Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday December 04, @10:01AM   Printer-friendly
from the laughing-so-much-it-hurts dept.

Our collective hearts are breaking for the poor scalpers:

It's no secret that the RTX 4080 has not been selling particularly well, primarily due to its $1,200 price tag, which most people feel is far too expensive. The situation has even impacted scalpers, with many now having to resell their cards at MSRP or even less in some cases. A few second-hand sellers have tried returning them, which seems to have prompted certain retailers to stop offering refunds for the RTX 4080.

We're used to seeing graphics cards arrive with such high demand that they're quickly bought in bulk by scalpers and sold on auction sites at hugely inflated prices. But the MSRP of the RTX 4080 (and RTX 4090) has led to memes calling Nvidia the scalpers.

Our investigation last month showed that the RTX 4080 isn't selling that well—most retailers have plenty in stock. But it seems plenty of scalpers assumed the Lovelace card would be hard to find, so they decided to purchase units for resale.

That lack of demand and abundance of stock is evident on eBay, where many RTX 4080 cards are selling for around or just over their official store prices, a far cry from the bad times when GPUs were being scalped for three or four times their MSRP.

VideoCardz reports that one scalper is offering six RTX 4080s from various manufacturers for MSRP. The seller writes that the "Market isn't what I thought."

It appears that being unable to sell the RTX 4080 cards has caused several resellers to return them for their money back—where allowed. YouTube channel Moore's Law is Dead spotted that Newegg is not letting buyers return the cards for refunds, possibly in response to so many scalpers trying to cut their losses.

The problem is the same in Germany: Scalpers buy the GeForce RTX 4080, put it on eBay - and what does not sell is sent back to the retailers. Unfortunately, the legal situation in Germany definitely prevents retailers from excluding returns.

[...] Things aren't going to improve for RTX 4080 sellers looking to make a quick buck. There are more cards from different AIB partners arriving all the time, and the upcoming launch of AMD's cheaper Radeon RX 7900 series will likely make Nvidia's prices look even less appealing. Given what gamers went through over the last couple of years, it's hard to imagine people shedding any tears for the poor scalpers.


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by stretch611 on Sunday December 04, @10:23AM (4 children)

    by stretch611 (6199) on Sunday December 04, @10:23AM (#1281115)

    May they lose their shirt (along with an entire retirement nest egg) and be forced to ask "would you like fries with that" for the rest of their lives.
    Original Submission

    --
    Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
    • (Score: 2) by Revek on Sunday December 04, @10:50AM

      by Revek (5022) on Sunday December 04, @10:50AM (#1281117)

      We know the shirt will not come with a heart but perhaps could contain some bile.

      --
      This page was generated by a Swarm of Roaming Elephants
    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 04, @11:55AM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @11:55AM (#1281124) Homepage Journal

      I'll second that. The SOBs collective efforts have doubled the prices of video cards in the past couple years. You either can't find them, or you pay exorbitant prices for them when you can find them. That environment has nurtured the other class of SOBs who use a new card for mining for several months, then resell as "new" or "slightly used" on places like Ebay.

      Alternatively, there are people who have built new systems, and decided that they just couldn't pay the asking prices for a nice video card, so they settle for a lesser, cheaper card, or reuse old hardware.

      --
      Don’t confuse the news with the truth.
    • (Score: 4, Funny) by Immerman on Sunday December 04, @04:59PM (1 child)

      by Immerman (3985) on Sunday December 04, @04:59PM (#1281158)

      Aww, poor scalpers.

      I propose we help them out. I'm willing to buy as many cards from them as they want for $12.00 and swift kick to the nuts/tits. It's more than they deserve, but I'm feeling generous.

      • (Score: 5, Funny) by krishnoid on Sunday December 04, @09:46PM

        by krishnoid (1156) on Sunday December 04, @09:46PM (#1281192)

        I say we sponsor a composer and some violinists and a trombonist to compose a few pieces in memory of the money the scalpers lost. So sad.

  • (Score: 1) by DrXenos on Sunday December 04, @02:25PM

    by DrXenos (5818) on Sunday December 04, @02:25PM (#1281132)

    F you, scalpers!!

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by pTamok on Sunday December 04, @02:32PM (45 children)

    by pTamok (3042) on Sunday December 04, @02:32PM (#1281134)

    It's how capitalism works. Those that have the working capital make the money. If you don't like it, and want to regulate the market in some way, well that's socialism, which is one step away from communism, and we don't want that, do we?

