Member's statement: Dynamic Pricing
Member's statement by Mr Declan McAleer on .
- MLA
- Mr Declan McAleer
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 9 September 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Dynamic Pricing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4511075
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I take the opportunity to speak about dynamic pricing. As you know, that is the practice by which the market value of tickets and products rapidly increases with demand. Last Saturday morning, along with thousands of other Oasis fans, I logged on at 7.30 to try to get tickets for the gig. I started at number 58,516 in the queue, and, by 10.30 am, three hours later, I had managed to get to number one. When I thought that it was my moment to get the coveted tickets, I was faced with the choice of — again, this happened not just to me; it happened to thousands of other fans — standing tickets in the range of €420 to €574 or seated tickets going from €542 to €574. A lot of fans here and across the water in Britain are very frustrated. It has left a bad taste in people's mouth. Indeed, the president of my party, Mary Lou McDonald, has called it out, saying that it has had a disproportionate impact on working-class people, who can least afford to pay for such tickets, especially given that the support base for Oasis in Ireland and Britain is mostly in working-class communities. That unfair practice needs to stop. Consumers need to know the price ranges when an event is advertised, know that they are fixed and know that everyone has a fair chance to buy a ticket. Basically, the practice needs to end. I welcome the fact that the Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) is investigating dynamic pricing in relation to the Oasis concert. You will all have received correspondence from the CMA in recent days. The investigation is looking at whether unfair commercial practices took place, whether people were given clear and timely information to explain that tickets could be subject to so-called dynamic pricing and whether they felt under pressure to buy tickets at short notice at a higher price than they understood they would be.
As part of the investigation, the CMA invites people who bought or attempted to buy tickets to share their views with it. That could involve sharing, for example, screen grabs or any information that they might have. The important thing is that the window for submitting that information and participating in the investigation is between 5 and 19 September, which is 10 days from today.
I take the opportunity and the platform in the Assembly to call on anyone who is listening in or watching or is in the Chamber and was impacted by that practice to have their say and to share their experiences with the CMA on its website. It takes only a few minutes. Hopefully, by taking part in the CMA investigation, the public and especially those affected can help to bring the unfair practice of dynamic pricing to an end.
471 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.04 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.84).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.84 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.99 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.37 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.34 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.13 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.11 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.05 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 10:57 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.