So then how do you distribute tickets, other than having a mad, random rush to sell them in the first few seconds they are on sale?

Registries of interest. Membership sales and similar schemes. Lotteries. Pre-sales. Phased sales. You know, any of the many ways that are already used.

There isn't a perfect solution where everyone who wants to go to an event where demand exceeds capacity can go. But pricing according to demand is probably, culturally speaking, just about the worst solution you could come up with.

Sellers could cut them out by raising their prices so that demand matches supply.

And wouldn't that be great? Instead of the venue, artists, promoters, ticketing agencies, etc., all covering their costs and making a healthy profit, they could... make a bigger profit. Woohoo!

Of course, for the millions of people attending events, they'd be spending a lot more than they were, or able to attend fewer events, especially if they want to sit in anything remotely resembling a good seat. And front row seats would only be affordable by billionaires and the five richest kings of Europe. But hey, people who were already making a healthy profit would make even more! Hurrah!

Or, maybe, just maybe, in the interests of culture, fixed price ticketing is actually a good thing...

No, they don't. Lossy rips are simply not bit-for-bit identical, and you're being completely disingenuous (no shock, based on the remainder of your reply) if you claim that they are. We're not talking FLAC here.

No. Lossy rips may not be bit-for-bit identical, and if they're encoded differently they certainly won't be. But if they're ripped with decent software/hardware (so you get identical wavs) and encoded with the same software and the same settings they will be identical. I have identical mp3s right here (identical md5sums) that were ripped at different times on different PCs but encoded with the same software and settings.

I'm not really clear on why you think lossy rips would be 'simply not bit-for-bit identical'. If you take an identical source and apply an algorithm to it, unless there's some random or other variable element to the algorithm, you're going to get the same result every time. The only variation here is going to come from errors reading the source CD (resulting in different wavs) and the use of different encoders. That's still a lot of potentially identical MP3s though.

I hadn't seen the page with that image ( http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/03/crunchpad-the-launch-prototype/ ).

Prototype C is the actual model they're using for demos, but you're right, that 'near-final industrial design' does appear to have a higher res. 1680x1050 at a guess which would fit with your estimates as well.

Getting a screen of that resolution on something like this isn't outside the realms of probability. But if they can do that within a $300 price range, that'd be impressive. I'd certainly consider getting one with that resolution.

The thing about the Nokia is, it only has a 800x480 resolution (I believe - correct me if I'm wrong). That's fine for some purposes, but if I'm reading a lengthy document, or trying to look at a large detailed image* I find that 800x480 is a low enough resolution to be irritating. That's what's put me off getting one.

This device looks like it has a 12" screen with a 1280x800 resolution (might be a bit less, I'm just estimating), so it has the potential to be more appropriate for some kinds of usage. Depends what you're looking for really.

*Like comic book pages. What were you thinking?

Judging by prototype C, it looks like a 1280x800 display to me.

Whether the final product will have that resolution I don't know, but given that it's a 12" screen, I'd say it needs it.

OK, obviously I was being a bit too cynical with my last comment then. :-) I appreciate the clarification.

Then the $100 buyer need not wait in line all night and sleep in the rain to get a ticket

Personally, I avoid waiting in line all night and sleeping in the rain by buying from one of those ticket sites they have on this new-fangled internet thing you've probably heard so much about. There's also often the option of using those devices that let you talk to people from distant locations, what're they called... oh yes. Phones.

I can't remember the last event I went to that required me to queue and buy tickets from an actual box office.

If you want to buy the domain make an offer, but a fair one or you will be added to ignore list after the first message. We get loads of offers which are too low by two-three orders of magnitude and reading all off them is not really an option.

Riiiiight... if you really wanted 'fair offers', wouldn't it be more productive to give some actual indication of what you think a fair offer is? It's all well and good to say "it's based on this, this, and this" and "we get offers that are two-three orders of magnitude out", but that's not saying much really without any kind of starting point (are people offering you one instead of a 1000 dollars/euros/whatevers or what?). If you can't/won't give an actual example of a fair offer, or even an indication of the ranges a fair offer might fall into, how can you expect others to?

You gave examples of three domains, "ghdn.com, geen.com, geek.com", what would you regard as fair offers - ballpark figures - on those for example?

Having asked that, I reckon you're trying for more of a generic "There's loads of demand, honest! Offer me loads of money or you won't get it! Muahahahaha!" approach here, rather than an actually helpful and informative approach, so I'm not really expecting an answer.