[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: bait and switch



In a message dated 03/12/2002 12:56:07 PM Central Standard Time, 
TheWho-Digest-Owner@igtc.com writes:


> I did not snooze on trying to get the "up-close" tickets.
> I *did* decide to pass on the mid and rear section seats that were available
> (the *ONLY* thing available)...BUT, I'm *NOT* bitching about that.  *That*
> part was my choice.  Not being able to purchase up-close tix despite being
> there at the start of the sale, was *not* my choice.
> 
> Ya know, it just strikes me.....isn't this an example of the classic "Bait
> and hook" advertisement that is illegal in this country?
> Advertise a product at a reasonable price, and then not have the product
> available for purchase, thus rendering consumer with only options of
> purchasing a lessor product?
> What's yo answer to *that* !??
> 
> 
You have crystalized my point about the inherent unfairness associated with 
ticket brokers.  This is why I have continued to participate in this 
argument.  What is inherently wrong is just what happened to you- someone 
doing absolutely everything possible to get prime seats but being shut out by 
brokers.  Can those camping in line at the box office get 1st row seats, 
even?  If not, we know why.  At least brokers should have to work like the 
rest of us to get tickets rather than getting them via "deals" with the box 
office or with TM.  And, yes, I follow the bait and switch angle and agree 
completely.

kevin mc