I agree with feral, too, that community connection may be another valid criteria, though as with the rest you don't want to go overboard and become too exclusive.
I'm not saying that all impacted events should have community priority presales, or that all tickets should be given out that way.
I'm saying it's one strategy that can work alongside other strategies, and depends on the kind of event you want to have.
I'm just not seeing how it would really work though. Who is the community?
Whoever the event hosts & promoters say they are.
Im sure they already do give away tickets to people. They just dont advertise it and you aren't one of those people.
If you're reading into my posts that I think I'm entitled a ticket to PAX because I post in D&D or something, then you're reading too much into my posts.
I'm not just talking about PAX here, but any impacted event.
And, yes, they do give away tickets to friends and having connections is always a benefit (as is having money or time to spend). What we're really talking about here is formalizing these processes.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
+1
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Another idea that I think works well in general is creating "priority passes" which give you priority seating to panels/concerts or the ability to skip certain lines at the event, and charging a healthy premium for them. It both achieves the objective of letting people who are willing to spend more spend more (and have that extra money go to PA) and differentiating the items so that there is no perception that people with money are being given priority for normal attendance.
I agree with feral, too, that community connection may be another valid criteria, though as with the rest you don't want to go overboard and become too exclusive.
I'm not saying that all impacted events should have community priority presales, or that all tickets should be given out that way.
I'm saying it's one strategy that can work alongside other strategies, and depends on the kind of event you want to have.
Exactly. You have a community presale of 2500 passes or something and throw a notification or email up. If you miss it, too bad, but it gets some hype built among people who are theoretically your core audience.
We are not asking for a free ride. We're just asking not to get fucked because we aren't watching the PAX twitter at all times during our workday. This is why most concerts and festivals have set dates for the passes to start being sold.
Another idea that I think works well in general is creating "priority passes" which give you priority seating to panels/concerts or the ability to skip certain lines at the event, and charging a healthy premium for them. It both achieves the objective of letting people who are willing to spend more spend more (and have that extra money go to PA) and differentiating the items so that there is no perception that people with money are being given priority for normal attendance.
This is *insane*. This totally violates the fundamental rules of PAX. How is there no perception that people with money are given priority if you're giving them priority to walk past thousands of people in line and sneak in into the rich people section. This is so far outside sane that I'm not even sure if you're serious.
I agree with feral, too, that community connection may be another valid criteria, though as with the rest you don't want to go overboard and become too exclusive.
I'm not saying that all impacted events should have community priority presales, or that all tickets should be given out that way.
I'm saying it's one strategy that can work alongside other strategies, and depends on the kind of event you want to have.
Exactly. You have a community presale of 2500 passes or something and throw a notification or email up. If you miss it, too bad, but it gets some hype built among people who are theoretically your core audience.
We are not asking for a free ride. We're just asking not to get fucked because we aren't watching the PAX twitter at all times during our workday. This is why most concerts and festivals have set dates for the passes to start being sold.
A lot of musicians have early presales for fan club members, or use coupon codes to a similar effect.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I agree with feral, too, that community connection may be another valid criteria, though as with the rest you don't want to go overboard and become too exclusive.
I'm not saying that all impacted events should have community priority presales, or that all tickets should be given out that way.
I'm saying it's one strategy that can work alongside other strategies, and depends on the kind of event you want to have.
I'm just not seeing how it would really work though. Who is the community?
Whoever the event hosts & promoters say they are.
Im sure they already do give away tickets to people. They just dont advertise it and you aren't one of those people.
If you're reading into my posts that I think I'm entitled a ticket to PAX because I post in D&D or something, then you're reading too much into my posts.
I'm not just talking about PAX here, but any impacted event.
And, yes, they do give away tickets to friends and having connections is always a benefit (as is having money or time to spend). What we're really talking about here is formalizing these processes.
I apologize if that is how it was read, but I wasn't trying to cast aspersions on you. It's just that this is a thing that they almost certainly do, but they aren't going to publicly say "yeah, we give away X amount of tickets to people we like in the...community or whatever..." because of the massive amounts of rage that would surely generate.
