Investors in Airbnb arbitrage business allege they were defrauded in scheme(cnbc.com)
cnbc.com
Investors in Airbnb arbitrage business allege they were defrauded in scheme
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/11/investors-in-airbnb-arbitrage-business-allege-they-were-defrauded.html
7 comments
> markets for appointment reservations [1] and ticket scalping. All of which are value destructive businesses
This is strictly incorrect in the same way that the market for methamphetamine is not a value-destructive business. It's simply an unsavory one.
Scalpers provide immediacy or service in a market where the issuer does not. Speaking specifically to ticket scalpers, I've often found StubHub to be a far superior purchasing experience to TicketMaster.
This is strictly incorrect in the same way that the market for methamphetamine is not a value-destructive business. It's simply an unsavory one.
Scalpers provide immediacy or service in a market where the issuer does not. Speaking specifically to ticket scalpers, I've often found StubHub to be a far superior purchasing experience to TicketMaster.
i find cashortrade.org to be the best of all, often get tickets at or below face value on there. no affiliation. screw TM.
"no, scalpers are good actually"
They just walk the frontier of price-time preferences. And time preference is just the same as any other preference. For people with high time preference and low price sensitivity, scalpers are good. If tickets were auctioned it wouldn't be a problem. For Electric Forest you get an early line if you've been before, which you could turn into either a separate auction or a discount.
Scalpers that corner the market can do things that are bad for everyone but them, of course, but till they have pricing power they provide utility to buyers.
Scalpers that corner the market can do things that are bad for everyone but them, of course, but till they have pricing power they provide utility to buyers.
Do they though when they have armies of bots snatching up released tranches within seconds?
Not saying this always happens but it's also not as simple as "people are comfy and thus pay more later".
With profits/volume comes "professionalization" (aka "scale") and the regular Joe gets left behind because they're just in it for one ticket and not thousand(s?).
Not saying this always happens but it's also not as simple as "people are comfy and thus pay more later".
With profits/volume comes "professionalization" (aka "scale") and the regular Joe gets left behind because they're just in it for one ticket and not thousand(s?).
> the regular Joe gets left behind because they're just in it for one ticket
I'm surprised neither Spotify nor Apple has attempted to launch a TicketMaster competitor (or alliance). We have the technology to distribute tickets to listeners first.
I'm surprised neither Spotify nor Apple has attempted to launch a TicketMaster competitor (or alliance). We have the technology to distribute tickets to listeners first.
I might be wrong, but I think either you create a two-tier music industry, where Apple Music subscribers can get to concerts first, or you allow anyone to book, at which point you have the same problem Ticketmaster does.
> you create a two-tier music industry, where Apple Music subscribers can get to concerts first, or you allow anyone to book
You release based on listening history and e.g. merch purchases. If you limit early release to accounts tied to a personal credit card, you'll limit the scalpers' scale.
You release based on listening history and e.g. merch purchases. If you limit early release to accounts tied to a personal credit card, you'll limit the scalpers' scale.
Is that the two-tier option?
If you believe tickets are not correctly priced to begin with then they simply make the market more efficient and capture this delta between supply and demand.
I'm sure it's just that easy.
Exactly, this is why scalpers exist. People have tried to disintermediate them many times unsuccessfully.
If I had to guess, it is that event companies / hospitality / ect. are not in the business of beating scalpers at their own game and as long as they price below the scalpers, scalpers will take this risk for them, if tickets are released at prices above scalpers, they are taking the risk of not selling to anyone.
Perhaps more AI/ML accessibility will beat this, but it will only threaten scalper profits as there will always be a margin of error.
If I had to guess, it is that event companies / hospitality / ect. are not in the business of beating scalpers at their own game and as long as they price below the scalpers, scalpers will take this risk for them, if tickets are released at prices above scalpers, they are taking the risk of not selling to anyone.
Perhaps more AI/ML accessibility will beat this, but it will only threaten scalper profits as there will always be a margin of error.
Isn't it? Couldn't they hold a Dutch auction for tickets, and then if they sold out at too high a price and really wanted to give more access to all of their fans and not just rich ones, add more shows to the tour until tickets clear at an acceptable price? The Dutch auction mechanic would mean that scalpers take on massive risk because anyone willing to pay a higher price would've already had the chance to do so. The artist is able to capture the premium from rich people who want to assure their ticket purchase instead of letting scalpers get that money.
