Jonfun said:

Ok.
Then I don't know where I got it from that I knew from the start that there was no guarantee of Prince playing. There was something that made me not buy any of these tickets. I might remember this wrong.

would you consider the line

dancing like a white girl

offensive and racist ?

ridiculous

pacey68 said:

Let's hope she didn't have ginger hair too!

AWJ said:

that what is aid in mu original ost about the fri 3rd aftershow party - they could told the waiting fans something instead of leeting the ill feeling increase - many poor bouncers were getting the thrid degree by tired an pissed off fans. we were standin with some fans who had travelled that day from glasgow and some from blacpool and were goin home again that day with no sleep - so understandably if theyd announced P wouldnt be on they could left and got some shut eye somwhere. the indigo site definatly said it was prince offical aftershow party - party i think being the key word - if you want to get all technical about it, its not billed as an aftershw however the tix do say that but that is probably due to the amount of space their heat transfer printers can output to ie a cetain number of characters etc.

my problem is still the fact that it has not been made CLEAR that he is not prforming. i went knowing that there was a chance the band would not be there! i think many pople were NOT under that impression. however, the mismanagement of the indigo2 is actually to blame as they coulda turned the situation around, made a party atmostphere and some would have a been alittle happier - the mood was SOUR!!!

GoldiesParade said:

Yes, but they can't argue it constitutes as a show perfmance by Prince, the name on the ticket, and the name in the advertisements.
[Edited 8/6/07 4:34am]

lol
this again
i offer the below as help not as the beginning (or end!) of a debate - take it or leave it its up to you - i have no wish to be drawn or to argue about who is right or not

couple of points -

1. ticketmaster are at fault here - they advertised for what a reasonable person would consider would include prince playing for an admittedly variable amount of time per night
2. the fact that on princes site after purchase the lack of a guarantee was posted is irrelevant - its between them and who they contracted with - my contract is with ticketmaster

i have no beef with prince at all

dont blame him tbh - after a 2/3 hour show it is his choice to play or not and would assume that this was stipulated in his contract with aeg who in turn should have stipulated this to ticketmaster who in turn should have mad this clear when selling instead of mis-selling
incidentally i may have the contractual parties wrong in between prince and us the consumer

the misrepresentation is ticketmaster's

if he doesnt play when i turn up i certainly will demand a refund and if none appears will sue ticketmaster

as some may know i referred to myself as a lawyer on another thread
its an all encompassing term that includes anyone who practices law
i am actually a uk solicitor and run a medium sized practice - www.brearleyssolicitors.com - somewhere on there there is my picture lurking (!) - come say hello if you see me at any of the gigs!
we deal with, amongst other things, contractual disputes and consumer law

for those wanting a definitive answer the law never gives one - it is about interpretation and opinion - its just that i happen to think my opinion is right and i am prepared to test it in court if need be!

this whole mix up is a shame as its brilliant that prince is in the uk and doing shows at all - its just i have no intention of being ripped off by a fat conglomerate called ticketmaster - just as prince, who felt ripped off by warner, stood his ground, then so shall i lol - totally understand those that feel it is pointless for £25 etc but to me principles are important and this is one such priciple! its also of course about much more when you have bought quite a few such tix for groups of people to quite a few such shows - £25 x ? x ? = a big rip off

peace

OperatingThetan said:

the way they were sold was the same
if he didnt turn up for the main show at all - refund due
same for the aftershow

re the person above who has suggested that any action in the courts would risk paying princes lawyers fees -

1.the action is against ticketmaster not prince
2.the action is small claims court and therefore no solicitors fees either side

as someone else correctly pointed out above you risk the court fee only

m3taverse said:

When I attended on Wednesday I had no notion that there was a guaranteed performance nor did I have this idea when I purchased my tickets.

As far as I was concerned, the tickets were for addmitance to Prince's Aftershow. Prince's venue AFTER the show. There is nothing in the word aftershow that describes or conveys the guarantee of another show taking place.

LoveRobot said:

They were sold through the Ticketmaster Merchant, yes. But these were not concert tickets but Aftershow tickets that allow you addmitance to Prince's Aftershow.

This is Prince's venue after the show, thus the use of the word 'aftershow'. As it is after Prince's concert and arranged by Prince, of course his name is rightly printed on the ticket.

However, nowhere is a performance explicitly guaranteed. Nowhere was that written or communicated. Nobody has even been able to link me to information remotely suggesting it.

Prince performances at aftershows have never been guaranteed in all the years I've been a fan. In 2002 I had to attend 3 aftershows to get ONE 45 minute performance at the Marquee. I just fail to conceive how this year is any different.

m3taverse said:

Not what it says on my ticket.

And no one is going to go to a small claims court because of the fees involved and they can argue that you still get a performance which is exactly what you get, we only interpret that its a Prince performance not a Rashida or Costa one.

