3 ms·

> 3. If someone wishes to sell their ticket (eg. changed plans, etc.), they can do so for 95% of the original purchase price with 5% going back to the band and

> 3. If someone wishes to sell their ticket (eg. changed plans, etc.), they can do so for 95% of the original purchase price with 5% going back to the band and marketplace. Why? It’s my ticket. Should t I be able to do whatever I want with it? Funny how the same crowd that complains about ‘not owning’ your phone/car/tractor etc is totally fine with not owning a concert ticket…

cool_dude85 4y ago
>Funny how the same crowd that complains about ‘not owning’ your phone/car/tractor etc is totally fine with not owning a concert ticket… Yeah, "ownership" is not exactly a black-and-white issue such that impinging upon it is always bad. People in general want good outcomes, not bad ones. They think that the way John Deere impinges upon the customer's ownership of their tractor (to lock it down and force you to pay recurring fees, use only licensed mechanics who kick back to Deere) is bad, and the way that Rammstein impinges upon the customer's ownership of their ticket (to keep you from scalping it and making money as a middleman who offers nothing of value) is good. Ownership is one of those concepts where it is difficult to draw universally applicable rules. Instead, we investigate the specifics of each case to decide whether the infringements are ok or not.
bredren 4y ago
There's nothing wrong with wanting to get face value + fees for a ticket in resale. But a ticket isn't a physical object that produces repeatable, expected value to the person operating it. A concert ticket is a license to a one time in person experience.
vkou 4y ago
It's their event, they can choose to let people in by whatever criteria they want.
echelon 4y ago
Firstly, because as things exist in the world today, we have thousands of highly funded companies using robots to snipe the ticket supply at release and create a much higher priced (3x+) market. It's the same thing that happens with PlayStation console launches, except there's no chance of getting the experience later. The artist won't be in your city again playing the same set list. Secondly, I don't think "concert tickets" should be classed quite the same as property per se, and this is for a few reasons: - Concert tickets are limited edition, single use time slots you're booking with a person or group you admire. They're like stock options in that they expire. - Buying concert tickets is a means to become a benefactor of the artist. (It's better financial support than buying their albums.) In exchange, you get a good experience. - The act of profiting off of a ticket for a group you like should feel sleazy. Rather, in selling a ticket, I think a fan would simultaneously feel remorse for missing the concert and happiness that someone else that wants to go can see it. These stipulations are of course if you really appreciate the art and the artist. There are all sorts of people that go to concerts -- such as those that talk loudly during the set, those that don't really care about the artist, etc. -- , and I understand they may feel differently.

cool_dude85 4y ago

>Funny how the same crowd that complains about ‘not owning’ your phone/car/tractor etc is totally fine with not owning a concert ticket… Yeah, "ownership" is not exactly a black-and-white issue such that impinging upon it is always bad. People in general want good outcomes, not bad ones. They think that the way John Deere impinges upon the customer's ownership of their tractor (to lock it down and force you to pay recurring fees, use only licensed mechanics who kick back to Deere) is bad, and the way that Rammstein impinges upon the customer's ownership of their ticket (to keep you from scalping it and making money as a middleman who offers nothing of value) is good. Ownership is one of those concepts where it is difficult to draw universally applicable rules. Instead, we investigate the specifics of each case to decide whether the infringements are ok or not.

bredren 4y ago

There's nothing wrong with wanting to get face value + fees for a ticket in resale. But a ticket isn't a physical object that produces repeatable, expected value to the person operating it. A concert ticket is a license to a one time in person experience.

vkou 4y ago

It's their event, they can choose to let people in by whatever criteria they want.

echelon 4y ago

Firstly, because as things exist in the world today, we have thousands of highly funded companies using robots to snipe the ticket supply at release and create a much higher priced (3x+) market. It's the same thing that happens with PlayStation console launches, except there's no chance of getting the experience later. The artist won't be in your city again playing the same set list. Secondly, I don't think "concert tickets" should be classed quite the same as property per se, and this is for a few reasons: - Concert tickets are limited edition, single use time slots you're booking with a person or group you admire. They're like stock options in that they expire. - Buying concert tickets is a means to become a benefactor of the artist. (It's better financial support than buying their albums.) In exchange, you get a good experience. - The act of profiting off of a ticket for a group you like should feel sleazy. Rather, in selling a ticket, I think a fan would simultaneously feel remorse for missing the concert and happiness that someone else that wants to go can see it. These stipulations are of course if you really appreciate the art and the artist. There are all sorts of people that go to concerts -- such as those that talk loudly during the set, those that don't really care about the artist, etc. -- , and I understand they may feel differently.