The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
The ethics of scalping.
Vincent Grayson
Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
Frederick, MDRegistered User regular
There was a debate going on in G&T regarding the ethical issues with eBay resellers for the PS3 launch (and past launches as well), but I'm dumping it over here, because it is more of a D&D topic, anyway.
So, "scalping". It's illegal with tickets, why not with other things? Is there even an ethical issue with reselling items at a price which more accurately matches the demand for them?
I say, no, not really, if someone values an item above its' "official" cost, and there is low supply, taking advantage of the opportunity to get what the item is truly worth doesn't seem unethical to me. How about you guys?
As an aside, I've never understood how exactly companies like Ticketmaster aren't just a giant scalping business.
So, "scalping". It's illegal with tickets, why not with other things? Is there even an ethical issue with reselling items at a price which more accurately matches the demand for them?
I say, no, not really, if someone values an item above its' "official" cost, and there is low supply, taking advantage of the opportunity to get what the item is truly worth doesn't seem unethical to me. How about you guys?
As an aside, I've never understood how exactly companies like Ticketmaster aren't just a giant scalping business.
Vincent Grayson on
0
Posts
I was sorely disappointed.
scalping's crazy, but if you really want to pay the extra money, whatever
Me too. I was all excited.
I wouldn't say it's unethical, all parties of the deal know what they're getting into and noone's being willfully fooled, it's just extremely stupid.
That is an excellent question, and to my knowledge, it's only illegal with tickets (despite ticketmaster's continued existence)
Ticket scalping seems no different from what's happening right now with the PS3 launch (and happened with previous launches), yet for some reason, there's obviously a difference in the government's eyes.
Tickets are an extremely limited commodity, so it's easy for people to corner the market.
Why do you assume legislators are going to actually be fair?
:P
In a pure capitalist system, sure. But the economic system in the US is far, FAR from that in a variety of ways.
Though one does have to wonder why the venues themselves don't get in on the action. If the demand so greatly outpaces the supply, it would seem like the most natural thing in the world to introduce some sort of bidding system, with the floor price being the bare cost of running the venue and an open upper limit. Split the profits with the attraction and everybody wins: Venue and artists make as much money as the public feels they are worth (whle still guaranteeing a profit), and the public is allowed to decide attendance based on interest/willingness to pay instead of timing.
I think a lot more people would be outraged by this is PS3 scalping weren't made anonymous by eBay because when you get right down to it, that scalper is buying a PS3 legitimately and then turning to the 11th person in line (assuming the shop got a shipment of 10) and saying "You can have this PS3 for $2,000."
It might not be illegal, but it makes you an asshole because it contributes nothing to the economy; it just adds another middle-man where one isn't necessary.
Edited for a question mark.
But really, aren't you just selling your skill (in this case, the ability to show up early enough) to someone unwilling to wait in line (or who didn't get there early enough)?
A guy who pays $2000 for a PS3 is basically saying "Here's $1400 for picking that up for me".
It pisses off a lot of people. If my favorite band were coming to town, and tickets were $400, I'd be like "fuck them," and probably avoid their music in the future.
The key difference is they aren't turning to just the 11th man, they are turning to the entire public and asking who wants it and for how much. They're trading their time and effort in securing the item for someone else's money, one of the most fundamental level of exchange in society.
As far as the middle man dig, as much as people bitch middle men really do serve a vital role in a functioning economy. Which isnt' to say there aren't bad middle men, but on the whole the are both necessary and a boon. It's a little counterintuitive, but they end up creating economic growth by facilitating the distribution of goods; where they've been cut out by external forces (government mandate) the result has inevitably been a collapse and severe inefficiencies.
Why though? If there's say, 2,000 seats, and so far, 1,999 people have said "It's worth $400 to me to see this band" it's been made pretty clear that's the value people place on those tickets...and because you don't place as high a value as others, you don't get to see them...that seems perfectly fair, and no reason to hate the band (aside from, perhaps, hating how popular they are)
Why?
Because tickets are to a one-of event. When it gets to the point that tickets are being scalped, people have two options:
1. Pay a ridiculous price.
2. Not go.
With the PS3, they can wait a couple of weeks and get one at retail.
Sure it'd piss people off, but everything pisses someone off. The real question is, would this piss MORE people off that your favorite band coming to town and tickets selling out in 13 seconds.
At least under my hypothetical, the tickets would go to the people who wanted them the most, not the people who happened to be watching ticketmaster at 6:13:37 PM three months before the concert.
Yeah, but I still don't get to see them.
