Re: Scalping

On Fri, 5 Jul 1996 12:02:08 GMT, born2run@pipeline.com wrote:

>As for other ways of identifying the most committed fans, I could suggest
>at least two (though out of sheer humility I must profess that my powers of
>discrimination are in no way God-like -- I'm just using common sense).  One
>is the willingness to wait in line for an extended period of time.

Except that people with jobs are now disadvantaged, as are people with
physical disabilities that would preclude standing in line for long
periods, or people with family responsibilities. Not that the idea is
without merit, but I am not ready to concede that it is in any way
superior to a market system. 

>A second way of identifying committed fans
>is through membership in fan clubs and subscriptions to fanzines like Naked
>Eye or Generations or even internet mailing lists.

I know I speak for everyone when I say that set-asides for members of
this mailing list are definitely desirable.<g> Of course, in all
honesty I must point out that not everyone has access to the Internet.


It also seems like the ground of this argument has subtly shifted away
from whether a secondary market and/or scalping is a net benefit.
 
>>>But the market system is hardly sacred -- market principles are 
>>>routinely compromised in order to further other, competing values.  Why 
>>>should ticket sales be any different?  
>> 
>>Fine. I didn't claim that the market system is sacred, merely that it 
>>is relatively efficient at getting tickets into the hands of those 
>>with the greatest willingness to pay, who are likely to be the most 
>>committed fans.  
>Once again, your argument rests upon the presumption that the most
>committed fans are those willing to pay the most.   

I am saying that *on average* willingness to pay is the best measure
available, although I always conceded that it is imperfect.
  
>>>But even when analyzed from purely a market standpoint, scalping has some
>
>>>serious problems.  First of all, scalping violates free market principles
>
>>>in that scalpers have special access to tickets. 
>>If so, where is the problem? Is it with the existence of a secondary 
>>market? I rather suspect that the real problem is with the 
>>TicketMaster monopoly. It is harded for resellers to get specialaccess 
>>whenthereare competing sources of supply. 
>If scalpers are getting blocks of tickets directly from the venue or
>promoters, I don't see  how the existence of additional ticket services
>would effect this special access.  Why should the employees of
>"Ticketmaster II" be any less susceptible to bribery than the employees of
>Ticketmaster?

Then the question turns on how many competing companies it takes to
create effective competition. There is no a priori answer to this
question, but the number probably is greater than two. 

>The problem with the Ticketmaster monopoly is that it allows
>TM to charge unreasonably high service charges -- sometimes as high as 30%
>of the face value of the ticket.  But high service charges certainly aren't
>responsible for scalping, which depends upon tickets being initially priced
>below market value. 

If indeed they are being priced below market value (which I would
agree with), I am not sure what your argument now turns on. Is it a
belief that fans somehow deserve to get tickets at below-market
prices? If so, why?
 
>On an intuitive level, I question the efficiency of a system in which a
>large number of tickets are initially sold to people who have absolutely no
>interest in going to the show themselves.

I claimed relative efficiency, i.e., a secondary market is an
improvement over no secondary market. Since we live in an imperfect
world, sometimes relative gains are the best we can manage.

>I also question the fairness of
>a system in which the best seats are effectively available only the
>wealthiest fans -- who, at least in my opinion, are not necessarily the
>most deserving.

Life is unfair. Let us compare alternatives to see which works better.
I claim that a market system is, on the whole, better in that people
have the opportunity to obtain these tickets.

>As for improving the current system,  I think there are
>ways of substantially diminishing the influence of scalpers.  First of all,
>more artists should consider selling a portion of their tickets through fan
>clubs.  Second,  I think special procedures should apply to purchases of
>the best 5 - 10% of the tickets in a venue ("premium tickets").  For
>instance, premium tickets could be sold as singles or pairs only and have
>the purchaser's name printed on them, and the holder of a premium ticket
>should be required to present some form of identification (or, in the case
>of pairs,  be accompanied by the purchaser who has ID) at the venue in
>order to take their seat.  This would not only discourage resales, but
>would probably make it very difficult for scalpers to acquire large blocks
>of premium seats from the venue and the promoters.     

So, to promote your agenda, you would prohibit me from purchasing more
than 1, or maybe two, tickets, and furthermore if for any reason I
could not attend the show I would be prohibited from selling them? And
I need to identify myself before I can attend the concert?

Thanks for clearing that up. I am now absolutely certain that a market
system is superior to your suggestions (although, if anyone from The
Who wants to set aside some tickets for subscribers to this mailing
list...)


Kevin B. O'Brien
kob1@ix.netcom.com
"I feel a very unusual sensation--if it's not indigestion,
I think it must be gratitude." Benjamin Disraeli