Louis C.K. sees ticket scalping drop over 96% by selling tickets himself • Hacker News Board

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

#181

Post by vacri » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 4:57 AM UTC

Resident_Geek wrote: post #178

vacri wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that 'smoothing' the market? CK Louis seems to have smoothed it flat with $45 for all tickets. If the scalpers didn't exist, the eventual ticket-holders would still be able to purchase from the original vendor. It's not like scalpers make tickets magically appear.

> If the scalpers didn't exist, the eventual ticket-holders would still be able to purchase from the original vendor. A lot of them wouldn't, though. If the scalpers sell the tickets for, say, $500, then the people willing to pay $500 get tickets pretty reliably. If the scalpers didn't exist, those people would have to take a roll of the dice along with the many, many more people who are willing to pay $45. A lot of…

I didn't mean the same people. The same number of people would see the show, and people generally believe in a first-come-first-served moral system - spend a night in an busy ER department and see how the general public like the idea of 'triage'.

Really, my point is more that those tickets were going to sell anyway, and all the scalpers are doing is reducing the potential audience for those tickets. I don't see how this specific market is 'smoothed' by this practise.

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

#182

Post by pbreit » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 4:59 AM UTC

The entertainment industry an ticket scalpers have a very healthy symbiotic relationship. Industry gets to sell tickets at fan-friendly prices and rich people get to go to the shows they want to. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. And I have no problem with this experiment.

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

#183

Post by bitdestroyer » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 5:01 AM UTC

voltagex_ wrote: post #167

callmeed wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On top of that (somewhat to TM's credit), I remember reading an article stating that they were the only company who had proven they could handle the huge load of online sales for top-tier acts (think Gaga and Bieber). Let's face it, Louis CK's site probably could not handle 100K simultaneous people buying tickets and choosing seats. EDIT: found the article http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/mf_ticketmaster/all/

That's interesting. The Australian branch of Ticketmaster uses queuing and delays to handle load and still often crashes when "big" events go on sale (annual festivals, Radiohead)

Radiohead couldn't even handle Radiohead on their last American tour.

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

#184

Post by beedogs » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 5:05 AM UTC

voltagex_ wrote: post #167

callmeed wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On top of that (somewhat to TM's credit), I remember reading an article stating that they were the only company who had proven they could handle the huge load of online sales for top-tier acts (think Gaga and Bieber). Let's face it, Louis CK's site probably could not handle 100K simultaneous people buying tickets and choosing seats. EDIT: found the article http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/11/mf_ticketmaster/all/

That's interesting. The Australian branch of Ticketmaster uses queuing and delays to handle load and still often crashes when "big" events go on sale (annual festivals, Radiohead)

Confirmed. The radiohead ticket release was an abomination. Although somehow, Ticketek manages to be even worse.

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

#185

Post by brianpan » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 5:07 AM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #121

brianpan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm definitely not an econ expert (far from it). Scalpers may not be confusing demand. But aren't they're artificially constraining supply? There are a limited number of shows and seats available. If I'm a scalper and I buy the last 100 seats (or rather, I have the last 100 seats not taken by someone who actually is going), I can now sell the tickets at a premium. If there are only 75 more fans that want to go, they…

In the short term, there are a fixed number of hard drives (and beach balls, and microwave ovens, ...). Why don't we have to worry about hard drive scalpers artificially constraining the supply?

Shows are much more constrained. It's the very specific "skilled labor" involved (only one person can produce a show in only one city, maybe two a night). Imagine if you needed a hard drive factory in each city and only one factory could run at a time.

I can't buy a show for Denver. I might not even be able to buy a show for Friday nights. That severely limits the pool of "supply" I can buy from. Louis might be in my city once a year for a few days if I'm lucky.

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

#186

Post by beedogs » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 5:07 AM UTC

dsl wrote: post #123

vijayr wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Ticketmaster's exclusives on venues" Sorry for the dumb question - does this mean that nobody else can book these venues? If that is the case, can't CK (and other comedians) find a neutral venue (or a venue that is not already on Ticketmaster's list)? At least in his case, he doesn't need sophisticated venues (like the ones need for an opera, or a circus for example) Also, for disruption - can't a company buy/build…

Effectively. You can still book venues, you just can't sell tickets to your event without Ticketmaster being involved. A company called Livenation went around about 10 years ago and bought all the venues large enough to hold a profitable concert or show, then a few years back merged with Ticketmaster. Livenation won't sell you one of their venues. Building a new one large enough to be profitable is near impossible. I…

Does this mean that Ticketmaster runs the risk of overextending itself and collapsing in a heap, the way Clear Channel did after buying up hundreds of radio stations throughout the 90s and early 00s? (ihopeihopeihope)

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

#187

Post by jeffool » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 5:50 AM 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…

>Leaving money on the table does no one any favors.

Except fans. Who can now buy his DVDs or other swag. (Or afford both his show, and rent.)

If your goal is to get as much money as quickly as possible, there's another word for that. Short-sightedness.

