Should you offer a public transport discount on event tickets?

Someone suggests taking a few dollars off admission for anyone who comes by bus or train. The hope is that attendees save money, fewer people drive, and your event gets something positive to talk about. Then you start working through the details. Who qualifies? What happens if the train is cancelled? And how much ticket income are you prepared to give up?

A public transport event ticket discount is worth testing when a usable journey already exists, cost is a real obstacle, and you can afford the offer even if many recipients would have taken public transport anyway. Start with a limited allocation and clear conditions. Judge the spending against the change you wanted, rather than assuming every discounted ticket represents a car journey avoided.

I'd fix an awkward return journey before reducing admission prices. A cheaper ticket doesn't help someone whose last train leaves during the headline set. Once the journey works, though, an incentive can be a reasonable part of your travel plan. You just need to know what you're buying with the subsidy.

This guide explains how to choose the offer, work through its cost, handle eligibility and disruption, and review the result. There's a fictional concert example and a planning brief you can adapt. All dollar amounts in the examples are USD and invented for explanation, not actual ticket prices, transport quotes or expected results.

Decide what you want the offer to change

You might want fewer cars using a narrow entrance. You might want local people to try a bus route they haven't considered. Or you might want to make the combined ticket and travel bill affordable for people who would otherwise stay home. Those are different objectives, even if each campaign uses the same discount.

Choose the main one before setting the amount. If the problem is parking, you need to understand vehicles arriving and the parking arrangements you can actually change. If it's affordability, ask whether the saving reaches the people facing that obstacle. If it's additional ticket sales, look at what those sales leave after costs. Don't let the easiest report become the objective by default.

Be comfortable with rewarding existing public transport users if that's your intention. They shouldn't have to pretend they would otherwise drive. An appreciation offer can be a deliberate spending choice, with a budget and a reason. The mistake is describing that reward as evidence of a new travel decision when you haven't established one.

The same applies to access. An offer may help someone attend without adding profit to the event. You can choose to fund that outcome, just as you might fund another part of audience development. Record the amount you're willing to spend and where the money comes from. Calling it a sales campaign later won't make the original cost disappear.

Write a plain sentence your team can use: "We're testing whether a modest admission reduction helps local attendees use an existing evening bus service, within an approved budget." Add the actual service, event and measure. Someone handling a buyer enquiry should understand the purpose without needing to read a sustainability strategy.

Keep this offer within your broader sustainable event travel plan. That guide covers making the journey work. Here, the decision is whether paying an incentive improves the result enough to justify the cost and administration.

Check the journey people would actually make

Start with the event date and the audience areas you expect to serve. Check the current routes, service times, changes and walking connection to your entrance. Then do the return. An afternoon timetable and a station pin on a map aren't enough to recommend a journey after an evening show.

Include the time people need to leave the building, collect belongings and reach the platform or stop. Check the route with the venue and relevant transport provider, including assistance arrangements. Avoid recommending the absolute last connection as though everyone can make it at the same pace. Publish enough detail for people to decide whether it suits them.

For events in Great Britain, the Health and Safety Executive's event transport guidance recommends coordination with relevant authorities and transport providers around the site, including additional services where appropriate. Use the equivalent local responsibilities elsewhere. A discount campaign doesn't replace that planning or give your team authority over the public highway.

Ask whether the route has room for the demand you're encouraging. A regular service may be suitable for scattered arrivals but struggle when your audience leaves together. Discuss the event with the provider rather than turning a published timetable into a promise of reserved places. If you're arranging extra transport, confirm who operates it, what is booked and what happens when it's full.

Think about people coming as a group. One person may drive because the alternatives make several fares expensive, while another already holds a season pass. Others may arrive by rail and leave by taxi. These differences affect which offer helps and what you can reasonably infer from its use. Don't assume everyone claiming a bus benefit has the same starting problem.

If the route remains uncertain, delay the discount announcement. You can still publish accurate travel information and invite questions. Waiting for confirmation is easier to explain than withdrawing an offer after people have bought an event ticket on the strength of it.

Compare an admission discount with help paying for travel

An admission discount reduces what the attendee pays your event. A travel discount reduces the fare through an arrangement with the transport provider. Included transport bundles a defined travel entitlement into the event offer. These can produce similar headline savings for a buyer while leaving your business with very different costs and responsibilities.

