5 ms·

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 mark

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.
- jcbrand 5y ago
  So you extrapolate from one HN comment to all libertarians? You are interpreting the original comment as uncharitably as possible. "Additional Woodstocks" can be easily interpreted as "additional concerts similar to Woodstock" without changing the meaning of the comment. Also, you don't need unlimited resources to create new concerts, and you don't need the "snap of a finger", you simply need people who are motivated to do so by virtue of the profit motive (as well as their love for music and live shows) incentivized through the price mechanism.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > So you extrapolate from one HN comment to all libertarians? Yes. Because all of their notions of "one true free market" require unlimited resources and ability to immediately create anything from scratch. > can be easily interpreted as "additional concerts similar to Woodstock" Same thing, different attempt to argue semantics. > Also, you don't need unlimited resources to create new concerts, and you don't need the "snap of a finger", you simply need people who are motivated to do so by virtue of the profit motive I'll repeat this again for the fourth-fifth time in this thread. Literally thousands of concerts exist, "simply" driven by "people who are motivated to do so by virtue of the profit motive". And yet, Woodstock is Woodstock. And Sziget is Sziget etc. I wonder why.
    - jcbrand 5y ago
      The existence of the Ford fiesta model won't necessarily make a Lamborghini cheaper, but it does make the category "car" more affordable and provides an option for people on a budget. The same applies to concerts. Woodstock, due to various factors is able to charge a premium, but that doesn't mean you can't go to other concerts. As more and more concerts are held, the premium that Woodstock can command is held in check, because people have other options.
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        > The same applies to concerts. The analogy is incorrect when what was claimed was: "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" > As more and more concerts are held, the premium that Woodstock can command is held in check, because people have other options. - 6-day festival pass to Sziget is 315 EUR (~$346). - Glastonbury (5 days) tickets are ~$365. So, in check, according to you. And then... - Coachella $449 and up - Burning Man (which is not even a concert per se) is $525 and up (some tickets are sold at $2500) And then... - Justin Bieber can easily ask for 1000 dollars per ticket and more. And so on. Even though, according to you and @FeepingCreature, it's enough to just create another Sziget/Glastonbury/Coachella/Bieber for the prices to go down to an equilibrium. Oh and there will be no scalpers. Even though already, now, no one is stopping you from creating thousands of concerts.... and yet the price for those discussed doesn't go down, and scalpers exist. Same for any sporting events etc.
- drugstorecowboy 5y ago
  No, grandparent is absolutely correct. It's not magic, if they charged what tickets are actually worth, there would be no scalpers. That is not a libertarian fantasy or anything close to it, in fact it's not even controversial.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    > if they charged what tickets are actually worth, there would be no scalpers Scalpers' motive is to gain profit off of a limited resource. It doesn't matter if the tickets cost even less than the concert costs to produce. By the way, who determines the "actual worth" of tickets? > That is not a libertarian fantasy or anything close to it That is not what I was responding to.
    - drugstorecowboy 5y ago
      The price people are willing to pay is who determines the actual worth of the ticket. Doesn't matter if its from the ticket booth or the scalper.Do people sell tickets for less than the concert costs to produce where you live? Thats a very flawed business model. Could it be instead that the pricing model for tickets doesn't adequately reflect what people are willing to pay? If ticket booths charged exactly what scalpers charge would that change anything for you?
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        > The price people are willing to pay is who determines the actual worth of the ticket. Indeed > Do people sell tickets for less than the concert costs to produce where you live? No, they don't, at it's not what I said. > If ticket booths charged exactly what scalpers charge would that change anything for you? Ni idea why you're asking me this question
        drugstorecowboy 5y ago
        Uhh what? So the price people are willing to pay dictates the worth, what exactly is your point here then? That scalpers are bad people because they make a profit?

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.

jcbrand 5y ago
So you extrapolate from one HN comment to all libertarians? You are interpreting the original comment as uncharitably as possible. "Additional Woodstocks" can be easily interpreted as "additional concerts similar to Woodstock" without changing the meaning of the comment. Also, you don't need unlimited resources to create new concerts, and you don't need the "snap of a finger", you simply need people who are motivated to do so by virtue of the profit motive (as well as their love for music and live shows) incentivized through the price mechanism.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > So you extrapolate from one HN comment to all libertarians? Yes. Because all of their notions of "one true free market" require unlimited resources and ability to immediately create anything from scratch. > can be easily interpreted as "additional concerts similar to Woodstock" Same thing, different attempt to argue semantics. > Also, you don't need unlimited resources to create new concerts, and you don't need the "snap of a finger", you simply need people who are motivated to do so by virtue of the profit motive I'll repeat this again for the fourth-fifth time in this thread. Literally thousands of concerts exist, "simply" driven by "people who are motivated to do so by virtue of the profit motive". And yet, Woodstock is Woodstock. And Sziget is Sziget etc. I wonder why.
  - jcbrand 5y ago
    The existence of the Ford fiesta model won't necessarily make a Lamborghini cheaper, but it does make the category "car" more affordable and provides an option for people on a budget. The same applies to concerts. Woodstock, due to various factors is able to charge a premium, but that doesn't mean you can't go to other concerts. As more and more concerts are held, the premium that Woodstock can command is held in check, because people have other options.
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > The same applies to concerts. The analogy is incorrect when what was claimed was: "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" > As more and more concerts are held, the premium that Woodstock can command is held in check, because people have other options. - 6-day festival pass to Sziget is 315 EUR (~$346). - Glastonbury (5 days) tickets are ~$365. So, in check, according to you. And then... - Coachella $449 and up - Burning Man (which is not even a concert per se) is $525 and up (some tickets are sold at $2500) And then... - Justin Bieber can easily ask for 1000 dollars per ticket and more. And so on. Even though, according to you and @FeepingCreature, it's enough to just create another Sziget/Glastonbury/Coachella/Bieber for the prices to go down to an equilibrium. Oh and there will be no scalpers. Even though already, now, no one is stopping you from creating thousands of concerts.... and yet the price for those discussed doesn't go down, and scalpers exist. Same for any sporting events etc.
drugstorecowboy 5y ago
No, grandparent is absolutely correct. It's not magic, if they charged what tickets are actually worth, there would be no scalpers. That is not a libertarian fantasy or anything close to it, in fact it's not even controversial.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  > if they charged what tickets are actually worth, there would be no scalpers Scalpers' motive is to gain profit off of a limited resource. It doesn't matter if the tickets cost even less than the concert costs to produce. By the way, who determines the "actual worth" of tickets? > That is not a libertarian fantasy or anything close to it That is not what I was responding to.
  - drugstorecowboy 5y ago
    The price people are willing to pay is who determines the actual worth of the ticket. Doesn't matter if its from the ticket booth or the scalper.Do people sell tickets for less than the concert costs to produce where you live? Thats a very flawed business model. Could it be instead that the pricing model for tickets doesn't adequately reflect what people are willing to pay? If ticket booths charged exactly what scalpers charge would that change anything for you?
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > The price people are willing to pay is who determines the actual worth of the ticket. Indeed > Do people sell tickets for less than the concert costs to produce where you live? No, they don't, at it's not what I said. > If ticket booths charged exactly what scalpers charge would that change anything for you? Ni idea why you're asking me this question
      - drugstorecowboy 5y ago
        Uhh what? So the price people are willing to pay dictates the worth, what exactly is your point here then? That scalpers are bad people because they make a profit?