Lottery or No Lottery

backseatLover12

jmuscatello said:

But backseat, aren't you the guy who went 0/8 for the fall tour? Or was that someone else?

But no doubt, they play the NE a lot. That's what high population density will do for you. I don't think they go there for the Dunkin Donuts coffee....

Nope, I was 0 for 2. And neither of them were for the big cities, NY or Boston.

Lost In Ohio

Zod said:

Lost In Ohio said:

As far as this goes, I do think it's unfair that some people get locked out of shows while other people get three or four shows. At least, everyone should be guaranteed a show "close" to them or their home show...whichever is closer. After everyone gets one show, then you go around a second time. I mean, how many of us would be pissed if we tried for one show we could walk or bicycle to and a second show we could drive to in 2-3 hours only to get locked out of both? Meanwhile, someone Australia gets a show in San Francisco and two shows in LA? What if you lived in LA and got shut out, but someone in New Zealand got that ticket?

I think your missing the point again. Most of these people who got tickets to multiple shows chose their hometown (or closest show) as their #1 and got tickets for the less popular shows as their other tickets. The letting everyone pick a pair first won't make much of a difference at all. Because that person is still going to pick the same show as their #1 choice. All it does is result in less people getting tickets in the smaller markets. Most of these shows ran out of tickets in the first rounds. You're assuming should a person only get 1 pair of tickets their magically going to choose a different concert as their top priority. Like people wanting to go to philly are all going to decide they want charlottesville tickets more. It's not going to happen. It makes no sense.

What I'm saying is that if I think if we all tried for a show we could walk to (or take a city bus or bicycle)...aka a "very short distance", and we didn't get 10C tickets for that show, we'd all have the right to be pissed when we come on here and see that other people get tickets to several shows that are further away from where they live...or even when people travel to *your hometown* when you got shut out of that hometown ticket.* Yeah, I'd be pissed if a dude from Washington DC or a guy from Swaziland got a ticket for a show that I could walk to and I'd have to try at the preparties.

For people who travel, I think part of the key is knowing and/or willing to sacrifice a shot at a large market for a show like Indianapolis or KC. Mathematically, of course it depends on venue size, but you may have a better chance at the smaller markets, knowing that people WANT to travel to NYC or Boston or wherever...how many people want to travel thousands of miles to a place like State College or Noblesville?

If I lived in England and wanted a show in the USA would I have a better chance at two shows in NYC or a show in a smaller market a bit off the proverbial beaten path?


Yes, you should be guaranteed a show in your home city though...and who knows...maybe part of the reason for this lottery is so that things can be "rigged" a bit like that...so that people aren't shut out of a show reasonably close to where they live. When we say we want first priority or second priority, who's to say there isn't a "First choice, subset A" and "First choice, subset B" and so on down the line?

Zod

Lost In Ohio said:

Yes, you should be guaranteed a show in your home city though...and who knows...maybe part of the reason for this lottery is so that things can be "rigged" a bit like that...so that people aren't shut out of a show reasonably close to where they live. When we say we want first priority or second priority, who's to say there isn't a "First choice, subset A" and "First choice, subset B" and so on down the line?

Other people have pointed out the flaw in the "hometown" argument. The argument is that Pearl Jam's tours continue to get smaller. There are way more cities and areas that they don't play than they do play. If you restricted shows to local members only, a whole plethora of fans would never get to see the band play.

Hence the preference system. Choose the one you want to see the most. Most people would generally choose the one closest to them, whether it be 3 miles or 300 miles.

The basis of your argument is only fans that live in cities that PJ plays should be able to get tickets to see PJ play. That's cold man, really cold.

edit: I find it odd. Pearl Jam tours less and less as time goes on and fewer and fewer different locations. Rather then try to motivate the band to do a real tour of considerable size, fans trying and think of ways to make different fans not get tickets to they can get tickets and go to shows. For me it still comes down to the same thing. They don't play enough so people miss out. Arguing about how to allocate the tickets just mean a slight swap in the fans who to go and the ones that don't. Just as many people still miss out.

Pjdreamer

No lottery, first time in 16 yrs I did not get my fanclub tickets.

weddingparade

pj should follow bruce's lead on how to run a ga floor show

Zod

I'm in the same boat. First time I never scored Seattle tickets. I see other issues though. The 10c gets way less tickets than they used to (because ticketmaster continues to restrict how many tickets fan clubs can have). In 2000 they got loads of tickets for the seattle show. They had the entire floor and the first 3 or 4 wing sections. The didn't have near that amount this time. PJ also plays less shows so you have more fans flocking to fewer shows, plus there's way more fan club members than there were 15 years ago. All of these things make it increasing hard to get tickets.

I don't think you can blame the lottery for lack of tickets. I imagine if it had be done via F5 people would be just as pissed, because just as many people wouldn't of gotten tickets, because no matter what method you use the fan club still gets the same amount of tickets.

