What service?
> Pay $200ish over MSRP and all the headache of locating and securing one goes away.
They create the headache in the first place.
Do you also think a protection racket provides a service? If you pay them for protection, all the headache of your business being firebombed goes away!
Keeping you from having to constantly try and ram through the checkout on a moments notice and still not get the product in the vast majority of attempts.
>They create the headache in the first place.
They would be completely sold out even without the scalpers. The scalpers are selling them to somebody -- that somebody would have just bought at MSRP and you would still have to do what I mentioned above.
>Do you also think a protection racket provides a service? If you pay them for protection, all the headache of your business being firebombed goes away!
This is a pretty ridiculous characterization, even if you don't like what scalpers do. You are not being forced to buy a PS5. You're not even being forced to buy a PS5 from them. You can pull up a restock stream and watch it like a hawk if you have the time. They're not engaging in violence against you because you didn't buy a PS5 from them.
They’re rent-seeking leeches that exacerbate supply issues.
They’re not providing a service; they’re interfering with our ability to engage in free exchange with retailers and manufacturers, and doing so through deceptive, dishonest, and immoral practices.
You're going on about how scalpers are abusive, deceptive, dishonest, immoral, rent-seeking leeches and are refusing to engage with the reality that their existence doesn't change anything other than giving you the option to pay $200 and skip the bullshit. I'm not asking you to like them, I'm just telling you that not much would be different if they were gone.
If I force my way to the front of the queue at every store in town, evade purchasing limits, buy all the baby formula before anyone else can, and then offer to sell it at a premium, I’m absolutely forcing my way in-between the retailer and the customer.
That’s not a service.
Now, nobody needs to buy a PS5, but the fact that a PS5 isn’t a required to sustain life doesn’t magically transmute scalping into a service.
> their existence doesn't change anything other than giving you the option to pay $200 and skip the bullshit
They are responsible for the bullshit. Of course it changes things.
How is it so hard to understand that someone creating an additional, artificial market barrier to extract rent is also making it harder for anyone else to buy the product in the first place?
I signed up with Sony to sit in the queue to buy one PS5. My signup is attached to my PSN account to help prevent scalping.
It cost Sony money to implement that queueing system and to fight scalpers.
Sony is losing licensing revenue on consoles because scalpers are eating into what would normally be spent purchasing games.
Sony is losing customer goodwill because scalpers are forcing themselves in-between Sony and their customers.
More of Sony’s customer base is frustrated and more likely to abandon purchasing the product altogether —- even when supply issues are resolved — because they have to compete with scalpers.
It’s not a fucking service, and we’d all be better off by extending existing ticket scalping laws and the CFAA to vigorously prosecute these absolute useless low-lifes that should be unceremoniously kicked back into whatever minimum wage gutter they crawled out of.
>these absolute useless low-lifes that should be unceremoniously kicked back into whatever minimum wage gutter they crawled out of.
If your perception of this situation is that minimum wage "useless low-lifes" should kicked back into the gutter because you have this logically unsound idea that it would be easier to buy a PS5 if scalpers didn't exist, you've lost the plot. Your understanding of the demographic that is doing this is wrong, and even if it wasn't, you have completely uncalled for contempt for a class of people who are trying to do better for themselves (or maybe even just trying to make rent and groceries).
If you're going to leave another comment hollering about rent seeking or how scalpers singlehandedly create this problem, but refuse to even acknowledge that you've already been told:
>The scalpers are selling them to somebody -- that somebody would have just bought at MSRP and you would still have to do what I mentioned above.
>because the scalpers definitionally need somebody to buy everything that they do. The demand isn't erased just because they don't exist.
>The fact that scalpers are still buying consoles means they're still selling them. That means if the scalpers didn't exist consoles would still be sold out, it would just be individuals following twitter accounts to spam refresh for a single console instead of 10.
I'm just going to ignore it, so you can save yourself the typing. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but it looks a hell of a lot like you don't have interest in a good faith discussion.
You’re purposefully ignoring that they actively create and exacerbate market inefficiencies by making it difficult for manufacturers and retailers to manage demand effectively, and by inserting themselves as a middleman to extract their rent.
> … completely uncalled for contempt for a class of people who are trying to do better for themselves (or maybe even just trying to make rent and groceries).
How is it uncalled for? They’re useless trash making money by virtue of being willing to take advantage of others, not because they’re contributing anything of any value in any form.
They produce nothing and provide nothing of value. The only skill required is a lack of moral scruples.
So yes, kick the useless trash — and their enablers — back to the gutter they crawled out of.
And for good measure, prosecute them under the CFAA once they’re there.
This doesn't add up.
Every person who buys a PS5 from a scalper for $700-$800 would also buy it for MSRP at $500, unless they are insane. Demand would outstrip supply even in the absence of scalpers, because one PS5 would be bought at MSRP from a retailer for every one that would have otherwise been bought and then sold by a scalper.
The only kink is that because PS5s immediately sell out at a price of $500, people who don't have the time to camp checkouts and/or want the item immediately are shit out of luck. However, they could pay a scalper an extra $200 to do that for them, because that's the value of the time they would lose acquiring the PS5, or the value they would miss out not having the PS5 immediately. In economics parlance, this is a service. You can call it something else if it makes your feel better. Either way, scalper activity cannot oversell the demand for a PS5 beyond not accurately modelling the sales you would lose from customers not wanting to deal with the effects of illiquidity on the market. The only thing scalper activity misrepresents if your MSRP is below what they're charging is the customers who won't buy your product at all if you're constantly sold out. Scalpers do not change forecasts.
Trying to regulate away this problem will just lead to more "innovative" scalpers.
if anything microsoft's plan of offering two sku's lowering the price has been more effective
How's that? If that's what people are already actually buying them for, then people can already afford them.
Supposedly, the world is more complicated than some stuff you picked up from Econ 101.
Imagine if, to get the latest gadget you had to queue outside a store for 30 hours - but you could hire someone to queue for you.
Theoretically one could argue the scalpers are queuing so you don’t have to.
I don't think this is true. The fact that scalpers are still buying consoles means they're still selling them. That means if the scalpers didn't exist consoles would still be sold out, it would just be individuals following twitter accounts to spam refresh for a single console instead of 10.
Only if the console wouldn't completely sell out every time without the scalper. But it would.
So the scalper provides a service to consumers with more money by allowing them to avoid the hassle of competing with lower classes for popular goods.