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

#188

Post by pessimizer » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 5:57 AM UTC

vacri wrote: post #168

pessimizer wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, xenophanes is simply explaining how markets work. Markets are supposed to maximize utility, whether that be monies or laughter at a concert. If a price is too low for demand, any opening that allows middlemen to creep in, raise the price to demand levels, and take the difference, will be taken. If the resellers price too low, they'll just generate an opening for re-resellers. The problem, for me, isn't with scalp…

Part of my response to xenophanes' comment is a visceral response to treating a 'robust market' as a target goal, rather than a journey to an outcome. The cost of ticket 1001 to a 1000-ticket show is infinity, regardless of whether you have scalpers or not. Increasing the price of the last 100 tickets does not mean you have increased ticket supply, all it means is you have taken 100 tickets from earlier, creating an…

I don't think he/she is. There might be 20,000 people interested in tickets to the show at $55, but only 1000 will get one and 19,000 will be left out in the cold. If 100 of those tickets are purchased by scalpers, 19,000 will be left out in the cold. The difference in the two cases is that 100 of those tickets in the second case will go to the people willing to 'be the most useful' for them - and in an ideal society that seems to me like the fairest way of doing things.

The only problem I have with it is that due to general political market distortions, money is very cheap to a small number of people who do very little and have lots of leisure time, so the dollar commitment for a ticket price has little relation to either subjective or objective (ideal) utility.

As a performer, I'd have an interest in keeping the ticket prices low simply because I wouldn't want an audience filled with the kind of assholes who would pay $500 for a ticket to a two hour comedy show. If I really adored Louie C.K., was one of those assholes, and it took 11 minutes to get to the site to buy a ticket that sold out in 10, I'd hope that scalpers got a significant amount of those tickets.

Hell, even if I wasn't one of those assholes I'd hope for scalpers, because if they overestimated demand and priced too high, they might end up dumping tickets at the last minute and I might end up paying less than face value. Instead of not being able to get a ticket at any price, the tickets are handed out based on how much you're willing to commit to get them. If demand then raises the prices to $1000, I can still get a ticket if I love Louie C.K. more than I love keeping my apartment.

Because, really:

the number of people who lose = the number of people who would go to the show for free - 1000

Personally, I lose at face value, because the day I pay $50 for a concert is going to be the day a gallon of milk goes for $15. It doesn't mean that I don't like Louie C.K., it just means that I like 3 gallons of milk more. Everybody makes their own call, whether it's when the cost goes over $10, over $1000, or over $55 + F5ing a site for 6 hours.

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

#189

Post by pessimizer » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 6:09 AM UTC

adgar wrote: post #142

masklinn wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So true fans are poor? No? True fans are alone, and true fans are not necessarily the earliest at the gate. If scalpers can grab half the tickets before the show's sold out by buying in bulk, they're going to make a lot of money. Because now they control the product. > he needs to increase supply by touring more. He's booked 67 dates, he's only one guy, touring more? He'll need to put his million of sales in clonin…

> true fans are not necessarily the earliest at the gate. If we're going no true scotsman, I'd say the true fans ARE the earliest at the gate. They're the ones who camp out for weeks. So really, you're sticking up for the fair-weather fans who can't be bothered to put in the extra effort to get their tickets at face value.

And you're sticking up for the fair-weather fans who aren't willing to take out a second mortgage on their homes.

Also, "true fans are not necessarily the earliest at the gate" is not an example of No True Scotsman, it's an example of Some True Scotsmen, the exact opposite.

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

#190

Post by batiudrami » Wed, Jul 04, 2012, 6:12 AM UTC

jes5199 wrote: post #152

blhack wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bmorg completely disenfranchised large parts of the community with a "ticket lottery". Earlier this year, we were seeing theme camps with something like 10% "success" rate in the lottery, and a lot of the major camps weren't going to be able to go. It was only through a last-ditch effort, cancelling a second lottery and giving the tickets to "established" camps that they were able to get some of the major theme c…

It's easy to blame scalpers, but I'm not convinced they're a major component of the shortage. Lots of large events sold out this year much quicker than usual: the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, Penny Arcade Expo, and others. I think that the recession is less of a concern for many of us this year, so there's pent up demand being used. Add a lottery to increase the sense of urgency, and you get a lot more peop…

I had no idea how bad the scalping situation was in the US until I tried to get tickets to a Lollapalooza aftershow (I live in Australia, and am going to Lolla as a part of a holiday).

I waited up late to get tickets, was on at exactly 10am Chicago time, suffered a website crashing hard and, within 15 minutes, the gig had sold out. Defeated, I went to bed (it was pretty late in my time zone).

Next morning, I got up, and there were 400+ tickets for sale on StubHub. For a 1300-person venue. Even if 100% of scalped tickets went on sale, on one website, within 10 hours of the event going on sale, that's still 30% scalping rate. If anyone is wondering, it was Childish Gambino at the Vic Theatre.

Now, I agree that part of the solution is to charge more for tickets (and I'm used to it - a lineup like Lollapalooza's would be impossible in Australia - tickets to a RHCP gig alone go for $150+). However, by allowing scalping to this extreme, Scalpers can buy 10x$30 tickets and sell only 2-3 of them at a ridiculous price to superfans and still turn a profit, leaving the rest unused. Everyone loses except the scalpers.

Big festivals in Australia print your name and date of birth on the ticket, and either only allow you to resell the ticket back to the festival (at cost), who then on sell it under a different name, or charge a fee to change the name on the ticket so that resellers are at a disadvantage. Both have their disadvantages, but both are better than the current situation in the US.