Examining the effectiveness of anti-scalping laws in a United States market
The secondary ticket market has existed for decades. Historically, this industry has been dominated by street scalpers located outside of venues and by local and regional ticket brokers. These individuals often took advantage of uninformed consumers and charged extremely high prices or sold fraudulent or misrepresented tickets. Subsequently, state governments created laws protecting consumers from such behavior. More recently, however, this industry has grown as the Internet has facilitated transactions in a safe and secure environment which has led to the increased legitimacy of the industry. Despite this growth in size and sophistication, existing anti-scalping laws remain. Given the significantly altered form of the industry, it is important to examine the appropriateness of these laws and their effect on current industry practices. The findings of the current study suggest that these laws do little to accomplish what they were originally set out to do: protect consumers. Instead, they serve as minor inconveniences for those engaging in ticket resale and major frustrations for those attempting to enforce the laws as written.
Volume (Year): 14 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/716936/bibliographic|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Drayer, Joris & Martin, Nathan T., 2010. "Establishing legitimacy in the secondary ticket market: A case study of an NFL market," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 39-49, February.
- repec:cto:journl:v:21:y:2002:i:3:p:443-461 is not listed on IDEAS
- Craig Depken, 2007. "Another look at anti-scalping laws: Theory and evidence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 55-77, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:spomar:v:14:y:2011:i:3:p:226-236. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.