0
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Another idea that I think works well in general is creating "priority passes" which give you priority seating to panels/concerts or the ability to skip certain lines at the event, and charging a healthy premium for them. It both achieves the objective of letting people who are willing to spend more spend more (and have that extra money go to PA) and differentiating the items so that there is no perception that people with money are being given priority for normal attendance.
This is *insane*. This totally violates the fundamental rules of PAX. How is there no perception that people with money are given priority if you're giving them priority to walk past thousands of people in line and sneak in into the rich people section. This is so far outside sane that I'm not even sure if you're serious.
Make the passes very expensive. It wouldn't be any different from buying backstage passes for a concert or the priority passes at Disney.
Edit: if a normal pass is $70 and a priority pass is $300+, do you really think people would be that resentful? You are not talking about buying the same thing here.
Another idea that I think works well in general is creating "priority passes" which give you priority seating to panels/concerts or the ability to skip certain lines at the event, and charging a healthy premium for them. It both achieves the objective of letting people who are willing to spend more spend more (and have that extra money go to PA) and differentiating the items so that there is no perception that people with money are being given priority for normal attendance.
This is *insane*. This totally violates the fundamental rules of PAX. How is there no perception that people with money are given priority if you're giving them priority to walk past thousands of people in line and sneak in into the rich people section. This is so far outside sane that I'm not even sure if you're serious.
Make the passes very expensive. It wouldn't be any different from buying backstage passes for a concert or the priority passes at Disney.
Edit: if a normal pass is $70 and a priority pass is $300+, do you really think people would be that resentful? You are not talking about buying the same thing here.
Good velvet ropes make good fellow penny-arcade community members.
Another idea that I think works well in general is creating "priority passes" which give you priority seating to panels/concerts or the ability to skip certain lines at the event, and charging a healthy premium for them. It both achieves the objective of letting people who are willing to spend more spend more (and have that extra money go to PA) and differentiating the items so that there is no perception that people with money are being given priority for normal attendance.
This is *insane*. This totally violates the fundamental rules of PAX. How is there no perception that people with money are given priority if you're giving them priority to walk past thousands of people in line and sneak in into the rich people section. This is so far outside sane that I'm not even sure if you're serious.
Make the passes very expensive. It wouldn't be any different from buying backstage passes for a concert or the priority passes at Disney.
Edit: if a normal pass is $70 and a priority pass is $300+, do you really think people would be that resentful? You are not talking about buying the same thing here.
Right there's the regular PAX experience most people would get and then there's the rich people's PAX experience. Exactly in line with what the people who host the convention absolutely don't want.
Quid on
+4
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Another idea that I think works well in general is creating "priority passes" which give you priority seating to panels/concerts or the ability to skip certain lines at the event, and charging a healthy premium for them. It both achieves the objective of letting people who are willing to spend more spend more (and have that extra money go to PA) and differentiating the items so that there is no perception that people with money are being given priority for normal attendance.
This is *insane*. This totally violates the fundamental rules of PAX. How is there no perception that people with money are given priority if you're giving them priority to walk past thousands of people in line and sneak in into the rich people section. This is so far outside sane that I'm not even sure if you're serious.
Make the passes very expensive. It wouldn't be any different from buying backstage passes for a concert or the priority passes at Disney.
Edit: if a normal pass is $70 and a priority pass is $300+, do you really think people would be that resentful? You are not talking about buying the same thing here.
Right there's the regular PAX experience most people would get and then there's the rich people's PAX experience. Exactly in line with what the people who host the convention absolutely don't want.
To be fair, some kind of priority pass system (especially if it's a non-financial one, IE everyone gets 1 golden ticket etc.) would be great, as if you want to go to a lot of panels, 90% of your PAX is going to consist of standing in line. I would really like to see some improvements to these things, as I feel they've fallen back a bit too hard on "well, we want to be fair to the community" when a lot of it seems to be not wanting to spend the time to fix the problems.