> Couldn't they hold a Dutch auction for tickets
Yes, as well as directly distribute tickets to fans. It isn't done because behind scalpers is a massive performance industry.
Yes, as well as directly distribute tickets to fans. It isn't done because behind scalpers is a massive performance industry.
Ding ding ding!
As a practical matter it's tough to add more shows to a major tour (i.e. something that requires a convoy of multiple coaches and heavy trucks to carry all the people and gear) as a response to high demand. The venue may not be available, travel is already planned to the next city, and performers need rest. The tour manager basically has to build in the option for extra dates in particular cities from the start.
It would require additional lead time definitely. But on the other hand, if someone is willing to pay $1000 for Taylor Swift tickets, they're probably also willing to participate in a pre-sale without guarantees or concrete dates before things are booked.
The idea also applies to things like GPUs and Playstations where they expect to sell out. Start the price high and decrease it over time as you get additional supply. Announce ahead of time that this is your plan along with what the eventual target price is, so people willing to pay the premium to get it early can do so, and others know they just need to wait and the price will drop.
The idea also applies to things like GPUs and Playstations where they expect to sell out. Start the price high and decrease it over time as you get additional supply. Announce ahead of time that this is your plan along with what the eventual target price is, so people willing to pay the premium to get it early can do so, and others know they just need to wait and the price will drop.
"internet commenter realizes that the optics industry cares about optics"
So you agree scalpers provide value? The industry cares more about optics than providing limited goods and services to those who value them the most (i.e. are willing to pay the most). Scalpers correct the market (or act as a front for the industry to set prices correctly while blaming a bad guy that totally isn't just them under another name), and ensure that someone who really wants to see Taylor Swift and is willing to pay $10k for a ticket can do so.
Taylor can always do more shows to increase supply and lower prices. Or do an auction and give all sales above $x to charity so it's clear that it's not about greed and is about stopping the evil scalpers.
Taylor can always do more shows to increase supply and lower prices. Or do an auction and give all sales above $x to charity so it's clear that it's not about greed and is about stopping the evil scalpers.
Scalpers provide value in the same way that any rent seeker provides value.
If you assume that the only way to make a profit is to provide value, then by a tautology anyone who has the ability to command as profit provides value.
The alternative is also true.
If you assume that the only way to make a profit is to provide value, then by a tautology anyone who has the ability to command as profit provides value.
The alternative is also true.
I'd love to see something like that. The world needs more auctions tbh.
People, as non rational actors, hate auction markets. Which is why this doesn't happen.
It's almost like there is a reason why they don't do that.
But what could it be?
https://www.google.com/search?q=angry+at+ticket+prices
But what could it be?
https://www.google.com/search?q=angry+at+ticket+prices
Again, if they want to make it more accessible, they can add more shows to increase supply. They have high certainty that they can make lots of money adding more shows because existing ones have sold out (assuming things are planned in advance so they can book the venues longer). Otherwise people are just mad at the fact that there's lots of demand and people are willing to pay more than them for tickets. The overall prices might also decrease just because scalping becomes more risky[0], even if it could still be profitable.
[0] You need to buy all tickets for scalping to work. Otherwise the official source is constantly becoming cheaper than the price you paid. And your ability to sell to whales is limited. Even if they would've potentially paid up to $10k but they wait, they might decide to buy in once it hits $2k because they expect the price to settle near $1k and don't want to risk missing a ticket. So if you buy in at $1k, you've already missed selling to them. So you can only really sell to people with low margin over your buying price, and if you overshoot the clearing price, you might take a huge loss. So risk-adjusted, scalping becomes unprofitable, and scalpers exit the market, which allows whales to bid under their true maximum price they'd pay, lowering overall prices vs. a market with scalpers.
[0] You need to buy all tickets for scalping to work. Otherwise the official source is constantly becoming cheaper than the price you paid. And your ability to sell to whales is limited. Even if they would've potentially paid up to $10k but they wait, they might decide to buy in once it hits $2k because they expect the price to settle near $1k and don't want to risk missing a ticket. So if you buy in at $1k, you've already missed selling to them. So you can only really sell to people with low margin over your buying price, and if you overshoot the clearing price, you might take a huge loss. So risk-adjusted, scalping becomes unprofitable, and scalpers exit the market, which allows whales to bid under their true maximum price they'd pay, lowering overall prices vs. a market with scalpers.