Ask providers what they already support before designing a process yourself. First Bus describes promotional codes for eligible bus tickets, including offers for event attendees. Its published process involves agreeing the requirements and supplying codes for redemption in its app. That's an example of a provider arrangement, not a promise that the same service or terms exist on your route.

A provider discount may keep the admission price intact and make the travel saving clearer. Check who funds it, which services and dates qualify, whether existing pass holders benefit, and what reporting you'll receive. A code redemption can establish that someone bought an eligible travel product. It still doesn't necessarily establish that they used it or changed their original plan.

There are also arrangements that include travel in event admission. Transport Victoria's special event ticketing information describes a Melbourne programme with eligibility, branding and payment conditions. Treat it as a local option to investigate directly. Don't copy its structure into another city or assume your event qualifies because public transport is nearby.

Compare complete commitments. A provider may charge against total participants rather than only people who board. Your admission discount may apply only to a limited allocation. One arrangement might require payment before the event; another reduces incoming ticket receipts as people buy. Put those differences in the budget before comparing a cost per user.

For a small first test, choose the simplest arrangement that addresses the actual obstacle. If attendees mainly need confidence about the route home, better information may do more than either discount. If fare cost is the problem and a provider can offer a workable reduction, investigate that before giving away admission revenue.

Work out what the discount costs your event

There are two useful money questions. First, how much less do you receive when the offer is used? Second, how does the event's result change compared with what would have happened without it? Keep both. The first sets the spending limit; the second helps you decide whether the offer was worthwhile.

Imagine a fictional concert called Riverworks Sessions. A normal ticket leaves the organizer $40 after applicable taxes and selling costs. Serving one more attendee costs $8, leaving $32 towards the event's other bills and profit. These are organizer receipts, not advertised checkout prices. The venue and artist bills remain unchanged within the spare capacity used in this example.

Suppose the proposed offer reduces organizer receipts by $5 per eligible admission, after allowing for the actual effect on taxes and fees. An eligible ticket then leaves $35 before the $8 attendee cost, or $27 afterwards. In a real campaign, calculate the customer saving and your retained amount separately. They may differ.

The team proposes a maximum of 120 discounted admissions. At $5 each, that authorizes up to $600 in reduced receipts compared with selling those same admissions normally. Setup and additional support cost another $180. The team therefore needs approval for up to $780 in reduced receipts and extra costs before counting any additional sales or other benefits.

The $180 includes the extra paid work required for this test. If existing staff absorb some work within unchanged wages, show their hours separately so you can compare the demands on the team. Don't count the same labour twice. Equally, don't call the offer effortless because the time doesn't produce a separate invoice.

Use the maximum allocation to approve the spending. A forecast of modest take-up doesn't protect you when the offer suddenly becomes popular. You can increase a limit later through an approved decision, subject to the terms already promised. It's much harder to recover ticket income after an unrestricted code has circulated.

Separate additional buyers from people who would have bought anyway

Suppose all 120 discounted admissions sell. For this scenario, assume 90 would have sold at the normal price and 30 are genuinely additional purchases that leave no later full-price buyer without a ticket. These are invented assumptions for comparison. An ordinary sales report cannot tell you that split by itself.

The 30 additional attendees contribute $810, because each leaves $27 after the stated attendee cost. The reduction given to the 90 people who would have bought anyway costs $450. Subtract the $180 campaign cost and the event is $180 better off under these assumptions. That's the change in its result, not its total profit.

You can check it another way. With the offer, 120 attendees leave $3,240 after the stated attendee costs, or $3,060 after campaign administration. Without it, the assumed 90 normal-price attendees would have left $2,880. The difference is the same $180. Keep one calculation in your record so nobody subtracts the discount twice.

Now change only the assumed additional demand. If 10 of the 120 admissions are additional and 110 would have sold normally, the extra contribution is $270. Reductions for the other buyers cost $550. After administration, the event is $460 worse off. The same redemption total can support a very different result.

With these assumptions and exactly 120 discounted admissions, 25 additional purchases would leave the event $20 better off; 24 would leave it $12 worse off. That threshold belongs to this fictional cost structure. It isn't a recommended conversion target or proof that you can identify the additional buyers accurately.

If the concert is expected to sell out anyway, be more cautious. A discounted sale may occupy a place somebody else would have bought at the normal price. The purchase can be new to your database while adding no admission to final attendance. Consider that lost full-price opportunity before claiming the campaign paid for itself.

