7 ms·

That's not why making an NFT out of the ticket is interesting. It's interesting because I can, for example, resell my Woodstock ticket on an open market.

dmitriid 5y ago
"It's interesting because I can hoard tickets and resell at profit". Why is that interesting, exactly? Edit All that is marked as "interesting" in crypto is inevitably "how can I profit/get rich quick off something".
- shawabawa3 5y ago
  Usually the whole point of NFT tickets is to _stop_ you reselling on an open market (aka StubHub/Ticketmaster) and instead force you to either resell back to the venue, or to resell at face value only
  - cmckn 5y ago
    Yikes. Not to mention there’s a public record of every ticket you’ve ever purchased. In many ways a blockchain is adtech done worst.
    - prox 5y ago
      I honestly tried to come up with ideas for crypto / blockchain but every time someone pointed out how my solution could be done easier / better without blockchain. Blockchain is a problem looking for a solution to make more money.
- FeepingCreature 5y ago
  In a proper market, it is impossible to resell because the sales price is the production price. So if the free-market price of the ticket is higher than the sales price, people should be producing additional Woodstocks until the prices match. At which point there is no point in being a scalper anymore. Scalping is only an issue if the sales price of products is artificially depressed.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    Ah yes. The magical "click my fingers and there's a new Woodstock every time someone raises a price" free-market.
  - mellavora 5y ago
    I didn't realize it was that easy to produce another Woodstock, or that the only purpose of music and festivals was profit maximization/economic equilibrium. Silly me.
    - FeepingCreature 5y ago
      The whole point of capitalism is that economic equilibrium is also value equilibrium. So if you think it's good to have a Woodstock, unless you like artificial scarcity, you should think that having two Woodstocks is approximately twice as good. Now maybe you cannot produce another Woodstock, like there's some inherently limited resource like management effort or willingness or space or licenses, but that's the idea. (I don't think that the capitalist ideal matches reality. But you should at least get the idea if you're gonna disagree.)
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776666 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776666 Free market as imagined by libertarians can only exist in the presence of unlimited resources and magic.
        jcbrand 5y ago
        You have it backwards. Markets exist because of scarcity, not because of abundance. If something is available in unlimited abundance, there's no need of a market for it.
        dmitriid 5y ago
        I don't think I got it backwards. This is the original statement: "In a proper market, it is impossible to resell because the sales price is the production price. So if the free-market price of the ticket is higher than the sales price, people should be producing additional Woodstocks until the prices match". The only free market where this is possible is a magical place where there are unlimited resources and ability to create new Woodstocks at the snap of a finger.
ahtihn 5y ago
What's the incentive for the ticket seller to enable that?
- melomal 5y ago
  Royalties. The ticket seller can set that and every time the ticket is resold, they will get % of that sale. For an artist that would mean they can sell a ticket with % royalty set and then profit from future sales on an ongoing basis.
  - dalbasal 5y ago
    So... A method for scalping scalpers?
    - melomal 5y ago
      Pretty much. 1000 true fans is essentially the backbone of the NFT argument which basically revolves around artists and their fans parting ways with cash for collectable items. With NFT tickets, the artist always gets paid no matter who is selling the ticket and how many times it get sold. I would say that this is a win for the artist.
      - drugstorecowboy 5y ago
        Well.. yes that would be a win for the artist. As would a sales tax that goes to artists, or a new law that legalizes pickpocketing for artists. Why is that a good thing? Why should an artist be compensated beyond the first transaction? If this concept took off, how long do you think it would take before Walmart begins taking a cut of every resale? They have just as much right to it as an artist.
        melomal 5y ago
        Well you could argue that it wouldn't be Walmart that does it, it would be the producer so Samsung, Apple, LG, Asus, Acer etc would sell their products with a digital twin (NFT) which provides sales from future purchases. That being said, it could reduce the need for new products/versions being created every other week. However, there would need to be a somewhat centralized 'marketplace' that facilities the second hand sales which is where Walmart could step in with some perks for selling with them.
boomlinde 5y ago
So ticket scalping. This was never desirable to anyone except the reseller in the first place. Concert goers hate scalpers, arrangers hate scalpers and the reseller adds no value to their service. I don't see how it's the least bit interesting.
- OtomotO 5y ago
  It's interesting because it could be _my_ profit! Nevermind the society or the environment. If money can be made, money shall be made, no matter how shady a business /s
  - eru 5y ago
    'Scalping' ticket is actually useful for society, to be honest. But yeah, everyone involved likes to say that they hate scalpers. So no one will do anything to help them.
- divs1210 5y ago
  I'm not talking about scalping. Woodstock was a legendary event. The tickets would now be considered collectors items.
  - boomlinde 5y ago
    In that sense you can already resell your Woodstock tickets on an open market. NFTs don't really add anything to this market in particular, so I don't get your point.
eru 5y ago
Only if the ticket seller wants you to be able to do that. Remember, it's trivially easy to follow transactions on the block chain. So the ticket seller can see whether an NFT has been resold, and can just refuse to honour it. Or only honour the first wallet it was in, regardless of whether it is still there or not.
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  I think the idea may be to resell it as memorabilia - which might work for some rare or legendary performance, but, I think, in the typical case will be meaningless.
  - tchocky 5y ago
    And even that works way better in physical form. For concerts I still order hardcopy tickets, because I collect them to go through them and remember what bands I have seen live and relive that memory. A digital NFT wouldn't give this justice enough for me.
- divs1210 5y ago
  I'm talking about it as a collectors item.
  - eru 5y ago
    That is somewhat interesting. But see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776567
happymellon 5y ago
You can resell your paper, or email ticket already. How does blockchain make it interesting?
- 0xRolex 5y ago
  No need to expose yourself, possible anonimity and most important one, the absolute lack of need of a third party which is the thing that most find intresting about blockchains usecases.
  - usrbinbash 5y ago
    Except the most common way to do blockchain transactions are broker services which do require user information. This, combined with the fact that the blockchain is an immutable public ledger (meaning any transaction can be traced back indefinitely), and there goes anonymity.
    - 0xRolex 5y ago
      By brokers you mean Centralised Exchanges ? If yes I agree it's an aberation as we've with recently with Russia's problems people getting banned from it because these exchanges are bounded to obey country's laws. Everyone should leave CEXs to get on DEXs and learn about DeFi but as cool as it can be it's everything but userfriendly and as it is it'll never make it to public adoption. About tracing transactions as long as you don't dox yourself everything people can have about a wallet being yours is suspicions and there's always services to make it shady like tornadocash or anonimity oriented blockchains
      - usrbinbash 5y ago
        > Everyone should leave CEXs to get on DEXs and learn about DeFi That is not going to happen, for the same reasons why most people don't dig their own wells, learn carpentry to make their own furniture, or weave their own cloth and learn how to tailor clothes. Every complex enough system will always have centralized points, aka. gatekeepers. That is how human society self-organises.
usrbinbash 5y ago
Only if the authority recognizing the ticket allows it. If they don't, then the name of the original buyer is likely part of the hashed information, and anyone else trying to use the ticket is out of luck. NFTs still require recognition by the authority actually controlling the goods/services in question.

