[eropple]

You're right, and this is the thing that's frustrating about the conversations here--I guess I'm not surprised that this is an audience that doesn't get it. A lot of music acts, even popular ones, were broke as hell for a long time. It is reasonable and, I think, actively laudable to want folks who are not of the Patagonia-jacket class to be able to see them live for a reasonable price.

There is a point where decent people can go "y'know, I make enough money" and not seek to squeeze out every ounce of blood from that stone; those same decent people can find it objectionable that other people attempt to do so on top of it. Not everything must be profit-maximized. Sometimes things like "bringing joy" might actually be more valuable.

And even if you are a meat-variant paperclip maximizer, there's obvious value into getting people who do not make onewheel-through-San-Francisco money into your music or your art. The people who currently make that money are usually older and will eventually age out. I still go see certain 90's bands every time they roll through in no small part because I saw them as a kid and I think they're fun.

[ryandrake]

> I'm not surprised that this is an audience that doesn't get it. A lot of music acts, even popular ones, were broke as hell for a long time. It is reasonable and, I think, actively laudable to want folks who are not of the Patagonia-jacket class to be able to see them live for a reasonable price.

I think we get the motivation, but what they are trying to do is not possible in a market without implementing strict rules. It is noble that a provider of a luxury, supply-limited service wants to provide it for a cost below market. It really is! But in practice it will never work because scalpers will arbitrage that price up to the real market price. If you disallow scalpers somehow, you will sell out instantly and then only lucky fans get the service, rather than rich fans. Is that any better?

If I’m a manufacturer of a very nice car and can only make 1000 of them a year, but still want to sell them for $5,000 so low income people can afford it, that plan is just not going to work. This is actually currently happening with Raspberry Pi computers. The only ones you can currently get are for higher prices on the secondary market.

[kelnos]

> what they are trying to do is not possible in a market without implementing strict rules

Then implement the strict rules!

> If you disallow scalpers somehow

Easy: tickets are non-transferrable. Names are printed on the tickets, and you present ID when attending the show. A looser alternative (since there are legitimate reasons why someone might want to give a ticket to someone else) is that tickets can only be re-sold at face value. Downside here is the only way to enforce that is digital-only tickets, but these days that's maybe not much of a problem.

> If you disallow scalpers somehow, you will sell out instantly and then only lucky fans get the service, rather than rich fans. Is that any better?

Yes, it's much better. Not perfect, but strictly better.

Your car analogy is not relevant, as it involves manufacturing. Concert ticket sales do not benefit from economies of scale in the same way.

[thunky]

> Then implement the strict rules!

Who are you suggesting should implement and enforce these rules?

And who determines what a fair ticket price is that will allow fans of all income levels to be able to afford it? If you really want to give poor people access to these cultural opportunities then I would imagine the price is going to have to be pretty low. I remember a $25 ticket being too expensive for me when I was broke. But with your system I would have been able to buy courtside tickets to the NBA finals for about $15? Nice!

[eropple]

This is a silly and frankly ungracious misreading. Nobody is saying that an artist shouldn't be able to price something however they'd like, to target whatever cohort they'd like to target. But if an artist wants to charge $X, a scalper who charges $X+$Y is an asshole, and cutting out those scalpers is a good thing.

Fair ticket lotteries for those willing to pay the artist's desired price are almost certainly the most fair, least evil way to do it.

[thunky]

I had the impression from you previous comments that you wanted the strict rules to prevent artists from maximizing ticket prices since the context is 'ordinary working class people can't afford a lot of concerts any more".

But if you are ok with artists setting high ticket prices as long as scalpers don't get any then I don't disagree.

[eropple]

The context that I am operating under "artists wanting to make things affordable for ordinary people, at their own expense no less, should not have to battle scalpers to make it happen".

[Symbiote]

In Denmark it's illegal to resell tickets above face value. It seems to work OK.

[mschuster91]

> If you disallow scalpers somehow, you will sell out instantly and then only lucky fans get the service, rather than rich fans. Is that any better?

The optimal solution is to give a quota for fan clubs and the rest away personalized in a fair lottery, while requiring proof that you can't attend for a valid reason (e.g. a doctor's note) to be eligible for a refund/swap.

[benji-york]

I think I am in total agreement with your comment and I have another angle to add for your consideration:

Assume someone wanted to sell highly sought-after tickets for less than the market clearing (profit maximizing) price—as you suggest. Lowering the price will increase demand (because more people can afford them). We now have more demand for the tickets; how will that demand be expressed?

Will some people stand in line for days to get the tickets? Is that a form of payment that some people can "pay" more easily that others because they are "richer" in disposable time?

Will some people write software to shave milliseconds off of their ticket-buying reaction time? Is that a form of payment that some people can "pay" more easily than others because they have the requisite skills?

Will some people pay others to do the above (or something similar)?

It seems to me that these are all forms of payment and that the total payment (in currency or otherwise) will approximate the market-clearing price in pure currency from the other scenario.

What do you think?

[eropple]

I think the obvious answer is a fair lottery for reasonably-priced, non-transferable tickets.