[pyre]

Sounds to me like:

1) Louis CK isn't big enough for scalpers to care about going through a non-traditional method of obtaining tickets.

2) People that would turn to scalping to recoup their expense when they can't go are just going back to Louis CK for a refund.

Personally, it sounds like offering a full refund also comes with the possibility that scalpers will purchase the tickets because they can easily flip them back for a refund (an $0 loss sans time spent) if they can't sell them for a profit. I admit that I know nothing about the 'event ticket scene' so I may be missing something.

[glesica]

Did it actually say you can get a refund at any time? The only place the word "refund" appears is here:

> ...we have the right to cancel your ticket (and refund your money).

So based on the article, we don't know if you can get a refund on-demand. All we know is that if he (his people) decide to cancel your ticket, you get a refund.

[nollidge]

Did you read it? #1 is invalidated by the fact they're comparing his shows (sold traditionally) vs. his shows (sold independently), not his shows vs. others'.

EDIT: nevermind, I get it now.

[tikhonj]

The thing is that his shows sold traditionally are sold exactly the same was as plenty of other tickets, through some big site. So, as a scalper, you just trawl through Ticketmaster (or whatever site in question) and buy tickets that look promising. You have your existing process and it works on tickets for anything sold through the site.

When an individual performer stops using the site, the only scalpers are going to be the ones familiar with the performer. That is, the sort of scalper that just goes through all the shows on Ticketmaster won't even realize that these tickets are an option--only somebody following Louis CK would.

Even if some scalper does realize, a relatively small show (I don't actually know the size of Louis CK's shows, so I'm just assuming they're not too big) will not be worth changing your process for. You would have to spend a significant amount of time figuring out the restrictions of the custom site he is using and how to best profit off them--there is no guarantee that this time would be worth investing.

This is basically like a small site using a custom CAPTCHA as compared to using a very common one. Spammers aren't going to bother with your site in particular, but if you use a common CAPTCHA they know how to deal with, they will spam even tiny sites.

[_delirium]

I think the hypothesis in #1 is that many scalpers just buy up tickets through regular channels for all big shows, going down the list. If you're not selling tickets through regular channels, people using that approach won't even have you on their radar, and may not consider it worth their time to go after the handful of events sold via "weird" means when they can just move on to scalping the next event on ticketmaster.com instead.

[mrtron]

I am not sure you understand the argument.

#1 is like saying virus makers don't write virii for the operating system I wrote for myself...it just means I have an obscure operating system not necessarily a virus proof operating system.

If everyone starts going this independent route, you can bet that scalpers will shift their methods over to these new ticket purchasing systems.

[ef4]

And number 2 is invalidated by the fact that the terms allow you to sell your ticket, just not for more than you paid.

[beambot]

Huh? Many sporting event tickets have the same terms (tickets cannot be sold for more than face value), but that doesn't stop scalping.

[pbiggar]

Scalping here is prevented by the customers knowing that the tickets will be canceled, and so they'll be out of pocket.