Debate contribution: Dynamic Pricing
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Frew on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Frew
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 16 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Dynamic Pricing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4532681
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I welcome the motion: this is a topical issue, and it is right that the Assembly should debate it. There are times, however, when I believe that dynamic pricing is a good thing. It can add competition, and it could lead to consumers getting a better deal. So, I am not necessarily against dynamic pricing. The issue here — it is referenced in the motion, which we support — is the lack of transparency. Add in the fact that fans are involved. They are not just consumers; they are fans. What does "fans" mean? It means fanatical supporters. That brings in a completely different dynamic. People who queue up to buy tickets are not necessarily buying tickets for themselves. The chances are that they are buying tickets for their friends or their children, and that is where the emotion comes into it. I agree 100% that, as soon as you hit the button on your computer to enter that queue, you should know exactly the price that you will pay for the tickets. In many cases, it is not just one ticket — it could be up to four tickets. That means a lot of money going out of a family home. It is vital that the Competition and Markets Authority leads this investigation. As has been stated here, I encourage anyone who has been affected by the Oasis ticketing experience to feed into that Competition and Markets Authority investigation by this Thursday 19 September. It would be good to hear from all those people. The Oasis ticket experience has been the catalyst for the investigation. However, Oasis is not the only band, and Ticketmaster is not the only company, that uses dynamic pricing. When we talk about fanatical support in the entertainment industry, you can see where dynamic pricing can do damage. There should an investigation into it and the potential for further regulation. Businesses should, of course, be able to match supply and demand. I do not think that any of us is talking about regulating an open and free market, but it is not right that you go into a queue or a system where you do not know the price of the product that you hope to buy. That has a massive impact. Imagine a parent trying to buy tickets for their children. After hours and hours of queueing and of their young ones asking, "Are we there yet? Have we got the tickets yet?", they get to the point where they see the cost and realise that it is completely and utterly unaffordable. That could bring catastrophe to a household in more ways that one. The emotion involved, which can build up in young people who need entertainment and want to go and see their favourite bands — their heroes — can do massive damage. This issue should be looked at. The Competition and Markets Authority should investigate to ensure that people who work hard for their money and who spend their money on the entertainment business — they pay Ticketmaster a lot of money, and they pay bands a lot of money to go to see them — are not short-changed for following their dreams and wanting to see their heroes.
537 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: 0.03 (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 (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.04 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.61 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.37 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.01 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:03 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.