Skip to main content

Changes to Public Performance Arrangements Led to Disputes Industry Should Honour Commitments to Build Hong Kong as an Events Capital

  • 2024.11.15

Hong Kong is an acclaimed events capital, with the government vigorously promoting its thriving mega event economy. The city’s calendar is replete with a diversified offering of public shows and performances. Not only are local show enthusiasts busy securing tickets, many tourists are also drawn to Hong Kong to see their favourite performers. Regrettably, the Consumer Council often receives complaints related to these public performances. Reported issues include the denial of refunds despite unforeseen changes to the performer line-up, unclear wording in fan meeting arrangements leading to unmet expectations, and show equipment obstructing attendees’ views.

The Council urges the industry to maintain transparency in event promotions by clearly highlighting any restrictions and risks, thereby empowering consumers to make informed decisions. While organisers should strive to deliver on their advertised promises, if changes are necessary due to unexpected circumstances, they should promptly inform affected consumers and offer considerate, flexible rearrangements. Every show presents a unique experience, and even different events held at the same venue may have varying seating arrangements, layout, and pricing plans. The industry is encouraged to leverage the ticketing systems to provide more detailed and accurate information. Consumers should also be aware that a ticket typically covers the entire event, and changes to individual performers or segments of the show may not warrant a refund request.

Case 1: Planned Headliner Pulled Out from Music Festival but Refund Denied

The complainant, a Mainland resident, had purchased a 3-day ticket for around $2,000 to attend an upcoming 3-day outdoor music festival in Hong Kong, attracted by the performance line-up. However, prior to the event, the organiser, Company A, announced that three of the performers, including the heavily promoted headliner, would be unable to participate. Disappointed by this change, the complainant decided to cancel his trip to Hong Kong, as the revised line-up without the main act no longer interested him. Opining that the performer line-up was a crucial factor in influencing consumers’ purchasing decisions, and the promotion featuring the headline act could possibly be a case of misrepresentation, he lodged a complaint with the Council and sought a refund.

In their response to the Council, Company A cited the terms of sale, stating that an admission ticket covered all performances and activities during the festival. Therefore, refunds could not be entertained due to changes in individual performers. The complainant then requested other forms of compensation, such as exchanging his ticket for the next music festival. However, Company A argued that the decision not to attend was a personal one, and suggested the complainant to transfer his ticket to family or friends instead, refusing to make any additional arrangements. The Council recommended the complainant to consider consulting legal advice before deciding whether to seek further redress. 

Case 2: Send-off Changed from Close-up to Seated, Causing Disappointment

The complainant was thrilled to hear that her favourite Korean singer would be holding a fan meeting in Hong Kong. From the organiser Company B’s social media page, she discovered that those who purchased the highest-priced ticket (approximately $1,850 per ticket) would be entitled to send off the singer up close after the fan meeting. Accordingly, she went on to buy 2 such tickets. However, just 4 days before the event, Company B updated the send-off session arrangements on its social media, stating that fans would be required to remain seated during this segment. Upset by this unilateral change, the complainant tried to file a complaint with Company B but received no response, leading her to seek the Council’s assistance.

In its response to the Council, Company B explained that the details of the send-off session were coordinated with the management company. It added that Korean celebrities typically would not leave the stage to interact with the audience. Moreover, what was perceived as a change was in fact just a rewording on social media to avoid confusion, while the send-off arrangements had remained the same all along. The Council followed up afterwards to see how the event had proceeded, and learned that the organiser had added a lucky draw of 5 autographed instant photos, which was met with enthusiasm by the audience. Since the complainant did not reach out to the Council again after the fan meeting, the issue was considered resolved.

Case 3: Suspended Speakers and Numerous Dead Pixels on Display Screens Obsructing the View

The complainant learned that his favourite singer would be holding a concert at the open-air event space in Central. He noticed that about 70% of the seats were allocated to the highest-priced category of $1,380. Concerned that the viewing experience could vary significantly between the front and back rows of this sizeable section, the complainant decided to buy 2 tickets priced at $880 for seats that were more to the side and further back. After attending the concert, the complainant was dissatisfied with the quality of the facilities and seating arrangements. One issue was the numerous dead pixels on the large LED display screens used as the stage background for real-time performance display. Another issue was the many large, suspended speakers above the stage that blocked the view, significantly affecting his concert experience. However, his seats were not labelled as “obstructed view seats” when he purchased the tickets.

Concerning the ticket categories, quality of facilities and venue design among other issues, the complainant submitted a complaint to the Council, hoping that Company C would make improvements in the future. The Council contacted Company C multiple times to relay these comments, but has yet to receive any response. As such, the Council has filed the case and will continue to monitor the company’s practices. The complainant also mentioned the possibility of further reaching out to the Hong Kong Customs and Excise Department.

With an abundance of diverse events on offer throughout the year in Hong Kong, consumer may pay heed to the following advice to minimise disputes during the ticketing and performances experience:

  • When trying to secure tickets, successfully getting past the ticketing queue would undoubtedly be thrilling. However, do not forget to carefully read the terms and conditions of sale, and pay attention to special arrangements such as real-name registration and the ticket purchase limits;
  • Before finalising the transaction, double-check all details, including the ticket date, quantity, price category, names of ticket holders (if real-name registration is required), and whether wheelchair seats have been mistakenly selected. Take a screenshot of the page with the entered personal information, and properly retain the purchase receipt and payment records;
  • It is advisable to have the organiser’s information and contact details on hand. This would enable consumers to make enquiries should there be any changes to the event, or to make claims in the unfortunate event of disputes;
  • Never purchase from scalpers. In recent years, there have been many cases of fraud involving ticket scalpers, where consumers were swindled out of money while still being ticketless. In the special case of a ticket refund initiated by the organiser, note that it may be processed only via the official ticketing channels. This means that holders of scalped tickets may not be able to receive a refund.

 

Download the article (Chinese only): https://ccchoice.org/577-performance

 

Consumer Council reserves all its right (including copyright) in respect of CHOICE magazine and Online CHOICE.