The Media Fails To Understand The Secondary
Several times per week, I consistently read news articles from around that world that mislabel or sensationalize the secondary ticket market. Several of those articles will use an inflated system by one buyer and enforce the idea that the outrageous ask made by that buyer is the norm for the entire market, or that event’s listing across the board.
Secondary Market: Instant Web Traffic Generator
This is a form of reporting malpractice. While some of it may be intentional in order to create web traffic, the majority is simply just that media outlets do not understand the secondary at all. Nor are they truly interested in learning. That’s because the secondary ticket market, despite having just as many comparisons as Wall Street in every facet, is deemed as a shady business distribution channel.
No business model, save for sports and concerts, has ever been a completely shut-off direct-channel system monopoly. It is funny to see organizations, who will spend millions on antiquated technologies that their fan bases have somewhat moved past, get upset at those entrepreneurs who buy the product (at face value) and resell it for 3-to-4 times the amount. That revelation should spur education onto the secondary market system, except all it creates is further scorn and a “science denial” by those who could benefit the most from it.
Inflated Secondary Headlines Are Junk Food
Let’s take a media headline that is both incorrect and sensationalized for web traffic by Elyssa Kirkham: “It Can Cost Up To $12,250 to Go to the 2015 US Open Tennis Tournament.”
This is supposedly a banking/investment education website. And yet, the blog post is designed to push the idea of the heavy cost of buying off of the secondary market. If Kirkham’s post were directed on Wall Street, would she simply focus on one seller who has Apple Stock & is asking for a bid of $500,000 per share? Absolutely not, as everything knows Apple Stock sells for less than $110 per share currently. But that’s the issue with reporting on the secondary market, each journalist focuses on one listing, selling two total tickets at $12,250 each. Guaranteed that the Average Resale Price (which no reporter bothers to write about) will be much less than the $12,250 per ticket after the U.S. Open has completed.
Misguided Outrage By Bold Listings
Another article would be a blog post by Rugby Heaven: “Outrage as two Rugby World Cup Final tickets scalped for $50,000.”
Okay, this is actually laughable. Let’s say you had a neighbor who attempted to sell a 1979 Buick at $6 million dollars. Just because they have a sign up in the window does not mean that 1979 Buick is worth $6 million dollars. The only way that your neighbor’s 1979 Buick is worth $6 million dollars is if someone is willing to purchase that vehicle at $6 million dollars. Then, the price has been established as fair, because there is someone willing to pay for it.
But this is a huge issue with the secondary market for tickets. Anyone can list anything at any price that they want – that’s called the MLP (Median Listing Price). It doesn’t mean it is fair or not fair, until someone on the purchasing end decides to pay for it – that’s called the ARP (Average Resale Price).
If the media decided to really take part, they would recognize a revolution in how tickets are actually being sold as well as transferred between two or three holders, prior to hitting the actual buyer. This is an amazing process, especially one that teams themselves should focus more education on.