Viagogo reprimanded over ticket ‘face value' claims
Viagogo has been reprimanded by the advertising watchdog after claiming that more than half the events listed on its site had tickets selling below face value.
An ad for the ticket resale site, heard in April last year during an episode of the Political Currency podcast, involved the hosts stating: 'This episode is sponsored by Viagogo, the world's leading marketplace that helps fans safely buy and sell tickets to their favourite live events… Did you know that over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value?'
It went on: 'It sounds like Viagogo might be the solution next time I need cheaper tickets to the hottest shows in town.'
FanFair Alliance complained that the claim 'over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value' was misleading.
Viagogo said it calculated 'face value' by starting with 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 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, it told the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
The ASA said: 'We considered that definition did not reflect consumers' 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.'
Further, the ASA noted that under Viagogo's definition, 53% of events listed on the website had sold at least one ticket below face value.
The ASA said: '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.
'For the above reasons, we considered that the claim, as it would be understood by consumers, had not been substantiated and was therefore misleading.'
The ASA added: 'We told 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.'
A Viagogo spokeswoman said: 'The advertisement in question is from last year, has been discontinued and has not aired since then.
'Viagogo is a safe, secure and regulated global online marketplace and we are fully compliant in the UK.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Ladbrokes ads banned over use of ‘Ladbucks' likely to appeal to under-18s
Ads for gambling firm Ladbrokes have been banned for using the term 'Ladbucks', found to resemble gaming references likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s. The TV ad, seen in December, featured a voiceover that stated: 'This is a Ladbuck, the new way to get rewarded at Ladbrokes, and these are some of the 100 million Ladbucks that will be dropping weekly. 'Collect them on our free to play games and choose rewards like free spins, free bets and more … Plus you can even use them to play your favourite games for free in our Ladbucks arcade. Like Fishin Frenzy and Goldstrike.' A Video on Demand ad, seen on Channel 4 around the same time, was the same as the TV ad. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received two complaints that the term 'Ladbucks' was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s. Ladbrokes said the term 'Ladbucks' was chosen as a play on the word Ladbrokes, and because it referenced, through the use of the term bucks, that it had value on the Ladbrokes website. They said the word had no origins in youth culture and believed that it was not of inherent strong appeal to under-18s, and highlighted that both ads had targeting restrictions to reduce the likelihood of children viewing them. The firm said it believed that the term was not associated with any coins from video games which were popular with under-18s, adding that 'V-Bucks' from Fortnite and 'Robux' from Roblox were in-game currencies that had to be purchased before being used to buy in-game items. Further, it did not believe the term 'lad' referred to a boy or young man and said its brand had never been used in that context. The ASA said several online games popular with under-18s, such as Roblox and Fortnite, had their own in-game currencies, which were called Robux and V-Bucks respectively. These currencies, which could be both bought and earnt through gameplay, were depicted as coins, and spent within in-game stores, usually on cosmetic items that enhanced gameplay. According to Ofcom's 2024 report into media use and attitudes, 60% of children aged between three and 17 years gamed online, while 89% of 11 to 18-year-olds gamed online weekly, with categories of games that were most popular including building games, such as Roblox, followed by games played against others, such as Fortnite. The ASA said it considered the term 'Ladbucks', through the suffix 'bucks', had strong similarities to the in-game currencies Robux and V-Bucks. It said the name 'Ladbucks', when considered alongside the imagery and the application of the coin in the ads, was 'depicted in a manner which was similar to features in video games popular with children'. 'We therefore considered the term in the ads was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s and breached the Code,' it said. The watchdog ruled that the ads must not appear again in their current form, adding: 'We told Ladbrokes not to include content in ads that was reflective of youth culture or which had strong appeal to those under 18 years of age.' A spokesman for Entain, which owns Ladbrokes, said: 'We are disappointed by the ASA's ruling on our 'Ladbucks' advertising campaign, and we are seeking an independent review of what we consider to be a flawed decision. 'For example, it is based on an inaccurate comparison with games such as Fortnite or Roblox and their in-game currencies. Entain works extremely carefully to ensure that its advertising does not target or appeal to under-18s. 'We maintain that this was a responsibly created and targeted campaign, pre-approved by Clearcast and only shown after the watershed.'