    (Note, Poe's law applies)

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday December 04, @02:53PM (44 children)

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @02:53PM (#1281138) Journal
      I know you're trying to be sarcastic, but scalpers serve an important role, making sure something is available to those who really want/need it, particularly last minute. And it's a market dynamic not a capitalist thing. The latter gets associated with it because capitalism has markets.
      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 04, @03:36PM (24 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 04, @03:36PM (#1281145)

        When the scalpers are able to use bots to purchase a substantial or majority number of video cards or concert tickets or whatever, they no longer serve any useful purpose. Perhaps what you say was true when they could purchase unused inventory (buying up sports tickets from people who can't attend) and find a market to resell it (standing outside the arena offering to sell them), but when a major concert sells out in a few minutes, or all the PlayStation 5s are sold in a few hours, and most of them going to scalpers (being immediately listed on eBay or StubHub), then that is not a useful or productive market.

        • (Score: 5, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Sunday December 04, @04:16PM (23 children)

          by digitalaudiorock (688) on Sunday December 04, @04:16PM (#1281150)

          When the scalpers are able to use bots to purchase a substantial or majority number of video cards or concert tickets or whatever, they no longer serve any useful purpose.

          Exactly. Scalpers in any market don't so much create added availability as khallow implies, but instead only create artificial scarcity. No useful purpose there at all.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 04, @04:20PM (21 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @04:20PM (#1281154) Journal

            Scalpers in any market don't so much create added availability as khallow implies, but instead only create artificial scarcity.

            That doesn't work, if the eventual customer isn't willing to pay.

            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Sunday December 04, @04:47PM (20 children)

              by digitalaudiorock (688) on Sunday December 04, @04:47PM (#1281156)

              That doesn't work, if the eventual customer isn't willing to pay.

              Well...yea, which is exactly what this article is about...the point where the scalpers get stuck with stuff they can't sell...which frankly serves them right. I still question the notion that they serve any useful purpose.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 04, @07:11PM (19 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @07:11PM (#1281170) Journal

                I still question the notion that they serve any useful purpose.

                Like most things people do, purpose is subjective. If you want the good at the original price and get lucky, it's bad. If you can't pick up the good at the start and really want/need it, then it allows you a chance to get the good at the elevated scalper price. Serving that latter group is the useful purpose.

                • (Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday December 04, @08:17PM (18 children)

                  by sjames (2882) on Sunday December 04, @08:17PM (#1281183) Journal

                  Except that without the scalper, you'd have had a better chance of finding it at MSRP.

                  From the standpoint of economic policy, usefulness and purpose are not THAT subjective.

                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 04, @08:56PM (17 children)

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @08:56PM (#1281189) Journal

                    Except that without the scalper, you'd have had a better chance of finding it at MSRP.

                    At the scalper's price, you have a much better chance of finding it.

                    From the standpoint of economic policy, usefulness and purpose are not THAT subjective.

                    Blatantly false. There is no standpoint of economic policy. Economic policy is an array of choices and decisions not a viewpoint.

                    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Monday December 05, @04:03AM (16 children)

                      by sjames (2882) on Monday December 05, @04:03AM (#1281216) Journal

                      Yes, but the value decisions are made for the economy in general. For example, broken windows are great for the glazier but the practice is a famous example of a fallacy because the economy as a whole takes a loss.

                      Likewise, scalping may be useful in a few local cases, but it's bad for the economy as a whole. It's just another form of rent seeking.

                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 05, @04:37AM (15 children)

                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 05, @04:37AM (#1281219) Journal

                        Yes, but the value decisions are made for the economy in general.

                        Which is quite irrelevant to your claim that somehow that makes usefulness and purpose not subjective.

                        Likewise, scalping may be useful in a few local cases, but it's bad for the economy as a whole. It's just another form of rent seeking.

                        Prove it.

                        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday December 08, @07:44AM (14 children)

                          by sjames (2882) on Thursday December 08, @07:44AM (#1281677) Journal

                          N graphics cards are made (possibly due to limits on capacity). Manufacturer sells for price X. With scalpers, manufacturer makes X*N and buyers pay through the nose at X*N*3. Without scalpers, manufacturer still makes X*N. stomers pay X*N. The remaining X*N*2 is then available for other economic pursuits. The scalper does NOTHING to increase production and if anything makes delivery from manufacturer to end buyer more convoluted.

