tout will sell to the person that will offer the most. Doesn't matter if you are rich or poor, if you are first on the site you get the ticket. That's fair odds, but if you miss out, only the rich man wins.

If you don't have the system we have with the Olympics Peter Poor would have no chance atall, but with the lucky dip ballot system we have in an oversubscribed session Peter has 'A' chance, whereas he would have had no chance otherwise with the normal system.
Not as good odds as Mr Rich of course but a chance nonetheless. A chance he would NOT have if he wasn't one of the lucky people to get a ticket in the normal way. I can't imagine what the system would have been like if it had been first come first served, even with the anti-selling laws it would have been a disaster.

I'm guessing you've never had to pay more than face value for tickets then? Ever seen the price differences on Ebay or even Ticketmaster if you're not lucky?


There is also the fact that in some sessions you can improve your odds by saying you would pay up to the top amount. That's not buying a ticket in each category to improve your odds through possibilities, that's saying you would pay the top rate. That is simply one person willing to pay more, nothing to do with buying lots to get one, but being willing to pay more. If Mr Poor wants the same odds then he needs to pay more.
If you are willing to pay more you have more choice, that's always the way.


'but a pithy 'That is life' is defeatist. '

Welcome to the real world. Not defeatist but realistic.
If you want to fight this I'd like to see how.
It's too late to be bemoaning this, it's the system we have for this, you can't change it now (unlike other things where it is worth fighting against to make change of which there are many). When you put in what you wanted you agreed to the terms and conditions and this involves the unbalanced way it was done. Maybe it would have been better to have just said no one person can bid for more than £500, £750, £1000 of tickets? But then you'd get people rightly saying that's unfair as well. You can't win.

Kite2010

Instead of blind luck with money going out and you not knowing what tickets you have won, they should have sent out emails saying something like:
"Congratulations you have won the right to purchase tickets for seats in section XYZ of the stadium, you have until the 3rd June to purchase these tickets or else they will go back into the hat for another ballot".

Therefore you can pick & choose the tickets you want to keep & pay for and 'release' the ones you don't want back into the pot. It will be harder to operate system, but fairer in my eyes.

opaque

Nice idea, especially if they only give you a short time as for everyone that doesn't want tickets thats another wait for someone else.

I see no reason why they can't send you an email saying what you have got on the day they've taken your money.
After all they have actually decided what you have by that point.

I'm wondering if they've actually sorted out the seating properly (as in where exactly you'll sit rather than in Band X) as they've only actually built three venues so far!

ACynic

The Olympic Games are being used to make LOCOG and a lot of consultants extremely rich. For this to happen, they have to create mass public hysteria ("Once in a lifetime event," "Don't miss out," "Tickets oversubscribed" etc), then devise a cunning system to ensure that as many people as possible part with as much cash as possible as quickly as possible. I think they've done a pretty good job so far....

And if people get themselves into debt, buy overpriced tickets miles from the action or go to events they have no interest in just to be "a part" of the Olympics, that is really not their problem!! Better that than empty seats...

If you don't like it, you know what to do - don't buy tickets and (if you feel strongly) boycott the sponsors. Cut up your Visa card, don't drink Coke or eat in McDonalds, refuse to bank with Lloyds and turn over the TV whenever the Games come on!!

opaque

Well to be fair "Once in a lifetime event," and "Tickets oversubscribed" are all accurate as it turns out but you are very right :T

inicholson

Did anybody hear this guy http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9487000/9487046.stm on radio 4 this morning? He has applied for £36,000 worth of tickets, paid by credit card even though his credit limit is much less than £36k. He seems to believe that he will only be charged for tickets that he has been allocated and that he will be allocated very few (if any) of the tickets he applied for.

But I was under the impression they would take the full price of all the tickets you applied for? As a result I applied for very few as my only Visa card is a debit card. (I did apply for a new Visa credit card but it turned up 2 days too late - I'm really annoyed with Visa and feel like returning it, but it's an MBNA cash-back Visa and therefore a better deal than my other cards which I had intended it to replace!).

Mobeer

inicholson wrote: »

Did anybody hear this guy http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9487000/9487046.stm on radio 4 this morning? He has applied for £36,000 worth of tickets, paid by credit card even though his credit limit is much less than £36k. He seems to believe that he will only be charged for tickets that he has been allocated and that he will be allocated very few (if any) of the tickets he applied for.

But I was under the impression they would take the full price of all the tickets you applied for? As a result I applied for very few as my only Visa card is a debit card. (I did apply for a new Visa credit card but it turned up 2 days too late - I'm really annoyed with Visa and feel like returning it, but it's an MBNA cash-back Visa and therefore a better deal than my other cards which I had intended it to replace!).

If you pay by credit or debit card, you only get charged for the tickets you get allocated.

If you paid by cheque then the cheque had to be for the maximum amount that you could be charged. If any tickets were allocated to you, then the cheque would be cashed (in full) and any excess funds refunded.

Mobeer

I like the ticket system - its a lot better than trying to sell tickets to whoever phones up first, or pricing everything at such high prices so that only 'Johnny Rich' gets to buy any tickets at all.

It would be nice to know earlier what tickets I might have been allocated, but I agree with jazmad that this would just lead people to remove money from their accounts. Imagine a group of 4 people each apply for 4 opening ceremony tickets, one person is told they have the tickets when they are charged, so the other three people quickly remove their money from their accounts so they don't get tickets they no longer want.

opaque

Mobeer wrote: »

If you pay by credit or debit card, you only get charged for the tickets you get allocated.

If you paid by cheque then the cheque had to be for the maximum amount that you could be charged. If any tickets were allocated to you, then the cheque would be cashed (in full) and any excess funds refunded.

Is it an offence to use a cheque to buy something knowing you don't have the funds, or using your card to try and pay for something over your overdraft credit limits? Even if it's not and you try I can imagine your bank would be very happy to charge you for the cost of bouncing back a large claim against your account.

Goes to show that if you think you have no chance of getting all your tickets anyone could have bid for thousands of pounds worth of tickets even if you had a small amount of credit or money in your account.
Of course you would end up with nothing if you couldn't pay for what you did get allocated over the amount of money you have.