OperatingThetan said:

this where we have to disagree
it all comes down to the 'man on the clapham omnibus' - to put it another way the non-prince fan
you are using your previous experiences of prince to cloud your view of this
anyone outside th prince circle (including a judge) will in my opinion buy tickets believing they will see prince play at a small club venue after the main show
that is the way in which they have been sold - your assumptions based on past experience of this particular artist are irrelevant - it is about what was advertised, paid for and provided that counts
if he played for 30 secs each night i wouldnt have a leg to stand on!

GoldiesParade said:

i will if need be
the fees are v small and i get them back when i win

God - if only I got to see Rashidia or Costa, instead i got Dr John - with all respect nothing to do with Prince except that hed played at the same venue (or was rostered to) the same night!!!!

Ive fired of my complaint to TM, i suggest more ppl do. Its a polite email, and Ive been told that it may take up 28 days for a reply.

From what I know of working at such places - it will be passed to their legal eagle and then well all be sent a generic email - thats when we should mention the small claims court or take the advice of our solicitor/orger friend

btw - ticketmaster presumeably feel they should make it clear as they have changed their webiste and advertising to reflect that "prince and the band are not guaranteed to perform"
fair enough
but too late in respect of those who have already paid

^ exactly. the point is 02/ticketmaster almost always certainly knew prince's performances were not guaranteed every night, and could easily have pointed this out. they chose not to, they chose to take the money and run. no wonder more casual fans were annoyed. prince is also partly to blame too, for not realizing or not caring what was going on (absurd for someone who, going by his daily mail stunt, is trying to attract new fans or bring back old fans).

everything about this 21 nights in london shiz reeks of sickening commercialism, from the pumping people full of alcohol til they collapse to the apparently underwhelming vip treatment to the aftershow tickets being misrepresented to the not the telling people prince has left the aftershow and is not going to play. not that i'd expect anything less from a venue named after a telecommunications firm.
[Edited 8/6/07 5:38am]

Some people really seem to be missing the point here.

If you are happy paying for a non Prince performance (like Friday night) at the aftershow, fine.

If someone feels agrieved, they have every right too. If I had been there, I would be getting a refund, no doubt about it.

We can all have an opinion as to whether we should expect P to perform, but this matters not in the eyes of the law. What matters is how something was desribed when sold, and what was delivered.

If we stick to the facts for anyone who bought from Ticketmaster:

1. The Tickets for the aftershows were sold (and still are) along side the tickets in the main arena. (could be argued "implication")

2. The aftershow tickets are clearly listed in the "concerts" section of their website. (The term "concert" is the arguement here)

3. Their website is a legal extension of their advertising. If they advertise, and agree to sell, they they must honour the contract of sale. Only if they do not take your money can they change the "offer to treat".

4. The tickets do NOT say party on them.

5. The tickets were sold in the concert section under the artist "Prince". A performace by other artists, and not Prince, is very likely to be judged as mis-representation.

6. The statement "The White hot place to hang for those still in need of some serious grooves. Prince and the band are not guaranteed to perform." was added AFTER a great deal of tickets were sold. In fact, it has only just started appearing on the Ticketmaster website. Therefore, this clause, or any released by 3121.com form no part of your contract.

7. There is no legal definition of "aftershow". It hasn't been proved it means something after the main concert, it doesn't mean its a second show. Any arguement on this point is a red herring. the point is, the "Aftershow" was advertised as a"Concert" not a "party". A Concert should therefore be reasonably expected.

8. You contract is with Ticketmaster, not Prince or AEG. You can only take action against Ticketmaster.


Basically, if you want a refund from Fridays show, it should be a formality. No legal representive in their right mind would challenge your request. Also, the fact they they have now changed the wording this week is likely to prove that they have not properly advertised it in the first place.

If you state these facts in a clear and polite email to Ticketmaster, there is a good chance they will just roll over. If the don't simply make a small claim online. or hand it over to your credit card company to sort it out as they have equal liability.

To take action as a small claims online is painless. It doesn't mean going to court (unless they fail to concede, which would be very interesting!). You simply need the registered address of Tickemaster and a credit card. The fee to apply is £30. Add this to the price of the ticket if you file a claim.

Now that just leaves those who feel a 5 minute performance was a rip off/was acceptable!

Again, I don't think 5 minutes could be deemed an "acceptable service, but thats a whole different ball game!!!!!

SquirrelMeat said:

yup thats about it
though the 5 mins / 5 secs thing is interesting!
thats the great thing about the law - no hard / fast answers - !!

LoveRobot said:

Funny thing is, I have a sneeking suspision that another artist was taken to court some years ago for only performing for 15 minutes. The artist lost as the concert did not constitute acceptable value!

Maybe I'm imagining it.

SquirrelMeat said:

not heard of that one
can see the argument though
at the end of the day i am really stoked about getting to see him again - main show, aftershow whatever!
long time since manchester

rwb78 said:

It should be called an "After Party" then. An afterparty w/ a DJ and live music. His name shouldn't even be on the ticket IMO.

