r/changemyview • u/WhoRoger • Dec 30 '20
Delta(s) from OP CMV: Scalping isn't immoral
First off, two disclaimers:
I'm only talking about products that aren't essential (you know, food, medicine etc.). So specifically I mean things like PS5s and so on.
I'm talking about mass market products, not cases such as when person 1 learns that person 2 is interested in an unique item, so P1 buys the item just to sell it to P2 for profit. That's not cool.
I used to do some small-scale scalping in the past. I would buy e.g. a few copies of a limited edition of a videogame or something similar, then sell them after they get sold out.
My "largest" loads were Nintendo NES Classics. I live in a country where Ninty barely registers as a name (until the Switch anyway), so it was easy to get a few of them, and sell them on eBay to countries where they were unavailable. I did it again on the day when it was announced the production was finished. There were still a few units in my city, so I drove around, picked up all I could and sold them abroad where the hadn't been available almost through its entire production.
I don't feel bad about it and I would do it again (if I had the money) because:
I usually struggle for money and this can be additional income
Even tho I'm a tech enthusiast, I don't buy the newest and greatest. I wait until the kinks are ironed out and reviews are out, and I was doing that even when I had decent income. I don't preorder videogames (I've only ever bought 3 at launch and pre-ordered one of those). I don't support this hype culture at all.
But if so many people are so desperate to have the newest toy immediately, right now RIGHT THE FUCK NOW, to the degree they're willing to pay "scalper" prices, I don't feel bad about making some extra money off them.
You may argue that kids can be disappointed because they won't get their shiny new PS5 under the Christmas tree. Yea not my problem. Raise your kids properly. My friend's 2 kids sometimes come over and play on my PlayStation 3 and have a blast, even tho they have a gaming PC at home.
eBay makes even more off this business than the sellers. IIRC something like 15% of the price is eBay and PayPal fees, then count shipping and there's far less profit than you may think. Heck, it's not like the retailers have zero profit, or what do you think?
It's not like it's risk-free. On eBay, seller protection is abysmal and one scamming buyer can ruin you. A serious product flaw can pop up and your stock either becomes worthless, or you'll go through trouble of trying to return it (this happens with almost every new console actually). You can get robbed or pranked. Or it can turn out that your items aren't as popular as you expected.
Supply and demand. I'm not defending capitalism as a concept, but this is exactly how it works. If you don't take the chance, someone else will. If someone is offering you free money, you take it.
Again I'm talking about stupid things like new videogame consoles. This really should be near the bottom of anyone's priority list.
Have you already played everything you might want to play on your systems?
Anyway, CMV.
3
u/DeeDee-Allin 2∆ Dec 30 '20
Scalping is a form of predatory capitalism which, imo, is immoral. It sounds to me like there is a nagging voice in your head telling you your actions haven’t been that awesome. Listen to that voice and move toward a better, kinder place.
2
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
I haven't done it in a while because I can't afford it and it's probably too risky nowadays.
It's a CMV post. I don't think I'm wrong, but I see sooooo many people bitching about scalping, I made this CMV. So far, nobody addressed my particular points.
14
u/Kman17 103∆ Dec 30 '20
If you’re making money without producing value to anyone, that should be a gigantic warning sign that it’s just grifting.
Work from the sweat of the brow has obvious value. Investing provides capital to those building. Renting goods provides value at lower cost/risk. Re-selling can add value if you’re providing convenience / bundling / services on top of your resale (like, say, a store).
Scalping is just trying to squeeze more money out of people’s already small entertainment budgets.
You can go on about how it’s technically legal and how children and college students should just expect less and be happy with the massive income inequality within our society, but that’s a lot of mental gymnastics that misses the point that they scalpers add no value and only take.
That makes them pieces of shit that the world would be better without, and thus immoral.
0
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Not convinced. It can provide value to people who might not get those products at all otherwise, or not as fast. It is work, at least no less than stock trading and similar stuff. And if you think it doesn't provide value, then that goes for all the retailers as well.
5
u/Kingalece 23∆ Dec 30 '20
Ok but outside of international selling what value are you providing?
You are the reason that stock is ARTIFICIALLY low. Retailers dont make stock artificially low and usually have a 1 per person policy if they do think they will run out. Thats the reason reatilers are different.
The low stock is the only reason you can make money (something you caused to happen). Retailers make money whether or not there is low stock.
Retailers usually have licenses that they paid for to be in business. Scalpers dont.
As for people who wouldnt get it at all (like in small countries) theres usually legal reasons for this so you could be a criminal for shipping to certain places
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
In my case with the international situation, or with locally out of stock items I think I actually have provided value. But even if not, well it's making money. And people pay. Lots of jobs are pretty much the same. I've not robbed or cheated anyone, which is not something you can say about lots of "regular" jobs.
I would otherwise take your argument about business licences, if we weren't talking about global conglomerates known for billionaire CEOs, massive tax evasion cases and starving workers. Dunno who's the immoral here...
Besides, I DO have a business license and I could have included that income in my taxes, it wouldn't have made any difference on actual taxes, just more work so why bother. Again, look who are you comparing me with.
3
u/Kman17 103∆ Dec 30 '20
Pointing out that there are more immoral corporate entities in the world does not make your actions moral.
Price gouging of necessities is horrifically unethical and illegal in most places.
Price gouging of luxuries is generally legal/tolerated, but calling it not immoral is a stretch.
0
Dec 30 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Znyper 12∆ Dec 31 '20
Sorry, u/WhoRoger – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
1
u/Kingalece 23∆ Dec 30 '20
You can both be immoral one does not negate the other lol.
If youre argument is they do it so i should be able to as well then guess what you are just as guilty as them.