With game consoles in particular, I find the practice distasteful, but for reasons I admit aren't wholly irrational. As a lifelong gamer, I have an idealized vision of some kid scrounging his pennies to save up for the newest system, then waiting excitedly outside the store on launch day so that he can rush in there, grab his new system, and go home to play it all day, basking in the warm glow of new-found gaming bliss. This is how it was when I was growing up, and I've been in this position more than once. There's something pure about it. Something joyous, something innocent. It makes me happy.
Enter the scalper. Instead of a a bunch of excited gamers vying amongst themselves for a limited number of a new console, you have a a bunch of excited gamers vying against a bunch of guys who just want to make a buck. The guy who managed to save up $400 by saving for a year has stood outside for a day and a half and really wants to go home and play Zelda loses out to the guy who doesn't give two shits about gaming, and just wants to profit. And then he sticks it up on eBay and sells it to some rich guy who was too damned lazy to get his precious fingers cold outside, and just hit the "Buy Now!" button. If that rich bastard had really wanted the system that bad, he'd be sitting outside in the cold with the real gamers. Fuck him, and fuck the guy who took the system away from the excited kid who now has to wait a month for the next shipment.
Like I said, it's not rational at all. It's retarded. We're talking about a game system, and all it really means is that the kid has to wait a few more weeks. It's just a function of how I've built up the Noble, Avid Gamer archetype in my head.
"Wanting them the most" and "most able to outbid everyone else" are two very different things.
That's a good point about middle-men in general, but who do PS3 scalpers help? PS3s were already distributed around the country. They're not in this as a business, and they're not in this to get a PS3 to that one guy is Pahrump, NV whose nearest Best Buy is over 100 miles away. They're buying PS3s for the express reason of holding them ransom from those that would play them so they can be sold at an enormous profit.
I understand how supply and demand works. I understand that what these scalpers do is very similar to what honest-to-God stores do to make money, but we'd all be crying foul (or a great many of us would) is Circuit City had bought all of Best Buy's PS3s and were selling them in their store for $2000.
It's not about legality, to me. It's about whether what you're doing is something that a dick would do. And a dick most certainly would buy the last PS3 with no intention of playing it and then turn around and say "It goes to the highest bidder! Who has got the most money?"
Then really, isn't everyone participating in capitalism a dick? Personally, it seems to me like it's always best if things go to those who value them the most. The guy willing to give $2000 for a PS3 obviously values it at a higher level than the guy behind you willing to $600, and no more.
Honest question: what stops people from buying multiple and selling all of them at higher prices?
You're assuming we all have infinite pools of money with which to purchase PS3s. We don't. Why should the rich guy get it just because he can afford to pay the scalper?
EDIT: In all honesty, I'll bet the people that want games consoles the most are those with the least amount of money: kids. Your theory only holds true if everybody starts on equal footing, and when it comes to income level, we're certainly not all equal.
Because he's rich, and has created more value than the other guy, and as such, wields more purchasing power.
Edit: Ok, yeah, the point about percentage of income and stuff is valid, but that, to me, is just sort of the way it works, with PS3s, and with everything else. The thing is, scalper man values your money, not your love of videogames.
I'd certainly agree that there's no 1:1 correlation, but then again there's no perfect way of measuring something like "want" across multiple people anyway. At the end of the day, it comes down to how do you distribute a finite resource to a large group, and the only fair and universal way is seeing how much they are willing to give for it.
Sure, it's entirely possible that some poor bum who "really loves X" will lose out to some rich guy who "loves X a little less" but that has more to do with the unfairness in wealth disparity than a flaw in free markets.
And these are all luxury items anyway. It's no big deal if someone can't afford them.
Mario Kart DS: 3320 6595 7026 5000
I'm thinking flipping a Wii for profit is going to be tough, I don't think it's going to have nearly the kind of supply problem PS3s have, and I'd be there'll be plenty to go around come Xmas time.
Now you've changed it. Previously you said that it should go to whomever wants it more. Now all of a sudden you have to want it really bad and be filthy rich?
Fuck that.
Scalpers help rich, lazy people at the expense of kids and working-class people. I might have been able to save up $600 for a PS3, but I certainly can't justify $2,000.
My buying power has nothing to do with how much I want something. If you honestly think that PS3s should have gone to those that wanted them most, everybody waiting in line in the cold should get one before anybody clicks a button on eBay.
Vincent makes a good point on this, and it's exactly what I was slowly stumbling towards. The amount of money one has, at least theoretically, is tied to how much one contributes to society. If I do more valuable work, I should have more money. From there it's only fair that I should be able to use this money to get more of what I want.
Again, it sucks for the kid, but the guy pulling down $100K has contributed more and if he's willing to put more money back into the economy to get what he wants, society isn't doing a good job by denying him the opportunity in favor of some nebulous "think of the children."
I don't see anything wrong with scalping, but I could see how it should be curtailed such that one person can't buy a crazy amount of something creating an artificial shortage.