Talk:Viagogo

Podrían editar y poner en esta página de Wikipedia, que Viagogo es una empresa que estafa a las personas.

Este tipo de empresas arruinan internet, y arruinan Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:AB88:C91:A900:285E:CD18:5C44:79B9 (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit Request - Viagogo facts and context
Hello, I have a conflict of interest with Viagogo and I was hoping to have some updates made to the page. Could an unbiased editor please review the requests and consider adding suitable versions to the related sections? Thank you kindly, Alex.SHVGG (talk) 03:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

1) Could this sentence/two references be added after the first sentence in the lead?

Headquartered in the United States and owned by StubHub Holdings,

2) Could these facts about the StubHub/Viagogo merger be added to history, please, to add scale and show completion?

In November 2019, StubHub disclosed having sold $4.75 billion in tickets in 2018 with $1.1 billion in annual fees, while Viagogo had not disclosed its financial details. Based in Geneva, Switzerland, Viagogo operated in 70 countries and was particularly popular in Europe and Britain, while StubHub sold tickets in 44 countries and was most popular in the United States.

As part of the deal, StubHub agreed to sell its business outside of North America, including its UK business, to Digital Fuel Capital LLC.

Through the merger, Viagogo and StubHub became owned by the new entity StubHub Holdings.

3) Could this content be added to the "Partnerships" section to update and explain, ideally before the section's first sentence about sports partnerships? The company facilitates the sale of live sport, music, and entertainment tickets through an online platform. The company charges a variable booking fee on top of ticket price, and a service fee from sellers. Viagogo has a policy to refund fake or invalid tickets, with onus placed on sellers to sell valid tickets in time or forfeit funds from the sale.

Along with partnerships with entertainers and music festivals,

4) Could the partnerships section title be changed to "Business model and partnerships," so it can encapsulate the actual content?

5) In the drip pricing section, could the following update be added?

In 2018, a CMA order dictated that Viagogo's UK portal include all-in pricing to make the platform more transparent to customers.

6) Concerning this unsourced sentence in the criticism section: "Google has since resumed advertising for Viagogo." Could the following update be added?

Google resumed advertising for Viagogo in November 2019, after Viagogo made "suitable changes to their account."
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: I implemented most of this, with my own edits, except for the first Partnerships request, as it was wholly sourced from their own website. Thank you. PK650 (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit request - new StubHub Holdings president
Could the new parent company president be added to the page, and also added to the inbox? Thank you! Alex.SHVGG (talk) 02:41, 4 August 2022 (UTC) Here's content that can be used:

In July 2022, Nayaab Islam was appointed StubHub president. Alex.SHVGG (talk) 02:41, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Not sure if this change is perhaps best left for the StubHub article only? PK650 (talk) 04:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Edit request - Viagogo updates
Hello. I have a lot of updates I feel would massively improve the page, but I don't feel comfortable adding them myself because of a potential conflict of interest. That said, I always edit as neutrally as I can, and I've tried to align all the requests with the Manual of Style and good sourcing, so hopefully a quick glance at the support refs and some editorial oversight for the prose, and the requests won't seem too onerous.

I also tried to make them bite-sized, since of course no individual editor is required to get to all of them. I would parse them out into stages, but meh. Figured maybe someone might prefer the bigger batch :)

Either way, thank you for any help! (and thank you for kindly taking a look at some of my requests last time)

Request #1: New sections
==See also== *Better Online Tickets Sales Act *List of United Kingdom Supreme Court cases *Online ticket brokering
 * Could a "See also" section be added? The links all mention Viagogo but aren't elsewhere on the Viagogo page yet. Thank you!

==External links== *https://www.viagogo.com
 * Could we add an external links section please?

Request #2: Switch from company to brand

 * After Viagogo purchased Stubhub, Viagogo became a brand of the newly formed company StubHub Holdings. Could the current company infobox be replaced with a brand infobox to reflect the change?


 * Also, could the first sentence be modified to explain the organization is now a brand, that it is branded lowercase, and also that it is no longer based in London? I would recommend: Viagogo, stylized by the company as viagogo, is a multinational ticket exchange and ticket resale brand.

Request #3: Combining and renaming sections

 * Could Business and partnerships be renamed ==Operations== to encapsulate sales strategy, shipping, sponsorships, and pricing all at once?


 * Due to their small size and topical overlap, could the "Drip pricing" and "High pressure sales tactics" sections be combined into ===Pricing and sales tactics===?


 * Could ==Drip pricing== and ==High pressure sales tactics== be moved under "Operations" instead of "Criticism"? While these sections do contain criticism, the company also has its own defenses and POV about sales tactics and pricing, arguably making "criticism" both an inaccurate parent section and a violation of WP:CSECTION.

Request #4: "Legislation" section changes
There are only two details in the "Legislation" section, and the second item is less about legislation and more about general politics. I'm guessing that an expanded section would focus less on Viagogo and more on the industry at large. Instead of that, could the section heading just be removed and the items moved elsewhere?


 * I would recommend moving this detail to "History", and for context, adding year (In 2012) and leaving Viagogo free to continue operating in the country without price caps to the end of the sentence: In the UK, Labour MP Sharon Hodgson's proposal that legislation be introduced to cap resale prices at 10% higher than their face value was rejected by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.


 * For this sentence, I would recommend it move to the "Criticism and legal action against Viagogo" section, as it is one part of a larger saga with CMA and the MPs covered in that section already: After the company failed to appear before the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee of the UK Parliament in March 2017, Hodgson and fellow committee member Nigel Adams visited its London headquarters the following July, but the party was turned away. }}

Could it also be tweaked to better reflect the sources and be less of a run-on sentence?

MPs in the the UK Parliament summoned Viagogo to an inquiry in March 2017. After the company failed to appear before the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, committee members Sharon Hodgson and Nigel Adams visited Viagogo's London headquarters in July and were turned away.

Request #5: Deletions
Over the years, it appears some items have been added that are trivial, essentially redundant, or more focused on regional industries than Viagogo itself. Consider these items for deletion, or greatly reword or tag for poor sourcing?

In the same month, research commissioned by Viagogo revealed that Britons had lost £50 million to ticket fraud over the preceding twelve months and 500,000 Australians had been the victims of ticket fraud, with 81% of cases resulting from transactions on eBay and Gumtree.
 * Could this ticket fraud research in "History" be removed for not focusing on Viagogo?


 * Could these details on just StubHub be deleted from the "History" coverage of the 2019 merger? StubHub disclosed having sold $4.75 billion in tickets in 2018 with $1.1 billion in annual fees, while [...] StubHub sold tickets in 44 countries and was most popular in the United States.