A travel change can be worthwhile without adding a ticket sale

A buyer who would have attended anyway might switch from driving alone to the bus. In the calculation above, their ticket still produces $5 less income. That doesn't mean the travel change has no value. It means the value needs a separate explanation, such as an agreed transport objective or a real reduction in another event cost.

HM Treasury's 2026 Green Book distinguishes outcomes that would happen anyway from outcomes caused by an intervention. It's guidance for public spending, rather than an event pricing manual. The useful question here is what your offer changes compared with a credible alternative.

For Riverworks Sessions, suppose the team can avoid a separate $300 overflow parking rental if demand falls sufficiently before the cancellation deadline. Only count that saving once the actual booking can be cancelled under its terms. Fewer cars using an already committed car park might improve arrival, but it doesn't automatically reduce the invoice.

If the $300 is genuinely avoided, add it once to the relevant comparison. It would turn the earlier $180 improvement into $480, holding every other assumption unchanged. If the car park still has to be paid for, keep the original result. Don't add a hopeful saving just because the discount was intended to reduce parking.

Likewise, decide how much you're willing to fund for a travel objective that has no immediate cash return. Record it as an approved cost. Your event can support a useful change without inventing a financial payback, provided the spending is affordable and the outcome is described honestly.

Decide who qualifies before choosing the proof

Define eligibility in terms a buyer can understand and your team can apply. Does a qualifying journey require bus, tram or rail for the whole trip, or for a specified part? Does a car journey to a station count? Are both directions required? What happens to someone who walks or cycles instead? Consider an equivalent benefit where it fits the objective, so the offer doesn't encourage an unnecessary paid journey just to qualify. Include its cost in the same approved budget.

You don't need the same answer for every event. You do need an answer that fits the purpose. If you're targeting congestion at the venue entrance, park-and-ride might help. If you're comparing complete travel emissions, a short train leg after a long drive needs different treatment. Avoid calling every qualifying purchase a completely car-free journey.

Consider existing pass holders explicitly. A person with a valid season pass may have no receipt for a new fare. Excluding them might make sense for a provider's particular fare promotion, but an admission reward for arriving by public transport should account for how they demonstrate that journey. Explain the distinction before anyone buys.

Decide whether the benefit applies to new buyers, existing ticket holders or both. A checkout reduction introduced halfway through sales can irritate early buyers who planned to take the train anyway. You can include them through a supported adjustment or another clearly described benefit, or make a deliberate new-purchase offer. Review the cost and the promise already made before choosing.

For group bookings, work at attendee level if that's how the benefit is funded. Four event tickets on one order don't establish that four people used the train. A group rail product may legitimately cover several people. Your check should accommodate that without multiplying one person's evidence across unrelated claims.

Keep admission, accessibility support and the optional reward clearly explained. Somebody unable to use the promoted route still needs accurate access information and a workable route into the event. Don't ask people to disclose a diagnosis at a public desk to explain why they drove. Have an appropriate private route for discussing access arrangements and review your local obligations.

Use evidence you can check without making entry miserable

There are several reasonable ways to run a modest offer. You can ask people to declare an intended journey before purchase, verify a completed journey at arrival, or provide a benefit afterwards following a claim. Each buys a different level of confidence and creates a different amount of work. Choose deliberately.

A declaration before purchase is easy for buyers but records intention. Someone may change plans for a perfectly legitimate reason. If you choose this approach, budget for imperfect verification and avoid describing the resulting ticket count as verified public transport use. A stern sentence in the terms won't turn a declaration into a travel record.

Checking evidence at arrival can support a narrower claim about the outward journey. Decide what staff can reasonably accept, including valid day tickets, pass arrangements or a relevant app screen. Confirm what those products actually show with the provider. A fare purchase might not establish that the person travelled, especially where tickets don't require activation or validation.

Keep that check away from the main scan position when it needs discussion. Your check-in staff should know whether a valid event ticket admits the attendee while an unresolved reward question goes to a separate help point. Don't create an improvised surcharge demand at the entrance because nobody settled the policy before launch.

A claim after the event can support a condition covering the journey home, but it delays the benefit and creates payment administration. Check that you have a supported way to pay it, a realistic processing date and a route for correcting a failed payment. Don't advertise instant money back when your team will review claims manually later.

