Potential Ticketmaster Draw Issues

otter

How do we know we lost for sure?  I didn’t get any email.  Am I out?

GlowGirl

jwhjr17 said:

It's a completely separate draw for each and every show.  The results of any other show have zero bearing on who is selected.  There is no fair/unfair.  As long as you're actually in the draw and not just registered for Verified Fan, everyone has the same chance of being selected.  Unless a recap of final results using the full spectrum of winners vs. entries etc. for each show is released, speculating based on a small subset of results reported by members online will never represent what happened. The complaining and conspiracy theories are fun to read though.  Carry on.

**Edit MSG only shows where result of another show mattered as you could only win for one of the MSG shows**

It is supposed to be a completely separate draw for each and every show - but do you think that is what actually happened. Last year there were several mistakes that TM made with the lottery draw and assigning seats - so trust in their competence to do this correctly is not a given.

Ledbetterdays

It just feels like I could do a better job of ticket allocation with a Microsoft Excel spreadhseet then how this goes down every tour. If it's not one thing its another. 

patkelly12

So no more equal opportunity to win tickets. Tickets need to be distributed based on equity. I think everyone can get behind that. 

Ledbetterdays

PJNB said:

Ledbetterdays said:

Based on the general results it seems like, yes, there was some kind of glitch. I say this due to the number of multiple show multiple GA winners vs. people who got shut out completely. That really should not happen statistically. Will it be significant enough for 10 Club to do anything about it? That remains to be seen. They acknowledged the problems much earlier last time and did their best to remedy where possible, but I think the problem in this draw is more subtle and for those of us who got no shows, we may just need to move on to TM.

With priority and seniority issues last year it was very obvious something was wrong. Something like this will be impossible to prove one way or another unless TM just comes out and says whoopsie. It is not like they will come out and show proof how their system works properly. 

I agree with you. I think it was way too obvious last time and this is much harder to pinpoint what exactly they did. Maybe people got bulk shows, maybe once they won they were favored by the algo, maybe they just got non-mathematically possibly lucky. All of this just goes to the point that doing all of these shows in bulk causes problems. Go back to priority listing. No one wants to be a Pearl Jam ticket broker, so lets not go down the route of everyone just choosing all options for all shows. Give members a 3 show max. Allocate those, then open it up.

HailHailVitalogy

I think there’s a happy middle somewhere in the future. Use only first priority, and then random draw for all other shows. Since the two-show-same-city format is becoming the norm, then only allow someone to win GA for one of the two shows in the same city, but still be able to be drawn for seats. But what has happened, happened. They can’t take away shows from anyone who won already. I also find it insane people got shut out of Wrigley with P1 going all the way up to the grandstands behind the poles.

cblock4life

otter said:

How do we know we lost for sure?  I didn’t get any email.  Am I out?

I wouldn’t give up hope until you get your final confirmation on Wednesday.  There were issues with banks etc.  they fixed one members issue so maybe others will get looked at as well.  Hang on till tomorrow.  Good luck 
 

mpedone

Ledbetterdays said:

PJNB said:

Ledbetterdays said:

Based on the general results it seems like, yes, there was some kind of glitch. I say this due to the number of multiple show multiple GA winners vs. people who got shut out completely. That really should not happen statistically. Will it be significant enough for 10 Club to do anything about it? That remains to be seen. They acknowledged the problems much earlier last time and did their best to remedy where possible, but I think the problem in this draw is more subtle and for those of us who got no shows, we may just need to move on to TM.

With priority and seniority issues last year it was very obvious something was wrong. Something like this will be impossible to prove one way or another unless TM just comes out and says whoopsie. It is not like they will come out and show proof how their system works properly. 

I agree with you. I think it was way too obvious last time and this is much harder to pinpoint what exactly they did. Maybe people got bulk shows, maybe once they won they were favored by the algo, maybe they just got non-mathematically possibly lucky. All of this just goes to the point that doing all of these shows in bulk causes problems. Go back to priority listing. No one wants to be a Pearl Jam ticket broker, so lets not go down the route of everyone just choosing all options for all shows. Give members a 3 show max. Allocate those, then open it up.

