Ignoring the part about your vibes, Ticketmasters business strategy is well covered at this point and it is precisely what you claim it isn't.

It first sells the ticket, that's the money that partially goes to the creator... And then it lets the buyers resell their ticket through it's platform, which you correctly identified as scalping, but that's kinda core to is profit strategy

▲

anonymous908213 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm aware that Ticketmaster supports scalping and profits from it itself. However, the premise of the article is that the artist hires Ticketmaster and profits from allowing Ticketmaster to do this on their behalf. Where is "blame as a service" here, when the reality is that Tickermaster is engaging in rent-seeking behaviour, extracting excess profit solely for its own benefit and not the artist's?

▲

RandallBrown 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I think the blame as a service is about the exorbitant fees that Ticketmaster charges. I have heard that some of those fees often go back to the artist.

	▲	anonymous908213 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I'd be very interested in a more reputable source than "I have heard". It would make a substantial difference in the validity of the premise of the article, but I can't find anything that suggests this is actually the case other than baseless speculation on forum threads. I've read a lot of Reddit posts asserting that artists are in cahoots with Ticketmaster and not a lot of any evidence. Ticketmaster itself, as well as anything I can find written by journalists, suggests that the artist gets only the face value of the ticket and the fees are shared between Ticketmaster and the venue.