 * Concerning the Arctic Monkeys mention in the "Legal action" section, the referenced BBC article does not actually clarify Viagogo and the Arctic Monkeys having a dispute, just Viagogo and Sheeran. Could the Arctic Monkeys be deleted to reflect the source?


 * Concerning the Israeli lawsuit in "Legal action", I can't find any better sources about this, so request removal of A class action lawsuit has been filed against the company in Israel.


 * Concerning the Munich court case listed in "Legal action", I failed to find better sources that weren't simply legal documents online, and would request it be removed: Munich court against Viagogo: Az. 33 O 6588/17


 * Concerning the September 2017 Swiss Government case listed "Legal action". As with the Munich case, I failed to find better articles to show the case received reputable press coverage: September 2017 - Swiss Government built case against Viagogo


 * Could the passage on this purchase test in the "High pressure sales tactics" section be removed? While the Gotenberg article appears generally fine as a footnote, this detail only rehashes points better explained elsewhere: During a test where three tickets were purchased, the average transaction took about ten minutes to complete which did not leave time to read the purchase conditions. Once the transactions were completed, the average price paid was about twice that charged by official ticket sellers.

Request #6: Updating "Operations" section
Much of the content in the "Operations" section is outdated or would make more sense in the "History" section.


 * Could the first sentence replace The company with The Viagogo brand to reflect that it's no longer an independent company?


 * Could the ESPN detail have multiplatform sports media company removed, with the sentence then moved into "History"?


 * Could the last paragraph on festivals in "Operations" be moved into "History" for being outdated? Also, Ultra Japan isn't backed by the source provided, could that be deleted?


 * In the "Business and partnerships" section, consider shortening sports properties in football, cricket, rugby, tennis, and wrestling to just various sports properties as the types of sports tickets currently sold is now more expansive.


 * Could this now outdated content: Under British law, unauthorised re-selling of Premier League and other football tickets is illegal, a restriction introduced by the British government to prevent hooliganism. By working with the Premier League clubs to obtain official authorisation, Viagogo is permitted to resell tickets to the clubs with which it works. be moved into the "History" section, and also reworded and sourced?

As unauthorized reselling of football tickets was illegal under British law in 2006, Viagogo's official reselling authorizations with Chelsea FC and Manchester United FC marked the first time Premier League tickets were legally resold in the United Kingdom.

Request #7: Combining lead paragraphs
Could the first two paragraphs in the lead be updated to reflect the merger, and also streamlined and combined? Sans the first sentence, it might read more easily like this (no new refs added except SBJ at very end):

Owned by StubHub Holdings since 2021, it was founded in London in 2006 by Eric Baker as an online marketplace for consumers to buy and sell tickets to sports, music, theatre and comedy events. Backed by investors such as Index Ventures, Brent Hoberman, and Jacob Rothschild, in February 2020 the company purchased StubHub for USD$4 billion, with the merging process finalized in 2022.

Request #8: CSECTION
The page currently has a criticism section, which runs against the advice in WP:CSECTION. Also, the "legal actions against Viagogo" title doesn't encapsulate the lawsuits Viagogo which filed against other entities. Could the section be renamed the broader "Legal action," and the details that could be better classified as just criticism be moved to other sections?


 * I would request moving these items (I haven't changed wording from live page) to the "Pricing and sales tactics" section please:

Although Viagogo offers some tickets at face value it is well known for vastly inflating prices for events.

In 2018, the Swedish Consumer Agency received 132 reports about the company, making it the seventh most reported business operating in Sweden. A frequent criticism was that customers felt stressed and pressured into finishing their purchases.


 * I would recommend moving these to "History" (again, not modified from live page):

They have been accused of trying to manipulate online reviews after hundreds of people complained on Trustpilot that the company had ripped them off.

In February 2018, Viagogo was found to have been marketing tickets for a non-existent performance by a Hungarian stand-up comedian for about twice the normal price.

In November 2012, fake tickets to a Mumford & Sons concert in Portsmouth with a face value of £23.50 were sold for up to £200 on Viagogo's secure marketplace. In an interview with the BBC, a spokesperson asserted that this was a rare occurrence and all buyers would soon be offered a refund or tickets to a future concert.

In March 2019, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport warned consumers not to buy or sell tickets through Viagogo.

Later that month, Google announced that it would no longer permit paid advertising by Viagogo, with a spokesperson stating "When people use [Google] for help in purchasing tickets, we want to make sure that they have an experience they can trust. This is why we have strict policies and take necessary action when we find an advertiser in breach." Google resumed advertising for Viagogo in November 2019, after Viagogo made "suitable changes to their account."

September 2019


 * Could the issuance in Japan be rewritten to:

Japan's Consumer Affairs Agency issued a warning about Viagogo's sales practices in late 2019.


 * The Trustpilot sentence seems to cherrypick the less relevant details from the associated Guardian article. Could it be changed to actually cover what the article is about (the glitch and refund issue)? So from They have been accused of trying to manipulate online reviews after hundreds of people complained on Trustpilot that the company had ripped them off. to perhaps:

After a "website glitch" reportedly overcharged dozens of UK customers, in 2017 Viagogo was criticized for allegedly denying prompt refunds.

Request #9: "Legal and government actions" table
This list presents several problems. It's chronologically backwards, it repeats content from its parent section, and most of the items have never been followed up on. Below, I've expanded the items into prose per WP:PROSE (excluding the Japan consumer affairs item, the Az. 33 court case, and the Swiss government case per earlier requests to move or remove). Could the list be expanded accordingly? Afterwards, could you kindly consider the sense behind:


 * Removing the table
 * Re-ordering items chronologically
 * Blending items chronologically into the parent section

==Legal and government actions== {

Request #10: "UK government" section
Much of the "Legal action" section is bloated with content related to a few UK investigations, and the material is extremely redundant and overly wordy. To start to make sense of the mess, could all British content be moved into a new ===UK government=== subsection of "Legal action?" Here's a cheat sheet for content from throughout the page that fits the bill, in chronological order:

They were involved in a legal battle with the UK Rugby Football Union (RFU) after they sold tickets which the RFU had forbidden from being resold for profit. Viagogo lost the initial trial and an appeal in the lower courts in December 2011, resulting in the issuing of a Norwich Pharmacal order.

In November 2012, Viagogo was ordered to give the RFU the names and addresses of certain second-hand ticket sellers.

Starting in 2016, Viagogo and other secondary ticketing companies in the UK faced investigations from the UK government, including from the UK Tax Office and CMA.

MPs in the the UK Parliament summoned Viagogo to an inquiry in March 2017. After the company failed to appear before the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, committee members Sharon Hodgson and Nigel Adams visited Viagogo's London headquarters in July and were turned away.