For a small offer, visual checking with a limited status record may be more proportionate than storing travel screenshots. The UK's Information Commissioner's Office explains data minimisation as collecting enough relevant information for a purpose without keeping unnecessary personal data. Its guidance is under review following legislative changes; apply the current rules relevant to your event.

You might record the event admission reference, whether the claim was accepted, the reason for an exception, and who handled it. Determine the necessary fields and retention period for your process. Avoid collecting full payment histories, travel account logins or unrelated journeys. The organizer needs to administer a benefit, not inspect an attendee's life.

Make the terms match the purchase and arrival experience

Before announcing the offer, write the conditions that affect whether someone can use it. Include the event date, eligible admission, saving, allocation, deadline and any evidence requirement. Explain what happens when a group buys together, whether other offers combine, and who can answer a question before payment.

In the UK, CAP's guidance on significant promotional conditions explains why material restrictions belong upfront in the promotion. Use the advertising and consumer rules that apply to your market. A link to long terms won't rescue a headline that gives buyers the wrong impression about eligibility or availability.

Separate the fare from the admission offer in the wording. "Save on your event ticket when you take the bus" doesn't include a bus ticket unless you've actually arranged one. Say whether people must buy their travel separately. Where a transport partner provides the benefit, identify which organization supplies it and which team handles problems.

Check the total buyer price against the advertised saving. Does the reduction apply before or after other charges? Does it reach every ticket in a basket? Your money model uses the change in organizer receipts, while the promotion describes what the buyer saves. Test both instead of assuming one number answers both questions.

Avoid demanding a final travel commitment before people can reasonably make one. If the discount opens months before the relevant timetable is confirmed, you need a fair approach to later disruption. A buyer shouldn't be pushed towards an unsuitable journey just to preserve a modest admission saving.

Give your support team the approved terms and the exact escalation route. Record which version applied to each campaign period. If someone shares an old image or forwarded email, staff need to know what was promised when that person bought. Keep any later remedy consistent with applicable rights and the commitments already made.

Set up the ticket offer and test the limits

Loopyah's discount code guide explains creating percentage or fixed reductions for a ticket type, setting total and per-user usage quotas, and activating or deactivating the code. That handles the ticket price offer. You still decide who qualifies, what evidence is proportionate and how an exception gets resolved.

The quota's meaning matters. A limit of 120 uses isn't safe to treat as 120 discounted admissions until you've checked what the system counts in your configuration. Test a basket with several eligible tickets, a mixed basket and a repeat purchase. Make the resulting exposure agree with the amount you approved.

Also test an exhausted allocation, failed payment, cancellation and refund where those could affect reuse. The help page doesn't specify every interaction, so confirm the behaviour you depend on before advertising it. If the setup doesn't support your intended restriction, simplify the offer or use another supported process.

Don't assume a travel provider's code and an event admission code validate each other. They may be completely separate systems. A transport partnership needs an agreed method for distribution, duplicate handling and reporting. Only promise automatic validation when you've verified the actual arrangement supports it.

Our event promo code strategy guide covers the broader limits and measurement decisions. For this travel offer, add the operational checks: what staff see, where the evidence is reviewed, how existing pass holders qualify, and what happens when an eligible attendee arrives without a usable phone screen.

Use a controlled test process and reconcile any real test purchases. Ask someone who wasn't involved in setup to read the promotion and complete the intended journey through purchase and eligibility. Their questions are useful. If they can't work out whether they qualify, your buyers are likely to have the same difficulty.

Plan for cancelled services and changed journeys

Public transport disruption is foreseeable even when you can't predict the particular cancellation. Agree the offer's response before launch. If someone bought in good faith and the advertised service fails, decide how their benefit is handled, how they contact you and which evidence is reasonably available. Don't leave that conversation to a temporary scanner.

You can choose to preserve an already granted admission discount during qualifying disruption, subject to a clearly designed policy and local requirements. That doesn't mean claiming the attendee used public transport when they drove instead. The customer remedy and the travel report answer different questions. Record the actual known journey separately from the exception.

If you're offering a later travel rebate, specify the disruption treatment there too. Someone who had to replace a train with a taxi may not satisfy the original journey condition, but a rigid refusal might contradict what your campaign promised. Have an authorized person review the case against the terms and applicable rights, rather than inventing a new rule after payment.

Distinguish admission support from transport reimbursement. Preserving a small ticket reduction doesn't automatically pay the taxi fare. Don't promise to cover replacement travel unless you've approved that exposure and can deliver the arrangement. Tell affected people accurately what help exists and how to reach the appropriate provider.

