The Power of Queueing Theory for The Concert Venue

Photo by Krizjohn Rosales from Pexels

 

In a recent post, I stated: “5,000 plus people trying to enter through less than four security lines is a safety concern in my opinion.” I want to use this post to help explain that statement and why I believe it.

 

I am fascinated by the science of management and even though the business of rock and roll may seem anything but. Venue operations math can help us develop ways to enhance the concert experience for fans, artists, and venue owners. One of these concepts is through the use of queuing theory.

 

Queuing theory is the mathematical study of waiting lines or queues. The formula may appear complex. However, there are a number of calculators online that will help you get the answers you need without understanding some pretty heady math that looks something like this from Portland State University.

 

 

Let’s move past these formulas and focus on how this can apply to your concert venue operations.

 

Part of the concert customer’s experience is entering the venue. This includes driving to the property, finding parking, and then going through security to gain entrance to the facility. This last element (security screening and entering the facility) present a unique challenge in that the operations team must weigh the customer experience of waiting in line against the demands of the security team to properly vet each patron. Part of establishing that balance is pinpointing how many security lanes you need per: (1) the venue capacity; (2) the arrival rate of guests; (3) the average security screen time; and (4) the cost of “x” amount of lanes, which can include equipment, such as screeners, and personnel.

 

You could achieve these results by speculating but guessing wrong could impact your operations in a few ways. For instance, your fans would likely end up waiting in line too long if you are underequipped. This could lead to lost consumer confidence and ultimately dipping revenues as word spreads about this negative aspect of the fan experience you provide. On the other hand, over equipping can lead to increased overhead and less profitability for the venue. Another unsustainable outcome. Luckily, there is a baseline to be found for virtually any venue and it is attained through a queuing theory calculation.

 

Let’s say that your venue’s capacity is 5,000. You open doors two hours before the show and a VIP lane an hour before that. You also know that a good chunk of your fans do not make it in on time due to traffic, family emergencies, etc. Taken together, you can estimate it would take four hours for the bulk of your customers to get through the gates. Your security team ensures that they can vet the average patron in 45 seconds or less and your observations say they are correct. Let’s place this information into our online queuing theory calculator.

 

We start by selecting the M/M/C model for a single queue with “C” amount of servers. Next, we need to average the number of people coming in per hour. To keep things simple, we will stick with a discrete probability. This means that we just divide 5,000 people by four hours, which is 1,250 patrons coming through the gates per hour. That is highly unlikely, but at this point, we are just looking for a baseline. We can adjust per our observations at a later time.

 

Place 1,250 under Arrivals/ Hour, which is Lambda in the calculator. Since your security team estimated they can vet each person in 45 seconds, that equates to 80 patrons per hour. Place 80 under Services/Hour, which is Mu.

 

Now let’s pick security lanes. Place four under the Number of Servers (C) and click Calculate. You will receive the following warning. “The queues will tend to infinity as Lambda is greater or equal than 4 times Mu.” This is telling us that you do not have enough servers to operate efficiently. It is NOT telling you it can’t be done. Rather, it is saying that there will be a back-up of the line. Remember, we are looking for a balance between customer experience, safety, and cost from which to start our ops planning. Further trial and error by selecting servers reveal that the optimal number of lanes is 16 based on these variables. At this level, your customer would walk directly into one of those lanes and spend (on average) 1.782 minutes waiting in line and another 45 seconds being screened. For a total service time just shy of three minutes. That is where you find the best customer experience at the lowest operations cost for a safe entrance into your venue.

 

Remember, this is your starting point. It is not saying anything less than 16 lanes for this size venue will fail. Rather, it is telling us that any number of security screeners below that will lead to a back-up of your line. I used a more advanced Excel calculator to find the average time your customer would wait if you only had four open lanes and found it to be between 27 and 30 minutes. This gives us a window. At four lanes, your customer could wait a half hour to get in while 16 lanes could lead to a zero wait time for the majority of your guests.

 

It is now up to you and your team to determine the balance between how long you want those customers to wait against the cost and logistics of adding more lanes. To do this you must take into account the price of additional screening stations (equipment and manpower) and if you have enough entrance points to accommodate their use. You could then analyze your open doors’ timeframe and how the line flows. Do more people come in at a certain time? Do you find that a large percentage of your clientele do not make it before the show? Finally, you could survey your customers about their experience. Did they have an issue waiting in line longer than 10, 15, 20, or 30 minutes? With this additional data, you are now more equipped to strike a balance between cost, customer experience, and the safety of your guests.

 

It all starts with queuing theory.

Don’t Overwhelm Venue Security with a Mismanaged Queue

 

Let’s face it.  We live in a radically different world where large groups have become targets for people with nefarious intent. As someone who not only works in live entertainment but spends his free time attending countless shows, I keep my head on a swivel around any crowd.  I watch for people demonstrating behaviors “outside the norm” such as loaners in places they shouldn’t be, excessive alpha-male behavior, and individuals who look extremely nervous or agitated. Once inside any venue, I seek out escape routes and tell my friends, where to meet, should we get separated if something happens.