RE: SKFM's pricing thing - this is a classic economic thing - if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong. The REASON for this is twofold:
1. Most of the profit is then passed to scalpers, as they are able to buy low and sell high.
2. Your audience will not necessarily be the ideal mix in that you are not exploring any depths of "willingness to buy"
Right there's the regular PAX experience most people would get and then there's the rich people's PAX experience. Exactly in line with what the people who host the convention absolutely don't want.
Agreed, that is why I am down for the bundled pack. Some t-shirts, art, other merch, but in the end the pax experience isn't altered for the people who didn't pay.
0
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong
Nope.
How do you tell when something is priced too low?
When the person who's selling the luxury product is dissatisfied with its distribution because of the low price.
+1
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
To be fair, some kind of priority pass system (especially if it's a non-financial one, IE everyone gets 1 golden ticket etc.) would be great, as if you want to go to a lot of panels, 90% of your PAX is going to consist of standing in line. I would really like to see some improvements to these things, as I feel they've fallen back a bit too hard on "well, we want to be fair to the community" when a lot of it seems to be not wanting to spend the time to fix the problems.
RE: SKFM's pricing thing - this is a classic economic thing - if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong. The REASON for this is twofold:
1. Most of the profit is then passed to scalpers, as they are able to buy low and sell high.
2. Your audience will not necessarily be the ideal mix in that you are not exploring any depths of "willingness to buy"
Right, but there are more reasons to sell a thing than to simply maximize profits. It's only priced wrong if that's your goal.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I agree with feral, too, that community connection may be another valid criteria, though as with the rest you don't want to go overboard and become too exclusive.
I'm not saying that all impacted events should have community priority presales, or that all tickets should be given out that way.
I'm saying it's one strategy that can work alongside other strategies, and depends on the kind of event you want to have.
Exactly. You have a community presale of 2500 passes or something and throw a notification or email up. If you miss it, too bad, but it gets some hype built among people who are theoretically your core audience.
We are not asking for a free ride. We're just asking not to get fucked because we aren't watching the PAX twitter at all times during our workday. This is why most concerts and festivals have set dates for the passes to start being sold.
I don't know where you get this idea that you have to watch the PAX twitter.
You can have that tweet forwarded to every SMS number and every email account you own.
Yeah, some people certainly go hours at a time during work unable to see or act on this notification. Those people can enlist friends or family members to help.
And some people have jobs that preclude receiving texts or checking email, and have no family or friends, and are unable to afford tickets on the secondary market. These folks get fucked.
Which sucks, but to me also seems like the smallest possible group to fuck.
Right now you can either jump through the hoops, get lucky, or bust out your wallet. At least as if last year, all three of these were legitimately possible ways to get a pass.
Every single suggestion seems to eliminate one or more of these avenues, leaving the fan with LESS options of how to get a ticket. This strikes me as a bad thing.
Now, when we get to one-minute sellouts, then that's a separate issue, and may require a more drastic solution.
As it is, I say a child's play auction of maybe 5% to 10% of badges (prior to going on sale) and providing an official means to resell tickets (with a cut going to the con) is probably sufficient. Scalpers gonna scalp, as long as they're legit passes I think we can deal with it. Most people are still getting passes for reasonable prices, and most people who put in the effort still get to buy them directly. All is well.
But then I don't really hate scalpers as much as most people. It's a healthy disdain, I see positives in the secondary market as well.
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
0
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
So do a partial auction and sell the others cheap/ give them away and make them no transferable, but returnable. I think this system hits every pro and has no cons. . .
Elton John tickets, when I saw him, were going for like $70 face value. I paid about $200. That sucked. But...
- I wasn't available during the two minutes they were on sale
- I actually got to select my seats, not whatever seats in the pool got offered
So while I paid a significant premium, I also got some benefit (buying on my own schedule, choosing my seats). And while scalping may hasten sellouts, I don't think it was necessarily the driving factor here...anticipation was high, he'd never played in the area before, ever.
And while Elton gets less money, he also gets to not be the asshole charging $200 a seat.