Arguing with you would be like arguing with a libertarian.
There is no point arguing with someone so detached from reality.
There is no point arguing with someone so detached from reality.
Detached from reality is selling something way below its value and being mad that it gets resold at the correct price. This is basic economics. It's also easily avoidable by holding an auction with the correct ruleset for the outcome you want.
If you wanted to appear less greedy, you could also do something similar to what the government does for bonds: everyone submits the highest price they're willing to pay. Take the top N offers, and all of those people get tickets at the lowest price out of the top N. So you're encouraged to bid what the ticket is worth to you because you almost certainly will end up paying less than that. If 50,000 people (modulo subdivisions for seat distance) agree a ticket is worth at least that much, then ipso facto that's what it's worth. Again it's scalper resistant because anyone you could resell to already got a ticket at the same price you did.
Point is there are plenty of documented auction styles to choose from depending on exactly what properties they want. It isn't hard. They obviously prefer scalpers exist.
If you wanted to appear less greedy, you could also do something similar to what the government does for bonds: everyone submits the highest price they're willing to pay. Take the top N offers, and all of those people get tickets at the lowest price out of the top N. So you're encouraged to bid what the ticket is worth to you because you almost certainly will end up paying less than that. If 50,000 people (modulo subdivisions for seat distance) agree a ticket is worth at least that much, then ipso facto that's what it's worth. Again it's scalper resistant because anyone you could resell to already got a ticket at the same price you did.
Point is there are plenty of documented auction styles to choose from depending on exactly what properties they want. It isn't hard. They obviously prefer scalpers exist.
Yeah I'm sure Taylor Swift just isn't as smart as you are and she's just leaving money on the table due to incompetence. If only everyone listened to you the whole problem would go away.
The market giveth and all entités are rational.
The market giveth and all entités are rational.
I didn't say she's incompetent. I said the opposite. I assume her and her team and her industry know how to eliminate scalpers. I said
> They obviously prefer scalpers exist.
I'm sure they have their reasons for this. But everyone else shouldn't act like scalpers are the bad guy then.
> They obviously prefer scalpers exist.
I'm sure they have their reasons for this. But everyone else shouldn't act like scalpers are the bad guy then.
In other words, the artists are leaving money on the table (by underpricing the tickets), and then fans get mad that other people are capturing said money.
> artists are leaving money on the table (by underpricing the tickets)
Artists and ticket vendors underprice tickets to assure sold-out venues: they're choosing to buy lower earnings volatility. The notion that tickets are underpriced to make them accessible is tripe.
Artists and ticket vendors underprice tickets to assure sold-out venues: they're choosing to buy lower earnings volatility. The notion that tickets are underpriced to make them accessible is tripe.
[deleted]
> "no, scalpers are good actually"
If you think meth is good, sure, that's a valid reading of my comment.
Also, I don't know of any multi-millionaire ticket scalpers. They seem more a convenient bogeyman for the ticket-industrial complex than a real problem.
If you think meth is good, sure, that's a valid reading of my comment.
Also, I don't know of any multi-millionaire ticket scalpers. They seem more a convenient bogeyman for the ticket-industrial complex than a real problem.
Stubhub is a small family business bootstrapped by hard working folks just like you or I. My bad for saying they are value negative.
> Stubhub is a small family business bootstrapped by hard working folks just like you or I. My bad for saying they are value negative.
The impliciation that only small outfits can be value positive requires rejecting economies of scale.
Which is a fundamental misunderstanding of economics compounded by its limited scope: the entertainment complex to which scalpers attach is massive. The shows which scalpers are attracted to are massive. Small shows don't get scalped.
The impliciation that only small outfits can be value positive requires rejecting economies of scale.
Which is a fundamental misunderstanding of economics compounded by its limited scope: the entertainment complex to which scalpers attach is massive. The shows which scalpers are attracted to are massive. Small shows don't get scalped.
I was responding to your astute observation not making a broad comment about economies of scale.
> I don't know of any multi-millionaire ticket scalpers.
> I don't know of any multi-millionaire ticket scalpers.
Is StubHub a ticket scalper?
You are making the argument that "technically" stub hub only enables scalpers but is not actually a scalper themselves.
Wonder how far the goalposts have to move before you realize how embarrassing this is for your ideology.