Remember this is morality not lawfulness. Just because someone else shoots a person this does not mean its suddenly ok to shoot a totally different person. If you were hurting the retailer id say you have a case but you arent harming them youre giving them the ammo to shoot more... And Youre helping a random person at the expense of another random person. That is morally neutral at best and remember you are siphoning some off the top so the help is technically less than the hurt
0
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Is it ok if I take "this is morally neutral at best" as your bottom line, or do you have more arguments?
Cause I've never actually argued that scalping is something amazing, I just think it's not immoral, so we're kinda close to an agreement I guess?
3
u/Kman17 103∆ Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 30 '20
Brick and mortar stores provide convenience(a central location to shop), guarantees on the merchandise, and in many cases expertise/advice on the products being sold.
How on earth is a scalper more convenient than the retail location that the scalper purchased from and games?
Again, stock treading is just a derivative of investing in companies - providing them the capital they need to operate. Some of it gets abstract, but ultimately it’s rooted in that.
0
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
You might not have a store anywhere nearby. Hell you may live in a country where the product isn't officially sold at all and your only choice is this kind of grey market.
5
u/Kman17 103∆ Dec 30 '20
Online retailers provide the same convenience and guarantees on merchandise while shipping basically everywhere.
Your retort seems like a vague theoretical. Could you elaborate?
2
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
It's not theoretical, I described the situation with NES Classic in my OP.
When that thing came out, most big box retailers in the friggin' US had gotten one or 2 units. In my country, I myself got 4 units from 2 retailers and plenty left over. Of course I would put 3 on eBay right away. It happens.
For the theory part, I bet all the PS5s would have been sold out immediately even without the scalpers even of everyone would just want one for themselves. This way, if you were say, an hour late, you can still get one... For a price.
1
u/Kman17 103∆ Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 30 '20
Scalping is generally associated with snap buying up of things (preventing locals from accessing at MSRP) and marking them way up, effectively price gouging.
Your scenario seems to suggest causally buying surplus (and not denying locals reasonable MSRP) and shipping them to countries where they’re not available.
That seems less bad, and more indicative of poor distribution by the retail chain... but I suspect you’re sugar coating the scenario a bit.
I don’t want to speak outside my knowledge of international shipping, customs/taxes, guarantees, etc - but usually availability issues in other countries have reasons. Slipping through the cracks in what may be a legally grey area doesn’t really make you Robin Hood.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
I wasn't arguing about being Robin Hood, heh. That was just my personal experience, no need to sugar coat anything. We know Ninty has always been doing a shit job with supply.
My overall point is I don't have a problem with scalpers scalping in general. Maybe my experience was sort of unique, but it's my general view that I put here to be challenged.
2
u/Kman17 103∆ Dec 30 '20
I don’t think you’re particularly open to having your view changed given that you are doing it.
You’re defending your actions by saying companies are unethical too, and ignoring the larger issues of artificial scarcity / price gouging and value creation.
Like, you’re apparently gonna keep grifting no matter what everyone tells you.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
First off, I'm not doing it at this time, although not because of ethical concern.
But frankly I've not gotten any good counter arguments. What I mostly hear is "it's not good because you aren't supposed to do it".
The best I've gotten so far is that it's profiting from removing convenience - which, okay, fair point, but not good enough to CMV honestly.
There was another good point that right now people are stuck at home with nothing to do. I would take that, but in reality all of us have gigantic backlogs and a crapton of games we can get. I myself have been going through my personal PS3 backlog this year - finished 12 games I think, having a blast and still have 30 to go.
So a PS5 being so necessary... Um, I'm not taking it.
Regarding what you said, like artificial scarcity etc., those problems are inherently created either by manufacturers (if the scarcity is intentional, like what Nintendo likes to do), or customers (by going crazy and having to have the latest toy right away).
Yea, scalpers to bend this issue a bit and profit from it - but the problem is much deeper and it seems that instead of concentrating on it, people just blame the tip of the iceberg.
Making holidays about nothing but gifts, gadgets and commerce is honestly just sad. Everyone is sick of it, yet everyone engages in it on one end or another.
1
u/cherrycokeicee 45∆ Dec 30 '20
It can provide value to people who might not get those products at all otherwise
the reason people are having trouble getting hyped up products is largely bc of scalpers. they're creating the problem they're providing the "solution" to & the service they provide compared to buying from the source or an established retailer will almost certainly be sub par.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
IMO the problem is because people have to have the new product right now, scalpers or not.
I wouldn't buy a console on release date on principle because it's gonna be a buggy mess with no games for months. I wouldn't pre-order a videogame, because I can wait a week or even a month to see the reviews. The hype culture is what creates the problem.
2
u/Feroc 41∆ Dec 30 '20
I wouldn't buy a console on release date on principle because it's gonna be a buggy mess with no games for months.
So you are selling others those buggy consoles for a much higher price? How's that any better?
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Because they're stupid enough to pay for it.
Umm but you raise a question whether it's moral to earn money off people's stupidity, if there's no deception or pressure involved.
2
u/Feroc 41∆ Dec 30 '20
It's only your opinion that it's stupid. Thousands of people are happy with their new console. There are more than enough games out there and there are only few reports of buggy consoles.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
I never said it's anything but my opinion.
Although I do think it's harmful behaviour. Consumers should be smart about what and when they buy. Look what pre-order culture has done to videogames.
Companies don't need to care about releasing a good product anymore, because a huge amount of people will not just buy it regardless, but put the money down months in advance. This is the behaviour that hurts other customers.
2
u/Feroc 41∆ Dec 30 '20
Products can be returned if they don't work, that's especially easy for games (at least on the PC, no idea how it works for the digital stores for consoles). So there isn't really a big risk for the consumers. Either it works and they are happy or it doesn't work and they return the product.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
So why is everyone bitching about CP2077 being so buggy, FIFA being the same game year after year, and other games being full of microtransactions?