On event day, assign one person to maintain the current travel message and brief the door lead. Update the event's travel information with a date and time, link to current provider notices and contact people with specific booked arrangements where necessary. Loopyah's attendee email tools let you build and test an update; the transport details and decisions still come from your team.

If disruption makes the offer impractical before new purchases, review whether to stop further promotion through supported controls. Preserve existing commitments and record the change. Don't quietly replace the original terms with a version that makes earlier buyers appear ineligible.

Rehearse the questions your team will get

Before launch, walk through the offer with the people answering enquiries and checking admission. Use realistic buyer situations and the actual approved terms. A rehearsal should show whether the process is understandable and whether the extra work fits the staffing you've budgeted for. Don't estimate the workload solely from the number of discounted tickets.

Take an existing pass holder first. They ask whether their pass qualifies even though they haven't purchased a separate bus ticket for the event. Staff should be able to explain the published eligibility and evidence requirement directly. If your offer excludes them, that needs to be apparent before purchase, with a reason consistent with the arrangement you're offering.

Next, try a group of four with one booking and a travel product covering only two people. The answer depends on your attendee-level rules and what the evidence establishes. Check that the benefit applies to the right admissions and that the other two tickets remain valid. One uncertain claim shouldn't turn into a dispute about the entire order.

Then consider someone whose phone battery has died. They may have valid admission and a legitimate travel claim but cannot display the evidence you've requested. Your team needs a supported admission process and the published route for resolving the reward question. If no alternative evidence is acceptable, explain that earlier so people can prepare. Don't ask a door assistant to improvise access to somebody's travel account.

Include a buyer who received the code through a friend. Sharing alone doesn't establish dishonesty. Staff should refer to the eligibility and purchase terms rather than accusing someone of abuse because they weren't on the original mailing list. If your restrictions cannot be administered fairly, reduce the exposure or simplify the offer before distribution.

Finally, use the disruption case. A buyer intended to take the advertised service, found it cancelled and arrived by car. Practise preserving the correct admission decision, recording any authorized exception and keeping the actual travel outcome accurate. The person who approves the remedy should be named, reachable and clear about any spending limit.

Watch the time these conversations take. If the same staff member must stop scanning tickets to review every claim, revise the staffing and cost before approval. If the proof is repeatedly inconclusive, consider a simpler offer based on intended travel with honest reporting, a separate claim process or an agreed provider benefit. The arrangement you choose should match the evidence you can collect and the work your team can deliver.

A planning brief you can use before approving the offer

Keep the brief short enough that the ticketing owner, travel lead and finance approver will actually read it. Complete the following fields together. The purpose is to expose unresolved decisions before the public announcement, while there is still time to change the arrangement.

• Event and owner: identify the event date, location, campaign owner and person authorized to approve spending or exceptions.

• Intended change: name the audience, travel obstacle and result you're trying to improve, with the main measure you'll review.

• Workable journey: record the services and return options checked, accessibility information, provider contact and any confirmation still outstanding.

• Offer and eligibility: describe the benefit, qualifying journeys, existing pass holders, group purchases and treatment of existing ticket holders.

• Cost and limit: record the actual reduction in organizer receipts, maximum discounted admissions, additional administration and any separate transport commitment.

• Verification and privacy: specify what is checked, where it is checked, what gets recorded, who can access it and when unnecessary records are removed.

• Buyer conditions: state the eligible ticket, allocation, opening and closing arrangements, combinations with other offers and the support contact.

• Disruption response: explain who decides exceptions, whether admission remains valid and what assistance you have actually committed to provide.

• Purchase tests: list the purchases, limits and claim cases tested, with the result and any setting that still needs confirmation.

• Review: define the collection method, comparison, reporting date and decision about repeating, changing or stopping the offer.

For Riverworks Sessions, the finance section would authorize no more than 120 discounted admissions at an actual $5 reduction each, plus $180 in extra administration. The maximum reduction in receipts and extra spending totals $780. The hypothetical parking saving remains excluded until its booking can genuinely be cancelled. The organizer doesn't rely on additional ticket sales to make the offer affordable.

The travel lead would then fill in the actual routes and return conditions. This fictional example supplies no timetable or provider agreement. If the concert's team cannot confirm a suitable journey, approval should stop there. The financial calculation doesn't solve the missing transport service.

