Unions’ crackdown on ‘dynamic’ pricing following Oasis’ comeback tour poses huge risks, says ALEX BRUMMER

As Culture Secretary, Lisa Nandy has a huge role to play in nurturing and monitoring Britain’s vibrant creative sector.

UK film and music production, gaming, architecture and sports broadcasting are huge sources of revenue, generating up to £126bn a year of value for the economy.

His decision to investigate “dynamic” ticket pricing, after the cost of Oasis concert tickets soared over the weekend, will no doubt win favour with rock fans.

As someone who has no interest in the Manchester band’s emotional rollercoaster, I find the alleged ticket price rip-off of little interest.

I admit, however, that I paid far more than my fair share on the secondary market, via the oft-criticised agency Viagogo, to see the incomparable rocker Bruce Springsteen at Wembley in July. His three-plus hours of uninterrupted performance were worth every penny.

The music economy has changed a lot with streaming. Artists can no longer count on making huge profits from vinyl or CD sales.

Live music at concerts and dozens of music festivals (Glastonbury being the main attraction) have become major sources of income.

The estimated £400m the Gallagher brothers generate from concerts through ticket and merchandise revenue will offset the decline in royalties on existing recordings.

Live music has become a big enough revenue stream to be scrutinized by Goldman Sachs.

It estimates it will generate £27bn of revenue this year and £38bn by 2030, with 70 per cent of cash coming from ticket sales. Oasis is a big plus for UK plc.

As popular as ticket price consultation is, Nandy should be aware of the minefield he is stepping into. Dynamic pricing is not a new concept dreamt up by Noel and Liam or ticketing agencies to rip off fans.

It is used in the commercial field to better match consumers with services. It is the mainstay of airlines, which pioneered what is known as yield management.

That’s why plane tickets to Mallorca early in the morning on a weekday are much cheaper than at 10am on a Friday during a bank holiday weekend.

I have recently been trying to book a hotel in Washington for the time when the IMF and other financial institutions meet in late October. On the days of key meetings, hotel rates skyrocket only to fall dramatically once the bankers leave town.

House Leader Lucy Powell is unhappy that she had to pay double the face value for Oasis tickets at a retail outlet.

But it’s better than paying four or five times the face value to the scalpers at the venue’s doors only to find that the entrances are on the upper levels, where even powerful binoculars are insufficient.

Labour ministers should familiarise themselves with the theory of supply and demand.

Wrong move

Rightmove is a UK technology innovator that has brought transparency and competitive advantage to the property market.

It is also among several innovative companies that are using technology to overcome barriers to entry and offer a service to consumers. Even more impressively, it has done so as a publicly traded company on the London Stock Exchange (LSE).

The prospect of a bid by an Australian subsidiary of Rupert Murdoch’s vast News Corp empire was enough to send shares soaring 27.4 per cent, valuing the empire at £5.6 billion.

It is an example of why the LSE has come to be regarded as the bargain basement for potential buyers. From a national interest perspective, it would be far more satisfying to see Rightmove as the predator rather than the prey.

The timing of the deal recognises that UK interest rates are set to fall and that housing shortages in Western democracies are not easily solved.

If a formal approach does come, chairman Andrew Fisher, a veteran independent M&S ​​director, should resist the temptation to sell.

Nerves of steel

Perhaps the board of Rightmove and other British companies could take a leaf out of US presidential candidate Kamala Harris’ book.

Campaigning in Philadelphia, Harris promised that if she wins on November 5, the White House would block a £11.5bn bid for US Steel from Japanese rival Nippon.