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Because you don't care about the profit? PAX may be run by a businessman, but its board of directors, as it were, is still two dudes who remember what it's like to be poor. They created PAX because the existing gaming conventions were for rich people.
Part of what PAX is selling is its image. It's for the little guy. It's not too commercial. It's about the gamers, and not the game companies. It's about the community. You change that, you change your product. You attract a different class of attendees, which may or may not prove more profitable. You're also going to change the volunteers you attract, which will effect the con experience, changing who comes back for more. And the attendees are the actual product. The real money's made selling spots on the expo floor.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
0
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Elton John tickets, when I saw him, were going for like $70 face value. I paid about $200. That sucked. But...
- I wasn't available during the two minutes they were on sale
- I actually got to select my seats, not whatever seats in the pool got offered
So while I paid a significant premium, I also got some benefit (buying on my own schedule, choosing my seats). And while scalping may hasten sellouts, I don't think it was necessarily the driving factor here...anticipation was high, he'd never played in the area before, ever.
And while Elton gets less money, he also gets to not be the asshole charging $200 a seat.
Everybody wins.
Unless you don't want other people reaping the rewards for your work. To me, that would be a pretty big deal. Sell the best tickets for $200, others cheap and don't allow resales (but allow returns and then resell them yourself) and I think everybody really does win.
Edit: just to say it, premium pricing for premium seats is pretty widely accepted for events, as is premium pricing for priority access. These are not strange new concepts.
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
So do a partial auction and sell the others cheap/ give them away and make them no transferable, but returnable. I think this system hits every pro and has no cons. . .
As a huge property rights guy, wouldn't you say I should be able to choose who I pass my paid ticket off to? Why should it go back to the pool, rather than allowing me to give it to a friend of my choosing?
Obviously a ticket is bound by terms, it's all legal, but on principle shouldn't the ticket be mine to give as I please?
I consider this a con. If I have duty that weekend, I'd much rather be able to give it to a friend who wants to go than get a refund and have a stranger get it.
Also, eliminates any potential for badge sharing. If I want to let a friend use it in the morning, and I use it that night, why shouldn't this be possible? Eliminating this is a con as well.
I shouldn't have to enlist friends and/or family to be eternally vigilant to get a ticket. That's stupid and inane.
@Quid - please stop being a goose about money. I was trying to note the economic concept. When something sells out in minutes, you need ways to meter demand or supply if you want a fair distribution of tickets, because otherwise the scalpers will get most of them. The easiest way to do this is price.
Tying tickets to id's won't work that well either, unless you have an army willing to stand and check every id of every pass every time they enter the building.
If the secondary market was actually a big problem they could check IDs at the doors and match whats on the badge, with hand stamps or wrist bands once you're in.
Some people didn't get to go when they wanted to. PAX is not unique in this phenomenon. #firstworldproblems
I shouldn't have to enlist friends and/or family to be eternally vigilant to get a ticket. That's stupid and inane.
@Quid - please stop being a goose about money. I was trying to note the economic concept. When something sells out in minutes, you need ways to meter demand or supply if you want a fair distribution of tickets, because otherwise the scalpers will get most of them. The easiest way to do this is price.
Tying tickets to id's won't work that well either, unless you have an army willing to stand and check every id of every pass every time they enter the building.
Stupid and inane, sure, but also effective. And I've yet to see a suggestion that isn't equally stupid and inane in other ways.
Like I said, right now you can rely on effort, luck, OR money. Every single suggestion seems to take away one or more options.
0
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
So do a partial auction and sell the others cheap/ give them away and make them no transferable, but returnable. I think this system hits every pro and has no cons. . .
As a huge property rights guy, wouldn't you say I should be able to choose who I pass my paid ticket off to? Why should it go back to the pool, rather than allowing me to give it to a friend of my choosing?
Obviously a ticket is bound by terms, it's all legal, but on principle shouldn't the ticket be mine to give as I please?
I consider this a con. If I have duty that weekend, I'd much rather be able to give it to a friend who wants to go than get a refund and have a stranger get it.