dmitriid 5y ago

"It's interesting because I can hoard tickets and resell at profit". Why is that interesting, exactly? Edit All that is marked as "interesting" in crypto is inevitably "how can I profit/get rich quick off something".

shawabawa3 5y ago
Usually the whole point of NFT tickets is to _stop_ you reselling on an open market (aka StubHub/Ticketmaster) and instead force you to either resell back to the venue, or to resell at face value only
- cmckn 5y ago
  Yikes. Not to mention there’s a public record of every ticket you’ve ever purchased. In many ways a blockchain is adtech done worst.
  - prox 5y ago
    I honestly tried to come up with ideas for crypto / blockchain but every time someone pointed out how my solution could be done easier / better without blockchain. Blockchain is a problem looking for a solution to make more money.
FeepingCreature 5y ago
In a proper market, it is impossible to resell because the sales price is the production price. So if the free-market price of the ticket is higher than the sales price, people should be producing additional Woodstocks until the prices match. At which point there is no point in being a scalper anymore. Scalping is only an issue if the sales price of products is artificially depressed.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  Ah yes. The magical "click my fingers and there's a new Woodstock every time someone raises a price" free-market.
- mellavora 5y ago
  I didn't realize it was that easy to produce another Woodstock, or that the only purpose of music and festivals was profit maximization/economic equilibrium. Silly me.
  - FeepingCreature 5y ago
    The whole point of capitalism is that economic equilibrium is also value equilibrium. So if you think it's good to have a Woodstock, unless you like artificial scarcity, you should think that having two Woodstocks is approximately twice as good. Now maybe you cannot produce another Woodstock, like there's some inherently limited resource like management effort or willingness or space or licenses, but that's the idea. (I don't think that the capitalist ideal matches reality. But you should at least get the idea if you're gonna disagree.)
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776666 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776666 Free market as imagined by libertarians can only exist in the presence of unlimited resources and magic.
      - jcbrand 5y ago
        You have it backwards. Markets exist because of scarcity, not because of abundance. If something is available in unlimited abundance, there's no need of a market for it.
        dmitriid 5y ago
        I don't think I got it backwards. This is the original statement: "In a proper market, it is impossible to resell because the sales price is the production price. So if the free-market price of the ticket is higher than the sales price, people should be producing additional Woodstocks until the prices match". The only free market where this is possible is a magical place where there are unlimited resources and ability to create new Woodstocks at the snap of a finger.