The UK Competition and Market Authority started to build a case against Viagogo in 2017.

The UK Competition & Markets Authority started to build a case against Viagogo in 2017.

The UK Government's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee opened an inquiry into ticket abuse in November 2017.

In May 2018, the UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) referred its ongoing case against Viagogo to Trading Standards.

In May 2018, the UK's Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, Margot James, told BBC Radio 5 Live listeners planning to buy from secondary ticket sites, "don't choose Viagogo - they are the worst". She gave this advice after the Advertising Standards Authority asked National Trading Standards to investigate Viagogo's alleged breaches of UK advertising rules about making any additional fees clear. Viagogo is no longer under investigation by trading standards after complying with the ASA ruling.

In August 2018, the UK Competition & Markets Authority confirmed it would be seeking court action against Viagogo following concerns that it is breaching consumer protection law.

On 27 November 2018, the UK Competition & Markets Authority stated that Viagogo had, effective 17 January 2019, agreed to perform a "comprehensive overhaul" of its services in order to improve their transparency, and strengthen the guarantees it provides to consumers. Among other changes Viagogo agreed to list the identity of the seller and whether they are a professional trader (defined as performing more than 100 sales in a year), as well as seat numbers and the original face value of the ticket, and any risk that the ticketholder may be turned away due to resale restrictions. In addition, the company was required to cease using misleading indications of how many seats remain for an event, and not to advertise ticket sales for events whose ticketing policies restrict resale.

In July 2019, the UK Competition and Marketing Authority began legal proceedings against Viagogo for contempt of court as a result of the company ignoring repeated warnings to comply with consumer law. }}
 * This request is way too complicated to answer, so I have removed it from the queue. It should be split into separate parts. Quetstar (talk) 00:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Edit request - Viagogo updates on Sept 22, 2022
Reopening request, after larger version was closed by another Wikipedian who felt it was too complex. It is still a relatively large request, but several of the items are interdependent and I just feel submitting them individually wouldn't work. I have combined several of them for sake of clarity. If someone has time for such a large request, much appreciated. (Pinging who was kind enough to help prior.). Alex.SHVGG (talk) 04:50, 23 September 2022 (UTC) A) Could a "See also" section be added? The links all mention Viagogo but aren't elsewhere on the Viagogo page yet. Thank you! ==See also== *Better Online Tickets Sales Act *List of United Kingdom Supreme Court cases *Online ticket brokering B) Could an external links section be added please? ==External links== *https://www.viagogo.com C) After Viagogo purchased Stubhub, Viagogo became a brand of the newly formed company StubHub Holdings. Could the current company infobox be replaced with a brand infobox to reflect the change? D) Also, could the first sentence be modified to explain the organization is now a brand, that it is branded lowercase, and also that it is no longer based in London? I would recommend: Viagogo, stylized by the company as viagogo, is a multinational ticket exchange and ticket resale brand. E) Could Business and partnerships be renamed ==Operations== to encapsulate sales strategy, shipping, sponsorships, and pricing all at once? F) Due to their small size and topical overlap, could the "Drip pricing" and "High pressure sales tactics" sections be combined into ===Pricing and sales tactics===? G) Could ==Drip pricing== and ==High pressure sales tactics== be moved under "Operations" instead of "Criticism"? While these sections do contain criticism, the company also has its own defenses and POV about sales tactics and pricing, arguably making "criticism" both an inaccurate parent section and a violation of WP:CSECTION. H) There are only two details in the "Legislation" section, and the second item is less about legislation and more about general politics. I'm guessing that an expanded section would focus less on Viagogo and more on the industry at large. Instead of that, could the section heading just be removed and the items moved elsewhere?
 * I would recommend moving this detail to "History", and for context, adding year (In 2012) and leaving Viagogo free to continue operating in the country without price caps to the end of the sentence: In the UK, Labour MP Sharon Hodgson's proposal that legislation be introduced to cap resale prices at 10% higher than their face value was rejected by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
 * For this sentence, I would recommend it move to the "Criticism and legal action against Viagogo" section, as it is one part of a larger saga with CMA and the MPs covered in that section already: After the company failed to appear before the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee of the UK Parliament in March 2017, Hodgson and fellow committee member Nigel Adams visited its London headquarters the following July, but the party was turned away. }}
 * Yes check.svg Done PK650 (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Deletions
Over the years, it appears some items have been added that are trivial, essentially redundant, or more focused on regional industries than Viagogo itself. Consider these items for deletion, or greatly reword or tag for poor sourcing? Thanks! Alex.SHVGG (talk) 23:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Could this ticket fraud research in "History" be removed for not focusing on Viagogo? In the same month, research commissioned by Viagogo revealed that Britons had lost £50 million to ticket fraud over the preceding twelve months and 500,000 Australians had been the victims of ticket fraud, with 81% of cases resulting from transactions on eBay and Gumtree.


 * Could these details on just StubHub be deleted from the "History" coverage of the 2019 merger? StubHub disclosed having sold $4.75 billion in tickets in 2018 with $1.1 billion in annual fees, while [...] StubHub sold tickets in 44 countries and was most popular in the United States.


 * Concerning the Arctic Monkeys mention in the "Legal action" section, the referenced BBC article does not actually clarify Viagogo and the Arctic Monkeys having a dispute, just Viagogo and Sheeran. Could the Arctic Monkeys be deleted to reflect the source?


 * Concerning the Israeli lawsuit in "Legal action", I can't find any better sources about this, so request removal of A class action lawsuit has been filed against the company in Israel.


 * Concerning the Munich court case listed in "Legal action", I failed to find better sources that weren't simply legal documents online, and would request it be removed: Munich court against Viagogo: Az. 33 O 6588/17


 * Concerning the September 2017 Swiss Government case listed "Legal action". As with the Munich case, I failed to find better articles to show the case received reputable press coverage: September 2017 - Swiss Government built case against Viagogo


 * Could the passage on this purchase test in the "High pressure sales tactics" section be removed? While the Gotenberg article appears generally fine as a footnote, this detail only rehashes points better explained elsewhere: During a test where three tickets were purchased, the average transaction took about ten minutes to complete which did not leave time to read the purchase conditions. Once the transactions were completed, the average price paid was about twice that charged by official ticket sellers.

CSECTION
The page currently has a criticism section, which runs against the advice in WP:CSECTION. Also, the "legal actions against Viagogo" title doesn't encapsulate the lawsuits Viagogo which filed against other entities. Could the section be renamed the broader "Legal action," and the details that could be better classified as just criticism be moved to other sections?


 * I would request moving these items (I haven't changed wording from live page) to the "Pricing and sales tactics" section please:

Although Viagogo offers some tickets at face value it is well known for vastly inflating prices for events.