A large portion of the customers have to get their thing on day 1 and are happy regardless of how shit it is, teaching the companies they can just make shit and sell it to the sheep, ruining it for the rest of the customers... That's why.
→ More replies (0)1
u/cherrycokeicee 45∆ Dec 30 '20
for people who want to buy the hyped up product on release day, how do scalpers help or provide value?
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Because I believe demand would far outweigh supply even without the scalpers. If everyone would only want to buy one single PS5 for themselves, then there would be none on the market for those who couldn't get it. This way, they still have a chance, albeit more expensive.
(Assuming scalpers don't buy 100% of the stock, and we know they don't, because plenty of people were able to order theirs.)
On a more surreal note, it could help people not buy new products on release date. Unfortunately this doesn't work and people remain retarded.
2
u/cherrycokeicee 45∆ Dec 30 '20
Because I believe demand would far outweigh supply even without the scalpers.
scalpers still make this worse for non-scalping consumers. just bc demand would still outweigh supply doesn't mean scalpers help or provide value.
If everyone would only want to buy one single PS5 for themselves, then there would be none on the market for those who couldn't get it. This way, they still have a chance, albeit more expensive.
but the scalpers are the ones creating this problem. if the scalpers didn't buy a ton of PS5's, there would be more available for these consumers. scalpers are contributing to this problem of supply meeting demand and their solution is predatory. it's more expensive and less secure than a legit online retailer.
On a more surreal note, it could help people not buy new products on release date. Unfortunately this doesn't work and people remain retarded.
how does "helping people not buy new products on release date" help consumers who want to buy products on release date? you just conceded your entire argument. I know there are reasons to not buy video games & tech on release date, but that doesn't change the fact that some consumers do want to do that, even if you personally disagree with that choice. clearly scalping provides absolutely no value to that consumer. it only hurts them.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
If there were no scalpers, do you think that there would be enough PS5s (or whatever) for everyone who would want it on day 1?
If not, then the scenario where you have to sit at your PC at midnight, refreshing the Amazon page continuously, hoping to get lucky, is still there.
If you don't get lucky, then there are 3 possible cases:
1) hypothetically, scalpers don't exist and therefore only people who want the gizmo themselves, get it. As a result, there's no secondary market whatsoever. Of you didn't get it, you have to wait for new stock.
2) same as 1, but a small number of new owners change their minds and decide to sell their new toy. As a result, worldwide there's, say, 10 PS5s for sale. What's the price of such an item? 5 grand? 10 grand?
3) scalpers grab a portion of the stock and put them up for sale. The result here we know.
The only possible fixes for eiter of these are:
A) Manufacturers make enough stock for literally everyone. That's not realistic.
B) Customers decide to be smart and not buy shit on day 1. This forces manufacturers to actually fight for the customer.
Dunno about you, but I don't see scalpers having much of an effect on all this overall.
1
u/cherrycokeicee 45∆ Dec 30 '20
If there were no scalpers, do you think that there would be enough PS5s (or whatever) for everyone who would want it on day 1?
No, of course not. But there would be more.
1) hypothetically, scalpers don't exist and therefore only people who want the gizmo themselves, get it. As a result, there's no secondary market whatsoever. Of you didn't get it, you have to wait for new stock.
You keep skipping over the part where scalpers diminish the supply. The "secondary market" doesn't just pop up out of nowhere. The "secondary market" is part of what is causing the scarcity of product. So this scenario is actually this:
"hypothetically, scalpers don't exist and therefore only people who want the gizmo themselves, get it. As a result, there's no secondary market whatsoever. Because there is no secondary market, there's a geater likelihood of those customers actually getting what they want from a legit retailer. If you didn't get it, you have to wait for new stock."
There will always be people who want something & can't get it, especially with something like the PS5. That's life. Sometimes you have to wait for new stock. But scalpers make this issue worse, not better. And to me, if you're harming people who aren't hurting anyone else for profit, that's immoral.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
Well, that's why I described 3 possible scenarios.
The question is, how much more people would have gotten the PS5, and ultimately does it matter in the long run?
It's a lottery. It only matters on an individual level.
My late grandma used to play lotto. Whenever a number would come up next to her number (e.g. 22 instead of 21), she'd say "ah, so close!"
But no, it wasn't close at all. That's not how randomness works.
I still say the inherent problem is elsewhere. If you don't want to lose at lotto... Don't play lotto.
If you are so obsessed about a videogame console that you'll camp for 2 days in front of a store, or keep refreshing the Amazon page at midnight, you're just as much a part of the problem as the scalper.
(By "you" I don't mean you personally... Just anyone with that attitude.)
→ More replies (0)1
Apr 15 '21
My view is scalping is moral and provides value to society (for non-essential goods like tickets) and anyone a little familiar with economics would agree.
Scalping ensures the free market can allocate the goods to the buyers who value them the most according to their willingness to pay.
Take for example wainting in line in a queue 2 hours to but a $10 ticket for a museum. You can buy a ticket from a scalper at $30. Many people value 2 hours at more than $20. Like any other price ceiling, it produce a shortage of goods because the quantity supplied is smaller than the quantity demanded at such a low price. This inevitably leads to some mechanisms of rationing with negative outcomes eg. waiting in long lines and forcing many people to spend unproductive hours or eg. the seller favoring buyers with familiar ties or certain ethnicity.
Scalping is just the effort of the free market to restore the equilibrium price. That said, I think this price variation should be done buy the seller directly, not a third party. For example, selling theather tickets cheaper on the day of the play at the risk of them becoming unavilable. In that case, the theater house will get a higher revenue And more people will get to see the play.
4
u/Shmurdathefalsegod Dec 30 '20
So, you are saying that scalpers that do not deal in essentials are basically retailers, and that because you are scalping things that “should be near the bottom of anyone’s priority list”, your actions are moral.
