Debate contribution: Dynamic Pricing
Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on .
- MLA
- Mr Gerry Carroll
- Party at the time
- People Before Profit Alliance
- Date
- 16 September 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Dynamic Pricing
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4532748
Read the official Assembly record
Text
I declare an interest as someone who tries to purchase music tickets when I can. Unfortunately, like the artists in front of me, I am forced to use Ticketmaster. For years, Ticketmaster has acted as a parasitic middle man, fleecing artists and fans alike while contributing absolutely nothing to the music industry. Dynamic pricing experts expect music fans to pay, as we have heard, hundreds of pounds in ticket premiums. The executives line their pockets with cuts of up to 30% from that ticket pricing. The Ticketmaster boss, Michael Rapino, was named as the fifth highest-paid American CEO in 2022. He has profited off the backs of those who see almost none of the money. That foul system rips joy out of the arts and rips people off at the same time. Ticketmaster is not new to scalping customers. For years, it has been monopolising the live music market and hiking up prices with hidden fees and costs. It recruited professional scalpers to cheat the system in order to resell tickets at eye-watering prices. In that way, it can get a second cut when the tickets are resold. The problem goes way beyond dynamic pricing. The growth of streaming services offers another way to rip off artists while making billions. Platforms such as Spotify keep costs low by paying artists pennies while they share an 85% cut of the profits with big-time labels. They pay $0·000173 per stream to artists, which is a tiny and shocking figure. The music industry is riddled with bloated corporate middlemen whose only purpose is to leech off those with actual talent. It is not about supply and demand; it is about greed. Regular people are priced out of experiencing their favourite artists and going to their favourite gigs. Big corporations set the prices, control the algorithms and pocket the difference. It is not just ticketing platforms that do it. Dynamic pricing does not just start and end here. We have heard of pubs discovering that they can charge more for drinks later at night and at weekends. Some shops have installed digital labels on essentials so that prices can be changed on a notion. What a disgraceful state of play at the minute. Access to arts, goods and services should not be left to the whim of the market. People are being fleeced for trying to survive and for trying to enjoy themselves. That is why it is important to discuss this matter today. The Assembly needs to protect people from money-grabbing executives and advocate proper public regulation of dynamic pricing to limit the power of money-driven scam artists. Class is at the heart of it all. Those who have wealth or wealthy families can afford to pay inflated ticket prices. Those who cannot have to do without, but they are the same people who have to grapple with all the other problems of working-class life: long waiting lists, the mental health crisis and so on and so forth. Class runs really, really deep in the arts. Róisín Lanigan stated in 'The Irish Times' at the weekend that half of the nominees for the BRIT Awards, the Mercury Prize and the BAFTAs were privately educated, yet only 6% of the total population of Britain went to private school. Class is everywhere, and class runs deep. In our society, we need to have art for the masses, not just for the ruling classes.
568 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: 0.12 (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 (0.78).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.91).
- Subject area: Education structures, integration and community division.
- 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 | 0.20 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.08 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.04 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.09 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.15 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.78 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.12 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.91 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.09 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.56 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.21 |
| Sport (including the GAA), the arts and cultural bodies | 0.10 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.08 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.04 |
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.