In 2018, the Swedish Consumer Agency received 132 reports about the company, making it the seventh most reported business operating in Sweden. A frequent criticism was that customers felt stressed and pressured into finishing their purchases.

They have been accused of trying to manipulate online reviews after hundreds of people complained on Trustpilot that the company had ripped them off.
 * I would recommend moving these to "History" (again, not modified from live page):

In February 2018, Viagogo was found to have been marketing tickets for a non-existent performance by a Hungarian stand-up comedian for about twice the normal price.

In November 2012, fake tickets to a Mumford & Sons concert in Portsmouth with a face value of £23.50 were sold for up to £200 on Viagogo's secure marketplace. In an interview with the BBC, a spokesperson asserted that this was a rare occurrence and all buyers would soon be offered a refund or tickets to a future concert.

In March 2019, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport warned consumers not to buy or sell tickets through Viagogo.

Later that month, Google announced that it would no longer permit paid advertising by Viagogo, with a spokesperson stating "When people use [Google] for help in purchasing tickets, we want to make sure that they have an experience they can trust. This is why we have strict policies and take necessary action when we find an advertiser in breach." Google resumed advertising for Viagogo in November 2019, after Viagogo made "suitable changes to their account."

September 2019


 * Could the issuance in Japan be rewritten to:

Japan's Consumer Affairs Agency issued a warning about Viagogo's sales practices in late 2019.


 * The Trustpilot sentence seems to cherrypick the less relevant details from the associated Guardian article. Could it be changed to actually cover what the article is about (the glitch and refund issue)? So from They have been accused of trying to manipulate online reviews after hundreds of people complained on Trustpilot that the company had ripped them off. to perhaps:

After a "website glitch" reportedly overcharged dozens of UK customers, in 2017 Viagogo was criticized for allegedly denying prompt refunds.
 * Hi, I've started to have a look at these for you. As they're quite numerous, I've reviewed just the first section for the time being. I agree that the research does not focus on Viagogo and thus is out of place. As for the StubHub information, I believe it's relevant as context. Per WP:PST, I've left the three court cases in place, given a "primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge"; I think this applies to these three instances quite well. Finally, while I agree with your general NPOV concerns re the High pressure section, removing the last paragraph would in effect render the entire section void. While I do agree the section in and of itself is not entirely neutral, I hold a copy edit would more appropriately tackle the problem. In other words, I'd like to see a reworded version of this section instead of just a blanket removal of valid ticket transaction concerns. PK650 (talk) 09:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I've now gone through all of the above. A majority of your requests were at least partially implemented. I agree there is no mention of review manipulation nor Trustpilot in The Guardian source whatsoever. I made the important distinction between "website glitch" and website "glitch", given we are quoting the source, not Viagogo's spokesperson. PK650 (talk) 03:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks again for your diligence, time, and knowledge in regard to the requests, it's really satisfying seeing the page start to look more encyclopedic and balanced. Also, thanks for being so tolerant of the nitty gritty questions, it's generous of you.
 * Concerning your comments from the last requests, thinking it over, I agree it makes sense to keep the StubHub details from 2019 for context.
 * Also agree on glitch distinction.
 * I also think it makes sense about copyediting the sales tactics paragraph instead of removing them (some suggestions below, if you're interested in taking a look yourself at some point).
 * Concerning the three lawsuit items that were not deleted, I hadn't known about that guideline, but it makes sense it applies even for lawsuits/controversies. With one of the cases, though, would that clause still apply even if the primary source is of very low quality? To explain, with the Israeli lawsuit, the viagogoclassaction.com website seems to be of unknown origin, and I assume the private domain was purchased by the lawsuit organizers themselves - but the dead source doesn't seem to confirm the suit was ever officially filed, just that they were starting to plan for it? And with the lack of any other press, I would think it seems the lawsuit fizzled, and therefore probably isn't particularly noteworthy compared to other lawsuits that could be mentioned? Alex.SHVGG (talk) 20:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree, so removed that one. Thanks for pointing it out. PK650 (talk) 07:17, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

"Pricing and sales tactics" copyediting and update

 * In the pricing section, could this Göteborgs-Posten-backed passage: Viagogo sells secondhand tickets. During purchase, one price is shown up front which does not include additional costs such as value-added tax or booking fees. be expanded into: The company has been criticized for its use of "drip pricing" in certain countries, where not all charges are shown until the end of a transaction. According to Swedish newspaper Göteborgs-Posten, during purchases of secondhand tickets in 2018, one price was shown up front, while additional costs such as value-added tax or booking fees were shown to buyers later in the checkout process. The newspaper criticized the practice as disingenuous.


 * Also, concerning this sentence: The customer is presented with several messages about tickets being about to run out and in the user interface, the "continue" button jumps and a timer keeps counting down. According to executive Chris Miller, the messages are intended to show customers they are visiting a "dynamic market place" and helps buyers to "make an informed decision". Could that be copyedited as well, to better blend with the prior sentence? Perhaps to: At that time of the CMA order, Viagogo had also been criticized for high pressure sales tactics on its website, such as warnings about time limits and a count-down timer. At the time, Viagogo defended the messages for showing customers a "dynamic market place" and helping buyers "make an informed decision".


 * Could this detail Although Viagogo offers some tickets at face value it is well known for vastly inflating prices for events. possibly be expanded to the following to include multiple perspectives for NPOV (i.e. keep the old perspectives, but explain the company's stance in the process)? The extended version also mentions "and other sales practices" to show the footnotes mention more than just the markups: In January 2008, the The Telegraph wrote that Viagogo and Stubhub and its "rivals at Seatwave and Get Me In, also founded by young Americans, have introduced a level of respectability and professionalism to a business that until recently was dominated by rogue traders who sold tickets - many of which never reached the buyers - at vastly inflated prices," in the UK. However, in later years, Viagogo itself has been criticized for allowing sellers to set prices at extremely high markups, as well as other sales practices. In response to a 2021 New Zealand Herald article criticizing highly priced Lorde tickets being resold through the site, Viagogo stated that "tickets that are listed at unreasonable prices get the most media attention but rarely, if ever, sell."
 * Would it be possible to add this new detail to the end of the section (to followup in the UK)? Pressure marketing and countdown timers were removed from the UK website in 2018.

"Operations" content to add or update
Much of the content in the "Operations" section is outdated or would make more sense in the "History" section.


 * Could the first sentence replace The company with The Viagogo brand to reflect that Viagogo is no longer an independent company?


