why would a New York senator care about the MLB playoffs?
My position on scalping...
back wrote:
why would a New York senator care about the MLB playoffs?
ouch/potw.
xneverwherex wrote:
this just was in the news today. good news - aside for those trying to buy U2 tix.
Crackdown on ticket resellers
NEW YORK. Sen. Charles Schumer wants to crack down on sky-high ticket prices: Proposed legislation would impose a two-day waiting period before resellers snatch up face-value tickets and jack up prices.
The new rule wouldn?t be enacted before fans buy tickets this morning for U2?s fall concert, Schumer said yesterday, but he hopes to see it pass before Major League Baseball playoffs.
So TM el al will just hold the scalp pool for two days before channeling them to the 'brokers'. The law is useless.
RatBastard wrote:xneverwherex wrote:
this just was in the news today. good news - aside for those trying to buy U2 tix.
Crackdown on ticket resellers
NEW YORK. Sen. Charles Schumer wants to crack down on sky-high ticket prices: Proposed legislation would impose a two-day waiting period before resellers snatch up face-value tickets and jack up prices.
The new rule wouldn?t be enacted before fans buy tickets this morning for U2?s fall concert, Schumer said yesterday, but he hopes to see it pass before Major League Baseball playoffs.
So TM el al will just hold the scalp pool for two days before channeling them to the 'brokers'. The law is useless.
agreed. . .i would love to see how this is enforced. . .what's ebay and craigslist to do? a number of states already have laws on their books about the resale of tickets, but that doesn't seem to stop people.
RatBastard wrote:xneverwherex wrote:
this just was in the news today. good news - aside for those trying to buy U2 tix.
Crackdown on ticket resellers
NEW YORK. Sen. Charles Schumer wants to crack down on sky-high ticket prices: Proposed legislation would impose a two-day waiting period before resellers snatch up face-value tickets and jack up prices.
The new rule wouldn?t be enacted before fans buy tickets this morning for U2?s fall concert, Schumer said yesterday, but he hopes to see it pass before Major League Baseball playoffs.
So TM el al will just hold the scalp pool for two days before channeling them to the 'brokers'. The law is useless.
it might be useless - but at least someone is _trying_ to do something. perhaps it will work in some ways, perhaps it wont. but after the springsteen fiasco, something had to do be done.
xneverwherex wrote:
something had to do be done.
ahhhh yes. . .the "something has to be done" rule of lawmaking. . .it's second only to the "there oughta be a law" rule.
Venerable wrote:xneverwherex wrote:
something had to do be done.
ahhhh yes. . .the "something has to be done" rule of lawmaking. . .it's second only to the "there oughta be a law" rule.
im not implying a law needed to be made regarding this - but its nice to see _something_ being done (or at least attempting to be done).
Pssst! Want a Ticket? Hey, I?m Legit. Really.
interesting read. selected quotes:
In contrast to the popular image of the ticket trader as a shadowy hustler, the life of the rank-and-file online broker can be surprisingly humdrum. In interviews several small resellers described a job not unlike that of a low-margin day trader. Each morning they scour the Web for passwords to use for special promotions on Ticketmaster, and all day they keep close watch on their secondary-exchange listings, making numerous competitive price adjustments. One New England broker, who also sells office supplies and didn?t want his name used to protect both jobs, said that for this high-maintenance side gig he hopes to make $40,000 a year.
(…)
To reach the widest potential market most brokers list their tickets on exchanges like StubHub, TicketsNow and TicketNetwork. Special software is needed to do that efficiently, and Mr. Vaccaro?s is particularly attractive to the little guys because of one ingenious feature: it allows them to borrow one another?s listings for their own Web sites, advertising what appear to be huge pools of tickets. As a result hundreds of sites are all essentially offering the same seats.
When brokers use the TicketNetwork software, whoever makes the sale gets a commission, even if another party fills the order. This can be great for brokers adept at drawing Web traffic. But it can confuse consumers, who don?t always know whom they are buying from until their transaction has been completed.
(…)
Then, with a wheezy chuckle, Mr. Vaccaro remembered the speech he gave at the first Ticket Summit.
?I know that you?ve all heard stories,? he recalled saying, ?about box-office managers getting cash payoffs, primary ticket outlets selling their tickets directly to brokers, managers selling their tickets to brokers. And I just want to dispel those rumors right now by confirming that they?re all true. This is the way that it was.