                          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 08, @02:30PM (13 children)

                            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 08, @02:30PM (#1281715) Journal

                            The remaining X*N*2 is then available for other economic pursuits.

                            It still is. Scalpers no more destroy such than anyone else in this scenario. They just have the X*N*2 instead of the other two parties.

                            The scalper does NOTHING to increase production and if anything makes delivery from manufacturer to end buyer more convoluted.

                            As I already noted [soylentnews.org], that's not part the value that scalping brings to this market. It doesn't make sense to whine about scalpers, if you don't understand what they do or their benefit in markets. In addition, there's two additional big effects.

                            First, it adds information for all market participants. For the manufacturer, scalping behavior is a signal that they need to either make more or price the good higher. For everyone else, it's a signal that there's a lot more demand (or at least expectation of demand among scalpers who tend to be better informed) than supply, and to expect that either prices can go up or shortages happen. Scalpers provide information for those who pay attention.

                            Second, keep in mind that if someone really wants this product enough that they're willing to pay X*N*3 for it, then that invariably means that they expect to generate more value than that with the good. By instead allowing parties who expect less value from the good to buy it, we're likely reducing value! This is the waste that scalping helps mitigate.

                            • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday December 08, @05:30PM (12 children)

                              by sjames (2882) on Thursday December 08, @05:30PM (#1281744) Journal

                              There's no new information provided. The manufacturer already knows demand is high because actual retailers and direct customers have placed more orders than they have on hand. The growing back-order has told them everything they need to know. If anything, a scalper's malinvestment is likely to provide distorted information.

                              The transfer of value from manufacturer and buyer to the non-productive scalper diminishes the economy. It reduces the productive use that the scalped item might have been put to by reducing the profit incentive of a potential buyer.

                              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 08, @11:48PM (11 children)

                                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 08, @11:48PM (#1281794) Journal

                                There's no new information provided.

                                If you have scalping going on, it tells you a lot about the inadequacy of the supply. That's indeed new information.

                                The transfer of value from manufacturer and buyer to the non-productive scalper diminishes the economy. It reduces the productive use that the scalped item might have been put to by reducing the profit incentive of a potential buyer.

                                I already explained how the scalper was productive. And you ignore the elephant in the room - creation of value. Because the manufacturer underpriced this item, it will be used for less valuable applications. And how do I know that? Because buying at a price is a signal that you think the item will be more valuable to you than that price. If you're willing to buy at X*3, then it must be of considerable value to you. But in the absence of scalpers, most of the people who would buy at X*3 now have to compete with the people who would buy at X. Keep in mind that if you bought at X, and then sell for any reason to someone who would pay more, that's scalping.

                                We prioritize all the time. Ambulances get priority over joy riders; dying people get priority over mild injuries at the ER; etc. Scalpers are one way this gets naturally implemented in markets.

                                Finally, consider your claim "It reduces the productive use that the scalped item might have been put to by reducing the profit incentive of a potential buyer." There are plenty of other things in that boat - such as regulation against pollution. Do we really believe that we reduce the productive use of a coal power plant by forcing them to scrub the otherwise huge amounts of sulfur and other pollutants that are routinely released otherwise? Externalities are a classic example that there are more important considerations out there.

                                Here, we have a short term zero sum game. There's only so much initial items released for sale and the producer chose to release them below the short term market price. We have opportunity cost, the corresponding economic factor to externalities of the coal power plant example. The market lowers this opportunity cost by having the people who are willing to pay more to signal their need for the item, actually pay more and get the item.

                                To summarize, nobody has shown there's an actual problem here. They won't be able to either because it isn't an actual problem. This is usual market dynamics doing a reasonable job of maximizing the value of the goods and the market.

                                • (Score: 2) by sjames on Friday December 09, @06:11AM (10 children)

                                  by sjames (2882) on Friday December 09, @06:11AM (#1281845) Journal

                                  If a huge backorder hasn't clued the manufacturer in to the idea that demand has exceeded supply, they're probably too stupid to stay in business anyway.

                                  The problem with scalpers is that they exaggerate the economic signals. In fact they seek to artificially exaggerate them (exclusively) for their own benefit.