 * The second and third sentence use the Viagogo home website, which I gather is suboptimal. If you think it would help, could those two sentences be replaced with this newspaper-backed version? I think it paints a broader more specific picture anyways of how Viagogo's operations work and the most relevant services available: Charging a fee to buyers and to sellers, Viagogo handles shipping labels, tracks packages, and "holds the entirety of the payment until the deal goes through." Viagogo has a policy in place to refund invalid tickets or tickets that do not arrive, guaranteeing a "sale price refund or a seat at the event" to any customers who have an issue with their order.


 * In the sports properties sentence in the second paragraph, please consider shortening sports properties in football, cricket, rugby, tennis, and wrestling to just various sports properties, as the types of sports tickets currently sold by Viagogo are now far more expansive.
 * Could this now outdated content (since the law changed): Under British law, unauthorised re-selling of Premier League and other football tickets is illegal, a restriction introduced by the British government to prevent hooliganism. By working with the Premier League clubs to obtain official authorisation, Viagogo is permitted to resell tickets to the clubs with which it works. be moved into the "History" section, and also reworded and sourced, as follows? As unauthorized reselling of football tickets was illegal under British law in 2006, Viagogo's official reselling authorizations with Chelsea FC and Manchester United FC marked the first time Premier League tickets were legally resold in the United Kingdom.


 * Could the ESPN detail have multiplatform sports media company removed for sounding promotional, with the sentence then moved into "History" since its a decade old?
 * Could the last paragraph on festivals in "Operations" be moved into "History" for being outdated? Also, Ultra Japan isn't backed by the source provided, could that be deleted?

"History" changes

 * Consider broadening the Mumford and Sons detail to: By 2012, Viagogo's ticket pricing policy had become a frequent subject of controversy in the United Kingdom. After a number of Mumford & Sons tickets, one reportedly marked up from face value of £23.50 to £200, proved invalid in November 2012, Viagogo assured the BBC that it was a rare occurrence and the tickets would be refunded or replaced.


 * Can this rambling sentence: Later that month, Google announced that it would no longer permit paid advertising by Viagogo, with a spokesperson stating "When people use [Google] for help in purchasing tickets, we want to make sure that they have an experience they can trust. This is why we have strict policies and take necessary action when we find an advertiser in breach." be trimmed to In July 2019, Google ceased paid advertising by Viagogo for breaching Google's internal advertising policies.


 * Could this fragment in history: On 25 November 2019, Viagogo announced its intent to acquire the U.S.-based StubHub (which was co-founded by Baker) for US$4.05 billion, be expanded to: After announcing its intent to purchase StubHub from eBay in late 2019, Viagogo agreed to purchase StubHub for $4 billion in February 2020, with Viagogo's owner Pugnacious LLC to become the holding company for both.


 * Could these few sentences: in April 2020 a full investigation by the Competition & Markets Authority was launched in the U.K. The CMA reported on 2 February 2021 that the StubHub merger gave rise to competition concerns and required Viagogo to sell the StubHub International business. be streamlined and better sourced: The deal was put on hold in 2020 by the Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) over competition concerns, as combined, the two companies held a 90% market share of secondary ticketing in the United Kingdom.

Thank you! I'm sorry if these requests were onerously granular, but I'm somewhat hoping that by doing them item by item like this, it might be more readily apparent that I'm trying very hard to avoid weasel-wording or other manipulations of the source material. Alex.SHVGG (talk) 20:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: Hi. I have a few notes for what I didn't implement: a) the "at the time of the CMA order" clarification was pertinent, but I still thought the paragraph deserved to stay; b) I'm not satisfied with your amendment to "Viagogo offers some tickets at face value", perhaps there may be a better rewording for this; c) same with the "Charging a fee to buyers and to sellers" bit, especially considering you're attempting to quote the viagogo website. Happy thanksgiving! PK650 (talk) 07:37, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Requests for January 2023 for Viagogo
Hello, I had some requests to fill in blanks in history, smooth rough edges, and address the redundancy of the incomplete legal items table. Possible to screen my requests for balance and sense, in part or their entirety? Thank you! Alex.SHVGG (talk) 04:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

"Pricing and sales tactics" copyediting and update

 * Could this detail backed by The Guardian: Although Viagogo offers some tickets at face value it is well known for vastly inflating prices for events. be reworded and expanded with new research to add context (about the pricing in relation to industry norms then and now):

In January 2008, the The Telegraph wrote that Viagogo and Stubhub and its "rivals at Seatwave and Get Me In, also founded by young Americans, have introduced a level of respectability and professionalism to a business that until recently was dominated by rogue traders who sold tickets - many of which never reached the buyers - at vastly inflated prices," in the UK. However, in later years, Viagogo itself has been criticized for allowing sellers to set prices at extremely high markups, as well as other sales practices. In response to a 2021 New Zealand Herald article criticizing highly priced Lorde tickets being resold through the site, Viagogo stated that "tickets that are listed at unreasonable prices get the most media attention but rarely, if ever, sell."
 * Could this be added after the "vastly inflating prices for events" sentence backed by the Guardian in the "Pricing and Sales tactics" section, to provide a balanced perspective (i.e. include Viagogo's rebuttal in effect, not just the criticism):

"Legal action" addition
Could this content be added to the "Legal actions" section? I've worked to include major perspectives covered in the BBC and Bloomberg:

In the United States, in August 2020 Viagogo faced litigation over its pandemic refund policy, with fans arguing that Viagogo had improperly classified certain shows as postponed instead of canceled to avoid paying refunds. With Viagogo refuting the claims, class action status of the lawsuit was refused by a Florida judge in July 2021 after a motion by Viagogo Entertainment Inc.

"History" modifications

 * The detail about hooliganism is about Britain at large, not how the law impacts Viagogo, so cut "with the purpose of preventing hooliganism" as cruft, perhaps?
 * Could the following paragraph in history:

Viagogo was founded in 2006 in London by Eric Baker, the co-founder of US-based StubHub. It was established to provide an online marketplace that allows consumers to buy and sell tickets to sports, music, theatre and comedy events. The company's launch included partnerships with Chelsea F.C. and Manchester United F.C. offering season ticket holders the chance to sell tickets to matches they could not attend to other club members, without having to lend their season card.

Perhaps be modified and updated to:

Viagogo was founded in 2006 in London as a secondary ticketing marketplace by Eric Baker, the co-founder of US-based StubHub. With sections for sports, music, theatre and comedy events, the company's launch included official partnerships with Chelsea FC and Manchester United FC, with the sports clubs sharing in the commission revenue on ticket resales.


 * Could "Manchester United ended its commercial agreement with Viagogo in 2011" perhaps be expanded into: Manchester United ended its commercial agreement with Viagogo in 2011, also ending official resale of its season tickets in the process.  Also, can that 2011 Manchester detail be moved to end of the next paragraph, directly after "legally resold in the United Kingdom"?


