Debate contribution: Dynamic Pricing
Debate contribution by Mr Declan McAleer on .
- MLA
- Mr Declan McAleer
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 16 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Dynamic Pricing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4532710
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I touched on the issue last week in a Member's statement, so I welcome the motion. While the practice of dynamic pricing has come into focus following the exorbitant prices charged for Oasis tickets, it is not a new phenomenon. It was disgraceful that, a few Saturdays ago, Oasis fans, including me, my children and thousands of others, waited online for hours to get tickets for the gig at Croke Park, only for the prices to rocket within hours and without warning. I was faced with a choice of standing or seated tickets in the range of €400 to nearly €600, which is way beyond the range of my family and of the vast majority of people. Colm made the important point that you cannot go off-peak. There are only two gigs. It is not like when you go to a hotel, choose an airline or pick your time to go somewhere. You cannot go when it is off-peak; there are only two gigs, so you are very restricted.
As I said, while it is not a new phenomenon, the Oasis issue has put a spotlight on it. I know that it has happened with other acts. My colleague Louise O'Reilly TD, who sits in the Dáil, has been highlighting the issue for a while. In my case, the tickets were not just for me but for my children, who do not understand how the prices rocketed. The bottom line is that you need to know what the prices are before you join the queue. The prices should be advertised, and everybody should have an equal chance to buy a ticket. Dynamic pricing, in my mind, is not that different from ticket touting. The practice needs to stop among ticket providers and promoters. It has left a bad taste in people's mouths. The president of my party, Mary Lou McDonald TD, made the point that working-class people have been thrown under a bus by Oasis. As Matthew O'Toole said, their fan base is mostly derived from working-class communities. I welcome the Competition and Markets Authority investigation of the sale of tickets for the Oasis concerts. I understand that the issue is also being reviewed by the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) in the South of Ireland. The CMA investigation will look at the possibility of unfair commercial practice and whether people were given clear and timely information or whether they felt under pressure to purchase tickets, at short notice, at a higher rate than expected. I welcome the call in the motion for the CMA:
"as part of its investigation ... to provide recommendations on how ticket providers and promoters could be prohibited from engaging in dynamic pricing."
In conclusion, to anyone who attempted to buy those tickets a few Saturdays ago, 'Don't Look Back in Anger' but share your views with the CMA. That could involve sharing WhatsApp messages or screen grabs. It is important that that is done. There are only three days left — it closes on 19 September — for anyone who was caught up in this and who feels hard done by to take part in the investigation. I commend today's motion.
528 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 (0.89).
- 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 | 0.06 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | 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 | 0.51 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.20 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.11 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.09 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.08 |
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.