South Wales Argus
11 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Diesel clothing advert banned for objectifying Katie Price
The ad, which appeared on the Guardian news website on March 26, included an image of Price wearing a bikini and holding a handbag in front of her chest. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received 13 complaints that the ad objectified and sexualised women and featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin. The banned Diesel ad featuring Katie Price (ASA/PA) Diesel said the ad was part of a brand campaign called 'The Houseguests', which was designed to challenge stereotypes and support diversity and inclusion in the fashion industry by reflecting a wide range of body types. It believed the ad was compliant with the advertising rules but said it removed the ad from the Guardian website. The brand said Price was 46 years old and had a body type that was not usually included in high fashion campaigns, explaining that the average age for editorial models was between 16 and 23. Diesel believed the image was a 'celebration of Ms Price's sexuality and empowerment and was not objectifying, degrading or sexualising', and 'showed Ms Price clearly in control in an active and dynamic pose where she proudly showed off her body and the handbag'. Diesel added that Price was 'well-known for her exaggerated appearance and larger-than-life personality and her large lips and breasts formed part of her curated public image', and this 'exaggerated, eccentric and altered appearance' formed part of the creativity of the campaign. Finally, Diesel said although Price was slender, she had excellent muscle tone and was not unhealthily underweight. The Guardian said it received a complaint directly about the ad on April 4 and blocked it from appearing again because it did not consider it complied with their policies. Partly upholding the complaints, the ASA said the bikini only partially covered Price's breasts, and it considered the positioning of the handbag, in front of her stomach with the handle framing her chest, drew viewers' attention to, and emphasised, that part of her body. The ASA said: 'While we acknowledged that Ms Price was shown in a confident and self-assured pose and in control, we considered that because of the positioning of the handbag, which had the effect of emphasising and drawing attention to her breasts, the ad sexualised her in a way that objectified her. 'We therefore considered the ad was likely to cause serious offence, was irresponsible and breached the Code.' The ASA did not uphold complaints about Price appearing to be unhealthily thin, and concluded that the ad was not irresponsible on that basis. The watchdog ruled that the ad must not appear again, adding: 'We told Diesel to ensure their future ads were socially responsible and did not cause serious or widespread offence.' Diesel said: 'Diesel's latest Houseguests campaign continues its tradition of challenging norms and embracing individuality. A key image features model Katie Price, 46, showcasing a body type rarely seen in high fashion, proving that women of all shapes and ages deserve representation. The photo celebrates confidence and empowerment without objectification. 'Shared in over 100 countries, it has not received any regulatory complaints, highlighting Diesel's commitment to respectful, inclusive storytelling.'
Glasgow Times
11 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Diesel clothing advert banned for objectifying Katie Price
The ad, which appeared on the Guardian news website on March 26, included an image of Price wearing a bikini and holding a handbag in front of her chest. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received 13 complaints that the ad objectified and sexualised women and featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin. The banned Diesel ad featuring Katie Price (ASA/PA) Diesel said the ad was part of a brand campaign called 'The Houseguests', which was designed to challenge stereotypes and support diversity and inclusion in the fashion industry by reflecting a wide range of body types. It believed the ad was compliant with the advertising rules but said it removed the ad from the Guardian website. The brand said Price was 46 years old and had a body type that was not usually included in high fashion campaigns, explaining that the average age for editorial models was between 16 and 23. Diesel believed the image was a 'celebration of Ms Price's sexuality and empowerment and was not objectifying, degrading or sexualising', and 'showed Ms Price clearly in control in an active and dynamic pose where she proudly showed off her body and the handbag'. Diesel added that Price was 'well-known for her exaggerated appearance and larger-than-life personality and her large lips and breasts formed part of her curated public image', and this 'exaggerated, eccentric and altered appearance' formed part of the creativity of the campaign. Finally, Diesel said although Price was slender, she had excellent muscle tone and was not unhealthily underweight. The Guardian said it received a complaint directly about the ad on April 4 and blocked it from appearing again because it did not consider it complied with their policies. Partly upholding the complaints, the ASA said the bikini only partially covered Price's breasts, and it considered the positioning of the handbag, in front of her stomach with the handle framing her chest, drew viewers' attention to, and emphasised, that part of her body. The ASA said: 'While we acknowledged that Ms Price was shown in a confident and self-assured pose and in control, we considered that because of the positioning of the handbag, which had the effect of emphasising and drawing attention to her breasts, the ad sexualised her in a way that objectified her. 'We therefore considered the ad was likely to cause serious offence, was irresponsible and breached the Code.' The ASA did not uphold complaints about Price appearing to be unhealthily thin, and concluded that the ad was not irresponsible on that basis. The watchdog ruled that the ad must not appear again, adding: 'We told Diesel to ensure their future ads were socially responsible and did not cause serious or widespread offence.' Diesel said: 'Diesel's latest Houseguests campaign continues its tradition of challenging norms and embracing individuality. A key image features model Katie Price, 46, showcasing a body type rarely seen in high fashion, proving that women of all shapes and ages deserve representation. The photo celebrates confidence and empowerment without objectification. 'Shared in over 100 countries, it has not received any regulatory complaints, highlighting Diesel's commitment to respectful, inclusive storytelling.'