 * Go ahead and make the proposed changes above my reply, but please format the cited sources properly. Your proposal includes bare links, which is a now obsolete citation style. See WP:CITEHOW for more information. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 07:28, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

"History" content to add
The history section is currently much smaller than the legal section, which seems to be mostly a reflection of missing major events. I've worked to collect items that seemed of particular note. Consider adding to the page as a starting to point for filling in the blanks, or at least a springboard for new history content?

With seed funding from American investors, by 2006 Viagogo was backed by venture capital investment firm Index Ventures as well as Brent Hoberman and Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild. Officially debuting in the United Kingdom on August 18, 2006 as an online ticket exchange designed to bypass physical ticket resale, Viagogo stated it offered users more protection than competitors such as eBay by guaranteeing refunds for tickets that were fake or didn't arrive. In August 2007, Viagogo branched into Germany with an official partnership with Bayern Munich. With Baker as CEO, Viagogo raised £30 million in August 2007 from investors including Brent Hoberman, Bernard Arnault, Jacob Rothschild, and Index Ventures. Viagogo had local sites in Germany, Holland, and Hammersmith, London by 2008. Viagogo by that January had traded £50 million in tickets overall and signed exclusive deals with Warner Music and James Blunt. In May 2008, Live Nation hired Viagogo as its official secondary ticket partner in Europe for Madonna's Sticky & Sweet tour, with Viagogo also handling the tour's VIP packages and premium tickets. Baker described it as the first time a major artist had endorsed secondary ticketing. Also in 2008, the French Tennis Federation appointed Viagogo the official ticket marketplace of the French Open. Baker stated the company sold $100 million in tickets in 2008 overall, with the company making 25% of that. By June 2009, new investors included Andre Agassi, bringing total funds raised to $70 million. By 2009, Viagogo was also an official resale partner of Michael Jackson, Lloyd-Webber's Really Useful Group, and the ATP World Tour Finals. In 2009, the company's estimated value was $300 million. The company liquidated its UK assets in 2012 and moved its headquarters to Switzerland. The change, which occurred directly before the London Olympic Games, meant Viagogo "was no longer subject to UK laws banning resale of tickets for Olympic events." Also in 2012, Madonna named Viagogo the "official premium and secondary ticketing partner" for her summer European tour. By then Viagogo had also officially partnered with the promoters of musicians such as Rihanna, Coldplay, Westlife, and Take That. Between 2013 and 2015 it also partnered with the Sydney Swans and Sydney Roosters. In October 2013, Viagogo announced a three-year deal with Scottish Rugby, in what was the first time Viagogo had partnered with a governing sports body, and its first deal including naming rights to a sports property. In December 2013, Viagogo entered Portugal with a partnership with the soccer club FC Porto. At the time, Viagogo operated across 50 countries and had deals with 30 European soccer clubs, including Paris Saint-Germain. Viagogo signed a $75 million sponsorship deal with SFX Entertainment in 2014, with Viagogo buying the exclusive rights to be the designated ticket reseller for around 50 SFX events. Viagogo operated 55 websites in 160 countries by early 2015. In November 2015, Viagogo became the official international ticketing partner of the Indian Aces of the International Premier Tennis League, at which point it had 60 global websites. By 2016, Viagogo had secured investments from Robin Klein. As of March 2017, Viagogo was owned by Pugnacious Endeavors, which was headquartered in Dover, Delaware in the United States. Viagogo remained technically based in Geneva, while administering much of its business from an office in London as well.

In August 2018, it was reported that Viagogo was preparing to move much of its workforce in the United Kingdom to New York.

In November 2019, Viagogo operated in 70 countries and was particularly popular in Europe.

As of 2020, Viagogo's majority owners included Madrone Capital Partners, Bessemer Venture Partners, and CEO Eric Baker, who held majority voting control. Viagogo retained offices in New York and London and employed 616 people in Europe, Asia, and the United States.

Viagogo agreed to purchase StubHub for $4 billion in February 2020, with Viagogo's owner Pugnacious LLC to become the holding company for both.

In early 2020, the live events industry was shut down due to the coronavirus pandemic, with Viagogo Group significantly reducing its Limerick, Ireland workforce as a result.

Viagogo took on a $330 million loan in late 2020 in response to the industry shutdowns, allowing the company "to operate with little to no revenue" until 2022 if needed, according to Moody's.

In July 2021, Moody's reported that Viagogo had been "free cash flow positive" since April 2021.

In January 2022, it was reported that StubHub Holdings was considering an IPO and had filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

In early 2022, StubHub Holding employed 650 full-time people, with a third of those employees at Viagogo.

In July 2022, Viagogo and StubHub announced that they would be closing their San Francisco and Shanghai offices by 2023, with a new focus to be placed on Los Angeles and New York. Offices would also remain in Switzerland, Ireland, Taiwan, and Utah. In 2022, the StubHub brand migrated all of its systems and technology onto Viagogo's tech stack, with Nayaab Islam, who had been running Viagogo's technology teams since 2014, promoted to StubHub president. During the consolidation, Viagogo's and StubHub's legal departments were combined.


 * Even without the unreliable sources helper plugin I can easily spot sources that cannot be cited in Wikipedia articles. The above content is an information and link collection, but not a proper proposal. Please rewrite this in order to become a proper proposal. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 07:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

"History" subsections
Could subsections be added to history? I might recommend: ==History== ===2006-2011===   ===2012-2019===    ===2020-2022===    ==Operations== ===Pricing and sales tactics=== ==Legal action== ===Legal and government actions===

Lead changes
Could some small improvements be added to the lead paragraphs?
 * Could "and owned by StubHub Holdings" in the lead be expanded into: and owned by StubHub Holdings since 2021
 * Concerning the sentence "It was founded in 2006 by Eric Baker, the co-founder of StubHub", could it be expanded to perhaps: It was founded in London in 2006 by Eric Baker as an online marketplace for consumers to buy and sell tickets to sports, music, theatre and comedy events.


 * Could "Viagogo is backed by venture capital investment firm Index Ventures as well as Brent Hoberman, the co-founder and former CEO of lastminute.com, and Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild." be trimmed to be less wordy, perhaps to: Viagogo is backed by investors such as Index Ventures, Brent Hoberman, and Jacob Rothschild.
 * Could "In February 2020, it acquired StubHub" be extended into "in February 2020 the company purchased StubHub for USD$4 billion" please? It is backed by the sources already listed.


 * After "it acquired StubHub" in the lead, could the following sentence and fact be added as an extension? with the merging process finalized in 2022.


