Reselling tickets for profit has long been a controversial practice that is often referred to as “scalping.” There is an ongoing debate around whether this practice should be legal and considered ethical. In this article, we will examine the key arguments on both sides of this issue.
What is ticket scalping?
Ticket scalping refers to buying tickets to popular events like concerts or sports games with the intention of reselling them at a higher price. Scalpers typically target events that are likely to sell out quickly and have high demand. By buying up large quantities of tickets and then offering them at marked-up prices, scalpers stand to make a substantial profit.
Some of the key characteristics of ticket scalping include:
- Buying tickets specifically to resell at a higher price, not to attend the event
- Charging well above face value – sometimes several times the original price
- Reselling through secondary markets like Craigslist, eBay, or StubHub
- Targeting sold out or high-demand events where people are willing to pay inflated prices
Scalping is different from individuals occasionally reselling extra tickets they cannot use. Professional scalpers buy large volumes of tickets as inventory to sell for profit as a business model.
Is ticket scalping legal?
The legality of ticket scalping varies widely by jurisdiction. In many countries like the UK and Australia, ticket scalping is completely legal and a largely unregulated market. In the United States, anti-scalping laws had been implemented in many states, but most of these laws have been repealed over time. As of 2022, ticket scalping is legal in around 30 states.
States that still have anti-scalping laws on the books like New York and Connecticut generally prohibit selling tickets for over face value within a certain distance of the venue. Enforcement remains inconsistent though. Many states have left it up to venues or ticket issuers like Ticketmaster to implement their own resale restrictions through terms of service.
State | Scalping Legality |
---|---|
New York | Illegal to resell for over face value within 1,500 ft of venue |
California | Legal |
Texas | Legal |
Florida | Legal, but venues/issuers may restrict |
Federal laws like the BOTS Act have also attempted to crack down on the use of ticket bots to buy up large volumes of tickets, but enforcement remains inconsistent.
Arguments in favor of ticket scalping
There are several common arguments made in defense of allowing the practice of ticket scalping:
It allows for price discovery based on demand
Supporters argue scalping provides an efficient market mechanism for discovering the true market value of tickets based on demand. If scalpers are able to sell tickets at higher prices, it indicates that the event organizer underpriced the tickets initially.
It expands access by reducing shortages
By charging market prices, scalpers reduce the chances of the tickets selling out immediately. This provides more opportunities for people to obtain tickets, even if it is at a premium. Supporters argue more people can go to an event with scalpers in the market.
It allows people to freely resell unwanted tickets
Scalping bans could infringe on individuals’ rights to resell tickets they purchased but can no longer use. Anti-scalping laws have to be carefully crafted to avoid preventing ordinary fans from reselling at modest prices.
The profits incentivize supplying more tickets
The profit motives of professional scalpers drive them to secure large supplies of in-demand tickets, increasing overall quantity in circulation. This expands access compared to sold out events with no scalpers.
It allows consumers choice in paying higher prices
If people are willing to voluntarily pay escalated prices on secondary markets, consumer choice should allow them to do so. Scalpers are simply providing an optional service at a premium.
Arguments against ticket scalping
There are also numerous arguments made for why ticket scalping should be prohibited or heavily restricted:
It prices regular fans out of the market
Critics argue scalpers unfairly divert tickets away from the average fan to those with the most buying power. Working class fans get priced out of events they would have otherwise attended at face value prices.
It leads to dangerous counterfeiting
When scalpers markup prices heavily online, it incentivizes counterfeiting fake tickets. Buyers often cannot tell if scalped tickets are real or fake until they try to use them and get turned away.
It costs event organizers and performers
Scalpers siphon away potential revenue from the performers, promoters, and venues themselves. The organizers lose out on money the scalper gained instead.
It leads to predatory practices and scams
There are often issues with fake tickets, parking passes, and other scams around major events. New protections and monitoring are needed if scalping is legalized to prevent fraud.
It encourages using unfair technological advantages
Large scalping operations use ticket bots and other software to buy up huge volumes before regular buyers can get tickets. This exacerbates the supply issues.
It is essentially legalized price gouging
Scalpers manipulate market conditions to charge excessive prices. Critics argue scalpers are rent seekers who provide little value compared to those high prices.
Regulating the secondary market instead of banning
While scalping bans are difficult to enforce, many argue that more regulation is still needed instead of a completely unregulated market. Potential regulatory approaches include:
- Capping maximum resale prices to prevent extreme gouging
- Requiring more transparency on who is selling the tickets
- Restricting the use of ticket buying bots and software
- Letting primary issuers cancel or revoke scalped tickets
- Prohibiting scalping of free tickets obtained through promotions
More oversight could help address some of the predatory practices in the scalping market without banning reselling altogether.
Ethical arguments around scalpers profiting from enthusiasm
Some view ticket scalping as inherently unethical because these middlemen profit directly from others’ enthusiasm and passion for entertainment. Fans resent scalpers benefiting financially from the performers and teams that fans are so emotionally invested in. To many, it seems wrong to allow scalpers to privatize and monetize public excitement over concerts and games.
Scalpers also disrupt the direct relationship between fans and performers. Some argue artists intend for tickets to be affordable to lower income fans, not subject to financial exploitation.
Conclusion
There are good faith arguments on both sides of this issue. Scalping provides certain economic benefits through market pricing and expanding supply. However, these need to be weighed against negative impacts on equity, affordability, fraud, and ethical factors of profiting from fandom.
A balanced approach looks to allow some secondary market activity while implementing consumer protections. Compromises like price caps and bot bans address the most predatory scalping practices. Regulation curbs the excesses of fully unconstrained scalping but still permits fans flexibility in reselling unwanted tickets.
Context and particular details of each jurisdiction also matter in crafting policy. A major international event may have different dynamics than a local arena. Policymakers need to consider regulations tailored to their unique situation.
In summary, whether reselling tickets is considered unethical scalping or a legitimate market freedom largely depends on factors like the extent of regulation and the spirit behind profiting from fans’ demand to attend entertainment events.
There are good arguments that some restrictions can balance ethical concerns over scalpers exploiting enthusiasm for profit with giving consumers resale options. But any policy solution is unlikely to please all sides given the fundamentally different principles at stake around fairness, property rights, and regulations on markets.
The scalping debate ultimately intersects with many broader themes on economic ideology, consumer rights, and responsibilities businesses have to their communities. As demand for live entertainment continues thriving, policymakers will be pressed to reevaluate where to draw lines between supporting free markets, restraining exploitation, and shaping companies’ obligations to average fans. Any reforms must contend with audiences’ insatiable appetite for shared experiences and the realities of what people will pay for them.
While views diverge on the ethics, there are pragmatic solutions governments can explore to target truly predatory scalping without overreaching into general resale markets. Considering protections like price caps and bot bans balances both ethical and economic interests relative to an unregulated scalping market. And enhancing transparency assists consumers in making informed decisions on secondary markets without prohibiting resales altogether. With thoughtful policymaking, solutions are possible that can allow some ticket reselling at fair prices while preventing the worst abuses.