Amongst the Ani

Zod said:

I don't think you can blame the lottery for lack of tickets. I imagine if it had be done via F5 people would be just as pissed, because just as many people wouldn't of gotten tickets, because no matter what method you use the fan club still gets the same amount of tickets.

+1

rgambs

Zod said:

I'm in the same boat. First time I never scored Seattle tickets. I see other issues though. The 10c gets way less tickets than they used to (because ticketmaster continues to restrict how many tickets fan clubs can have). In 2000 they got loads of tickets for the seattle show. They had the entire floor and the first 3 or 4 wing sections. The didn't have near that amount this time. PJ also plays less shows so you have more fans flocking to fewer shows, plus there's way more fan club members than there were 15 years ago. All of these things make it increasing hard to get tickets.

I don't think you can blame the lottery for lack of tickets. I imagine if it had be done via F5 people would be just as pissed, because just as many people wouldn't of gotten tickets, because no matter what method you use the fan club still gets the same amount of tickets.

agreed! It's worth noting that pretty much everyone that put in for tickets to the Euro tour (outside of Ams.) got all that they put in for. Demand is much lower in Europe so there's your solution to the lottery right there! I think there are a ton of new folks (like me) coming in to the 10club. I was meaning to join since 2010 but just put it off and I think that is common. That this band is still relevant is amazing and I, for one, am fairly desperate to get in on it before they dissolve... They can't rock like this forever and so with time dwindling ticket demand is up... Sorry to those that have put their time in for years and miss tickets because I Got Some. Ka is a wheel baby and it turns us all! Can't wait for the Euro Tour!

PJ_Soul

Judging from where the member numbers are now, there are around 40,000 new members in the past two years alone, and I'd be willing to bet that the drop date for memberships is pretty low at this point. Yeah, the number if tix Vs fans wanting them has to be pretty small. No matter what the method is there will.always be a lot of disappointed members. The only thing that would fix that is if the band did more shows.

Ledbetterman10

mcgruff10 said:

Lottery yes. Ga, no

Yeah same here

helplessdancer

my brother is my new concert ticket buddy

PJStatTracker

It does seem like there are wayyyy more pro-lottery people now than there were when it was introduced. If this poll had been taken back then, results would've been drastically different so it can't be all that bad!

breath123

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Zod

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Wouldn't make a big difference. Most people are complaining they aren't getting their first/second preference. One pair per tour wouldn't change that, because the current system only gives you one first preference (sort of two because there's two lotteries per show). It's basically the same thing. You only get extra tickets when the people who chose it as #1/#2 all got their tickets. You only get extra tickets if you select other shows that had more tickets that people who selected that as the show they wanted to go to.

The lottery system only rolls over the extra tickets when there isn't enough demand for 1st/2nd preference to use 'em all up. So it's pretty much a wash using 1 pair per tour except the preference system gives people access to shows that had extra tickets.

I don't think people really get how it works or realize the ticket problems are related to a lack of supply moreso than the lottery system itself.

backseatLover12

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Agreed. Everyone wins at least that one show.

pjsteelerfan

backseatLover12 said:

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Agreed. Everyone wins at least that one show.

They are never going to guarantee everyone a ticket to a show.

backseatLover12

pjsteelerfan said:

backseatLover12 said:

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Agreed. Everyone wins at least that one show.

They are never going to guarantee everyone a ticket to a show.

Not guarantee…. limit. They can never guarantee.

pjsteelerfan

backseatLover12 said:

pjsteelerfan said:

backseatLover12 said:

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Agreed. Everyone wins at least that one show.

They are never going to guarantee everyone a ticket to a show.

Not guarantee…. limit.

OK, they are never going to able to make it so everyone wins at least one show.

backseatLover12

pjsteelerfan said:

backseatLover12 said:

pjsteelerfan said:

backseatLover12 said:

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Agreed. Everyone wins at least that one show.

They are never going to guarantee everyone a ticket to a show.

Not guarantee…. limit.

OK, they are never going to able to make it so everyone wins at least one show.

How 'bout one show or no show, that's what I'm saying, rather than multiple wins by one guy and no shows won by another guy. It's fair.

PJ_Soul

backseatLover12 said:

pjsteelerfan said:

backseatLover12 said:

pjsteelerfan said:

backseatLover12 said:

breath123 said:

I think we should go back to one show per tour per member. They can lottery until their hearts content with whatever tickets are leftover.

Agreed. Everyone wins at least that one show.

They are never going to guarantee everyone a ticket to a show.

Not guarantee…. limit.

OK, they are never going to able to make it so everyone wins at least one show.

How 'bout one show or no show, that's what I'm saying, rather than multiple wins by one guy and no shows won by another guy. It's fair.

You'd end up.with the same result though. A bunch of people shut out of high demand shows, and then a bunch of people going to several shows when they enter for the hypothetical second lottery of left over tickets for the lower demand shows.