Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, one of which was Upheld. The other was resolved informally with the advertiser’s agreement to make changes.
Ad description
A podcast ad for Viagogo, heard on 22 April 2024, during an episode of the Political Currency podcast. The hosts stated, “This episode is sponsored by Viagogo, the world’s leading marketplace that helps fans safely buy and sell tickets to their favourite live events […] Viagogo say they provide a regulated, safe and secure marketplace with a range of robust, industry leading safeguards in place to protect consumers. Did you know that over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value? […] It sounds like Viagogo might be the solution next time I need cheaper tickets to the hottest shows in town […] If you were to buy tickets for an event on Viagogo, their guarantee means that in the very rare instance that an issue arises, full refunds will be issued or replacement tickets of comparable value at no extra charge […] Viagogo provide flexibility and choice when buying tickets allowing you to safely get in the room at your favourite live events, whether you miss the original on-sale date or simply don’t have the time to queue for hours online.”
Issue
FanFair Alliance challenged whether the claim “over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value” was misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
Viagogo GmbH t/a Viagogo said that the claim “over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value” was based on data covering the whole of 2023, which they considered appropriate substantiation for a claim made in April 2024. “Face value” was calculated by inputting the base price of a ticket, excluding booking fees, service charges, delivery fees or any other charges, and then applying a 20% increase. They said that 20% of the base ticket price was the average additional cost paid by consumers for those additional fees and charges when buying tickets from their original seller, based on an independent study. They said the claim compared the Viagogo price, including all fees and charges, against the face value price including the 20% for fees and charges, which they believed was an appropriate like-for-like comparison. On that basis, in 2023, of all UK events for which tickets were sold on Viagogo’s marketplace, 53% had at least one ticket sold at below face value.
Assessment
Upheld
The ad included the claim “over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value”. The ASA considered that consumers would understand the phrase face value to be referring to the price listed on the ticket (the ticket price) when purchased from the original seller, excluding any booking fees or other charges. In that context, we considered that consumers would understand the claim to mean that they would have a reasonable chance to purchase those tickets through Viagogo, below the ticket price. We also noted that the claim referred to “tickets” which we considered implied that more than one ticket was sold below face value per event. The ad also stated that “It sounds like Viagogo might be the solution next time I need cheaper tickets to the hottest shows in town” which we considered reinforced the impression that consumers would likely be able to purchase tickets below the ticket price.
We assessed the evidence provided by Viagogo. We first considered Viagogo’s definition of face value as used to substantiate the claim in the ad, which was calculated by adding a 20% increase to the ticket price to account for booking fees, service charges, delivery fees or any other charges the original ticket purchaser may have paid. We also understood that, in addition to that 20% increase, Viagogo added a delivery fee to the purchase, once the consumer had selected their preferred delivery method. We considered that definition did not reflect consumer’s understanding of the face value of a ticket, because it included the various booking fees and other charges paid by consumers. We also understood that it did not reflect Viagogo’s own use of the term face value on their website, where it related to the ticket price. Because of the disparity between the ticket price and Viagogo’s definition of face value, we considered that the data provided was not relevant in supporting the claim as it would be understood by consumers.
Notwithstanding the above, under Viagogo’s definition, 53% of events listed on the website had sold at least one ticket below face value. We considered, however, that one ticket per event was not a significant proportion of tickets and, as such, did not represent a reasonable chance for consumers to purchase tickets below face value. We further considered that, because consumers would expect more than one ticket to be sold below face value per event, that implied claim also was not substantiated by the information provided.
For the above reasons, we considered that the claim, as it would be understood by consumers, had not been substantiated and was therefore misleading.
On that point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Viagogo GmbH t/a Viagogo to ensure that they did not mislead consumers by claiming that over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value, if that was not the case.