At launch, keep the approved terms and test results with this brief. During the campaign, record meaningful changes and their approval. At review, add actual receipts, spending and evidence. That gives the next edition's team an explanation of what happened, rather than a code name and an unsupported claim that it worked.

Measure take-up, travel and additional demand separately

Start with the quantities you can establish from the offer itself. Record discounted admissions, orders, total reduction in receipts, refunds, exceptions and administration. Keep orders separate from attendees. A purchaser with four tickets and a single transport claim can otherwise make both the sales and travel report misleading.

Then record what you know about travel. A declaration is intended travel. An accepted fare document is the evidence your process checked. A survey of completed journeys is a respondent's account of what happened. Label each accordingly. Don't upgrade weaker evidence because the campaign needs an impressive headline.

To investigate behaviour, ask a neutral question about what the person would most likely have done without the offer. Include attending with the same transport, attending by another route, not attending and not sure. Follow with the actual outward and return journey where useful. Make clear that an honest answer doesn't remove a benefit they've already legitimately received.

Those replies still describe what people say about an alternative that didn't occur. They can help you learn, but they don't by themselves prove the discount caused the change. People who claim the offer may differ from everyone else, and people who answer the survey may differ from the other claimants.

Suppose a fictional follow-up receives 60 eligible individual replies from the 120 discounted attendees. Of those respondents, 36 say they would have used public transport anyway, 15 report switching from a car journey, and nine are unsure. You can report those response counts and the questions asked. You can't describe all 120 attendees as having switched, or automatically double the 15 to estimate the whole group.

Nor do 15 reported switches necessarily mean 15 fewer cars. Some respondents may have shared one vehicle, travelled with a nonattendee or changed only one part of the journey. Keep the claim at the level your questions and records support. If parking is your objective, use an appropriate vehicle-counting process alongside the attendee feedback.

For a repeated series, consider a carefully designed comparison with similar eligible audiences or dates. Record changes in programme, weather, service availability and sales activity. If substantial spending depends on proving the offer caused a change, involve someone qualified to design the evaluation. A small practical pilot can still be useful without claiming experimental certainty.

Compare costs with the original objective. Did the offer reach the intended audience? Could people claim it without a dispute? Was the spending within the cap? Did it improve a specific journey problem or reveal that fare cost wasn't the main obstacle? Keep the commercial and travel findings together without forcing them into one flattering percentage.

Report the result without overstating the environmental benefit

A discount is an action you funded. A journey is something an attendee completed. An emissions reduction is a comparison requiring an appropriate method and evidence about the alternative journey. Moving between those statements needs more information than a ticket-sales report supplies.

The UK Competition and Markets Authority's Green Claims Code checklist asks for clear, substantiated environmental claims and fair comparisons. Apply the relevant requirements in your market. A narrowly accurate statement about an incentive shouldn't imply that the whole event has been shown to be sustainable.

For the fictional example, you might report that 120 admissions used the offer, reducing organizer receipts by $600, with $180 in additional administration. Separately report the 60 individual survey replies and their limits. Those are concrete campaign findings. They don't establish a carbon saving or prove how many additional ticket purchases the offer generated.

If you need a travel emissions estimate, collect the complete journey information and use a suitable reviewed method. Account for return journeys, distances, shared vehicles and any additional transport you operated. Don't attach an average car-emissions figure to each redemption and call the result saved carbon. That assumes the very behaviour you were trying to investigate.

Our guide to event sustainability communication covers presenting useful progress without making broader claims than the evidence supports. Keep limitations close to the result when you share it with a sponsor. A careful note in a separate file won't travel with a headline copied into a presentation.

Choose what happens at the next event

Repeat the offer when the journey works, the cost remains affordable and the evidence supports the objective you chose. Change it when the administration is disproportionate, eligibility confuses people or another intervention addresses the obstacle more directly. Stop it when it mainly reduces receipts without a result you're willing to fund.

Rewarding existing public transport users may still be a valid choice. So may a deliberately funded access offer. Say that plainly and judge it against the approved budget. You don't have to manufacture additional sales or environmental savings to explain every decision your event makes.

Before approving the next allocation, ask the travel lead to confirm the route again and the ticketing owner to recheck the purchase process. Prices, services and audience needs can change between editions. Use the previous brief and results to make a fresh decision, then publish only the offer your team is ready to honour.