Also, eliminates any potential for badge sharing. If I want to let a friend use it in the morning, and I use it that night, why shouldn't this be possible? Eliminating this is a con as well.
I have no problem with a contract giving you a limited right. And I think that the pro of eliminating scalpers outweighs either con you raised, but this is just personal opinion.
That said, I think it is incoherent for G&T to both day pricing is low let anyone in but to ignore scalping. If the reality is that some people are paying more, don't stick your head in the sand. Deal with that reality (IMO, that means capturing that money yourself).
I shouldn't have to enlist friends and/or family to be eternally vigilant to get a ticket. That's stupid and inane.
Quid - please stop being a goose about money. I was trying to note the economic concept. When something sells out in minutes, you need ways to meter demand or supply if you want a fair distribution of tickets, because otherwise the scalpers will get most of them. The easiest way to do this is price.
No, it's not fair, it is in fact specifically advantageous to those with more money.
No matter how the tickets are sold, the method is going to be beneficial to one group or another. There is literally no "fair" way to sell the tickets because however you decide to sell the limited luxury good, someone isn't going to be able to get it.
I shouldn't have to enlist friends and/or family to be eternally vigilant to get a ticket. That's stupid and inane.
@Quid - please stop being a goose about money. I was trying to note the economic concept. When something sells out in minutes, you need ways to meter demand or supply if you want a fair distribution of tickets, because otherwise the scalpers will get most of them. The easiest way to do this is price.
Tying tickets to id's won't work that well either, unless you have an army willing to stand and check every id of every pass every time they enter the building.
Stupid and inane, sure, but also effective. And I've yet to see a suggestion that isn't equally stupid and inane in other ways.
Like I said, right now you can rely on effort, luck, OR money. Every single suggestion seems to take away one or more options.
I think a presale or some sort of announcement of what day they're going to start would be a wonderful improvement.
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
So do a partial auction and sell the others cheap/ give them away and make them no transferable, but returnable. I think this system hits every pro and has no cons. . .
As a huge property rights guy, wouldn't you say I should be able to choose who I pass my paid ticket off to? Why should it go back to the pool, rather than allowing me to give it to a friend of my choosing?
Obviously a ticket is bound by terms, it's all legal, but on principle shouldn't the ticket be mine to give as I please?
I consider this a con. If I have duty that weekend, I'd much rather be able to give it to a friend who wants to go than get a refund and have a stranger get it.
Also, eliminates any potential for badge sharing. If I want to let a friend use it in the morning, and I use it that night, why shouldn't this be possible? Eliminating this is a con as well.
I have no problem with a contract giving you a limited right. And I think that the pro of eliminating scalpers outweighs either con you raised, but this is just personal opinion.
That said, I think it is incoherent for G&T to both day pricing is low let anyone in but to ignore scalping. If the reality is that some people are paying more, don't stick your head in the sand. Deal with that reality (IMO, that means capturing that money yourself).
Right, it's personal opinion. I just need to make sure you realize that.
Pretty much every declaration of "pro" or "con" you mention needs to come with a "for ME" attached. And you need to realize that this may or may not apply to the tens of thousands l attendees who are not you, or to the persons running the event (G&T in this case).
I mean, you can sell something for a profit but cap the price (and thereby the profit) at a set level, but unless you disallow secondary transfers, the result will still be that someone gets that profit. It just isn't you. I can't come up with a reason for how this pricing model could be anything but irrational.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
So do a partial auction and sell the others cheap/ give them away and make them no transferable, but returnable. I think this system hits every pro and has no cons. . .
As a huge property rights guy, wouldn't you say I should be able to choose who I pass my paid ticket off to? Why should it go back to the pool, rather than allowing me to give it to a friend of my choosing?
Obviously a ticket is bound by terms, it's all legal, but on principle shouldn't the ticket be mine to give as I please?
I consider this a con. If I have duty that weekend, I'd much rather be able to give it to a friend who wants to go than get a refund and have a stranger get it.
