The Role of the Patron
Adam Natale
During our last Community Design Session in MN, I saw some topics arise that dealt with what ticket buyers would probably want to have in a system, but that companies didn't really consider/want to consider. As ATHENA is about infrastructure and UI will be determined by the companies using the software, I understand that we may not need the patrons' voice in the initial discussions regarding software requirements. However, I think that we are limiting our worldview by not *thinking* like a patron, and I'd like to start a discussion/bring up some topics that ticket sellers might not think about, but that buyers/patrons do.
One topic that we explored, and that Jamye at Theatre Bay Area was also concerned about, was ticket exchanges. Most folks at the CDS "red-dotted" this item, meaning they did not think it would be necessary to include in the ATHENA Tix software, at least not in the initial version. Jamye brought up the fact that ticket exchanges take a lot of phone time and could possibly be mitigated through software that had a very specific workflow to process such a transaction. Once CDS attendees realized that exchanges could be done this way, they agreed that it would free up a significant chunk of their staff's time (even up to 1/3rd!). As a subscriber to multiple theaters, exchanges are something I would much rather take care of online. If I never had to deal with box office staff over the phone (or even through email), I'd save myself time, the theater's time, and I wouldn't feel like I was being bothersome trying to exchange a ticket.
So, if we were to create a workflow for this, we could think about things like....
- How many exchanges a ticketholder could process per ticket/order.
- When the deadline/window is for permissible exchanges.
- If exchanges had to be approved by staff.
- If there is a charge for exchanges (this could be a HUGE revenue source for theaters, as it is for airlines!).
- How seating changes would be handled.
Etc etc etc....
But, what other areas do theater staff freak out about that ticket buyers would love to see in a system we're using?
- Refunds
- Ticket fees noted up front. (I encourage everyone to read TicketMaster's new blog, which discusses their new strategy regarding this, as well as some other topics -- http://blog.ticketmaster.com)
- Seating Changes (ie, checking to see if better seats are available on the day of a performance, a la airline seating)
- SeatGuru (something that tells you how good/bad a seat is -- like http://www.seatguru.com)
- Searching multiple dates for a performance at once to try and find the best seats (instead of searching one performance at a time)
Now, I completely understand that there are a lot of things patrons want that might not be good to have. The SeatGuru idea, for example, could result in overly high expectations that cannot be met. That equals more disgruntled patrons and customer service issues. At the same time, it would be good to DISCUSS these things. In many cases, it's about considering what software CAN DO that we are currently afraid of doing because of the customer service issues we encounter (refunds, exchanges, telling people how good/bad their seats are). But, the more ways we can 1) help our patrons make informed decisions, 2) make the ticketing process not only easy, but fun, and 3) reduce the amount of time we have to spend with them on the phone/email, the better.
(By the way, I'm not sold that something like SeatGuru would be a bad idea. I understand how showing a view of the stage from each seat/section would create unreasonable expectations, but this does not do that. It specifically has details on seat measurements and how close you are to the restroom, galley, etc. Knowing if there is a bar or a pole in front of certain seats that could obstruct a view would be helpful. And, if you're asking the ticket seller/box office those questions already, then why can't you just put it online?)
What else do we think patrons want? When you buy a ticket -- whether to a performance, concert, etc. -- what elements frustrate you as a ticket buyer? Let's start there and then work backwards to see if it's something that could be solved by software.
Looking forward to further discussion.....
--
Adam J. Natale
Director of Membership & Program Development
Fractured Atlas
888-692-7878 ext. 203
212-277-8025 (Fax)
adam....@fracturedatlas.org
Drew McManus
SEAT EXCHANGES: I think this would be a great feature although it
would likely require a good bit of programming time plus it would
seem to indicate individual seat selection, which is a feature I
thought wasn't going to be included in the initial dev cycle, has
that
changed?
SEAT GURU: I do think there's some real issues with subjectivity but
at the very least, having the ability to notate obstructed and
partially obstructed views should be notated on certain seats.
SEARCHING MULTIPLE DATES: WE spent a good bit of time in the Venture
Platform dev cycle working on event management and multiple
occurrences of the same performance and came up with what I think is
a pretty good system than incorporates all of the reoccurring dates
under a single event entry. It also provides the ability to change
time/venue location/ticket price/ticket purchase link for each
reoccurring instance. We discovered that within the search feature, it
automatically pulled up multiple occurrences when users searched
individual events. Granted, we weren't putting together a box office
module, but an event management module. But there might be something
there worth considering.
Drew
On Aug 26, 4:47 pm, Adam Natale <adam.nat...@fracturedatlas.org>
wrote:
>
> During our last Community Design Session in MN, I saw some topics arise that dealt with what ticket buyers would probably want to have in a system, but that companies didn't really consider/want to consider. As ATHENA is about infrastructure and UI will be determined by the companies using the software, I understand that we may not need the patrons' voice in the initial discussions regarding software requirements. However, I think that we are limiting our worldview by not *thinking* like a patron, and I'd like to start a discussion/bring up some topics that ticket sellers might not think about, but that buyers/patrons do.
>
> One topic that we explored, and that Jamye at Theatre Bay Area was also concerned about, was ticket exchanges. Most folks at the CDS "red-dotted" this item, meaning they did not think it would be necessary to include in the ATHENA Tix software, at least not in the initial version. Jamye brought up the fact that ticket exchanges take a lot of phone time and could possibly be mitigated through software that had a very specific workflow to process such a transaction. Once CDS attendees realized that exchanges could be done this way, they agreed that it would free up a significant chunk of their staff's time (even up to 1/3rd!). As a subscriber to multiple theaters, exchanges are something I would much rather take care of online. If I never had to deal with box office staff over the phone (or even through email), I'd save myself time, the theater's time, and I wouldn't feel like I was being bothersome trying to exchange a ticket.
