you used to be able to go the box office and skip the fees
This is probably the biggest sign that the entire price scheme is distorted beyond all reality.
It is now customary to have an $8-$15 "processing fee" when all the processing is done by a smaller team of humans managing an automated system, whereas 40 we paid zero dollars in "processing fees" when there was actual processing being done by 20,000 actual human beings across the country who each got paid to sit at a desk all day and hand you tangible paper tickets.
Now that I think about it that way, on its current trajectory the future of AI is to turn every industry into Ticketmaster/LiveNation. Ticketmaster/LiveNation is the GOAT of profit strategy. Every young business hopes someday they grow up to be like Ticketmaster/LiveNation.
If the ticket is actually worth $1000, why wouldn't the venue sell it for that amount themselves?
That's a great question, one which should have good answers before enacting legislation. I can suggest a few.
First, reputation. Artists don't want to be seen as profit hungry bandits. If Beyonce sold seats at $1,000 for nosebleed seats, a lot of her fans would be alienated. She has plausible deniability if she retails them for a mere $500.
Second, risk. The venue doesn't want seats to go empty. If they underprice tickets, they guarantee themselves a predictable amount of income.
Third, buzz. If tickets originally sold for $500 and now are going for $1,000, it must be a good show, right?
Fourth, who says the venue doesn't sell them for $1,000? I bought some tickets over the last year and Ticketmaster was happy to let me resell them on their site, for a cut of the action, of course. They make a ton of money if tickets change hands many times so it's somewhat in their interest to let party A buy the ticket for $100 then resell it for $1,000.
I guarantee you lots of smart people have run the numbers and know ticket pricing strategies which incorporate all these effects. I further guarantee they've thought about it a lot more than you and I combined.
Good points. They seem to run well with my just-came-up-with-it proposal for an auto-depreciating ticket market: https://news.slashdot.org/comm...
But especially to your second point, perhaps the best outcome of a price-decay system is for the venues. Because one of the problems with the current bot-scalping industry is that sometimes events "sell out" in terms of tickets, but actual attendance is below capacity. That means we have both inefficient allocation of resources and lost revenue from the alcohol/concessions for the venue (which is sometimes shared with the artist/promoter on a percentage) and the artist merch table.
Under a price-decay system, you ought to see higher attendance across all events because of all the people who aren't superfans, but would on a last-minute whim think, "Sure I'll be in the nosebleeds, but for $25 each I can bring a couple friends for fun so we can get drunk and sing along with those two radio hits we recognize, and still have money left for a cool tshirt to show off that We Were There".
That makes the total pie bigger for all participants - artists, venue, promoter, fans - EXCEPT the scalpers. It dramatically raises their risk of getting stuck with un-resold tickets because they know they'll be competing with lower prices as we get closer to the event. And the smaller profit margin of those last-minute tickets is not worth the risk of trying to bot-purchase in bulk since you don't have as much time to turn around and resell them. Thus they're incentivized to be more downward-elastic with pricing.
Having a broader range of prices encourages full participation. It's like restaurant wine menus. If you only have your $7/glass house white and then a jump to $25/glass prestige wine, you'll make less revenue. Smart restaurateurs know that diners will upsell themselves if you give them a gradient. Your high dollar foodies are not going to stoop to the cheap glass because there's no psychological cachet to drinking it, thus it is literally worth zero dollars to them. Your low dollar folks are not going to jump that high differential even for a splurge, but if you give them a spectrum they WILL reason themselves from the $7 to the $10 to the $14 glass "as a special treat". You're always gonna sell more of your 2nd and 3rd cheapest wine than your luxury OR your house vintages.
Things are not as simple as they seems at first. - Edward Thorp