Talk:Ticket resale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Law (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Transport  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


I always thought a tout was someone who hung around heavily touristed sites, attempting to make money in one way or the other (usually as a guide) from tourists. Not sure whether to include it in this article or spin off a second one. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:58, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I've travelled to India, and there locals referred to hawkers as touts. -- Longhair 05:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead and added a section ("Other meanings") about the other type of tout. Actually, I think the first sentence I put in that section could be moved to the top of the article, as it seems to encompass all the various kinds of touts. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 05:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I see that, following the page move, the more generic meaning is now at the tout article. However, that article's talk page was redirected here, which I have undone. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

The arguments against the legality of reselling tickets are unconvincing and don't belong in an objective description unless the obvious (and stronger in my view) counterargument is also mentioned: If the buyer hasn't agreed not to resell it, why shouldn't he?

In any case discussing the law of a couple of individual countries at length seems out of place in an encyclopaedia with a global readership.

I don't quite agree with the legal explanation: a ticket is a proof that a person is entitled to certain services. (and not just a token to facilate the service) SYSS Mouse 04:41, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Can someone add a section on how to buy from scalpers? It's common practice to advertise as "need tickets" when in reality they have tickets, right?

Two websites should go here and Do think think it's fair that they go on this page, if not why? 00:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC) Thanks Don

"As a result of the decision to sell tickets solely online local fans of the Colorado Rockies were placed at a disadvantage, forced to compete with ticket brokers and ticket scalpers from around the world. Also at a disadvantage were people without usable web access, such as people with disabilities living in areas with public libraries unable to accommodate them and people whose public libraries were closed at the time the tickets were available for sale. Does anyone else believe that it is utterly ridiculous to make the argument that people who are able to afford WORLD SERIES TICKETS somehow don't have access to the internet in their own residence???-- 21:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Buying tickets on behalf of another person?[edit]

"the money paid to the organisers is actually paid for the service of attending the event; a buyer cannot resell this because, since it is the organiser (not the buyer) providing the service, the buyer does not have it to sell. The ticket is not a trade good in its own right, but merely a token used to facilitate the process of selling the service; typically selling it on will contravene the original conditions of sale."

The obvious defense or defence is that the original purchaser was buying the tickets on behalf of another person who intended to attend the event. Otherwise, it would be prohibited for a person to buy tickets for other members of the person's family. How have courts interpreted this? --Damian Yerrick () 22:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I always thought it was illegal to resell a ticket for less than the actual face value on that ticket, because of possible financial harm to the legitimate venue ticket box office. It was my understanding that it is legal to resell or 'scalp' tickets as long as you are reselling at, or above, the original face value of the ticket, since the ticket window from the venue still got whatever price they originally demanded for that seat. Has anyone heard of this legality before? If so, please post and incorporate into the article. I may have read this in an Economics textbook somewhere during college ...

Are you serious? How does it harm the venue box office if you resell a ticket for below face value? In either scenario you describe the box office still receives face value.

-- I rewrote this to try to say the same thing a bit more clearly with a bit less POV, but it's still all uncited:

It is controversial whether tickets are a good which can be privately resold. Some parties argue that the money paid to the organisers is actually paid for the service of attending the event, which a buyer cannot resell because the buyer does not have the service to sell. Other parties argue that tickets are paid for by consumers and should be transferable just like any other good. Typically private resale will contravene the original conditions of sale, but it's legally questionable whether the original conditions of sale are even enforceable.

--JRocketeer 02:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


removed the following as POV (borderline, but it could use revision): "However, these arguments are best decided by local and state laws and there’s no getting around the fact that a market exists for the reselling of tickets at market value."

Possible Spam[edit]

Companies are obviously abusing the external links section. I don't know what is and isn't spam, so I will just take out the one here and any others which have evidence which suggests spam-- (talk) 11:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC) EDIT. In fact, I'm just going to comment the commercial links out-- (talk) 11:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

What about other things?[edit]

Is there really any difference between this and what people do on eBay all the time? They buy up all of a type of collectible or, like, the Wii, and resell them on eBay because scarcity makes it possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no real difference. It's illegal in some places because A) consumers are not used to paying a premium for high demand commodities in today's world and therefore complain about it, and B) ticket distributors (such as Ticketmaster) do not get paid more if they sell for greater than their face value on the secondary market and actively discourage it (unless they are getting a cut like through their own ticket exchange). Also for the very understandable crowd control and nuisance issues. Byerss (talk) 02:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Why are tickets not issued to a specific holder?[edit]

Event organizers could prevent re-selling simply by issuing tickets to a specific holder and require identification upon entering, just as done as airline tickets. This would eliminate, to a great extent, the possibility of re-selling tickets without the need for legislation or expensive enforcement. Why hasn't it been done on a regular basis? I heard rumors that it has been done in the 2006 FIFA World Cup and the 2008 Summer Olympics, but couldn't find any concrete evidence. TippTopp (talk) 12:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

See my recent edits Turkeyphant 02:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)