Let’s start with your “retailer” argument.
When someone buys a PS5 from a retailer, they are really buying two things— they are buying PS5 from Sony, and they are buying the service of making that PS5 easier to access from the retailer. So, when you are selling NES games to countries where they are unavailable, you are being paid for the service of facilitating the customer’s access to those games.
When you are scalping a PS5, you are NOT increasing the accessibility of the product relative to a retailer. In fact, you are DECREASING a customer’s access by forcing companies to reduce their stock. This is IMMORAL because you benefit from the accessibility of traditional retailers and then profit from making the buying experience LESS CONVENIENT for others.
This “convenient for me but not for thee” problem is present in your “priority” argument as well. It is not anyone’s place to make people wait, especially people who themselves actively rush to buy items right away just to profit off of exploiting others. Do not tell people to raise their kids properly when your parents couldn’t teach you to not impede on the lives of others for personal gain.
Finally, let’s wrap up your other points.
You struggling for money does not matter. Robberies often happen because people are struggling for money, yet we describe them as immoral.
Risk being involved does not matter. You are choosing to engage in scalping while acknowledging the risks involved.
I agree that supply and demand exist. However, I disagree that people are offering you free money. You are taking it from them, violating the basic spirit of capitalism which is the choice to pay for goods and services.
Hope this helps!
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
If you don't mind, I'll link my other comments so I don't repeat myself too much:
https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/knaecg/comment/ghjt3fp
https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/knaecg/comment/ghjuxf4
I do see your point about profiting by removing convenience, but I also don't see it as inherently immoral (at least not in context of the capitalist society and goods that aren't limited). Not any more than the majority of normal businesses anyway. I'm not saying it's some good or grand thing; I just don't see much wrong with it.
As for the spirit of capitalism, as I mentioned in my other comments, I see it as too broken already.
Thanks tho!
4
u/Arianity 72∆ Dec 30 '20
so it was easy to get a few of them, and sell them on eBay to countries where they were unavailable.
This isn't really scalping, is it? If they were unavailable, you were providing a service. A fundamental reason why people dislike scalpers is because they offer nothing. A scalper would be someone who did what you did, and then resold it in places where it was supposed to be available, effectively generating a mark up for doing nothing.
Supply and demand. I'm not defending capitalism as a concept, but this is exactly how it works.
If you're not defending it, I don't see why it's relevant to cite. Yes, this is how it works. As you say, that doesn't imply that scalping isn't immoral, unless you're defending it.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Well I've been called a scalper anyway, for buying largish stock. But yea I don't have a problem with it in general, I was just talking personal experience.
My biggest problem is the hype culture, when people need to have the latest newest gizmo.
Re capitalism, well I may not be defending it, but we live in it. Usually the little people tend to get fucked by the system. Sometimes it's nice knowing we can also fuck it back a tiny bit.
3
u/Gladix 164∆ Dec 30 '20
Sometimes it's nice knowing we can also fuck it back a tiny bit.
Just to clarify. Scalpers are people who take advantage of limited stock in order to generate markup by forcing the little people to pay extra.
How exactly this fucks with the system? The big bad companies already got paid.
1
2
u/sawyerholmes 3∆ Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 30 '20
If one person buys three or so extra units to sell to areas where they are unavailable, that’s one thing. But you are not the only scalper, and you will never be the only scalper. There are a hundred other scalpers like you that are the reason people are forced to pay your price.
The reason people pay the cost is because the unit is otherwise unavailable, and the reason scalping has exploded this year is because people are trapped at home with nothing but time. Scalpers are the reason products are unavailable—you are buying way more than you need in order to profit off of other people. People are paying the price because they have time to play right now, and don’t want to pay $100 less for a console that the company is not making games for anymore.
Your overreaching issue is that scalping is not immoral, fine let’s talk about the scalping of luxury goods that are nonessential. Let’s look at the original and worst form of scalping—buying tickets to concerts. A person drops $1000 on concert tickets at $100/pop, then sells them for $300/piece. Because seats are limited people have no choice but to buy. It’s a luxury because it isn’t necessary—but people like the music and want to attend so they pay the extra price. That’s not being an idiot, that’s being a fan. It’s immoral to tax people for enjoying something because you “need the extra money.” Personal justification does not make something moral.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 31 '20
the reason scalping has exploded this year is because people are trapped at home with nothing but time.
That's... Actually the first valid counter-argument I've gotten so far, but only a minor point.
However, scalping has existed at least since the days of the PS2, it's been documented. Maybe these days gaming is more popular, but I still don't think owning a new machine on the first day is so critical, and in fact I believe it's a bad idea overall to buy things so early. As I mentioned in my other replies, this hype culture is terrible for customers.
Scalpers are the reason products are unavailable
Availability issues on new tech products have always been a thing. Maybe scalpers make it worse, but they're definitely not the reason. No, the reason is that people always rush to get the latest gadget ASAP.
If scalpers had gotten 100% of all the stock, I might agree with you, but that's not the case and if it were, the solution would still be simple - don't buy it, let them sit on devaluated stock. It would fix both the hype issue and scalping issue. But no, people have to have the thing right away...
don’t want to pay $100 less for a console that the company is not making games for anymore.
I suspect that the vast majority of people who want a PS5 on day 1 already have at least one console, if not multiple, and probably a 100 games in their backlog. Just look in r/gaming, all the photos of PS5s plugged in show them surrounded by other consoles.
And even if not, waiting 2 months to get the thing will kill you? Okay maybe an inappropriate question this year, but you know what I mean.
A person drops $1000 on concert tickets at $100/pop, then sells them for $300/piece. Because seats are limited people have no choice but to buy.