Found this at http://www.thisislondon.c...rtComments



Going on the 28th to Concert and the Afterparty... if there is no show by 1:30am...I'll be off to my bed....pretty pissed he might not show but at least I can now expect him NOT to appear !!

to be fair to prince, he probably would have showed if he knew marcus garvey was in the audience

theghostoftonym said:

I can't believe you lot!


How many of you have been Prince fans for more than five minutes?

I don't come on here very often - only to read fans thoughts etc., and have rarely commented until last week, simply because I wanted to join in with the excitement I know we've all shared. Especially anyone in Britain who's been wiating 5 years for this.

This is first time I've ever felt completely compelled to write something.

1. The aftershow thing.

I was there on Friday. I've been a follower of Prince long enough now to know that Prince has ALWAYS been unreliable where aftershows are concerned. So when he didn't show, I was stoked but didn't feel annoyed at anyone.

Frankly, I was chuffed that Dr John was playing. I think you'll find Prince is a big fan of New Orleans roots/blues/jazz, and this is why he probably requested Dr John stay on after his main show and perform for his fans.

I can name loads of times when he did this. Once upon a time, it was seen one of Prince's "eccentricities", at the same time a pain in the arse for anyone who bought tickets. How about Georeg Benson, Mica Paris or Chaka Kahn noodling or singing for an hour and Prince not bothering? This has happened loads of times.

So what I'm saying is - legal issues aside (I wouldn't dare get into that on here!), surely everyone knows Prince's aftershow parties aren't and never have been "Prince concerts".

I remember seeing an aftershow at the Hippodrome in '98 and everyone there was fu**ing delighted that he showed up. We would have been narked too if he hadn't shown, but it was definitely an atmosphere of relief when he did.

Why did I buy a ticket then? Cos the aftershow at the Hippodrome happened to be the greatest gig I ever saw in my life, and figured it was worth the £25 to have a chance to repeat that.

Bottom line: asftershows have never been billed as Prince concerts. TM, AEG, Prtince's management, whatever - I don't think anyone is to blame here. Anyone on here who is really that upset by it, why not just learn from this disapointment and think carefully next time before you gamble on it. Cos that's what Prince aftershows have always been - a gamble.


2. Workin' up a black sweat.

Come on you lot - whoever it was that said that in the first place (I can't even be bothered to find out by trawling back through that arguement) OBVIOUSLY didn't mean any harm.

And to the person that is taking offence - just let it lie. You have no more right judging a person for their choice of phrase than they do making a racist remark. If you're black and have suffered bad experiences of genuine racism I honestly feel for you - but come on - what they said was just one of many ways of describing someone physically.

I'm sure many people who saw the current Prine line-up would be hard pushed to know the name of every new band member, and let's face it, even the Twinz could be taken for backup singers to the undiscerning eye. So Tamar could indeed, and without any prejudice be described as one of the 'black' singers.

For the record, I used to play in a funk band with 4 black guys. As I was the only white guy in the band, the rest of the band always refered to me as the white guy. We've all got dark hair and brown eyes, so what else would the say..?

Honestly - this post is not intended to continue the above debates, rather just put some perspective on it all.

Come on - stop all this fussin' and fightin'! In the meantime, good luck to everyone trying to get refunds - I honestly hope you get some recompense, and fingers crossed everyone who has tickets for upcoming aftershows. (Me included, I'm hoping one out of the two I bought for Prince will play at!).

Peace.

larasavage said:

If you read my posts, I didn't get all worked up it was the other people that did. ALL I said is that it would have been more appropriate and polite to refer to her as a "singer" since that is what she's doing with Prince rather that as "a black girl" which has nothing to do with anything. This is ALL I've said yet everyone else has gotten all hype and rude about it.

larasavage said:

these ones were. and, worse, marketed to people who had little or absolutely no knowledge of prince's aftershow tradition.
[Edited 8/6/07 7:51am]

larasavage said:

They are all listed under Prince Concerts over at TM right now!

Fair point then. And you're right - I think one of teh biggest problems here is that Prince hit a wider market with this tour than he has for 15 years.

As a result I suppose a lot of people who aren't familiar with - as you say - tradition of these events were left disappointed. I think that's why I'm a bit dumbfounded by the number of negative posts on here though - I honestly thought prince.org was mainly made up of long-time die-hard fans who would have known this.

It's a bummer, and I feel genuinely bad for people who feel they've been duped.

SCNDLS said:

BOLLOCKS. You commented on how "insulting" it was to call her a black girl. You need to get rid of the huge chip on your shoulder about race. Maybe you should sue Prince for calling a song "Black Sweat" 'cos that's racist, isn't it?

larasavage said:

Same here . The good thing is TM have made it clear on the site now, so at least some members of the public will go in with eyes open.