Also, eliminates any potential for badge sharing. If I want to let a friend use it in the morning, and I use it that night, why shouldn't this be possible? Eliminating this is a con as well.
I have no problem with a contract giving you a limited right. And I think that the pro of eliminating scalpers outweighs either con you raised, but this is just personal opinion.
That said, I think it is incoherent for G&T to both day pricing is low let anyone in but to ignore scalping. If the reality is that some people are paying more, don't stick your head in the sand. Deal with that reality (IMO, that means capturing that money yourself).
Again, what about the value of PAX's image? Could it not be that by making PAX cost more they are damaged in the long run? Change the audience that attends PAX and you change the product you are selling to exhibitors.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
0
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong
Nope.
How do you tell when something is priced too low?
When the person who's selling the luxury product is dissatisfied with its distribution because of the low price.
Firm owners are not infallible god beings. They can employ a bad pricing strategy and still be satisfied with the results. That does not automatically validate the pricing or the process.
If you sell out immediately you're probably underpricing. If you SURPRISE announce the event and your servers still can't handle the load, well, that's problematic imo.
I shouldn't have to enlist friends and/or family to be eternally vigilant to get a ticket. That's stupid and inane.
Quid - please stop being a goose about money. I was trying to note the economic concept. When something sells out in minutes, you need ways to meter demand or supply if you want a fair distribution of tickets, because otherwise the scalpers will get most of them. The easiest way to do this is price.
No, it's not fair, it is in fact specifically advantageous to those with more money.
No matter how the tickets are sold, the method is going to be beneficial to one group or another. There is literally no "fair" way to sell the tickets because however you decide to sell the limited luxury good, someone isn't going to be able to get it.
This is hard for some people to get.
You're just choosing who gets fucked. The only actual "fair" way to do so is a lottery and nontransferable tickets. But that's also the most inane and stupid method of all as far as I'm concerned.
if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong
Nope.
How do you tell when something is priced too low?
When the person who's selling the luxury product is dissatisfied with its distribution because of the low price.
Firm owners are not infallible god beings. They can employ a bad pricing strategy and still be satisfied with the results. That does not automatically validate the pricing or the process.
If you sell out immediately you're probably underpricing. If you SURPRISE announce the event and your servers still can't handle the load, well, that's problematic imo.
The servers were fine.
They melted down the first time because, IIRC, they tried to change processors. They changed back, and had no issues.
if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong
Nope.
How do you tell when something is priced too low?
When the person who's selling the luxury product is dissatisfied with its distribution because of the low price.
Firm owners are not infallible god beings. They can employ a bad pricing strategy and still be satisfied with the results. That does not automatically validate the pricing or the process.
Sure it does.
They want PAX to be populated via a method in which effort and luck are a significant factor. So then they use a price that promotes that method.
Boom. They have used the appropriate price.
0
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong
Nope.
How do you tell when something is priced too low?
When the person who's selling the luxury product is dissatisfied with its distribution because of the low price.
Firm owners are not infallible god beings. They can employ a bad pricing strategy and still be satisfied with the results. That does not automatically validate the pricing or the process.
Sure it does.
They want PAX to be populated via a method in which effort and luck are a significant factor. So then they use a price that promotes that method.
Boom. They have used the appropriate price.
I'll just refer you back to Shuss's post. This is an actual business/econ thing.
Also, it isn't worthwhile to have a discussion if you're just going to default to "Well the organizers want to run it like this, so it's the best!"
Posts
If you're reading into my posts that I think I'm entitled a ticket to PAX because I post in D&D or something, then you're reading too much into my posts.
I'm not just talking about PAX here, but any impacted event.
And, yes, they do give away tickets to friends and having connections is always a benefit (as is having money or time to spend). What we're really talking about here is formalizing these processes.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Exactly. You have a community presale of 2500 passes or something and throw a notification or email up. If you miss it, too bad, but it gets some hype built among people who are theoretically your core audience.
We are not asking for a free ride. We're just asking not to get fucked because we aren't watching the PAX twitter at all times during our workday. This is why most concerts and festivals have set dates for the passes to start being sold.