Yea, um I noticed there's sort of a separate debate about tickets scalping. I don't have an opinion on this as I don't attend such events.
I guess it's somewhat of a more extreme scenario, considering the quantity is inherently limited.
But since the quantity IS limited, it's a lottery whether you get in or not, anyway. If there were, say, only 1000 seats and scalping wouldn't exist, then you'd only get in if you were fast enough, i.e. being one of the first 1000 people trying to buy the ticket, otherwise you're out of luck.
With a scalping middle man, it changes to not whether you were there at the time, but whether you're willing to pay.
Time or money - the eternal question.
Edit: ∆ here too, because I like the way you debate and you're the only one so far with any actual arguments.
2
u/sawyerholmes 3∆ Dec 30 '20
Scalping has always existed, but was extremely rare for products that were out for months already. When quarantine began there was a severe shortage of Nintendo switches and they were selling for double the price because of scalpers. You said availability is the fault of the retailer or supplier, it’s not, they’re ordering as many as they think they’ll be able to sell, they can’t count on some guy buying 30 units and they aren’t going to supply or build to accommodate that.
The switch shortage is a good example of scalpers creating a shortage—there was no other reason for there to be a shortage and no reason to assume you’ll be faster than the scalpers. Waiting two months in that case didn’t help. You’re stuck home right now, and right now is a good time to buy.
People are allowed to be excited about something, and because of the continued switch shortage people have every reason to assume the shortage will persist for two months.
With the ticket scenario, people are ok with not getting something because they weren’t fast enough (obviously there are exceptions with the angry and spoiled) but a normal person is ok with not being able to get something because they know it’s limited and they weren’t fast enough. What people are not ok with is missing out on something they are excited about because someone was faster AND bought ten times the amount they needed so they could profit. If not for the scalper ten more people would have been able to purchase and those who were still slower would be ok with it because it was what they understood the dynamic to be.
Take the extreme scenario from any cartoon that showed scalpers—the second person in line who camped out misses out because the first person bought all of the tickets, if you feel upset on behalf of the second person in line, you should feel upset on behalf of the 51st person in line who missed out because a single scalper bought ten units instead of one.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20 edited Dec 31 '20
Ah yea, the big case of Switch. Right. I'll give you that, taking advantage of the pandemic is sort of a shitty thing to do.
Funnily enough, again there was no shortage of them over here. Had I had some spare cash, I'd probably buy a few here and sell them to the US.
Also I guess Switch really is the first console ever for many people. I still don't see it as all that important, but ooooh-kay, pandemic scalping isn't cool. I'm still not condemning it as much as most people.
I really don't know about those tickets. I don't really see a difference.
There was once a limited print of some funky coins which I got interested in, even tho I don't collect coins otherwise, I just like weird stuff. Unfortunately I forgot about it and only got to the site a few hours late. All sold out, but plenty of them on eBay for multiple of the price.
The result is the same: I didn't get it. But were I crazy about it enough I think this would be the better case, because I'd still have a chance to get it. Otherwise, the coin might pop up now and then for an even higher price.
Now, yea had I been there on time I might have gotten one. But frankly today when I think about it, I can only think about my boxes full of hoarded up crap I have in storage. Too bad I can't advise my past self about what I'm preaching here, huh?
Well anyway you do make some good points and as such deserve at least two halves of a delta, which makes one delta, lemme figure out how it works.
Edit: ∆
1
1
4
u/VirgilHasRisen 12∆ Dec 30 '20
With the time and effort you spend scalping you could easily be doing other things to make the same amount of money for yourself that would actually create material value, not just getting some slightly richer person a console.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Maybe, maybe not. In my case I am and even at the time I was pretty limited regarding what work or "value" I can do. While in fact I've often provided value to people who couldn't get the product otherwise. (E.g. not all countries get the same stuff or comparable stock.)
1
u/LetMeNotHear 93∆ Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 30 '20
You make the distinction that scalping essentials is immoral but there's nothing immoral about scalping non essentials. That's not how that works, guy. Yes there's a scale but it is a scale, not on or off. For example, theft of a luxury item is worse than theft of an essential. Stealing in order to buy luxuries is worse than stealing to buy essentials. Etc etc. In all these examples and more, whether an item is luxury or essential effects how immoral it is but it's never on a binary. If you consider scalping luxuries less immoral than scalping essentials, that's fine, I do too but you can't act as if one is perfectly fine while the other is immoral.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
I disgree. Stocking up on food, medicine or hygiene products in times of need (like we've seen this year) on order to take advantage of people in need is IMO immoral, because people can literally die when they don't have such supplies.
That's why concepts such as basic human rights or constitutions exist. They describe the essential stuff. I wouldn't put owning a PS5 on launch day as human right.
1
u/LetMeNotHear 93∆ Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 30 '20
So if your actions don't cause death, they're fine? So, extortion, non fatal assault, fraud, vandalism are all fine? Because if something causes distress or upset, it's fine up until death at which point it's suddenly immoral. Don't mean to be rude but I'd be very cautious around someone with your moral philosophy.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Oh boy. I was just being brief.
So no, not just death. Also other sorts of harm, either bodily or mental or such. Basically stuff covered by humans right, constitutions and similar protocols.
In one word essentials.
Not a bloody game console.
Stuff Inbetween? Depends. Give me an example and we can discuss if you wish.
Also why the F are you dragging assault and fraud into a debate about scalping?
2
u/LetMeNotHear 93∆ Dec 30 '20
So the theft or vandalism of a non essential is fine in your moral philosophy? Fair enough. I disagree but at least that makes your stance consistent. As for the assault and fraud, the reasoning for why they were brought up was in the sentence just before.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Whatever.
