Simple way to solve this is to make SH an escrow service that requires the tickets up front. Of course that would increase costs and their responsibility, so it will never happen.
They actually do this for some very high profile events - they require you to send in your tickets before they are placed for sale on the site. The Super Bowl is one, the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight was another. But regardless of whether or not it is a high profile event, the seller should only be given a few days to deliver the tickets after the sale. That way this kind of thing won't happen. If this seller only had 5…
The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
31–40 of 148 posts
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#32Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#33To be fair, the very first section of the StubHub user agreement warns about this scenario: "1. Using StubHub Ticket Marketplace. StubHub is a marketplace that allows users to buy ("Buyers") and sell ("Sellers") tickets, related passes and merchandise or other goods (collectively, the "tickets") for events. As a marketplace, StubHub does not own the tickets on the Site nor does it set prices for tickets. Because sell…
That's just ridiculous. Nobody reads user agreements, everybody knows nobody reads user agreements, and pretty much everybody expects that if you purchase something through a company, that company is responsible for delivering. You can't reasonably set up a marketplace, be the middleman for buying and selling, then throw up your hands and say "sucks to be you" when the product you advertise doesn't get delivered to b…
"StubHub should be more transparent about the seller-side risks involved when "selling tickets" to customers"
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because money. HN will likely play devils advocate but I agree with you. If you enter an arena, I believe you are partly responsible for what happens in that arena.
Morally, yes, they should be responsible. But StubHub only has an obligation to act legally, not morally. There should be laws in place to deal with this situation. Maybe there already are?
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed; this is probably already fraud between the seller and the buyer, ignoring StubHub's involvement already. It's unlikely we need any laws to "fix" this because the ones that have been around for centuries are probably already sufficient. Small-claims court may already be an available avenue of relief as in many states this would fit under the limit, though the internet can as always make jurisdiction a tricky i…
Would a small claims court in this case do anything besides ensure the buyer got a refund, which they already got anyway?
I won't guarantee victory because of course I can't, but this strikes me as a fairly basic argument about possession suitable for a small-claims court, not a bizarre legal theory.
By contrast, had I merely "reserved" the tickets but no money transfer had occurred, in a transaction clearly labeled as a "reservation subject to cancellation", I'd expect the court to tell me to go pound sand and that I was lucky to get coupons in that value. But buying a ticket on StubHub looks and feels like a purchase, not a reservation subject to arbitrary cancellation. StubHub's terminology is all about "Buy" and "Sell" on their website, not "Reserve". (Just checked to be sure.)
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's just ridiculous. Nobody reads user agreements, everybody knows nobody reads user agreements, and pretty much everybody expects that if you purchase something through a company, that company is responsible for delivering. You can't reasonably set up a marketplace, be the middleman for buying and selling, then throw up your hands and say "sucks to be you" when the product you advertise doesn't get delivered to b…
Hence my 1st takeaway: "StubHub should be more transparent about the seller-side risks involved when "selling tickets" to customers"
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#37I was lucky/smart enough to list all the games I couldn't attend at multiples of face value and adjust the price as the game dates come closer. This worked out well with my tickets to the game against the Lakers because they sold pretty quickly after Kobe's announcement. I definitely didn't get full market value for them, but people were getting their tickets poached at far less because they set them for a pre-retirement announcement value. Since the Lakers stink and it was a weekday game, that value was probably below face value.
But with the market we're forced to use, you can't take your tickets back, which is clearly a good thing.
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
SH has no mechanism to ensure delivery of the ticket. The seller holds the ticket, so how can SH compel them to hand it over - short of not releasing the buyer's payment to the seller. Short being the operative word. SH is running a speculative marketplace against n% insurance fee on unfulfilled sales.
Why are they set up this way? The purchase should confer ownership at the time of purchase, or within a reasonable time afterwards, in such a way that it is physically impossible for the seller to take back ownership without the cooperation of the buyer.
I'm not sure how this is logistically possible without the seller sending SH tickets when he or she wants to sell them, in which case we'd just be reading an article about how SH accidentally sent out $6k in tickets that were never paid for.
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#39To be fair, the very first section of the StubHub user agreement warns about this scenario: "1. Using StubHub Ticket Marketplace. StubHub is a marketplace that allows users to buy ("Buyers") and sell ("Sellers") tickets, related passes and merchandise or other goods (collectively, the "tickets") for events. As a marketplace, StubHub does not own the tickets on the Site nor does it set prices for tickets. Because sell…
"If your tickets have sold but you cannot fulfill the order (also referred to as 'dropping a sale' or a 'dropped sale'), StubHub may charge your payment method an amount equal to 20% of the price of the ticket sold to compensate us for the losses we incur to meet our obligations under the FanProtectTM Guarantee. In some cases involving dropped sales that result in unusually large losses to StubHub (for example, dropped sales involving large numbers of tickets or tickets with significant price appreciation), however, StubHub reserves the right in its sole discretion to charge your payment method the full amount of the replacement costs StubHub incurs under the FanProtectTM Guarantee (including costs in excess of 20% of the ticket price)."
They have given themselves the ability to make this right and go after the seller for the costs of it, but they are choosing not to, screwing the buyer instead. They will of course happily pocket this 20% fee and the additional higher fees on the eventual sale of the tickets at the higher price, whether on this account or another (if the seller is banned).
"2. Buyers should be more aware of the fact that Stubhub is only a marketplace, and they are really at the mercy of the seller."
Why should buyers be aware of this when Stubhub advertises a "FanProtectTM Guarantee"?! Stubhub shouldn't be advertising one thing on nearly every page of their website and then disclaiming in their TOS.
Also, Stubhub has come out to say that they'll get this guy to the game. No mention of changing policy to make sure it doesn't happen again though.
Re: The Surreal Story of StubHub Screwing Over a Kobe Fan
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
SH has no mechanism to ensure delivery of the ticket. The seller holds the ticket, so how can SH compel them to hand it over - short of not releasing the buyer's payment to the seller. Short being the operative word. SH is running a speculative marketplace against n% insurance fee on unfulfilled sales.
Why are they set up this way? The purchase should confer ownership at the time of purchase, or within a reasonable time afterwards, in such a way that it is physically impossible for the seller to take back ownership without the cooperation of the buyer.
I imagine for some events there is this entire chain of sell/buy/sell/buy going on.