feat(web): Wave 4 — prose layouts + /policies on Tailwind typography
diff --git a/content/posts/2026/ticketing-platform-showdown/index.md b/content/posts/2026/ticketing-platform-showdown/index.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4e81f34 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/posts/2026/ticketing-platform-showdown/index.md @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@ +--- +title: "Ticketing platform showdown" +pubDate: 2026-04-05T20:04:48.000Z +updatedDate: 2026-04-05T20:04:48.000Z +draft: false +excerpt: "We have used four ticketing platforms across 37+ events. Each one taught us something about conversion rates, data ownership, audience trust, and the hidden costs that eat into margins. Here … Read more" +categories: + - Guides +tags: + - financial + - format-case-study + - tech + - tone-instructional +featured: + src: https://cdn.slist.net/posts/ticketing-platform-showdown/cover.png + alt: "Multiple event tickets scattered for comparison" +legacy_wp_id: 16005 +--- +We have used four ticketing platforms across 37+ events. Each one taught us something about conversion rates, data ownership, audience trust, and the hidden costs that eat into margins. Here is the honest breakdown of every platform we tested and why we ultimately decided to build our own. + +## Resident Advisor + +RA was our first platform. It has the best built-in audience for electronic music — people actively browsing RA for events in their city represent a warm audience you do not have to create from scratch. Our Silo debut sold 122 tickets through RA for $749.70 in revenue. +Diff truncated (70 lines total). View full commit on GitHub →