Unfortunately, unless we all stop going to shows, Ticketmaster has zero incentive to change anything.

mace1229

PJNB said:

Ledbetterdays said:

Based on the general results it seems like, yes, there was some kind of glitch. I say this due to the number of multiple show multiple GA winners vs. people who got shut out completely. That really should not happen statistically. Will it be significant enough for 10 Club to do anything about it? That remains to be seen. They acknowledged the problems much earlier last time and did their best to remedy where possible, but I think the problem in this draw is more subtle and for those of us who got no shows, we may just need to move on to TM.

With priority and seniority issues last year it was very obvious something was wrong. Something like this will be impossible to prove one way or another unless TM just comes out and says whoopsie. It is not like they will come out and show proof how their system works properly. 

I find TM to be a very honest and fair organization. I expect a statement any minute now. 

mace1229

mpedone said:

Ledbetterdays said:

PJNB said:

Ledbetterdays said:

Based on the general results it seems like, yes, there was some kind of glitch. I say this due to the number of multiple show multiple GA winners vs. people who got shut out completely. That really should not happen statistically. Will it be significant enough for 10 Club to do anything about it? That remains to be seen. They acknowledged the problems much earlier last time and did their best to remedy where possible, but I think the problem in this draw is more subtle and for those of us who got no shows, we may just need to move on to TM.

With priority and seniority issues last year it was very obvious something was wrong. Something like this will be impossible to prove one way or another unless TM just comes out and says whoopsie. It is not like they will come out and show proof how their system works properly. 

I agree with you. I think it was way too obvious last time and this is much harder to pinpoint what exactly they did. Maybe people got bulk shows, maybe once they won they were favored by the algo, maybe they just got non-mathematically possibly lucky. All of this just goes to the point that doing all of these shows in bulk causes problems. Go back to priority listing. No one wants to be a Pearl Jam ticket broker, so lets not go down the route of everyone just choosing all options for all shows. Give members a 3 show max. Allocate those, then open it up.

Unfortunately, unless we all stop going to shows, Ticketmaster has zero incentive to change anything.

If we stop going to shows, TM has more tickets to charge premium for. 

Get_Right

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

NewfieintheUSA

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

on2legs

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

SHZA

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

Seems that people who hit the jackpot want to crow about that as much as the losers want to complain. Maybe the middle of the road results are underreported 

NewfieintheUSA

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

I've seen all types of results reported, I do every lottery. Comparing this to customer service is false equivalency.

on2legs

SHZA said:

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

Seems that people who hit the jackpot want to crow about that as much as the losers want to complain. Maybe the middle of the road results are underreported 

I'm sure middle of the road results are under reported.  But I would consider middle of the road or 50/50 results in the lottery to be a success. 

PB11041

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

online sampling would almost never be representative without very manicured curation, at its core it over compensates towards people who are heavy users of social media and online forums, which at its absolute best represents about 15-20% of demographic segments.  Then add a situation that is highly contentious like a ticket draw you are going to over compensate for people who are constantly online either sharing every success or every failure looking for validation.  Online sampling is the land of confirmation bias and nutpicking. 

on2legs

NewfieintheUSA said:

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

I've seen all types of results reported, I do every lottery. Comparing this to customer service is false equivalency.

Negative experiences will always draw a more passionate response. 

NewfieintheUSA

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

I've seen all types of results reported, I do every lottery. Comparing this to customer service is false equivalency.

Negative experiences will always draw a more passionate response. 

Agree with that 

know1

SHZA said:

on2legs said:

NewfieintheUSA said:

Get_Right said:

Keep in mind that only a small percentage of members actually post here or on facebook. We are not seeing anything close to the whole picture. Yes, the process could be improved, and yes TM has made major mistakes in the past. It is is an imperfect system, and truthfully, it always has been.

Agreed, but it should be a representative sample 

Not really.  Negative experiences are much more likely to be reported than positive ones.  How many times do you call customer service just to say everything was great?

Seems that people who hit the jackpot want to crow about that as much as the losers want to complain. Maybe the middle of the road results are underreported 

This. I'm one who never mentioned what I got. It's about what I expected, but not quite what I'd hoped and better than I feared. No point in me really talking about it.