
The Oasis comeback: What’s The Story?
While the Gallaghers are famous for hitting the headlines, it’s usually more for rock ‘n’ roll star behaviour rather than consumer rights grumbles.
All around the world, people were glued to phones and computers on Friday evening and Saturday morning, hoping to secure tickets for the comeback of the century. The social media teases of an announcement, the big reveal, releasing extra dates…this was a masterplan campaign, but the supersonic demand opened all kinds of avenues for those involved to take advantage of consumers. The dynamic pricing that took fans by surprise at the eleventh hour, increasing little by little as availability dwindled, is already generating discussion (and government attention) about tactics usually seen within the travel industry. The band have subsequently issued a statement saying they were not aware of the use of dynamic pricing. Many of those who managed to book have paid more than expected just to be here now for this cultural event – but if you’re selling to consumers, remember you’re not beyond the law just because you’re selling something so sought-after.
Pre-contract information
When supplying to individuals, traders must comply with various consumer protection laws: this is not the same playing field as business-to-business trading where bargaining power can justify some one-sided positions. Consumer protection laws include making available in advance certain details, such as how pricing is calculated, any additional fees and whether cancellation will be possible. Last week’s media frenzy certainly skimped on some of these details, even after fans spent hours in a Ticketmaster queue and were presented with limited information at the point of purchase.
Let’s hope there won’t be a need to consider consumer remedies if Liam and Noel have artistic differences before the tour’s over.
Misleading consumer practices
Consumer law also prohibits aggressive or disingenuous tactics when advertising to individuals. The incoming Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, (DMCCA), due to take effect in phases later this year and early in 2025, will replace the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 but many of the same rules will be preserved.
A commercial practice is an act or omission, regardless of when it takes place, that relates to the promotion or supply of goods, services or digital content. Commercial practices are unfair if they would cause the average consumer to make a decision about a purchase, (including a subscription or a switch to a new supplier), that they would not otherwise have made due to:
- misleading actions or omissions
- aggressive practices
- failure to include key information in marketing materials.
Some practices are considered always unfair, such as false endorsement claims, bait advertising, (enticing customers with the promise of unavailable products), and false representations on availability. There is considerable overlap with the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) rules on running promotions. The ASA has already received over 400 complaints about the misleading aspects of this situation.
The shift to online shopping has given traders much more scope to act unethically should they choose to do so – no doubt we have all experienced manipulative ‘dark patterns’ of websites that urge purchase before a countdown clock runs out, default to premium postage charges or use persistent pop-ups to nag for personal data. Was Ticketmaster’s “inventory is now limited and not all ticket prices are available” message a factual update or intended to urge on those spending their Saturday in a queue?
Further, the law expects traders to not take advantage of vulnerable consumers who may be more easily misled due to age, health or credulity. Whilst the scope of “vulnerable consumers” will be expanded by the DMCCA, (to cover temporary circumstances such as recent bereavement or job loss), it won’t be broad enough to cover over-eager fans hitting “buy now” when facing the pressure of a live sales screen.
Resale tickets
Secondary ticket sales are hard to police at the best of times, despite changes brought in by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, but touts are particularly likely to push their luck knowing how badly people want Oasis tickets. People could pay massively over the odds, (and, worst case scenario, not receive genuine tickets). Whilst the rules mentioned above – and various other protections - would still apply, the challenge here will likely be identifying and engaging with rogue sellers.
Personal data
Aside from setting up a Ticketmaster account to enable queuing and purchase, fans have signed up to links advertising pre-sale access and entered promotions to try and win tickets. In modern life we share personal data every day, especially when browsing online, so what’s the concern? In the same way as sellers can take advantage of the demand for tickets by increasing prices and adding unnecessary fees, they can collect more personal data than is strictly necessary and fans are likely to ‘agree’ to any suggested data collection in hopes of obtaining tickets.
Those collecting personal data are bound by a raft of obligations as data controllers, including GDPR principles of collecting only the data they need, processing it fairly, and being transparent about how it may be used or shared, (which requires making a suitable privacy policy easily available). As with consumer protection laws, those involved may be taking a view on whether they can apply lower-than-usual compliance standards when fans are so keen to hand over data.
The UK’s data protection regulator, the ICO, is already looking into Oasis’ own pre-sale sign-up that suggested consent to receiving text marketing was a condition of entry. Sign-up was actually possible without agreeing to this, but the pre-ticked opt-in is a clear breach of direct marketing rules - and that consent would not be valid under GDPR as it was not freely given. The ICO would be entitled to issue a fine and other reprimands should it choose to do so.
Ambush marketing
As the tour creeps nearer, enterprising individuals and businesses will try to ride on the coattails of the Oasis brand. Using any trade marks owned by Oasis and their team, unless officially authorised, will constitute trade mark infringement and could lead to legal action. These situations open up more scope for misleading consumers and selling unauthorised memorabilia that may be low quality. Do not plan any sales or marketing activity that may suggest you are endorsed by someone else’s brand if that’s not the case.
Headline thoughts
Basically, demand was so high in the circumstances, consumers were unlikely to be deterred by unfair commercial practices if they saw their chance of tickets slide away. Some might say the threshold of what’s acceptable seems very different when the prize is so coveted – and the hardcore will acquiesce to whatever conditions if it ‘secures the goods’.
Maybe the Gallaghers will live forever and there’ll be further tours for those who missed out if fans can roll with it and don’t look back in anger. It will be interesting to see if the media attention on ticket sales is reflected in attention from consumer and data protection regulators in investigating any complaints.