 * This seems to be implemented. --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 07:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

"Legal and government actions" table
This list presents several problems. It's chronologically backwards, it repeats content from its parent section, and most of the items have never been followed up on. Below, I've expanded the items into prose per WP:PROSE. Could the list be expanded accordingly? Afterwards, could you kindly consider the sense behind:


 * Removing the table
 * Re-ordering items chronologically
 * Blending items chronologically into the parent section

==Legal and government actions==

"UK government" section
Much of the "Legal action" section is related to a few UK investigations and is extremely redundant. To start to make sense of it all, could all British content be moved into a new ===UK government=== subsection of "Legal action?" I would list the items, but fear I'd just complicate a pretty straightforward task (keywords for the British investigations are RFU, CMA, Competition and Market Authority, Advertising Standards Authority, ASA, National Trading Standards, NTS).
 * Hi! I've started with your first subsection above. As it's a bit long I might divide it into more manageable bits. PK650 (talk) 07:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll leave a few notes here as I go along:
 * The SP source citing the number of countries is actually quoting a company spokesperson, and as such cannot be used reliably. PK650 (talk) 04:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Could you specify which paragraphs you're requesting be under the legal government subsection? PK650 (talk) 00:00, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Finally, I'm happy to keep the table if the outcomes are expanded. PK650 (talk) 00:10, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I support your decision! Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 07:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: There doesn't seem to be any progress; I'm thus closing this section; parts that were good have been implemented. -- Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 16:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Edit request April 2023 - Viagogo
Hello. I have a lot of updates I feel would improve the page. Thank you for any help! Alex.SHVGG (talk) 19:59, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I suggest getting the January edit request done before dealing with this one. There is still a lot to do. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 07:39, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

"Lead" content
1) StubHub Holdings is now the official owner of Viagogo and also the parent company, with StubHub just a brand owned by Viagogo/StubHub Holdings. Since StubHub Holdings doesn't have it's own page, I figure Viagogo is therefore the most likely redirect location. With that in mind, could the first mention in the lead of StubHub Holdings be stylized in bold text?

2) In the lead, could this be added to the list of investors? and Bessemer Venture Partners,

3) Could the final sentences of the lead be expanded to better reflect the page's content? I might recommend expanding this: The company has been criticized for inflation via ticket resale, lacking transparency, and in some cases, having sold counterfeit tickets. These controversies have led to legal action in some of the countries where Viagogo operates, and also led the UK Competition & Markets Authority to order changes to Viagogo's operations. to:

Earning revenue by charging a fee from both buyers and sellers of ticket, the brand handles shipping labels, tracks packages, and has a refund policy in place for tickets that don't arrive or are forged. With Viagogo in some cases officially partnering with promoters such as Live Nation, ESPN, and Scottish Rugby, controversies over its sales policies have led to legal action in several countries related to price caps, transparency, refunds, and counterfeit tickets. Among other legal orders, in 2018 the Competition & Markets Authority ordered changes to Viagogo's operations in the United Kingdom.


 * I did 2), but not 1) and 3): StubHub Holdings should not be messed up with viagogo; what you suggest in 3) is already described in the first paragraph of the lead section (albeit in an encyclopedic manner). Also not that techcrunch is not exactly the best source. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 17:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Viagogo versus viagogo
The brand's legal name is actually lowercase as in the infobox (viagogo), but the rest of the article doesn't reflect that. I'm having trouble ascertaining if this request entirely fits with the Manual of Style, since the guidelines seem contradictory in some places, but if it doesn't violate a rule, could the article's prose be reworked to use viagogo instead of Viagogo, similar to the articles for vitaminwater and eBay?

In terms of viagogo being used in the press, I found these websites using the lowercase version:
 * / /  /
 * (in legal text, not prose)
 * (government text)


 * Not done, see MOS:TMRULES; trademarks are capitalised like proper names. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 17:51, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

"History" and "Operations" additions
1) In "History", could this sentence By 2006 Viagogo was backed by venture capital investment firm Index Ventures as well as Brent Hoberman and Jacob Rothschild, 4th Baron Rothschild have this added to the front of it as context and clarification? With seed funding from American investors,

2) In "History", could this sentence As part of the deal, StubHub agreed to sell its business outside of North America, including its UK business, to Digital Fuel Capital LLC. have this added to the front of it as context and clarification? In September 2021, the CMA gave Viagogo permission to complete its acquisition of StubHub.

3) In "History," could this sentence: Through the merger, Viagogo and StubHub became owned by the new company StubHub Holdings. have this added to the end? with StubHub International becoming a separate entity.

4) In "History," concerning this sentence: "The company liquidated its UK assets in 2012 and moved its headquarters to Switzerland," could "where its financial accounts are private" be removed? There is no context there on what laws or regulations actually make the finances more private than other countries.

5) In "Operations," maybe consider replacing The company charges a variable booking fee on top of ticket price, and a service fee from sellers. with a version backed by newspapers instead of the company website? Such as: Charging a fee to buyers and to sellers, Viagogo handles shipping labels, tracks packages, and "holds the entirety of the payment until the deal goes through."

6) Also in "Operations," perhaps consider expanding on the third sentence (about its refund policy) to add in a newspaper perspective? To: Viagogo has a policy in place to refund invalid tickets or tickets that do not arrive, guaranteeing a "sale price refund or a seat at the event" to any customers who have an issue with their order.


 * 1) cites an interview; 2), 3) done; 4) is backed by the source so I'm not doing it; 5) not done (techcrunch); 6) not done, because it's not backed by the sources. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

"Legal action" changes

 * The first sentence of "Legal action" doesn't reflect the article in that it seems the criticism was selling any charity tickets, not just expensive ones. Maybe rewrite to the following? Viagogo faced criticism for reselling Ed Sheeran charity tickets in February 2017 for profit.


 * Could this sentence be considered as an introductory sentence to the "Legal action" section? Viagogo has been involved in legal disputes involving the legality of its tickets sales in different locales, as well as its sales practices in different countries.


 * The Bruno Mars ticket blurb in "Legal action" doesn't fully describe the article. Could it be expanded to read as such, and could we take out the random Bruno Mars detail so it reads like this? In August 2018, the New Zealand Commerce Commission sued Viagogo for alleged breaches of the Fair Trading Act (FTA), particularly false and misleading representations. Also, could this detail be added to the end of the sentence as an update? In 2020, Viagogo announced changes to its New Zealand website to align with Commerce Commission standards, including an upfront estimation of all fees. The regulator subsequently dropped its push for an interim injunction.


