Talk:Ticketron
Appearance
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ticketron Today
[edit]Ticketron[1] is still a legitimate online business. The Ticketron Brand was acquired from Ticketmaster in 2017 as well as the Federal Trademarks and full rights to the Ticketron brand.
Ticketron is now operating as an online network of websites. Operating as the Ticketron Network, the Ticketron Brand includes Ticketron.com, Ticketron.net, Ticketron.org, Ticketron.us and other websites specializing in the resale of event tickets nationwide.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.199.54.137 (talk) 16:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
- The Ticketron that exists today is not in any way (seemingly at least) related to the entity that was, other than in having acquired the brand name and being associated with the sale of event tickets. Rather than being a first-party seller of tickets, it is just (seemingly) a completely different company with a completely different business model (which appears like it aggregates resale-market ticket listings). DBalling (talk) 21:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
- Responding to the commit-comment "Ticketron never claimed to be a primary seller of event tickets and clearly states we are a resale ticket marketplace. There is no reason why another persons opinion of what it is should be written on the live page." ... This article is about the company which no longer exists, the primary-seller company that was Ticketron. If you think the new "Ticketron Network" is noteworthy enough to deserve an article of its own, feel free to create one and see if the community agrees about that noteworthiness. But trying to turn an article about the defunct company into an advertising path for the current owner of the trademark is not appropriate. DBalling (talk) 16:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
- That is not appropriate. The company brand acquried from Ticketmaster at one time was the original Ticketron Brand. So to simply say that the original brand is defunct is not accurate information. No matter how the brand is revived it is important information for anyone reading to realize that this is the original brand as acquired by the Ticketron Network, which was acquired by Ticketmaster in 1991. I do not see how that is not relevant to the Ticketron discussion. That is my point is that its all relevant to the original brand history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.199.54.137 (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
- Here's what, I think, is the disconnect - This article isn't about "Ticketron the brand", it's about "Ticketron the *company*". It would be appropriate, perhaps, to add a sentence (after the sentence about the Lovecraft group) which tells the fate of the trademark. Something along the lines of "In Month, Year, the Ticketron mark was sold to company-name, who continue to use it to this day." (Presuming that suitable reputable sources can be cited to back up that claim, obviously). If the company in question is "notable" enough, then it could link to that company's Wikipedia article. DBalling (talk) 21:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
- That is not appropriate. The company brand acquried from Ticketmaster at one time was the original Ticketron Brand. So to simply say that the original brand is defunct is not accurate information. No matter how the brand is revived it is important information for anyone reading to realize that this is the original brand as acquired by the Ticketron Network, which was acquired by Ticketmaster in 1991. I do not see how that is not relevant to the Ticketron discussion. That is my point is that its all relevant to the original brand history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.199.54.137 (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
References
This is about the Ticketron that was
[edit]This article is about the Ticketron that was in operation from the 1960s until 1990. Start another article if you want to write about something else. -- Pemilligan (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Pemilligan: I really don't see the point. It's a direct lineage. Unless the new company has enough media coverage to warrant it's own article, which it doesn't because I already looked, we should hook it in this article.--v/r - TP 00:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Categories:
- Start-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- Start-Class Computer hardware articles
- Mid-importance Computer hardware articles
- Start-Class Computer hardware articles of Mid-importance
- All Computing articles
- Start-Class Technology articles
- WikiProject Technology articles