This is *insane*. This totally violates the fundamental rules of PAX. How is there no perception that people with money are given priority if you're giving them priority to walk past thousands of people in line and sneak in into the rich people section. This is so far outside sane that I'm not even sure if you're serious.
A lot of musicians have early presales for fan club members, or use coupon codes to a similar effect.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
This is not the objective. Never has been. And as G&T have stated before probably won't be any time soon.
I apologize if that is how it was read, but I wasn't trying to cast aspersions on you. It's just that this is a thing that they almost certainly do, but they aren't going to publicly say "yeah, we give away X amount of tickets to people we like in the...community or whatever..." because of the massive amounts of rage that would surely generate.
Make the passes very expensive. It wouldn't be any different from buying backstage passes for a concert or the priority passes at Disney.
Edit: if a normal pass is $70 and a priority pass is $300+, do you really think people would be that resentful? You are not talking about buying the same thing here.
Good velvet ropes make good fellow penny-arcade community members.
Right there's the regular PAX experience most people would get and then there's the rich people's PAX experience. Exactly in line with what the people who host the convention absolutely don't want.
That's p much like everything else in life.
RE: SKFM's pricing thing - this is a classic economic thing - if your stuff sells out in minutes, it is priced wrong. The REASON for this is twofold:
1. Most of the profit is then passed to scalpers, as they are able to buy low and sell high.
2. Your audience will not necessarily be the ideal mix in that you are not exploring any depths of "willingness to buy"
Nope.
How do you tell when something is priced too low?
When the person who's selling the luxury product is dissatisfied with its distribution because of the low price.
Right, but there are more reasons to sell a thing than to simply maximize profits. It's only priced wrong if that's your goal.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I don't know where you get this idea that you have to watch the PAX twitter.
You can have that tweet forwarded to every SMS number and every email account you own.
Yeah, some people certainly go hours at a time during work unable to see or act on this notification. Those people can enlist friends or family members to help.
And some people have jobs that preclude receiving texts or checking email, and have no family or friends, and are unable to afford tickets on the secondary market. These folks get fucked.
Which sucks, but to me also seems like the smallest possible group to fuck.
Right now you can either jump through the hoops, get lucky, or bust out your wallet. At least as if last year, all three of these were legitimately possible ways to get a pass.
Every single suggestion seems to eliminate one or more of these avenues, leaving the fan with LESS options of how to get a ticket. This strikes me as a bad thing.
Now, when we get to one-minute sellouts, then that's a separate issue, and may require a more drastic solution.
As it is, I say a child's play auction of maybe 5% to 10% of badges (prior to going on sale) and providing an official means to resell tickets (with a cut going to the con) is probably sufficient. Scalpers gonna scalp, as long as they're legit passes I think we can deal with it. Most people are still getting passes for reasonable prices, and most people who put in the effort still get to buy them directly. All is well.
But then I don't really hate scalpers as much as most people. It's a healthy disdain, I see positives in the secondary market as well.
Define irrational.
Higher prices can lead to bad PR, which can offset the gains. The scalpers get the profit, but also the hate.
Also, not everything need be strictly rational. Sometimes personal distaste can be enough to keep you from charging the full price the market will bear. The number disappointed doesn't change, you're just personally more willing to disappoint fans based on bad luck or bad timing instead of financial means.
So do a partial auction and sell the others cheap/ give them away and make them no transferable, but returnable. I think this system hits every pro and has no cons. . .
- I wasn't available during the two minutes they were on sale
- I actually got to select my seats, not whatever seats in the pool got offered
So while I paid a significant premium, I also got some benefit (buying on my own schedule, choosing my seats). And while scalping may hasten sellouts, I don't think it was necessarily the driving factor here...anticipation was high, he'd never played in the area before, ever.
And while Elton gets less money, he also gets to not be the asshole charging $200 a seat.
Everybody wins.
Because you don't care about the profit? PAX may be run by a businessman, but its board of directors, as it were, is still two dudes who remember what it's like to be poor. They created PAX because the existing gaming conventions were for rich people.