 * Could the 2021 detail about WellingtonNZ and Jersey Boys be cut down to "Following complaints," and then combined with the sentence afterwards to read: Following complaints, in February 2021 the Commerce Commission was again suing Viagogo for false representations of ticket price, scarcity, and validity. Could this be added to the end of that sentence as an update? Viagogo defended its New Zealand selling process by stating its website made clear that prices were set by sellers and that "prices may be listed as higher or lower than the face value, depending on demand."
 * Could this detail about Italy: In April 2018, Viagogo was fined one million Euros in Italy. have the following tacked on?, although the Italian Competition Authority was ordered to return the fine in July 2019 by an Italian court.


 * Could this be added? In April 2021, an Italian court rejected an appeal by Viagogo to drop a £3.2 million fine over its price cap policy in Italy, rejecting Viagogo's argument it was a "passive hosting provider."


 * Could this SIAE lawsuit: In 2017, the Italian Society of Authors and Publishers (SIAE) sued Viagogo in Italy over resold tickets for artists such as Lady Gaga and Vasco Rossi. have this tacked on to the end as an update? Ultimately, that June, Viagogo along with Live Nation and Seatwave were banned from allowing ticket resale of U2 concerts in Italy.


 * Could this be added to "Legal action"? By August 2016, Viagogo had sued SFX during SFX's bankruptcy proceedings, seeking to collect $1.6 million related to a 2014 contract.


 * Could the Ed Sheeran/Kilimanjaro lawsuit paragraph have a new intro sentence with context? In 2017 and 2018, Viagogo was involved in several legal disputes with the promoter of artist Ed Sheeran, both in the UK and Germany. In 2018, the Advertising Standards Agency upheld a complaint against Viagogo for describing itself as an official seller for Sheeran's 2017 tour.


 * Could this detail: The company is the only ticket resale site to have refused to work with Ed Sheeran to prevent ticket touts reselling tickets for his tours. be expanded into: Early in 2018, Viagogo was the only ticket resale site in the UK to refuse Ed Sheeran's request to stop listing his tickets for resale, stating it believed similar "entry restrictions [by promotors] are highly unfair and in our view, unenforceable and illegal" and that its Ed Sheeran tickets in the UK were genuine and legal. Taking a public stance against ticket touting, Sheeran in early 2018 voided 10,000 of his own tickets if they were resold through secondary ticketing sites such as Viagogo.


 * Could this detail be added about the Kilimanjaro lawsuit? Viagogo also argued that "Sheeran's promoter set up fake Viagogo stalls" to void fans' tickets and require them to buy new ones at the promotor's profit.


 * The second paragraph in the "Legal action" section is all focused on Take That tickets, and is very redundant. Could it be streamlined, and maybe the sentences combined?


 * I have fixed most of the legal action section as it was not well-composed. Please have look and let me know, I have made most edits that you proposed excluding those that were rendered obsolete by my section trimming. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

"Australia government" section
1) The four sentences about Australia in the "Legal action" section are either redundant or related, so would it be possible to move them into a new ===Australian government=== section so they can be woven together? Thank you! Maybe they could be cut and combined into the following? (references not added or removed)

===Australian government=== The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) sued Viagogo in 2017 for allegedly making false claims about officially reselling certain tickets, misleading customers on ticket scarcity, and failing to disclose a 27.6% booking fee until late in the checkout process.

The ACCC levied a AU$7 million fine in October 2020.

2) Could these details be added to the section?

In response to complaints about its practices in Australia, Viagogo argued Australia's ticketing market was a "protectionist racket" for concert promoters, with the interests of organizers put above fans, and lagging behind the United States. Viagogo also argued that reports of fake tickets bought through Viagogo were being "exaggerated," as some people brought wrong documents to the gate. However, in late 2019, Viagogo made a number of changes to its Australian website, including how fees were presented.

In March 2021, a court allowed Viagogo to hold off paying the fine pending an appeal.


 * I have implemented an Australia section; please have a look. I feel that talking about the government is not warranted here. Authorities maybe? Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

"UK government" section
1) The Norwich Pharmacal sentence doesn't have a source, could this be used?

2) Concerning the rugby matter, could They were involved in a legal battle with the UK Rugby Football Union (RFU) after they sold tickets which the RFU had forbidden from being resold for profit. be reworded to In 2011, Viagogo was sued by the UK Rugby Football Union (RFU) for listing tickets the RFU had forbidden from being resold for profit.

3) The Competition & Markets Authority and Advertising Standards Authority are both overlinked in this section right now, possible to cut down some, or add in acronyms?

4) The start of the November 2017 case is mentioned three times in a row! Could those three sentences be combined?

5) Could the BBC Radio live detail with Margot James be rewritten with more context from the article, perhaps to: In May 2018, the UK's Minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, Margot James, called Viagogo "the worst" on BBC Radio 5 Live for lack of clarity concerning fees and charges, advising listeners not to use the service.

6) Concerning the final paragraph in "UK government" about the "comprehensive overhaul," it seems way too wordy and detailed. Could it be trimmed to just this?  In November 2018, CMA stated that Viagogo had agreed to a "comprehensive overhaul" by January 2019 in order to improve transparency and strengthen guarantees to consumers. Also, chronologically, might make sense to move it above the "contempt of court" sentence.

7) The "contempt of court" sentence is somewhat inaccurate, since the legal proceedings were threatened but not instigated. Could it be reworded to the following? In July 2019, CMA threatened to sue Viagogo for contempt of court for ignoring prior agreements. Then, could this tacked on the end as an update? with the legal action suspended in September 2019.

8) Could this missing detail about a second appearance refusal be added somewhere? Viagogo in September 2018 wrote to MPs that it had not appeared for a second time at a parliamentary committee, due to "unequivocal legal advice" from its lawyers concerning how the hearing might impact CMA legal proceedings.


 * Mostly done, have a look. Best regards, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 18:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

May 2023 Vandalism
There were recently a series of edits to the page that were clear vandalism and/or minimally modified the vandalism but left it intact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Viagogo&oldid=1154826365

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Viagogo&oldid=1155012553

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Viagogo&oldid=1155012581

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Viagogo&oldid=1155217253

I have reverted the page to the last version prior to the vandalism. It may be worth discussing potential sanctions towards the offending IPs and/or protection status for this page.

Update

Approximately two hours after I reverted the page, someone added clearly biased content that was quickly reverted by another user.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Viagogo&oldid=1155461445

I am now firmly of the opinion that this page needs protection.

Out to catch those vandals (talk) 05:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

COI
These utter bastards seem to have made an amazing job of sanitizing the article while staying within the WP rules. It just shows what really good PR people with a big budget can do, despite an article having protection and a well documented history of COI editing. This is probably the most egregious corporate page in WP. Ef80 (talk) 18:14, 10 July 2023 (UTC)