 

One of the things that scare the hell out of me is when I watch ill-prepared operations teams mismanage patrons entering a venue. Here are a few examples I have witnessed in the past twelve months.

 

  • At one venue, patrons were let through security but the doors were not open yet. This led to a bottleneck between the security screening station and the doors. The team continued to push guests into this bottleneck, which led to the scanners misfiring. Rather than pausing the line, security screeners allowed patrons to enter without adequate checks in place.
  • At another concert, I walked through the metal detector. It went off and the person just looked at me and waved me through with no additional measures.
  • At a third show, I put all of my belongings inside my hat and placed the package in one of the plastic bins. A security guard simply looked down and slid my items through checkout without further analysis.

 

All of these situations shared a commonality – the entrance team was ill-prepared for the mass of people coming into the venue. Each team lacked one or more of the following elements: (1) not enough entrance lanes; (2) no senior team members directing employees on how to handle the influx; (3) employees capable of communicating to large masses of people; (4) improper queue set-up and direction. Let’s dive into each element.

 

Not enough entrance points: 5,000 plus people trying to enter through less than four security lines is a safety concern in my opinion. Even if your queues are properly set-up, your patrons informed of the security protocols ahead of time via email and social media, and your security team well trained. Employees get overwhelmed in these situations. I have yet to meet anyone who is 100% comfortable dealing with 5,000 people. Much less that many in the one to two hours before a show. When people get overwhelmed, they stop thinking rationally and the brain looks to reduce that pressure. This can lead to a bad decision to speed-up the vetting process and put everyone at risk.

 

No senior team members directing employees on how to handle the influx: The concert experience is best looked at in three phases – ingress, show, egress. Leadership must learn to allocate the proper amount of people for each phase. To do this, managers must be available to assess and allocate resources “on-the-fly.”

 

Employees who are capable of communicating to large masses of people: I see it time and time again. There are just one or two employees at the entrance of a show. They act reserved and operate from a “responsive” position waiting for customers to ask them questions. These individuals need to work from a mass-communication standpoint by proactively vocalizing to the crowd where the lanes start. Where the VIP entrance is. To have their tickets ready on their mobile devices, etc. When asked questions from confused guests, these employees need to be trained to answer quickly and efficiently so they can return to repeating the rules to the mass entering the facility.

 

Improper queue set-up and direction: If possible, queues should be set up as straight as possible. Try creating distance between the end of the queue and the screening area. You can do this by leaving space between the stanchions and the screener’s table or by adding a second table to create more space. This will craft a barrier between the queue and the screening personnel, help them feel less overwhelmed by the crowd, and mitigate scanner misfires. Signs for lane entrances should be placed overhead (about seven-plus feet) so guests can see where to go from a distance. Finally, your queue team should be proactive in directing people into open lanes to create efficient traffic flow.

 

Talk to your team after the show to understand what they felt what went right… what went wrong… and what could be done better for the next time. Take the extra time to speak with your security team. Find out if they felt overwhelmed and if they had adequate time to vet patrons entering the facility. Finally, survey your customers about their experience. You want both your employees and guests to feel safe and secure, so they can rock out with you for years to come.

A Ticket Scalping Benefit for Bands

 

Country-singer Kacey Musgraves was preparing for a sold-out show at the 1,800 seat Van Buren in Phoenix on February 13th, 2019 when she took home four trophies including Album of the Year at the 61st Grammy Awards on February 10th. Phoenix fans were lucky to find out that her management had already placed a second show on sale at the 5,000 capacity Comerica Theater in August.

 

I was certain that Musgraves new mass-market status was going to push demand, and consequently the price of tickets up. It appeared that I was not the only one.  The show sold great out of the gate and within weeks very few primary tickets were left. Fans were forced to purchase from the resale market. As usual, these prices were higher than the ticket’s face value – at least up until showtime.

 

Between 2:00 pm – 4:00 pm on show day a flood of tickets went on sale. Many at half the face value. Tickets are sometimes released closer to show time, but usually, these are from the act’s camp and sold on the primary market. Instead, these below-face value tickets were found on the resale markets. This got me thinking about the ticket brokering game, how it impacts the concert ecosystem, and if there is an added benefit to the practice.

 

Most of the press surrounding ticket scalpers or brokers is negative and rightfully so. They buy blocks of tickets at face value then jack up the prices. This results in less opportunity for true fans to enjoy their favorite artist. However, at its core, ticket brokering is pretty much the same as trading stocks. You buy a piece of a company at a reasonable price in hopes that their valuation will rise so you can sell the stock and earn money for your prediction. The same is true in ticket scalping. Individuals or companies buy up blocks of tickets based on the assumption that demand for a particular artist will increase. These entities then raise the price and make a profit on their analysis.