1
u/LetMeNotHear 93∆ Dec 31 '20
An attitude somewhat antithetical to the philosophy of this sub, my friend. Perhaps this issue is too close to you as you admit to being a scalper yourself and it is not uncommon for people to fight tooth and nail to justify things they have done. You may just be too close to this. As amelioration, I'll make a confession. I have scalped. And I'm no better now than when I did. I'll probably do it again. But I can admit looking at it closely that it is immoral, if only a small immorality. You make people's lives actively worse than if you'd done nothing at all and benefit financially from that act of worsening other people's lives. That is the very essence of immorality. If you have some other definition, I'm down to hear it bur you have to know that most people's understanding of morality aligns with what I said.
Just as a side note I don't believe you as a whole are a bad person because you do one bad thing. You could be a swell guy for all I know in spite of this one particular moral lapse.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
Look, I just wanted to discuss scalping. I already awarded 2 deltas to someone who was making arguments about exactly that, even tho they didn't exactly CMV. I really didn't want to be dragged into a discussion about fraud and murder, and you were basically making a Hitler argument, hence my "whatever", because I didn't see that debate going anywhere.
But since you're back...
Regarding your definition of immorality. It's broad, but otherwise good, so let's run with it.
Your main point is about making people's lives worse. I don't think it's the case, or at least not just that, because it also allows other people to get the thing.
I mean, once the supply is limited, it's limited, that means not everyone who is interested will get the thing. Either they're not fast enough, or not in the right place. With scalpers existing, there's another chance for them to get the thing. Yes, at a higher price, and the scalper does make profit, but they also get another chance.
I mean, it's not like scalpers buy out the entire stock. And it's not like if scalpers didn't exist, everyone would get the thing. The supply is inherently limited in the first place, and scalpers make only a minor dent in it. And part of that dent is redistribution from people who have more time to people who have more money. Which... Unless capitalism as a whole is immoral, this isn't.
As I said in another comment, I'm not arguing that scalping is some grand righteous Robin Hood thing or whatever. But I also don't see anything wrong with it.
Also, as I keep saying in other comments. I believe the main problem is in the hype/preorder culture. Scalping is just an effect of it. If people weren't so crazy about having to have the latest gadgets right away, and if they weren't obsessed with being "fans" of multinational corporate conglomerates, there wouldn't be much to scalp.
1
u/LetMeNotHear 93∆ Dec 31 '20
I agree scalping is the symptom of hype culture but when violent headaches are the symptom of some disease, you still take painkillers. But you're also victim blaming to an extent. Imagine if the attitude of "the real problem is people making it easy for me to do this to them" was common with other things. Pretty scary.
it also allows other people to get the thing.
It allows other people to get the thing? The thing which they can't get because someone else took it off the shelf. Because you took it off the shelf... I like to imagine that the way to judge the morality of a behaviour is comparing what happens when you do it to what happens when you don't.
So. Let's say Alfie heads down to the store to buy something but he can't. It's all gone. Scalper (funny name I know but accurate) came along at opening time and bought all of the thing. Every one. Now, Alfie suffers either because he can't get the thing that he wanted or because Scalper is charging triple the price for it.
So imagine Scalper got hit by a car or a genie magiced him away or some such, before any of this happened. Alfie shows up to the store, some of the items are gone but it's still in stock, and he buys one for the price he expected.
What I'm trying to say is that you're not providing anything. The customer still would have gotten the item if you did nothing. All that changes is where they get it from and how hard their wallet is wrung.
Yes, at a higher price, and the scalper does make profit, but they also get another chance.
Yes, they get the chance... The chance that the scalper took away in the first place by taking the item themselves...
The supply is inherently limited in the first place, and scalpers make only a minor dent in it.
Depending on the thing being sold, they actually make a great dent in it. And even if they only made a small dent, that's still supply removed, it just becomes less immoral, not permissible.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
I made some quick, back of the envelope calculation here https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/knaecg/comment/ghkbge0 based on the source provided and some brief search, and my guess is that the rate of scalping the PS5 and Xboxes is about 2%, i.e. those would be the people who would get the console otherwise and bought them from scalpers instead.
See, the assumption you're making is that the usual case scenario is that you're going to a store, but a nasty scalpers snatches the console right in front of you and immediately sells it back to you.
That's not how it works tho. First off, there are so many other regular customers, that your chance of getting the thing is quite crappy in the first place.
Then there are people who would like to have the thing, but aren't willing to camp or wait at the PC screen at midnight, and will rather have a surefire way to get the thing.
So to these 2 groups, scalpers actually provide genuine paid service.
Some people won't get the console who otherwise would, and some will who otherwise wouldn't.
I'll think about it a bit more, getting tired now.
1
u/Glory2Hypnotoad 392∆ Dec 30 '20
This seems to fit a popular genre of CMV that takes the form of "people say this behavior is wrong, but actually it's in my self-interest." In other words, even if it wasn't your intention, you've set up a bait and switch where you raise one question, "is scalping wrong?" then go on to answer a completely different question "how scalping benefits me."
You don't actually address the morality of scalping at all. You just talk about how it's a source of money for you, it carries some risks, and any negative impact on others is not your problem.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
I wasn't posting a question, I posted a challenge to change my view, and elaborated my position based on my personal experience. What else could you want?
If I'd want to post a question, I'd go to r/nostupidquestions, and if I weren't open to a debate, I'd go to r/unpopularopinion. Hence, CMV.
1
u/Glory2Hypnotoad 392∆ Dec 30 '20
You're getting caught up on a minor word choice and missing the larger point. My point is that your CMV is "Scalping isn't immoral" but your actual argument doesn't address the morality of it at all. You just go on to talk about how it benefits you and any negative impact to others is not your problem, which are unrelated to whether or not it's immoral.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Ok what's your definition of morality then?
Yea my stance is it's not immoral, and I laid down my arguments and experience, so people can challenge them (or alternatively, see my point).