ahtihn 5y ago

What's the incentive for the ticket seller to enable that?

melomal 5y ago
Royalties. The ticket seller can set that and every time the ticket is resold, they will get % of that sale. For an artist that would mean they can sell a ticket with % royalty set and then profit from future sales on an ongoing basis.
- dalbasal 5y ago
  So... A method for scalping scalpers?
  - melomal 5y ago
    Pretty much. 1000 true fans is essentially the backbone of the NFT argument which basically revolves around artists and their fans parting ways with cash for collectable items. With NFT tickets, the artist always gets paid no matter who is selling the ticket and how many times it get sold. I would say that this is a win for the artist.
    - drugstorecowboy 5y ago
      Well.. yes that would be a win for the artist. As would a sales tax that goes to artists, or a new law that legalizes pickpocketing for artists. Why is that a good thing? Why should an artist be compensated beyond the first transaction? If this concept took off, how long do you think it would take before Walmart begins taking a cut of every resale? They have just as much right to it as an artist.
      - melomal 5y ago
        Well you could argue that it wouldn't be Walmart that does it, it would be the producer so Samsung, Apple, LG, Asus, Acer etc would sell their products with a digital twin (NFT) which provides sales from future purchases. That being said, it could reduce the need for new products/versions being created every other week. However, there would need to be a somewhat centralized 'marketplace' that facilities the second hand sales which is where Walmart could step in with some perks for selling with them.

boomlinde 5y ago

So ticket scalping. This was never desirable to anyone except the reseller in the first place. Concert goers hate scalpers, arrangers hate scalpers and the reseller adds no value to their service. I don't see how it's the least bit interesting.

OtomotO 5y ago
It's interesting because it could be _my_ profit! Nevermind the society or the environment. If money can be made, money shall be made, no matter how shady a business /s
- eru 5y ago
  'Scalping' ticket is actually useful for society, to be honest. But yeah, everyone involved likes to say that they hate scalpers. So no one will do anything to help them.
divs1210 5y ago
I'm not talking about scalping. Woodstock was a legendary event. The tickets would now be considered collectors items.
- boomlinde 5y ago
  In that sense you can already resell your Woodstock tickets on an open market. NFTs don't really add anything to this market in particular, so I don't get your point.

eru 5y ago

Only if the ticket seller wants you to be able to do that. Remember, it's trivially easy to follow transactions on the block chain. So the ticket seller can see whether an NFT has been resold, and can just refuse to honour it. Or only honour the first wallet it was in, regardless of whether it is still there or not.

ALittleLight 5y ago
I think the idea may be to resell it as memorabilia - which might work for some rare or legendary performance, but, I think, in the typical case will be meaningless.
- tchocky 5y ago
  And even that works way better in physical form. For concerts I still order hardcopy tickets, because I collect them to go through them and remember what bands I have seen live and relive that memory. A digital NFT wouldn't give this justice enough for me.
divs1210 5y ago
I'm talking about it as a collectors item.
- eru 5y ago
  That is somewhat interesting. But see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30776567

happymellon 5y ago

You can resell your paper, or email ticket already. How does blockchain make it interesting?

0xRolex 5y ago
No need to expose yourself, possible anonimity and most important one, the absolute lack of need of a third party which is the thing that most find intresting about blockchains usecases.
- usrbinbash 5y ago
  Except the most common way to do blockchain transactions are broker services which do require user information. This, combined with the fact that the blockchain is an immutable public ledger (meaning any transaction can be traced back indefinitely), and there goes anonymity.
  - 0xRolex 5y ago
    By brokers you mean Centralised Exchanges ? If yes I agree it's an aberation as we've with recently with Russia's problems people getting banned from it because these exchanges are bounded to obey country's laws. Everyone should leave CEXs to get on DEXs and learn about DeFi but as cool as it can be it's everything but userfriendly and as it is it'll never make it to public adoption. About tracing transactions as long as you don't dox yourself everything people can have about a wallet being yours is suspicions and there's always services to make it shady like tornadocash or anonimity oriented blockchains
    - usrbinbash 5y ago
      > Everyone should leave CEXs to get on DEXs and learn about DeFi That is not going to happen, for the same reasons why most people don't dig their own wells, learn carpentry to make their own furniture, or weave their own cloth and learn how to tailor clothes. Every complex enough system will always have centralized points, aka. gatekeepers. That is how human society self-organises.

usrbinbash 5y ago

Only if the authority recognizing the ticket allows it. If they don't, then the name of the original buyer is likely part of the hashed information, and anyone else trying to use the ticket is out of luck. NFTs still require recognition by the authority actually controlling the goods/services in question.