?But I think it?s getting better.?
</quotes>
interesting read. selected quotes:
In contrast to the popular image of the ticket trader as a shadowy hustler, the life of the rank-and-file online broker can be surprisingly humdrum. In interviews several small resellers described a job not unlike that of a low-margin day trader. Each morning they scour the Web for passwords to use for special promotions on Ticketmaster, and all day they keep close watch on their secondary-exchange listings, making numerous competitive price adjustments. One New England broker, who also sells office supplies and didn?t want his name used to protect both jobs, said that for this high-maintenance side gig he hopes to make $40,000 a year.
(…)
To reach the widest potential market most brokers list their tickets on exchanges like StubHub, TicketsNow and TicketNetwork. Special software is needed to do that efficiently, and Mr. Vaccaro?s is particularly attractive to the little guys because of one ingenious feature: it allows them to borrow one another?s listings for their own Web sites, advertising what appear to be huge pools of tickets. As a result hundreds of sites are all essentially offering the same seats.
When brokers use the TicketNetwork software, whoever makes the sale gets a commission, even if another party fills the order. This can be great for brokers adept at drawing Web traffic. But it can confuse consumers, who don?t always know whom they are buying from until their transaction has been completed.
(…)
Then, with a wheezy chuckle, Mr. Vaccaro remembered the speech he gave at the first Ticket Summit.
?I know that you?ve all heard stories,? he recalled saying, ?about box-office managers getting cash payoffs, primary ticket outlets selling their tickets directly to brokers, managers selling their tickets to brokers. And I just want to dispel those rumors right now by confirming that they?re all true. This is the way that it was.
?But I think it?s getting better.?
</quotes>
Doctor wrote:
Scalping is different from beer reselling – Scalpers profit without adding value to the transaction, and are therefore essentially leeches on society (much like derivatives traders). Bars profit because they add value to the beer they're selling – an enjoyable atmosphere, for example.
I'm rather surprised this obvious difference needs to be explained. ::)
Yes, BARS do that. But when I go to a concert venue, I have already paid for the atmosphere with my ticket. I'm not even suggesting that concert venues should charge less for alcohol than bars; however, I don't believe that it's too much to ask that they charge the SAME. After all, I pay to go to a concert venue, but I almost never pay to go to a bar.
I institued a simple policy long ago that I will simply not drink at a venue that charges too much (and as much as I love the 9:30, it's a prime example). The way I see it, lower alcohol prices would be greatly offset by greater volume sold. When I can go to a venue like Spaceland and buy a draft pint (of GOOD beer) for $5.50, I'll probably have at least one or two. And venues like that make me see venues like the 9:30 who charge $6 for a bottle (the price of a six-pack, in some cases, such as with Woodchuck Cider) in a very poor light. If the price for a bottle of Woodchuck were even $4 (still about four times its store price), I'd probably have one or two. Most smaller venues aren't that bad, though. It's the really large venues I can't stand, with their $9 and up plastic cups of crappy beer (thanks to their horrible selection).
I hold a passionate hatred for scalping, and long ago resolved not to buy tickets from scalpers no matter how much I want to see a show. I'd rather miss a show I really want to see than pay $60 for a $20 ticket and support some lowlife out to ruin it for true fans who just want to see a band play. However, I will say that I very often buy tickets the night of a show, but only from people who just want to get rid of an extra ticket or two. I've gotten into many, many sold out shows that way. I don't know about anyone else, but I really don't know what'll be going on one, two, three months down the road, and will very rarely commit to a show more than a week or two in advance. That means that I very often have to find tickets for sold-out shows. I'm all for instituting methods to limit and prevent scalping, but printing names on tickets and checking IDs would completely ruin that option for people like me, and for people who do commit months in advance and end up not being able to make the show. Ticket selling between fans is completely different from scalping, and any attempt to curb scalping needs to take that into account.
6 dollars for a pack of Woodchuck!? I've never paid less than 8.
runwhiteyrun06 wrote:
6 dollars for a pack of Woodchuck!? I've never paid less than 8.
$6.50 at Total Wines stores in VA
Redskins Fans Waited While Brokers Got Tickets
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/01/AR2009090103984.html?hpid=topnews
So the Skins Ticket Sales Team is responsible for a small portion of the scalping problem in DC.
