Ticketing basics: holdbacks
What are holdbacks?
“Holdbacks” is an industry term for live event tickets that are withheld from the inventory that’s made available to the general public. These tickets can be "held back" for a broad array of reasons.
Here are some real world examples:
A rock band offers members of their fan club access to tickets to their shows before the general on-sale, because they want to reward their most loyal fans (and performances are the most fun when the biggest possible proportion of the audience consists of committed fans.)
An author plans a book talk at a concert hall and partners with an independent bookstore to offer a dedicated block of tickets to its loyalty rewards program members.
An opera reserves a block of tickets for season ticket subscribers.
A country singer’s tour promoter negotiates a partnership with a credit card company—cardholders have early presale access to a certain number of tickets. In exchange for this early access, the credit card company covers some of the marketing expenses associated with the show.
A mid-size concert hall books a contemporary classical string quartet. The venue is unsure how much demand there will be for tickets, so they put the ground level seats on sale but don’t offer seats in the balcony for the initial sale. If demand remains low, the venue doesn’t need to spend extra staffing costs for the full space. If it turns out that demand is strong, they may open up the balcony after the initial onsale.
A K-pop group offers members of its fan club tickets before the general population. The legions of fan club members actually buy up all the tickets, and so there is never an on-sale to the general public.
A promoter and ticketing service reserves a certain portion of inventory for ticket buyers located within a certain radius of the venue (to limit access to inventory for commercial resellers located out of town).
An R&B artist is performing at an arena. In the process of preparing for the tour, changes are made to the stage and sound configuration which frees up some additional seats that are put on sale a few weeks before the event.
Why are we talking about this now?
Recent ticketing controversies have surfaced consumer frustration with high prices (including fees), complicated on-sale procedures, and difficulty acquiring tickets. That’s created an opening for parties who have long sought to limit or restrict holdbacks to claim that holdbacks generally are a major part of the reason for high prices or difficulty accessing tickets. But that claim doesn’t really hold up to scrutiny.
How do artists feel about holdbacks?
As a general principle, artists know their fans the best, and it makes the most sense to allow artists the ability to make the choices that they feel are best for their specific fan community and their values, which at times includes holdbacks. As with all aspects of ticketing, artists with the most leverage have the most ability to negotiate for their preferred arrangements with venues, promoters, and ticketing firms.
Not all holdbacks make sense for every artist, presenting organization, or venue. Some artists might object on principle to partnerships with a corporate presale partner, while for other artists the tradeoff might be worth it, if it allows them to upgrade the production budget without further raising ticket prices. And of course, most performers and promoters will never be in a position to negotiate a deal with Verizon or Capitol One. As pop star Lorde has written , touring margins are thin, and artists are typically trying to balance a range of new challenges while still trying to serve fans as best they can.
Does Regulation of holdbacks rein in Ticketmaster’s monopoly in any way?
No. Every piece of legislation we’ve seen at the state and federal levels regarding holdbacks has applied equally to all venues, promoters and ticketing services.
Who thinks holdbacks are problematic?
The biggest opposition to holdbacks comes from secondary sellers. That includes ticket brokers and resale sites like StubHub, Seatgeek, and Vivid Seats. It’s easy to understand why: holdbacks—whatever the reason they’re employed— inherently limit resellers’ access to inventory. They can’t resell tickets at inflated prices (and charge big fees) for tickets if they can’t first buy those tickets via a public on-sale. That’s why secondary sellers have advanced legislation at the state and federal level to either limit the amount of ticket inventory that can be held back, or require disclosure of the specific number of tickets that are going on sale.
Wait, what’s wrong with disclosure of numbers?
Here’s what Pearl Jam said on the issue, in a 2020 letter opposing the BOSS Act, a failed piece of legislation addressing the issue:
“This hurts consumers more than it will help, because consumers don’t make purchasing decisions based on how many tickets are available—bulk purchasers like professional resellers do. Many times in final planning, after tickets have gone on-sale, we are able to create additional ticket opportunities. Artists need to retain this flexibility, for example, to open “obstructed view” seats after a concert nears sellout. We have found this to be beneficial to true fans.”
Pearl Jam’s view, shared by many artists, venues, and promoters is that resellers are a key factor driving up prices and so keeping tickets away from resellers must be a core goal. Forcing artists to share data that helps resellers would only make problems worse.
Even President Biden seems to have conflated the issues. When discussing a proposed Junk Fees Act, Biden has mentioned “holdback transparency” as something that should be included along with fee caps and all-in pricing. This is especially confusing because whatever you think of holdbacks, they certainly don’t have anything to do with junk fees. Inclusion of measures that effectively make it easier for bulk resellers to access inventory could result in higher prices paid by consumers. Focusing on holdbacks could make it impossible for the artist community to support proposed reforms, and make it harder to achieve better outcomes.
Are there cases where holdbacks are unambiguously bad?
Potentially. Here’s a couple real world examples.
An artists’ management team holds back a certain amount of the ticket inventory from general on-sale and then place those tickets on the secondary market without ever having offered them on-sale to the general population, without any disclosure.
A large venue holds back a significant inventory of very good seats for its own purposes, which include giveaways to industry friends and local bigwigs. Some of those insiders end up selling these tickets for big profits, and none of that money makes it to the artist or her team.
These things have happened, and could merit a specific targeted response—and artist groups could potentially be supportive of reining in these practices. At the same time, it’s also important to understand that they also constitute edge cases—the majority of use cases for holdbacks are benign.