Louis C.K. sees ticket scalping drop over 96% by selling tickets himself

Post by larrys » Tue, Jul 03, 2012, 9:00 PM UTC

cletus wrote: post #26

This is of course interesting and will lead to inevitable comments about disruption being needed in event ticketing. Let me save you the trouble as this has been rehashed many times already: the problem here is Ticketmaster's exclusives on venues and the entertainment's willingness to let Ticketmaster be the "sacrificial anode" and focus of ire from both audiences and performers. There was a deal done some years ago-…

Post by fusiongyro » Tue, Jul 03, 2012, 9:03 PM UTC

sambe wrote: post #107

fusiongyro wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they're only paying extra because, ta-da!, the tickets were scalped. The competition is higher at the lower price because, ta-da!, the tickets were scalped. The arguments for scalping only work if the effects of the scalping are ignored. Eliminating scalpers benefits everyone.

It's not so much an argument "for scalping" as an argument against being emotional and extreme. So, once again, - no, not everyone benefits. Without the higher price tickets available from the scalpers, they would not have been able to go. They got what they wanted at a price they could afford. Disliking something is not the same as it being inherently and totally evil.

Post by cron » Tue, Jul 03, 2012, 9:16 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #4

Scalping always seemed like a mismatch between the ticket price incentives and the venues incentives. Venues like to sell out to increase concession sales / parking etc, but 'talent' is better off picking a price that fills, most but not all seats and maximizes their take. I suspect they also increase their cut by selling tickets early and sitting on a few weeks/months worth of interest.

Post by shinratdr » Tue, Jul 03, 2012, 9:25 PM UTC

larrys wrote: post #108

joezydeco wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C'mon, let's have a little reality here. Anyone that has tried to deal with buying tickets (either in today's system or even back in the old days where you had to stand in line) knows that there are people with large sums of cash willing to pay people to stand in line or bombard ticketmaster.com with requests to land tickets for a show they have no intention of seeing. They resell those tickets immediately for a prof…

"more time and resources than you can jump ahead of you in line and, as a result either deny you an experience or make you pay more out of pocket for it." Isn't that the way the world works? We aren't talking about access to food, education, or healthcare here. We're talking about entertainment. Is there a particular reason why someone with more time or money shouldn't have an edge and be able to spend their money to…

Post by balloot » Tue, Jul 03, 2012, 9:31 PM UTC

Androsynth wrote: post #57

AndrewDucker wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Market efficiency is not necessarily a person's aim.

Leaving money on the table does no one any favors. If people are willing to pay $150 for tickets and hes charging $50 (or whatever it is), he's only doing himself a disservice. If people are willing to pay that much and he delivers a show that is up to his normal standard, they won't hate him for charging them that much; quite the opposite actually. It's only the price gauging and poor service of monopolies that peop…