3 ms·
>Of course the prices are going to increase. If the supply is the same and the demand increases, the price increases. There is nothing anybody can do about that
by ginko 6y ago
>Of course the prices are going to increase. If the supply is the same and the demand increases, the price increases. There is nothing anybody can do about that.
The profit over the targeted ticket price could be returned uniformly to ticket holders. I guess this would be hard to do in practice and may complicate bidding strategies but it would avoid price increases.
- qsort 6y agoDoesn't that defeat the purpose of the auction in the first place? That would simply become "the ticket goes to whoever writes the largest number on this piece of paper", right? I believe to reach your intended goal (i.e. the seller doesn't want to profit from the auction), you would have to redistribute the price increase among all participants. A way to do this would be as follows (needless to say, completely unpractical fantasy land experiment, I'm only doing this for the sake of argument): - Have people freely register. Let's say you have M tickets, N people registered, the interesting case is when N >> M. - Assign to each registered participant M/N of a ticket (assume tickets are infinitely divisible), and collect from them M/N * P where P is the intended price of a single ticket. - Have people trade fractions of tickets. The seller collects exactly M * P, and under usual assumptions the price of a ticket would converge to its 'true' value.
- ginko 6y ago> Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the auction in the first place? That would simply become "the ticket goes to whoever writes the largest number on this piece of paper", right? People who are bidding more will still pay more. The main weirdness introduced by that approach is that low bidders that win a ticket may get more money back than they paid.