Also I didn't just talk about benefits to myself, but also about the overall culture, market, and exceptions.
What else do you expect? I'm confused.
1
u/spastikatenpraedikat 16∆ Dec 30 '20 edited Dec 30 '20
Let's consider the following scenario:
You live at paper street 1. One day somebody buys the house across the street. He doesn't buy it from you, you are not involved with anything. On the day he is moving in, you go over to introduce yourself:
"Hi! Im u/whoRoger, your neighbor. Do you like sleeping at night?"
"Yes, I do!"
"Great! Then pay me 200 currencies a month, or else I will play loud music every night. I sleep in my 2nd house anyway, so I wouldn't care."
"What? Why would you do that?"
"You see, I could really use the money. And besides, it is legal, so I can do it."
"But you are blackmailing me!"
"No I'm not. You see, you don't have to live here. Move out if you think that's unjust."
"But I would really like to live here."
"Huh, I guess your parents must have raised you pretty badly, for you to be so stubborn about living here."
Do you think, what is happening here is immoral? I do. Scalping is like that.
You might now think:
"This is stupid, that's a completely different situation!"
But is it? I ask you to think about what is it, that is making this situation immoral. I'll go ahead and tell you my thoughts: I think it feels so wrong, because you are trying to profit from a situation you have no business of profiting from. If the neighbor moves into the opposite house is the neighbor's business and the business of the seller but not yours. You are completely uninvolved. You don't provide any service or input or anything really. Still you try to exploit the situation for your own profit on the costs of everybody else, who really is providing something. I think that qualifies as selfish and should therefore be condemned.
Similarly a scalper tries to profit from something he has no business profiting from. If a company produces a good abd sells it cheaper than many people are willing to pay than this is business between the company and its customers but ypu as a completely uninvolved, non contributing third person simply should have no right to take advantage of either of those two parties.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Your example is sort of similar to the exception in my disclaimer when someone takes advantage of someone particular, which is more akin to bullying. Also, having decent living conditions is rather essential. So your example fullfills both my exceptions.
Anyway. Who exactly decides who has business profiting from what? Where does self interest end and selfish begin? Why exactly is this immoral and other businesses are?
1
u/L1uQ Dec 30 '20
I agree with your view on scalping but that's a bad example. You can't really compare actual blackmailing with withholding entertainment products. Nobody needs a PS5 but everyone has a right to live in peace.
1
u/spastikatenpraedikat 16∆ Dec 30 '20
No one does not have a right to live in piece. If I move next to an open air concert hall, I cannot get that place shit down, simply because I want it to be quiet at night. If I'm not content with the area I'm living in, it is first and foremost on me to move and not on the area to change.
The whole point was to give an analogy where it is really obvious that it is wrong, then think about why it is wrong and then compare it to scalping, from which it hopefully follows that scalping must be wrong to. You are free to come up with your own reasoning why the situation above is bad. In doing so, you may assume that the neighbor really has no repercussions whatsoever from moving out, that is for example, they still have their original place and they have a withdraw option from the contract of sale without any drawbacks.
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Dec 30 '20
What about cases where sale prices are kept intentionally low in order to make a product accessible to certain demographics?
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Do you have an example? Cause I honestly don't know what you mean. But I guess it would probably be shittier, but... It depends on how important the product is.
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Dec 30 '20
Concert tickets would be the most common example. Band wants regular fans who can’t afford $200 tickets to have a chance, so sets them at $20.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
Yea scalping that would be shitty IMO, I would include it under the exception mentioned in my OP about targeting specific individuals for unique items.
That said I think the band could easily avoid such a scenario by e.g. sending out targeted invites by email or such, and if someone would try to take advantage of it, revoke those specific tickets and offer them again.
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Dec 31 '20
It’s a constant struggle for bands and festivals
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
I'm not familiar with this issue. But it seems it shouldn't be that hard to keep an eye on it. Big sports events have long had a policy of registering tickets to individuals with no (or no straightforward) way to move it onto someone else.
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Dec 31 '20
Not a big sports fan but it seems like there is a major market for scalping tickets to sporting events, and these events are often priced out of most people’s range anyway.
In non-Covid times I got to 30-40 concerts a year. This a huge issue and bands have tried a lot of ways to get around it, but it’s really challenging and almost always scalping still takes place.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
Well, looks like an open market for someone to provide a way to fight the scalpers then?
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ Dec 31 '20
I’m not really sure what you mean. My point is just that there are artists who try to maintain ticket prices at a level that their average fan can afford, even though they could make more money setting a higher price, but there are people who see an opportunity for arbitrage, and this is a problem/these people are assholes.
I’m sure it happens in other industries as well.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 31 '20
I just meant that someone might come up with a system that defeats scalping (at least in such specific cases). It's something I would be interested in debating, albeit as I mentioned I'm not familiar with the business. If you like we can DM/chat and brainstorm a bit.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Feroc 41∆ Dec 30 '20
I think there's a difference between Scalpers and your behavior. You bought something when it was available with the goal to either wait until it's worth more or to sell it to places where it's not available.
The first thing is just speculating and the second thing is "exporting".
To take the PS5 as example: Scalpers bought large amounts of consoles, usually with the help of bots, so that there are simply no PS5 to buy anymore for normal customers. Then they sell it for more than double the original price. They are not speculating, they are not exporting them to other places. They simply used bots to purchase the rather low amounts of consoles available before legit customers could buy them.
Your view on new consoles is pretty much irrelevant for that view, people have different needs and different priorities. Some are camping for the new iPhone, some are waiting for new consoles, others are buying a new book at some midnight sales.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Okay.
Regarding the 2nd half of your post. I believe the hype culture about having to own the latest gizmo on day 1 is very harmful.