Part of what PAX is selling is its image. It's for the little guy. It's not too commercial. It's about the gamers, and not the game companies. It's about the community. You change that, you change your product. You attract a different class of attendees, which may or may not prove more profitable. You're also going to change the volunteers you attract, which will effect the con experience, changing who comes back for more. And the attendees are the actual product. The real money's made selling spots on the expo floor.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Unless you don't want other people reaping the rewards for your work. To me, that would be a pretty big deal. Sell the best tickets for $200, others cheap and don't allow resales (but allow returns and then resell them yourself) and I think everybody really does win.
Edit: just to say it, premium pricing for premium seats is pretty widely accepted for events, as is premium pricing for priority access. These are not strange new concepts.
As a huge property rights guy, wouldn't you say I should be able to choose who I pass my paid ticket off to? Why should it go back to the pool, rather than allowing me to give it to a friend of my choosing?
Obviously a ticket is bound by terms, it's all legal, but on principle shouldn't the ticket be mine to give as I please?
I consider this a con. If I have duty that weekend, I'd much rather be able to give it to a friend who wants to go than get a refund and have a stranger get it.
Also, eliminates any potential for badge sharing. If I want to let a friend use it in the morning, and I use it that night, why shouldn't this be possible? Eliminating this is a con as well.
@Quid - please stop being a goose about money. I was trying to note the economic concept. When something sells out in minutes, you need ways to meter demand or supply if you want a fair distribution of tickets, because otherwise the scalpers will get most of them. The easiest way to do this is price.
Tying tickets to id's won't work that well either, unless you have an army willing to stand and check every id of every pass every time they enter the building.
Some people didn't get to go when they wanted to. PAX is not unique in this phenomenon. #firstworldproblems
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Stupid and inane, sure, but also effective. And I've yet to see a suggestion that isn't equally stupid and inane in other ways.
Like I said, right now you can rely on effort, luck, OR money. Every single suggestion seems to take away one or more options.
I have no problem with a contract giving you a limited right. And I think that the pro of eliminating scalpers outweighs either con you raised, but this is just personal opinion.
That said, I think it is incoherent for G&T to both day pricing is low let anyone in but to ignore scalping. If the reality is that some people are paying more, don't stick your head in the sand. Deal with that reality (IMO, that means capturing that money yourself).
No, it's not fair, it is in fact specifically advantageous to those with more money.
No matter how the tickets are sold, the method is going to be beneficial to one group or another. There is literally no "fair" way to sell the tickets because however you decide to sell the limited luxury good, someone isn't going to be able to get it.
I think a presale or some sort of announcement of what day they're going to start would be a wonderful improvement.
Right, it's personal opinion. I just need to make sure you realize that.
Pretty much every declaration of "pro" or "con" you mention needs to come with a "for ME" attached. And you need to realize that this may or may not apply to the tens of thousands l attendees who are not you, or to the persons running the event (G&T in this case).
Again, what about the value of PAX's image? Could it not be that by making PAX cost more they are damaged in the long run? Change the audience that attends PAX and you change the product you are selling to exhibitors.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Firm owners are not infallible god beings. They can employ a bad pricing strategy and still be satisfied with the results. That does not automatically validate the pricing or the process.
If you sell out immediately you're probably underpricing. If you SURPRISE announce the event and your servers still can't handle the load, well, that's problematic imo.
This is hard for some people to get.
You're just choosing who gets fucked. The only actual "fair" way to do so is a lottery and nontransferable tickets. But that's also the most inane and stupid method of all as far as I'm concerned.
The servers were fine.
They melted down the first time because, IIRC, they tried to change processors. They changed back, and had no issues.
Sure it does.
They want PAX to be populated via a method in which effort and luck are a significant factor. So then they use a price that promotes that method.
Boom. They have used the appropriate price.
I'll just refer you back to Shuss's post. This is an actual business/econ thing.
Also, it isn't worthwhile to have a discussion if you're just going to default to "Well the organizers want to run it like this, so it's the best!"