                                  Meanwhile, you DO know that Capitalism is supposed to drive prices down and production up, right? There is no Capitalist virtue in driving prices up.

                                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 09, @12:56PM (9 children)

                                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday December 09, @12:56PM (#1281864) Journal

                                    If a huge backorder hasn't clued the manufacturer in to the idea that demand has exceeded supply, they're probably too stupid to stay in business anyway.

                                    Scalping is an even stronger clue, since people are backing that behavior with real money.

                                    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Friday December 09, @04:31PM (8 children)

                                      by sjames (2882) on Friday December 09, @04:31PM (#1281883) Journal

                                      That's a very weak argument at best. Beyond that, the manufacturer could just ask for a percent up-front to get the same information and could even then use that money for the actually productive purpose of expanding manufacturing capability.

                                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 10, @01:30PM (4 children)

                                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 10, @01:30PM (#1281929) Journal

                                        That's a very weak argument at best.

                                        Compared to what? Where's the strong argument in this thread?

                                        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday December 10, @06:18PM (3 children)

                                          by sjames (2882) on Saturday December 10, @06:18PM (#1281947) Journal

                                          Compared to an argument worth making.

                                          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 10, @09:23PM (2 children)

                                            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 10, @09:23PM (#1281953) Journal
                                            Sorry, I check that box easily. Really, what's the argument against scalpers here? Some sort of whine that they aren't productive in a sense you choose to recognize? That you might hypothetically have to pay more for a cutting edge product? Imaginary loss of value and that the money would somehow be better in someone else's hands?

                                            There isn't a serious argument here. Sorry, that you might have to pay more on rare occasions while for something that should cost more.
                                            • (Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday December 10, @09:51PM (1 child)

                                              by sjames (2882) on Saturday December 10, @09:51PM (#1281954) Journal

                                              Really, what's the argument against scalpers here?

                                              Made amply clear but you don't want to understand it. In brief, rent seeking, creating artificial scarcity on top of lesser actual scarcity, creating friction and using it to skim off money for nothing.

                                              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 10, @11:59PM

                                                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 10, @11:59PM (#1281962) Journal

                                                In brief, rent seeking, creating artificial scarcity on top of lesser actual scarcity, creating friction and using it to skim off money for nothing.

                                                And you missed the obvious - it's not rent-seeking nor is the scarcity more artificial. First, we've already established that there are benefits to scalping and that you chose not to recognize those benefits. Second, before it was a case of artificial abundance - pricing a good cheaply as if you had vastly more of it than the demand at that price would be. There's only two circumstances under which scalping is at all viable - the supply of the good doesn't meet demand at a given price or it almost does, but there's high inelasticity. Either is a sign of poor pricing in the market.

                                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 10, @09:15PM (2 children)

                                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 10, @09:15PM (#1281951) Journal
                                        Missed this last time:

                                        Beyond that, the manufacturer could just ask for a percent up-front to get the same information and could even then use that money for the actually productive purpose of expanding manufacturing capability.

                                        If they're excluding scalpers from that "percent up-front", then they're not getting the information scalpers would otherwise be providing! People who pay percent up-front aren't the market for scalpers.

                                        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday December 10, @10:00PM (1 child)

                                          by sjames (2882) on Saturday December 10, @10:00PM (#1281955) Journal

                                          Your whole argument here boils down to a man walking down the street. There is thunder and lightning, he is soaked to the bone, he has to keep blinking raindrops out of his eyes. The wind is howling. He just stepped in a puddle halfway up to his knees. But without the guy on the corner trying to sell umbrellas for 5 times retail, he might not have realized that it's raining.

                                          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 11, @12:39AM

                                            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 11, @12:39AM (#1281965) Journal

                                            But without the guy on the corner trying to sell umbrellas for 5 times retail, he might not have realized that it's raining.

                                            You have made an excellent case in this thread that he indeed might not realize it's raining.

          • (Score: 2) by krishnoid on Sunday December 04, @09:48PM

            by krishnoid (1156) on Sunday December 04, @09:48PM (#1281193)

            That's just unfair to the hardworking ... never mind [youtu.be].

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Opportunist on Sunday December 04, @05:46PM (3 children)

        by Opportunist (5545) on Sunday December 04, @05:46PM (#1281162)

        That would be true if they just gobbled up resources that otherwise would have gone to waste, store them and then sell them at a premium to people who are desperate enough to pay it for these goods because they are nowhere else available anymore.

        That's not what scalpers do. They hoover up a limited resource, adding to its scarcity and then make a profit off that scarcity. They serve no purpose whatsoever in an economy except to enrich themselves.

        As far as I'm concerned, the only reason they're still alive is that they ain't worth a second of jail time for ridding the world of them.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday December 04, @07:29PM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @07:29PM (#1281173) Journal
          To the contrary, selling a scarce good below the price demand is willing to pay for it is a waste - just not for you.
          • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 05, @03:35PM (1 child)

            by Freeman (732) on Monday December 05, @03:35PM (#1281267) Journal

            That's nuts. By that "logic", every good that is sold below the "price of demand" as you define it, is a waste. By that logic, all baby formula, all gas prices, everything should be priced to "just below the breaking point". That is a perfect way to destroy an economy.

            --
            Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 05, @10:19PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 05, @10:19PM (#1281330) Journal

              That's nuts. By that "logic", every good that is sold below the "price of demand" as you define it, is a waste. By that logic, all baby formula, all gas prices, everything should be priced to "just below the breaking point". That is a perfect way to destroy an economy.

              There's a reason economics gets called the "dismal science". A lot of economics seems nuts to those who don't understand it. Here, for example, the scalper dynamic doesn't price video cards near the "breaking point". They are trying to make a profit - not be an example to others. There's no threat to an economy here.

      • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Sunday December 04, @06:00PM (2 children)

        by bradley13 (3053) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @06:00PM (#1281163) Homepage Journal

        scalpers serve an important role, making sure something is available to those who really want/need it

        That's a very unpopular opinion, but you have a point. Graphics cards are, perhaps, not essential to life.

        Consider the scalping that goes on in disaster zones: You buy up some essential good - say, bottled water - from outside the zone. You do what is necessary to get it into the disaster zone. The government then prosecutes you if you try to make a profit. Result? People don't try, because...why should they? Instead, you are left with the government agencies, which are notoriously slow and inefficient. The profit motive can encourage efficiency.

        Of course, the situation with graphics cards is a bit different. With bottled water, there is no global shortage - it's a matter of providing incentives to get it from point A to point B. With graphics cards, the scalpers managed to buy up a large portion of the global supply. On the other hand, graphics cards are a luxury item. If people had to wait a year or two for the market to adapt, or had to settle for an older model - whoopie, their lives will go on. Even if crypto had not crashed, the producers would just have ramped production, thus also eliminating the problem.

        tl;dr: Scalping is not that big a deal. At worst, it is a short-term annoyance. In many cases, it is actually beneficial - capitalism at work.

        --
        Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
        • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 05, @03:51PM (1 child)

          by Freeman (732) on Monday December 05, @03:51PM (#1281272) Journal

          In the event that "someone really wanted/needed" a specific GPU. Even, if all retailers were sold out. Someone who said, 'yo, I'll pay 2.5x what a card normally sells for. You'd likely have people that would sell their card. Instead, with scalpers, you have a few people with a significant number, if not the majority of the cards that are available. They then sell all of their cards at a 1.5x to 2x what they paid for them. Thus, the only thing they're doing is giving themselves money. Though, one could say they're also helping the video card vendors. Since warranties are generally useful for original purchasers, only. How sure are we that Nvidia, et al aren't in on the gig?

          --
          Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 08, @02:31PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 08, @02:31PM (#1281716) Journal

            You'd likely have people that would sell their card.

            In other words, scalp.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by sjames on Sunday December 04, @08:14PM (9 children)

        by sjames (2882) on Sunday December 04, @08:14PM (#1281182) Journal

        Sorry, no. Scalpers do way too much rent seeking to be economically beneficial. The word you're looking for is retailers or perhaps brokers.

        If you desperately want it now, hire a broker to go get you one. He will do it for MSRP plus a substantial fee for services rendered. The scalper just makes a hard to get thing even harder to get so people have to pay him substantial rent for no actual work.

        • (Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Sunday December 04, @09:04PM (8 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 04, @09:04PM (#1281190) Journal

          If you desperately want it now, hire a broker to go get you one.

          In other words, a scalper.

          • (Score: 2) by sjames on Monday December 05, @03:59AM (7 children)

            by sjames (2882) on Monday December 05, @03:59AM (#1281215) Journal

            No, a broker. Brokers don't hoard things, they find someone selling on the behalf of someone who wants to buy. They just facilitate the deal for a fee.