I would guess they got their hot little hands on some U2 and McCartney tickets as well.
Danny not knowing about it and being 'livid' is as true as Fox News being 'fair and balanced'.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/01/AR2009090103984.html?hpid=topnews
So the Skins Ticket Sales Team is responsible for a small portion of the scalping problem in DC.
I would guess they got their hot little hands on some U2 and McCartney tickets as well.
Danny not knowing about it and being 'livid' is as true as Fox News being 'fair and balanced'.
News does not have the properties of being fair and balanced. Opining does but not news reporting. Which is exactly what is wrong with 99.999% of the so called news media these days.
Reod wrote:Doctor wrote:
Scalping is different from beer reselling – Scalpers profit without adding value to the transaction, and are therefore essentially leeches on society (much like derivatives traders). Bars profit because they add value to the beer they're selling – an enjoyable atmosphere, for example.
I'm rather surprised this obvious difference needs to be explained. ::)
Yes, BARS do that. But when I go to a concert venue, I have already paid for the atmosphere with my ticket. I'm not even suggesting that concert venues should charge less for alcohol than bars; however, I don't believe that it's too much to ask that they charge the SAME. After all, I pay to go to a concert venue, but I almost never pay to go to a bar.
I institued a simple policy long ago that I will simply not drink at a venue that charges too much (and as much as I love the 9:30, it's a prime example). The way I see it, lower alcohol prices would be greatly offset by greater volume sold. When I can go to a venue like Spaceland and buy a draft pint (of GOOD beer) for $5.50, I'll probably have at least one or two. And venues like that make me see venues like the 9:30 who charge $6 for a bottle (the price of a six-pack, in some cases, such as with Woodchuck Cider) in a very poor light. If the price for a bottle of Woodchuck were even $4 (still about four times its store price), I'd probably have one or two. Most smaller venues aren't that bad, though. It's the really large venues I can't stand, with their $9 and up plastic cups of crappy beer (thanks to their horrible selection).
I hold a passionate hatred for scalping, and long ago resolved not to buy tickets from scalpers no matter how much I want to see a show. I'd rather miss a show I really want to see than pay $60 for a $20 ticket and support some lowlife out to ruin it for true fans who just want to see a band play. However, I will say that I very often buy tickets the night of a show, but only from people who just want to get rid of an extra ticket or two. I've gotten into many, many sold out shows that way. I don't know about anyone else, but I really don't know what'll be going on one, two, three months down the road, and will very rarely commit to a show more than a week or two in advance. That means that I very often have to find tickets for sold-out shows. I'm all for instituting methods to limit and prevent scalping, but printing names on tickets and checking IDs would completely ruin that option for people like me, and for people who do commit months in advance and end up not being able to make the show. Ticket selling between fans is completely different from scalping, and any attempt to curb scalping needs to take that into account.
whew…I'm not sure happiness is in your future no matter how all this is handled
I am not making any statements for what I think prices should be on a damn thing, but it is indeed the buyer who sets the market price. A seller can ask what the heck he wants. You have the buyer has the dollars in your hand. You determine if something is worth the price being asked. If something is being offered at a price you think it is worth, buy it, if not, don't.
If you don't like the beer prices, you can go down the street, grab a beer, and run back for the show. And why do you assume your ticket price did more than pay for the band and security and all the other workers and that the club makes its money off bar sales. I know some of the smaller venues where the bands get the door and so what does the venue make? Beer sales, that is all. So don't think that your ticket is necessarily paying for the venue, because it might not be, just for a greedy band.
Add Van Halen and Ticketmaster to the pile.
http://beatcrave.com/2009-09-01/van-halen-caught-up-in-scalping-scheme/
Van Halen Caught Up In Scalping Scheme
By Jeffrey Hyatt
The Van Halen classic ?Runnin? With the Devil? might very well be changed to ?Runnin? With the Scalpers? now that the rock band has been alleged to have conspired with ticket scalpers during a fall 2007 tour in order to reap an extra $1 million, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal.
The plan, part of a Ticketmaster initiative named ?Project Showtime,? was devised to grab a piece of the exorbitant prices charged by scalpers, which sometimes surpass a general ticket?s face value by hundreds (often thousands) of dollars.
Van Halen?s part, according to the paper, was involved in farming out up to 500 of the best seats from about 20 of its concerts with original frontman David Lee Roth to secondary ticket brokers.
