Yeah, that argument can definitely be made.
But the evolution of the system makes the arrangement questionable. There was a time when scalping tickets was illegal, and at that point I always felt that if a willing buyer and seller can come to terms, why not?
Ticketmaster, then others, saw the scalping aftermarket take off and decided, "Why not grab this for ourselves." That might have been okay, but when they got the venues onboard with it, it created an unhealthy alliance that squeezed out the little guy. So, performers who want to use [often, taxpayer funded] facilities as intended are forced into selling only to the wealthy. People who helped pay for those facilities in many cases, are unable to benefit from them because of this scalping arrangement.
I'm not sure how far my capitalistic bent carries me with this issue. Not saying price controls are a solution, but I do wonder whether the collusion between ticketmaster and the venues creates a situation that supply and demand is able to handle. I can see no reason that Ticketmaster should benefit from taxpayer "investments" in facilities constructed and operated for the "public good" by virtue of their control of the ticket sale platforms.
I'm not a fan of John Oliver's, but I did find it enlightening. It was clear to me that everyone was making out better over the last few years but the mechanisms of it were unclear. Oliver's comments did shed light on that for me. |