            • (Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Monday December 05, @04:35AM (6 children)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 05, @04:35AM (#1281218) Journal

              Brokers don't hoard things, they find someone selling on the behalf of someone who wants to buy. They just facilitate the deal for a fee.

              That's exactly what scalpers do as well.

              • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 05, @03:45PM (5 children)

                by Freeman (732) on Monday December 05, @03:45PM (#1281270) Journal

                The difference is that brokers don't screw up the availability of a thing. They just charge a "finders fee" per se to a person who "really wants" x thing, then the broker finds someone who wants to sell x thing, and facilitates the transaction. As opposed to buying as many of x thing as possible, then trying to find buyers for x thing. The first is providing a service to people. The second is gambling.

                --
                Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 05, @10:30PM (4 children)

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 05, @10:30PM (#1281333) Journal

                  The difference is that brokers don't screw up the availability of a thing.

                  Except, of course, they do for the same reason scalpers do - they buy some quantity of the thing creating an immediate short term reduction in the supply of it for everyone else.

                  • (Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Tuesday December 06, @05:06PM (3 children)

                    by cmdrklarg (5048) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 06, @05:06PM (#1281408)

                    Incorrect. A scalper has inventory, a broker does not. Brokers are purchasing agents; scalpers are second-hand retailers.

                    --
                    Answer now is don't give in; aim for a new tomorrow.
                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday December 06, @10:44PM (2 children)

                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 06, @10:44PM (#1281452) Journal

                      A scalper has inventory, a broker does not.

                      Unless, of course, the broker has inventory as well. Notice how mincingly small these differences become? Reminds me of the difference between a pimp and a manger [soylentnews.org].

                      Basically a scalper is a broker who brokers in a way you don't like.

                      • (Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday December 08, @06:30AM (1 child)

                        by sjames (2882) on Thursday December 08, @06:30AM (#1281670) Journal

                        Yes, A manager is a manager and a pimp claims to be a manager because that sounds so much better and doesn't imply that he is a violent exploitative sleazeball.

                        Kinda like a toe cutter may claim to work in accounts recievable.

                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 08, @06:35AM

                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 08, @06:35AM (#1281671) Journal

                          Yes, A manager is a manager and a pimp claims to be a manager because that sounds so much better and doesn't imply that he is a violent exploitative sleazeball.

                          It's all connotative noise for very similar things. A pimp may or may not claim to be a manager (in the entertainer sense), but he is one by definition. Same with scalpers and brokers.

                          Kinda like a toe cutter may claim to work in accounts recievable.

                          Or a Soylentil making non sequitur arguments.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08, @08:55AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08, @08:55AM (#1281684)

        Change the law. Concert tickets must have a name registered. A person can buy 20, but they must show ID to get in. No ID no entry. Tickets cannot be onsold or resold, only refunded to the vendor.

        This is where the concert ticker scalping ends.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 08, @02:50PM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 08, @02:50PM (#1281720) Journal

          Change the law. Concert tickets must have a name registered. A person can buy 20, but they must show ID to get in. No ID no entry. Tickets cannot be onsold or resold, only refunded to the vendor.

          So why would we want to do that and greatly drive up the cost for concerts? I suggest instead that we ignore the non-problem and simply stop caring about it. It's a far better solution.

          This is where the concert ticker scalping ends.

          Why would you want to end concert scalping? You have a reason?

  • (Score: 2) by Opportunist on Sunday December 04, @05:41PM (1 child)

    by Opportunist (5545) on Sunday December 04, @05:41PM (#1281161)

    You gambled, you lost. And you're no bank, so no tax money bailout for you.

    If there is any justice, they go bankrupt and lose their home, then end up dead in a ditch after selling their kidneys. Which I only add because that way they might at least have had some value.

    • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday December 05, @03:40PM

      by Freeman (732) on Monday December 05, @03:40PM (#1281269) Journal

      That's a bit excessive. I would settle for them having learned their lesson and their actions being shown as a warning to others. Don't do this, because you're going to lose in the long run. Would be sufficient for me.

      --
      Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by rufty on Sunday December 04, @07:46PM

    by rufty (381) on Sunday December 04, @07:46PM (#1281178)

    I've sprained my schadenfreude!

(1)