Irving Azoff, Van Halen?s manager and Ticketmaster?s chief executive, is said to have spearheaded the scheme in the summer of 2007.
Under the proposed plan, the scalpers (who prefer the term ?brokers?) would keep 30% of the marked-up ticket sale price for themselves, and the remaining 70% was divided among Ticketmaster, the band and its handlers, the paper reported. Van Halen?s involvement in ?07 was actually part of a test run.
Ticketmaster, which is now pursuing a merger with Live Nation, was negotiating with ticket brokers such as Ace Ticket, a Boston-based broker, Barry?s Tickets Service in Los Angeles and Elite Ticket Service in New York to launch the above-mentioned ?Project Showtime.?
The project also included negotiations with concert-promoter AEG Live, and Madison Square Garden-parent MSG Entertainment.
One of the main reasons ?Project Showtime? fell apart was because Ticketmaster execs were gun-shy about going into business with the leaders of an industry they had long opposed, which makes sense. From a purely illegal standpoint, the deal makes sense. But clearly the trust meter in the room between the brokers and Ticketmaster was registering a 1 out of a possible 10, so everyone just walks away thinking about ?what if??
Of course, before the deal was completely shelved for good the ticket brokers had already been given tickets to scalp, and rock stars Van Halen pocketed an extra $1 million.
http://beatcrave.com/2009-09-01/van-halen-caught-up-in-scalping-scheme/
Van Halen Caught Up In Scalping Scheme
By Jeffrey Hyatt
The Van Halen classic ?Runnin? With the Devil? might very well be changed to ?Runnin? With the Scalpers? now that the rock band has been alleged to have conspired with ticket scalpers during a fall 2007 tour in order to reap an extra $1 million, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal.
The plan, part of a Ticketmaster initiative named ?Project Showtime,? was devised to grab a piece of the exorbitant prices charged by scalpers, which sometimes surpass a general ticket?s face value by hundreds (often thousands) of dollars.
Van Halen?s part, according to the paper, was involved in farming out up to 500 of the best seats from about 20 of its concerts with original frontman David Lee Roth to secondary ticket brokers.
Irving Azoff, Van Halen?s manager and Ticketmaster?s chief executive, is said to have spearheaded the scheme in the summer of 2007.
Under the proposed plan, the scalpers (who prefer the term ?brokers?) would keep 30% of the marked-up ticket sale price for themselves, and the remaining 70% was divided among Ticketmaster, the band and its handlers, the paper reported. Van Halen?s involvement in ?07 was actually part of a test run.
Ticketmaster, which is now pursuing a merger with Live Nation, was negotiating with ticket brokers such as Ace Ticket, a Boston-based broker, Barry?s Tickets Service in Los Angeles and Elite Ticket Service in New York to launch the above-mentioned ?Project Showtime.?
The project also included negotiations with concert-promoter AEG Live, and Madison Square Garden-parent MSG Entertainment.
One of the main reasons ?Project Showtime? fell apart was because Ticketmaster execs were gun-shy about going into business with the leaders of an industry they had long opposed, which makes sense. From a purely illegal standpoint, the deal makes sense. But clearly the trust meter in the room between the brokers and Ticketmaster was registering a 1 out of a possible 10, so everyone just walks away thinking about ?what if??
Of course, before the deal was completely shelved for good the ticket brokers had already been given tickets to scalp, and rock stars Van Halen pocketed an extra $1 million.
RatBastard wrote:
I am not making any statements for what I think prices should be on a damn thing, but it is indeed the buyer who sets the market price. A seller can ask what the heck he wants. You have the buyer has the dollars in your hand. You determine if something is worth the price being asked. If something is being offered at a price you think it is worth, buy it, if not, don't.
WHat market? One seller is not a market!
It is the SELLER in a monopoly environment that determines the price. Or you think the 930 does not determine the price of the beer they sell? Since there is no possible competitor its a "take it or leave it" situation.
Jesus how long does this debate have to go on. Beer prices will continue to rise and scalpers are not going anywhere. If it bothers you that much, stay home. Otherwise quit yer bitchin.
chaz wrote:
Jesus how long does this debate have to go on. Beer prices will continue to rise and scalpers are not going anywhere. If it bothers you that much, stay home. Otherwise quit yer bitchin.
Talk about bitchin! I count four five different bitches in 30 words! Good stuff Chaz!