>
> So, if we were to create a workflow for this, we could think about things like....
>
> - How many exchanges a ticketholder could process per ticket/order.
> - When the deadline/window is for permissible exchanges.
> - If exchanges had to be approved by staff.
> - If there is a charge for exchanges (this could be a HUGE revenue source for theaters, as it is for airlines!).
> - How seating changes would be handled.
>
> Etc etc etc....
>
> But, what other areas do theater staff freak out about that ticket buyers would love to see in a system we're using?
>
> - Refunds
>
> - Seating Changes (ie, checking to see if better seats are available on the day of a performance, a la airline seating)
>
> - Searching multiple dates for a performance at once to try and find the best seats (instead of searching one performance at a time)
>
> Now, I completely understand that there are a lot of things patrons want that might not be good to have. The SeatGuru idea, for example, could result in overly high expectations that cannot be met. That equals more disgruntled patrons and customer service issues. At the same time, it would be good to DISCUSS these things. In many cases, it's about considering what software CAN DO that we are currently afraid of doing because of the customer service issues we encounter (refunds, exchanges, telling people how good/bad their seats are). But, the more ways we can 1) help our patrons make informed decisions, 2) make the ticketing process not only easy, but fun, and 3) reduce the amount of time we have to spend with them on the phone/email, the better.
>
> (By the way, I'm not sold that something like SeatGuru would be a bad idea. I understand how showing a view of the stage from each seat/section would create unreasonable expectations, but this does not do that. It specifically has details on seat measurements and how close you are to the restroom, galley, etc. Knowing if there is a bar or a pole in front of certain seats that could obstruct a view would be helpful. And, if you're asking the ticket seller/box office those questions already, then why can't you just put it online?)
>
> What else do we think patrons want? When you buy a ticket -- whether to a performance, concert, etc. -- what elements frustrate you as a ticket buyer? Let's start there and then work backwards to see if it's something that could be solved by software.
>
> Looking forward to further discussion.....
>
> --
> Adam J. Natale
> Director of Membership & Program Development
> Fractured Atlas
> 888-692-7878 ext. 203
> 212-277-8025 (Fax)
Leah Cooper
Exchanges probably necessitate customizable business rules related to
upgrades. For example, a season ticket holder who bought the Thursday
night package wants to switch to a Friday night, so they probably need
to pay an upgrade fee, and they need to be told they can't have their
usual seat. And, like TicketMaster's new policy, the patron needs to
know this before they make the switch. I think the complexity of
pricing shift based on changing days and/or section are at least one
part of why box office staff freak out.
I think the SeatGuru is interesting so long as it's clearly not
focusing too much on sightlines but perhaps more on comfort and
amenities. Some patrons care much more about leg room, proximity to
the aisle, etc. than sightlines and they'd probably appreciate those
details.
Justin L. Karr
Most of these are out-of-scope for the first release or are really
questions for how ATHENA is implemented and not what is in the system
itself. (The system must support refunds somehow, but whether or not to
let customers have them easily is really up to the org using it.)
This big-picture, long-term thinking is great though because it helps us
frame some technical choices we have to make now. For example, a
feature that came up in Minnesota was...
MULTI-STAGE PURCHASES in which a patron reserves tickets over the phone
or on the web and then purchases them at the venue at the time of
performance.
This is a cool feature that makes remote advance cash sales possible. In
an environment where orgs 1. trust their patrons and/or 2. do not have
serious inventory limit issues (they don't sell out or have flexible
capacity), this could be great.
While explicitly supporting this isn't something we had planned on,
thinking about multi-stage purchases and whether or not our system could
support them was really valuable.
A lot of these features Adam brings up are dependent on reserved
seating, but they are things we should think about now.
Here are some more:
CUSTOMER REVIEWS OF VENUES: Sort of like SeatGuru but for the entire
venue. Maybe segmented by category (cleanliness, staff, concessions,
sightlines, etc.). I like this because I think it helps justify higher
ticket prices on nicer venues.
CUSTOMER REVIEWS OF PERFORMANCES: Danger zone. Some love this idea and
some hate it. I think it comes down to how much you trust your patrons
and how many you think you can get to participate.
FLEX-PASSES AND/OR GIFT CARDS: Really just an additional
method-of-payment, but one that has inventory implications. If you sell
more GCs than you have seats, you have a problem.
SELF-FORMING GROUPS: I _love_ this one, but it might be hard to
implement. One patron guarantees X number of seats and that patron's
friends buy them individually from that allocation. Some possible
broker-abuse issues here.
SPLIT METHODS OF PAYMENT: Some cash, some card or two cards on an order.
TRANSFERABLE TICKETS: Buy a ticket and transfer it to someone else.
Lets that person be identified for admission or customer service at the
event. An easy idea to call "good" but rife with possible broker-abuse
issues.
Justin
--
Justin L. Karr
Director of Technology Programs
Fractured Atlas
o:212.277.8020 c:917.328.6279
Ryan Price
--
Visit: http://athena.fracturedatlas.org/tix
You received this email because you are subscribed to the "ATHENA Tix Planners" group on Google Groups.
To post, email: athena-ti...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe, email: athena-tix-plan...@googlegroups.com
For more, visit: http://groups.google.com/group/athena-tix-planning?hl=en