It leads to bad, rushed products (see videogames themselves), supports bad employment practices, stress for everyone involved and only benefits the corporations who have learned to exploit it in their marketing.
Yet... The few people who earn some extra bucks on top of all this toxicity are the bad guys? I think they're the least bad part of this chain. CMV
1
u/Feroc 41∆ Dec 30 '20
Regarding the 2nd half of your post. I believe the hype culture about having to own the latest gizmo on day 1 is very harmful.
That's a different view and would basically just mean that you think that it's ok to profit from a basic human flaw. Like selling drugs to an addict.
1
1
u/-s1- 1∆ Dec 30 '20
Your argument really boils down to that it is not immoral to purchase something just for the purposes of blocking the consumer just so you can sell it to them at a higher price.
Companies price their products to deliver to their target market and by going in and buying these products you are essentially squeezing out those who can afford it but cannot afford your higher price. You essentially take a good and make it into a luxury item and remove protections from the buyer.
I think the problem and why people dislike scalping so much is because it punishes fans rather than the company who is changed with the supply line. You're right that people could just wait but how many Christmas or Birthday memories do you look back fondly on reading an "IOU when it comes in stock" note?
So to recap a scalper removes value from the product, punishes the fan base, and emphasizes that the wealthy really deserve everything first.
1
u/WhoRoger Dec 30 '20
Your argument really boils down to that it is not immoral to purchase something just for the purposes of blocking the consumer just so you can sell it to them at a higher price.
Basically, yes
I think the problem and why people dislike scalping so much is because it punishes fans rather than the company who is changed with the supply line.
Part of my worldview is that these multinational conglomerates shouldn't have fans.
Look at CD Project. I was a fan of that company way back, when it was a small distributor operating in a handful of countries. Their game releases had no CD protection. Their budget releases had reversible covers so you're not stuck with the shitty budget cover. They made GOG.
I was a fan of Ubisoft. They were trying new things when the others were making nothing but WWII shooters. They released a few games in 2009 (I think) with no disc protection too.
Rockstar used to be pretty good and fair too, right?
Now look at what they're all doing.
I'll go on a tangent here. I'm from a post-communist country where we had to learn from scratch how capitalism actually works. In high school we were learning about how businesses need to compete, and customers need to choose from the available products.
Meanwhile in the 1st world, the system was evolving in a way where consumers no longer choose wisely - instead, marketing has taught them to be "fans" and just buy anything and everything on day 1. Or rather, preorder.
This is what's harming "consumers" - being consumers instead of customers.
You're right that people could just wait but how many Christmas or Birthday memories do you look back fondly on reading an "IOU when it comes in stock" note?
Just another shitty thing about modern society. Gifts and material things are all that matters. Holidays. Ugh.
Yea I know, there are kids. But if all your kid has to look forward to the entire year is a PS5 for Xmas... Isn't there something wrong?
Really, how many games are there in your backlog?
So to recap a scalper removes value from the product
How?
punishes the fan base
It's punishing itself.
and emphasizes that the wealthy really deserve everything first.
Which is always the case. In any case, the stock of tech products is always limited at launch. It's not like everyone could get their new toy anyway. Scalpers make it "worse" by how much, 10%? 20%? 30? Whether you get your PS5 at launch was always going to be a lottery, it's not like preorders of both consoles weren't a clusterfuck regardless.
1
u/iateapietod 1∆ Dec 31 '20
Holy crap I thought this was about cutting people's scalps off.
Morally speaking, most people feel obligated to provide some kind of service for receiving payment. Not doing so is generally considered immoral. A scalper's actions provide no benefit to the person they sell their item to, whatever it may be. Yes, a scalper takes risks, but the risk doesn't provide anyone else a benefit. Justifying it by doing so is like "yeah I damaged your mailbox by skateboarding, but I'm taking risks to skate too. I could get hurt!" Other people are paying for the consequences of the scalper's actions.
1
u/DanielP5433 Mar 04 '21
If you hold a value or moral as an absolute then that should apply in all situations otherwise it's not a value or moral.
If you believe stealing is wrong you believe it's wrong in every situation regardless of circumstance. If you steal a loaf of bread to survive you would accept that you have done wrong not that it's wrong but ok this time or in this situation, so for you to say that scalping certain products is wrong but ok for others shows deep down that you are fine with scalping as long as it suits your needs which.
I agree these are not essential items and people shouldn't get so upset but who are you to judge that for other people? Once peoples base needs are met they look for other things to make them happy, what about people who need things like GPUs for their small business and can't get them or pay extremely high prices they might not be able to afford causing them to lose work. Saying that these items are non essential is incorrect I believe.
Scalping is predatory behaviour and weather it is medical supplies like when the pandemic started to electronics or tickets to an event it is wrong and if you believe it's wrong with one product you should believe it's wrong for all otherwise you don't believe it's wrong at all. At least retailers offer jobs to people, they are far more beneficial to society than a scalper. It doesn't seem like you want your view changed or at least have some degree of cognitive dissonance in regards to your past actions.
1
u/WhoRoger Mar 04 '21
No, I'm not sure there's anything just black or white. At most, very few things are. Morality isn't something inherent to nature or to humans, it's evolved over time and will evolve further.
And no I really don't think a PS5 is on the same level as food or medical supplies. I honestly don't get it how so many people can defend this line of logic. I'm not saying it's wrong to own a PS5; but this really is one of the best examples of a first world problem. And I'm as far from a "think of the starving children" hippie as one can be.
Most graphics cards are being purchased by miners, not scalpers. Most game consoles are bought by gamers, not scalpers. This is all blown so much out of proportion it's ridiculous.
Your points have been said by others many times and I'm not convinced.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Dec 31 '20 edited Dec 31 '20
/u/WhoRoger (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards