This site has been accessed well over 100,000 times since its inception in November `96. Many seasoned ticket professionals, students, educators, lawyers, bureaucrats and people from all over the world have written to me in appreciation and disdain for setting the record straight as the first site on the web to really tell the story of the ticket market like it really is from both sides, no punches pulled. If you would like permission to copy the material herein or make a link to this site, read this first before doing so. I appreciate your interest in promoting this site and the ideas in a positive manner. Please note that the opinions expressed herein are the author's personal opinions for entertainment purposes and discussion only and should not be interpreted or used as legal advice. The author is not a lawyer and makes no claims to possess any legal knowledge nor offer any legal advice for free or otherwise --- this site is for entertainment purposes only and is free to the public provided that it is used in accordance with the guidelines at the Permit Page. You may e-mail your comments here. Keep in mind that I rarely respond to comments, and I never respond to negative comments/flames or viewpoints which I consider to be mired in ignorance, nor do I debate or answer questions. I just don't have the time or desire to attempt to change anyone's viewpoint; that can only done by your own revelations and life's experience.   Your best bet chance for a response is to send something really positive.  Also please note that I do not sell tickets at this site. Try searching for tickets using Alta Vista or Google for the best results, and also search using a phrase with the exact type of event tickets you are looking for in closed quotation marks, such as "super bowl tickets" or "daytona 500 tickets" in closed quotes. Be sure to use the word "tickets" when you search to eliminate fan pages and newspaper articles, etc. With that in mind, please read on, and thank you for visiting the internet's #1 Ticket FAQ site!

It's hard to believe that in this day and time, in The United States of America, at the dawn of a new millennium, there are people in this country in a number of states, business people engaged in a very misunderstood, yet practical and necessary profession, who are losing the assets that they own --- those assets are being confiscated by government authorities, they are being stripped of their constitutional right to earn a living providing a very useful service to consumers; their money is being confiscated by these backwards law enforcement officials by a unconstitutional, informal forfeiture in rem without due process in most cases, their lives being infiltrated by a law which does nothing more than serve as an unfair and discriminatory restriction on free trade. They do absolutely no harm to the economy, no harm to society or its members physically, emotionally or spiritually, nor do any harm to themselves. They push no drink or drug, offer no sex, nudity or pornography, preach no anarchy, advocate no violence or disobedience, nor do they have any stance on or affiliation with religion, abortion, politics or other popularly volatile subjects. They are more reviled than used car salesmen, insurance salesmen and ambulance-chasing lawyers. They are legally preyed upon by governmental authorities bent on destroying them as if they were nothing but the leper scum of society that belonged in a dungeon without a trial. They are the true misunderstood and under-appreciated members of our society. Who are they, and more importantly, can this truly be happening in America today, the home of the free and the brave, where free-enterprise is meant to flourish?

Yes, it's happening today as I speak. It's a scene which was played out in the 1600's when pilgrims sought religious freedom and crossed the ocean to settle this nation --- in the 1700's when Washington, Adams & Jefferson (who never intended for government intervention of this kind) decided that they would rather form their own government without tyranny than suffer taxation without representation or forced governmental control of their lives and businesses --- in the 1800's when women who desired to vote were told they had no right to do so --- and as only a scant generation ago in this country when minorities were told that they were not deserving of the same civil rights as the majority.

There is a group of American citizens --- business people of many different races, nationalities and creeds, some of whom have fought for and defended our country during times of war from tyrannical and communist forces to protect our freedoms and our right to engage in free-enterprise, but who don't enjoy the right to ply their trade without fear of prosecution by a number of state governments whose ignorant rhetoric flies in the face of all reason. And they are mired in a public misconception of their trade due in large part to the acts of politicians who use them as a whipping post for their own political and personal gain; Judas' own brethren whose reasoning defies all logic. They are even attempting to instigate certain members of the federal government's mammoth bureaucracy to join in their tyrannical prosecution. These business people are decent people in their respective communities who invest in a commodity which does not harm individuals or the public safety in any way, shape, form or fashion; to the contrary, they provide a liquid and orderly market for their commodity and want nothing more than the opportunity to participate in the American Dream, yet these people are working in an underground economy in a time where we still live with laws straight from the puritanical dark ages, right here at the dawn of the millennium in, of all places, America - the land of free-enterprise and capitalism . . .

. . . and all they're doing is selling tickets!

Before we move on to discussion topics, there are 3 main points that I want to get across to you.  They are the 3 basic truths that are logically correct and are unavoidable if you understand the ticket business and free market economics in general. They are:

1) There is NO LEGITIMATE REASON to place the purchase price of a ticket on the face of any ticket.

If the original purchase price were removed from the ticket, it would be just like any other commodity and this article and all the hoopla and chaos surrounding it would not be necessary anymore. In fact, many costs to purchase/obtain a ticket are not printed on the ticket, and no major college or pro football team prints the miscellaneous high costs they charge to prime seating purchasers (e.g., PSL's - Permanent Seating Licenses, Booster Fees, Scholarship Fees, etc.) which are many times as much as 10 to 20 times above the face price of a season ticket.

2) Everybody pays the market price.

When 2 people make a purchase of separate, but basically identical tickets at the same time, as long as they both pay no more than the market value, they generally both pay/lose the same value for their respective tickets, no matter what they actually paid out of their respective pockets. For example, if you buy a front row ticket at the box office for face price ($50) and at the same time another person buys the one next to you on the front row from a broker for the current market price ($500), which is 10 times higher than the face price, you are both paying/losing the same value for it if you choose not to resell at that particular point in time.

Now let's discuss this, because I'm sure you are thinking “That doesn't make any sense whatsoever”. And why should the price be removed, and why do football teams not list all the costs on their prime tickets? These concepts are true and actually quite easy to understand:

We'll start with examples. We'll use a Super Bowl XXXIV ticket, which was played in Atlanta in January of 2000, a wonderful city if you've never been there. These tickets had a face price of approximately $300 each, however, resellers nationwide were asking upwards of $1,600 each MINIMUM for them.  That was the market price, and it wasn't unusual, as the street prices for Super Bowl XXXIII in Miami were $1,500 for the entire 2 weeks prior to the game and continued to hold that price until the final day or so when they crashed. And the year before that, they sold for an incredible $2,400 minimum in San Diego until the bitter end. In fact, in Atlanta about 7 years ago when the city had its first and only Super Bowl, prices spiked to $1,700 until the game started. The market went nuts!

Now let's assume that you got lucky and you were able to purchase 1 ticket through the NFL lottery at a face price of $300 at the time when the current street (market) price was $1,800 for that same ticket. If you choose not to sell that ticket right then, you have lost $1,500 in unrealized profit and the $300 you spent in hard cash out-of-pocket. If you hold it and use it to enter the game, you have lost/spent that money just as surely as another guy who paid the market price of $1,800 from a broker, or just as surely as you threw the money out the window, with the exception that you got to experience the value that you spent, that being the spectacle of the event itself.  It's an unrealized loss, but still a loss nonetheless, and it becomes a real loss when you use it or sell it for less than the $1,800 you could have received at that moment in time.

Another example of this principle:

You and your brother agree to build substantially the same type and size of homes right next to each other on substantially the same type of lots. They are identical in price and value, however, you negotiated with the builder and talked him into taking 10% less to build your house. The home cost your brother $300,000 to build and it cost you $270,000 to build, but they are both worth $300,000. If they both burn down, have you lost less value than your brother? No, of course not. It would probably be easier to see if we were to back up and pretend that you bought your home 10 years earlier and spent only $100,000, and your brother built one identical to it next door now and spent $300,000. And both homes are appraised at basically the same value. Would you be prudent to insure your $200,000 equity or should you only insure it for what you paid for it? Please don't smokescreen this with argument about the paydown of principal, improvements made and the value of new versus a pre-owned home and all the other nuances of a real-life comparison, let's just assume for the sake of argument that all things are equal, as they basically are anyway, give or take a few thousand.

Still don't get it? More examples of unrealized value:

You inherit a home worth $500,000 and all you have to do is pay the back property taxes of $1,000. Is it worth what you paid for it ($1,000) or what you can get for it ($500,000)?

Someone comes along and paints in indelible paint the number "$1,000" on your home to signify what you paid for it, and the law says you have to leave it there to show everybody what you paid for it, and you cannot sell it for more than that without breaking the law, but there are plenty of people who will gladly give you $500,000 for it. Is the law preventing you from realizing the home's true value, or is it worth what you paid it for it ($1,000)? Wouldn't this be a stupid law? What if the builder came back and said that if you sell it for a profit, he will take it back and you will lose your investment, because it's not fair to the buyers to have to pay you the true value of it and especially unfair because he's not getting a cut of it! Guess what --- that's what Billy Joel and Garth Brooks are preaching to anybody who will listen. And that's what the ticket laws of various states are supporting. But what more would you expect from these “rocket scientists” anyway? Ask them if they would like to receive fair market value for their CDs or a set rate decided by a governmental agency without input from the record company or artist.  Next example . . .

You move your home to another state so that you can sell it and realize the equity value you have in your home. Now, it's still worth $500,000 in its new location, but the next month, the beautiful lot where you chose to plant it permanently becomes a neighbor to a brand new nuclear waste dump, and now nobody will buy it or rent it, and you can't move it, in fact, it becomes downright untenable and you can't sue anyone to recover your cost or value. How much value or money have you lost, the $100,000 you spent to build it 10 years earlier or the $500,000 you could have received in a favorable situation?

Is good liquidity (the ability to turn an asset into cash by selling it quickly) essentially the same as cash? Absolutely! A check is not cash, but if it's good, it can be turned into cash, so a good check has the same value as the cash value it represents, but if that check were written 40 years ago by John F. Kennedy or Marilyn Monroe, even if it's not good anymore, it's worth far more to a collector than its cash value. In fact, if the check is good, it has two values, the market value and the cash value, and whichever is higher is the one you want, right?

Does a ticket have both "market value" and "cash value"?  In only rare instances will a ticket ever have "cash value", because you can't return it to the box office and get a cash refund unless the event is cancelled.  In fact, the ONLY value a ticket has IS the "market value", i.e., what you can get for it on the open market through a bid/offer process. I'll tell you what --- the next time you buy a ticket, ask the box office what the "face value" is, then wait until the next day and tell them you want to return it and get your "face value" back, i.e., ask for your money back, and then see what they say.  I bet they'll say the ticket has no cash value, but no matter what they say, I'll bet they won't give your money back to you.  So where's the "face value" or "cash value".  It doesn't exist, except that it left your pocket!  In fact, turn it over and read it. It basically states everything that just happened in small writing on the back, along with the other bull about not being able to resell it because they say so even though you bought it with your hard-earned money and it now belongs to you. Although the artists don't mind you giving it away, they don't want you to resell it, like they control it and still own it, which is just plain lunacy.

How about this example: If you own a ticket to a 1933 World Series game, you've got something worth far more than the original face price. But the Yankees don't seem to mind that, because the game is over. They consider that ticket to belong to the purchaser. So why should it matter if the game hasn't been played yet?  Did you know that the first 2 Super Bowls didn't sell out, and the face prices started at $5 ticket?!?  If you have a full, intact, unused Super Bowl I ticket, chances are you are holding a ticket that is worth about $500 to $1,000 on the open market, maybe more.  You could actually get more for it now than you could have before the game was played some 35 years ago!  Is selling an old ticket for more than the face price against the law?  The laws don't state that the event has to be a forthcoming event.  technically, it may be against the law to do that even, which shows you how redundant the law is.

Why place the price of a ticket on the face of the ticket itself? It's not for accounting purposes; come on now --- don't you think that box offices and their agents have a record of what they sell a ticket for? Believe me, they have records of everything they buy and sell; the tax man requires every corporation to have detailed records of its transactions. Is it necessary for you to know what the price is? You should know what you paid for it at the box office --- you're the one who bought it! If you can't remember, maybe you have other problems besides not being able to understand economic principles! Is it necessary for others to know? Absolutely not, no more than they should know what you paid for anything you are reselling, such as your home. Actually, the only reason it is there is because it is a form of habit, not of function, and some states, in following with the habit, have actually enacted laws that it must be placed there, but of course, there are many archaic laws on the book in all states that nobody has taken the time to repeal because they are either not enforced by the police as a matter of practice or are basically unenforceable. It's still against the law to kiss in public in some localities!  It's also against the law for two person, heterosexual or homosexual, to practice anal sex in Georgia, whether they are married or not, but can it be enforced effectively?  Preaching it --- yes. Living it --- yes. Enforcing it --- virtually impossible, and the state of Georgia has said publicly that they couldn't and wouldn't enforce it to the letter of the law.  Ticket laws are still enforceable, they are just not right, that's all.

One last example --- a lottery ticket. We all understand lotteries and how they work --- you buy a ticket by paying your dollar and selecting your numbers or letting the machine select them for you. At a future date and time, the state lottery agency will pull the winning numbers and you check to see if you won, say, $10,000,000 or not. Let's examine what has occurred and what may occur . . .

You have spent $1, and the ticket says you spent $1 on the face of the ticket, therefore, the "face price" of the ticket is $1. You could say the "face value" is $1, but that's not true as it can't be redeemed for cash unless it's a winner.  It doesn't have any inherent value at all unless it's a winner, and it also has no market value if it's not a winner, unless you can talk somebody else into giving you money for it in the open market before the drawing. What --- you've never heard of that? There's a lot of people that will buy a lottery ticket for a $1 and sell it to you for $2, and you can pick the numbers. If you get your cousin in Miami to purchase them and send to you in Montana and you pay him back, you've bought tickets from someone. If you agree to cut him in, he's done it for compensation, even though it's non-monetary consideration unless it's a winner.

Now the numbers are pulled and hey --- you're the winner! You're holding a $1 lottery ticket that's now worth $10,000,000! But if you lose it before you can be established as the winner, how much have you lost? Is it the $1 you invested or the $10 million you could have received if you had turned it in and claimed the prize? You've lost $10 million, and anyone who could convince you otherwise could use Quantum Physics and convince you that a cow could jump over the moon, but use your brain and believe otherwise.

What is a ticket anyway? It's a coupon that constitutes a written "right" for the bearer of such to receive something, not a license, as licenses are issued to a certain person, not a "bearer".  Usually, a ticket is an admission coupon to an event, as with concert or sports tickets, but in the case of a lottery ticket, it's a right to share in the disbursement of cash prizes if you are one of the lucky winners. There are many companies who, if you are a lottery winner, will purchase your right to receive the lottery payments, essentially buying your lottery ticket from you. Many of them will offer a lump sum equal to what they would receive if they invested the lump sum at a 15% APR compounded annually over the life of the payments, which may be as much as 50% of the total payments due, though usually much, much less in the case of 20-year payouts. Let's assume for the sake of example that a company offers you $5 million for your lottery ticket. You would be selling that ticket for $4,999,999 over its face price, you scalper you!! They should put you under the jail if the states who have these insane, archaic and unconstitutional laws would apply the ticket laws fairly and equally, but that would be an incredible, oxymoronic double standard that they can't comprehend.

3) This is the year 2000 and we are still in the dark ages, but we will never emerge until enough people take up the torch to stop the sadistic annihilation of free-market rights by state's who do not allow ticket brokering.  Everyone should be allowed to sell their tickets for the top dollar it will bring in the marketplace, just like any other commodity, as the market is the only sure-fire way to control prices effectively and fairly in a free-enterprise, capitalistic society such as America.

Tickets are no different that stocks, bonds, jewelry, stamps, coins, art, or anything else that has a secondary market and value.  They should be treated as such, and in previous state and federal court cases, it has been specifically stated in the ruling that to treat them differently than other commodities was prejudicial.

But if you live in one of the minority of states that have laws that make ticket reselling illegal, then don't do it.  Breaking the law in defiance is not the answer.  But the laws and the attitudes toward ticket brokering will never change until someone does something positive and logical.  Take a stand, take a position --- You can work to get the laws changed in a legal manner by writing a clear and concise letter in support of free-market ticket brokering to your local politicians if there is a local ordinance against ticket brokering and/or your district's state legislators and your governor if there is a state law against ticket brokering and voice your opinion in a logical and brief manner and your intention to vote for and gather support for a candidate in the next election that will support free-market economics in the ticket business.  This goes beyond tickets.  If the same laws were applied to vary other commodities such as real estate, there would be an all-out revolt of the people.  Ask your politicians to include a revision to the law in an omnibus bill or state budget if they want to slip it into the law books without fanfare; they are quite familiar with that method.  Starting a legal PAC (Political Action Committee) is another method of influencing politicians.  You can also start a petition to get the law changed.  Make sure it is a legal petition as required by the state to be recognized properly.  Look into hiring representation for your PAC, and ask some competent lawyers if taking the fight to the courts is the way to change the law effectively. There is legal precedence at the state level on your side in cases directly involving ticket reselling.

There is plenty of U.S. case law to back the pro-ticket brokering argument, including a U.S. Supreme Court case titled "Tyson & Bro.- United Theatre Ticket Service v. Banton, D.A. of New York" (1927), in which the U.S. Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional the laws prohibiting the resale of tickets over a set limit per our individual property rights granted to us in the 14th amendment.  The justices nullified the position of the state of New York that the right to obtain tickets to theatre shows, sporting events & concerts at a set price was a "public" right, instead ruling that right only extends to the necessities of life, such as utility companies and such, further averring that tickets are private property and no state shall abridge a ticket brokers rights to resell them at any price that the market will bear.  Why the state of New York still has a law against it baffles me entirely.  Also, look up a state court ruling in Alabama titled "Estell v. Birmingham" (1973).   

I hope you now believe and understand the points that I'm pounding home, and that is that everybody pays/loses the same value for a ticket no matter what they pay out of their pocket at any specific time, and the face price on all tickets should be removed immediately, as they have no bearing on the true value and serve no legitimate purpose whatsoever, and that these crazy laws have got to stop A.S.A.P. and we've got to behave like the enlightened souls that we are.  Rest assured that there is NO logical or legal argument that will support prohibitions on ticket selling, and that every person who fights ticket brokering is only using smoke & mirrors in an emotional argument that is steeped in a ridiculous and archaic tradition.   Wake up!

WHAT IS A TICKET?
WHAT IS AN "AUTHORIZED TICKET AGENT"?
WHAT IS A "TICKET BROKER"?
WHAT IS A "SCALPER"?
WHAT ARE "SCALPING LAWS"?
WHAT SERVICES DO TICKET BROKERS PROVIDE, AND ARE THEY NECESSARY TO THE PUBLIC?

Click here for Page 3, which includes some popular questions and covers some popular myths & misconceptions:
ISN'T A TICKET ONLY WORTH THE PRICE STATED ON THE TICKET? (THE FACE VALUE)
HOW ARE TICKET PRICES ON THE SECONDARY MARKET SET, AND WHY ARE THEY SOMETIMES PRICED SO UNREASONABLY HIGH?
IF TICKET BROKERING IS GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC, THEN WHY ARE THERE LAWS AGAINST IT IN SOME STATES AND WHY DO THE FANS, PROMOTERS, ARTISTS AND VENUES HATE IT SO MUCH?
DO TICKET BROKERS HAVE TO BE AUTHORIZED TO SELL TICKETS FOR ANY PARTICULAR EVENT?
DO TICKET BROKERS GET THEIR TICKETS THROUGH ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL METHODS?
SHOULD I TRUST A BROKER WHO SELLS TICKETS IN ADVANCE FOR LATER DELIVERY JUST BEFORE THE EVENT? IS THIS COMMON?

Click here for Page 4, which includes some real intriguing questions and observations (This is the best page for arguments and ideas):
SINCE SCALPING IS ILLEGAL IN SOME STATES, SHOULDN'T IT BE ILLEGAL NATIONWIDE?
WHY DON'T PROMOTERS CHARGE A LOT MORE FOR THE GOOD TICKETS, THEREBY ELIMINATING THE SECONDARY MARKET AND/OR ITS PROFIT INCENTIVE, AND WHY IS STAGGERING PRICE LEVELS A GOOD IDEA, AND WHY ARE SO MANY SPORTS TEAMS AND CONCERT PROMOTERS DOING IT?
WHY DOES THE MOST EXPENSIVE TICKET IN SPORTS, A MASTERS GOLF TOURNAMENT BADGE, SELL FOR AS MUCH AS 100 TIMES IT'S FACE PRICE ON THE STREET, AND WHAT CAN AUGUSTA NATIONAL DO TO REDIRECT THE PROFITS, AND WHY WILL IT NOT AFFECT THE STREET PRICE?
WHY DON'T PROMOTERS AUCTION OFF THE BEST TICKETS?
WHY DON'T PROMOTERS MAKE TICKETS NONTRANSFERABLE OR RESTRICTED TO MEMBERS ONLY OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT?
WHY DON'T PROMOTERS OFFER ONLY GENERAL ADMISSION TICKETS LIKE SOME ROCK ARTISTS DO?
DIDN'T THE ATLANTA OLYMPICS HAVE A FEDERAL LAW AGAINST RESELLING TICKETS? HOW COULD THEY DO THAT AND WHY CAN'T THE STATES DO THE SAME?
WHAT ABOUT THAT METHOD OF HIRING BUMS AND KIDS TO STAND IN LINE AND PURCHASE TICKETS ON BEHALF OF TICKET BROKERS?
WHY CAN'T PROMOTERS & ARTISTS JUST NOT ALLOW THE RESELLING OF TICKETS TO THEIR EVENT? AFTER ALL, DON'T THE TICKETS ULTIMATELY BELONG TO THEM --- A REVOCABLE LICENSE?
ARE THE LOTTERIES USED BY VARIOUS BOX OFFICES TO SELECT WHO GETS TO BUY TICKETS FIRST FAIR TO CONSUMERS?

Click here for Page 5, which includes more popular misconceptions & myths (This is a good FAQ page):
TICKET SCALPERS ARE INDECENT, GREEDY PEOPLE. NO DECENT, REASONABLE PERSON WOULD SCALP TICKETS, RIGHT?
DOESN'T A GOVERNMENT HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONTROL TICKET SALES BECAUSE IT'S IN THE PUBLIC  INTEREST & SAFETY TO ASSURE THAT TICKETS ARE FAIRLY DISTRIBUTED AND AVAILABLE AT A REASONABLE PRICE?
IF THE BROKERS DIDN'T BUY SO MANY TICKETS, WOULDN'T ALL OF THE TRUE FANS HAVE A CHANCE TO GET A REALLY GOOD TICKET, OR AT LEAST A DECENT SEAT FOR FACE PRICE?
THE BANDS THAT OFFER THEIR TICKETS FOR BELOW $25 EACH DO THIS TO INSURE THEIR FANS CAN AFFORD TICKETS AND CAN GET THEM EASILY. THEY DON'T WANT SCALPERS BUYING THE TICKETS AND MARKING THEM UP 1,000%. THEY CARE ABOUT THE FANS WHO SUPPORT THEM!
A BROKER CAN'T DO ANYTHING THAT I CAN'T DO ON MY OWN.

Click here for Page 6, which is a perfect, logical solution to the problems in the ticket market and the postscript with other WWW sources:
HOW CAN WE END THIS CONTROVERSY IN ONE EASY STEP IN A MANNER WHICH IS FAIR TO ALL SIDES?
POSTSCRIPT AND SELECTED RESEARCH MATERIALS

This web page and its entire contents (c) 1996 TIXFAQ. All rights reserved.
Use of any part of this text is subject to these guidelines.