Wonder how far the goalposts have to move before you realize how embarrassing this is for your ideology.
> making the argument that "technically" stub hub only enables scalpers but is not actually a scalper themselves
Yes, Expedia isn’t an airline and the New York Stock Exchange doesn’t make cars.
> your ideology
Out of curiosity, what ideology would that be?
Yes, Expedia isn’t an airline and the New York Stock Exchange doesn’t make cars.
> your ideology
Out of curiosity, what ideology would that be?
> One day in 2022, while scrolling through Instagram, he came upon another opportunity.
Scrolling through instagram, you get exposed to a lot of "opportunities".
Anyway, if someone is ever selling you an opportunity that claims to be "passive income" that requires very little work, you need to ask yourself why they'd be selling this to you, instead of simply doing more of it themselves.
Scrolling through instagram, you get exposed to a lot of "opportunities".
Anyway, if someone is ever selling you an opportunity that claims to be "passive income" that requires very little work, you need to ask yourself why they'd be selling this to you, instead of simply doing more of it themselves.
MLMs have been targeting young people long before Instagram, I remember somebody handing out flyers for Amway at a high school graduation. And the peddlers of these scams always sell it as "Start your own business", "Be your own boss" and so on. And when it's not a MLM it's some kind of dropshipping scheme. I agree social media has given those schemes a much wider audience to capture.
It should have been immediately obvious to everyone that this was a scam. Anyone who has a money printer by definition does not need your help. If you are being asked to invest there is risk. If you are being told it’s a sure thing you are being lied to. Setting aside the obvious stupidity of finding your investment opportunities on Instagram of all the ridiculous places…
I can't believe this happened. I get all my investment opportunities from Instagram ads!
"...he invested in crypto ..."
buying crypto to try to profit is called speculation not investment
buying crypto to try to profit is called speculation not investment
[deleted]
As opposed to Real Investments which are not made to try and make a profit?
It's not the profit bit; it's the crypto bit.
Math is inherently fraudulent, you see.
Please add real content someone can respond to, instead of half-implications. What are you actually saying?
One group of scammers got scammed by another group of scammers. So what.
Tbf, buried in the scammers scamming scammers is what appears to be a scandalously bad bit of customer service from AirBnB.
Normal member of the public "Kathy" makes a normal reservation via the AirBnB website for a falsified hotel listing whose address resolves to a vacant lot and whose "representative" doesn't respond to her questions. To add insult to injury, the scammers on AirBNB's platform post her personally identifying information including contact details on their social media (presumably as evidence of "real customers" to try to sell more scam franchises)
AirBNB - according to the reporting - decides that refunding her "about half" the money she paid AirBNB for a nonexistent hotel room is sufficient...
Normal member of the public "Kathy" makes a normal reservation via the AirBnB website for a falsified hotel listing whose address resolves to a vacant lot and whose "representative" doesn't respond to her questions. To add insult to injury, the scammers on AirBNB's platform post her personally identifying information including contact details on their social media (presumably as evidence of "real customers" to try to sell more scam franchises)
AirBNB - according to the reporting - decides that refunding her "about half" the money she paid AirBNB for a nonexistent hotel room is sufficient...
Airbnb customer service has basically always been terrible in cases like this. Some years back I had a host that simply stopped responding a few days before the reservation, and Airbnb would not allow it to be cancelled and refunded until check-in time had passed, despite it being obvious to them that the host had flaked. They have no way to meaningfully compel the host to actually provide the booked stay, nor are they likely to have any meaningful "spare" listings to put you in instead.
There is always a significant risk that you'll show up and your reservation has been de facto cancelled by the host leaving you to scramble to find a day-of hotel booking. I've had some good Airbnb stays, but I'd never book one without a backup plan (and if you can't have a backup plan, book a hotel instead).
There is always a significant risk that you'll show up and your reservation has been de facto cancelled by the host leaving you to scramble to find a day-of hotel booking. I've had some good Airbnb stays, but I'd never book one without a backup plan (and if you can't have a backup plan, book a hotel instead).
Once Airbnb starts a good faith effort to take down obviously fake listings or listings in clear violation of local ordinances or condo association rules, then I might start feeling bad for people scamming them.
While it's fun to watch them get screwed since they provide negative value and yet make a profit, there is a never ending supply of scam artists waiting to take their place.
1. https://appointmenttrader.com