 

But what happens when these predictions are off and the broker is stuck with a block of tickets they can’t sell at face value? In the stock market, that individual can just hold onto the stock in hopes of a better-priced future. However, in the world of rock-and-roll concerts are time-sensitive. The ticket scalper’s opportunity to recoup his or her investment is gone forever once the lights hit. The only course of action is to sell at a loss and hope they make some of their money back.

 

This can be a HUGE benefit for the artist. In most scalping instances tickets are purchased at the agreed-upon ticket scaling rate between the venue, promoter, and artist’s management team. Yes, brokers buy up blocks of tickets, but they are typically doing so at face value, so the artist receives some benefit.  For one, they are more likely to have a sold-out show and for a band building their brand on the road. Sold-out shows help them appeal to promoters and talent buyers that represent larger spaces and better opportunities. As I mentioned in a previous post, buyers and promoters are constantly assessing the risk involved in booking an act and sold-out sales metrics help alleviate that concern. Second, and perhaps more important. The band and their team earn a larger paycheck. This helps them stay on the road.  Pay the crew, put on better concerts, market new events, and release new music.

 

I am not condoning ticket scalping. Especially in a day and age where bots can exasperate the process and cut off true fans within seconds. Just remember, scalping has been a part of the concert industry for decades. We all hate paying more than the face value of the ticket we receive. However, there are plenty of times where savvy fans get into shows at exceptional rates without impacting the Artist’s bottom line. There is some benefit to that.

 

 

 

Promoter and Buyers Explained

 

I am a talent buyer in the casino industry.  Yet, some people tend to call me a promoter and while both share similar responsibilities. There are some differences between the two as well as one very important concept both share.  Watch the video to learn more about talent buyers and promoters from entertainment consultant Jeremy Larochelle.

 

 

 

The Email Operations Killer

The Email Cc’ combines a benign appearance and exponential results that can swallow-up the average office worker’s day. Let’s take a look at why the email Cc’ should come with a warning label much like a pack of cigarettes.

 

If I were to email an employee, they would likely reply. That is (at a minimum) two emails.

 

Not too shabby.

 

Consider instead, I “Cc” two people on that email. This increases the likelihood that a number of different exchanges could result. Cc’d party one (1) could email the employee directly. The employee could email Cc2. Cc2 could email the whole group… the list goes on and on. To calculate the number of potential exchanges we need to utilize the permutation formula from the mathematical study of Combinatorics.

 

To calculate the permutations of potential interactions between the sender, receiver, and the two “Cc’d” parties we will apply the permutation formula Four choose Two (4!c2!), which is 4×3 or 12. We then need to add four since each entity can also email the entire group. This results in 16 possible permutations.

 

Whoaa… those two Cc’s just increased the email chain potential interaction by 700%.

 

Imagine, a few days ago, I received an email with thirty plus Cc’s and I know I am not the only one swamped in electronic correspondence. Just look at what Harvard Business Review reported:

 

“The average professional spends 28% of the work day reading and answering email, according to a McKinsey analysis. For the average full-time worker in America, that amounts to a staggering 2.6 hours spent and 120 messages received per day.”

 

For many, the Cc’ seems so innocent and that is where the problem starts. We add our bosses to that quick response to a client to show them we are on it. We Cc’ Sharon in accounting, because it seems like the right thing to do. We may even Cc’ other members of the client’s team since they always include those people in their emails anyway. And why wouldn’t we? It takes barely any time to include them in the chain and it doesn’t cost us anything.

 

Or does it?

 

Harvard Business Review’s article demonstrates that this afterthought can be detrimental to your entire operation. I contend that much of those 2.6 hours per day spent working on one’s inbox can be attributed to the overzealous use of Cc’s in many organizations. We already demonstrated that four people on a chain can result in the potential for 14 additional email interactions. Add two more on the Cc’ line and the total potential interactions jump to 36. Now consider that HBR’s research tells us that it takes, on average, either 15-30 seconds for someone to read an email or three-seconds to delete it. Then, it takes that individual another 64 seconds on average to return to their normal state of work. It doesn’t take rocket science to figure out this is an unsustainable practice.

 

Sure, we are not reading every single email we are Cc’d on and it doesn’t take many of us 64 seconds to return to work after reading every email. These are just averages. The point of this article is to demonstrate through sheer math just how dangerous those Cc’s can be.

 

Use them wisely my friends.

Mapping Your Electronic Drums Easily for Midi

 

One of the keys to getting a quality electronic drum take is for the musician to have a good feel on the kit. Is she hearing the snare nuisances envisioned?  Does her hi-hat foot create just the right wash?  While Steven Slate Drums does an exceptional job out of the box when mapping your Roland kit. Sometimes, things can be “out-of-whack.” You will likely need to re-map your MIDI notes To fix that snare sound that isn’t triggering… the ride that sounds like a splash… etc.

 

Here is a “down and dirty” way to achieve these results right from the Roland Drum head.