Freeman

ARTICLE

The Boston Red Sox and Bad Baseball Economics

No way to make cheap tickets more available.

FEBRUARY 01, 2012 by AARON GORDON

The Boston Red Sox are following our politicians’ lead, enacting paternalistic market restrictions that defy basic economic principles. The team announced a new Digital Ticket Initiative, which will require upper-bleacher patrons to swipe at the gate the credit card they used to purchase the tickets, effectively killing the secondary ticket market for those seats. The stated goal of this measure is to “gradually eliminate those purchasing these specific tickets solely for the purpose of resale, and instead get these tickets into the hands of fans and families all over New England.”

Unlike the government, of course, the Red Sox organization is private and has every right to enact this measure. But, that doesn’t mean we should ignore the bad economics in action, especially since it contradicts the exact goal the organization is apparently pursuing.  By restricting the market for these seats in an attempt to make them cheaper, the Red Sox are only going to make them more expensive for most fans and increase the power of incumbent season ticket holders.

If you’re a Red Sox fan without season tickets, you had two choices: Buy a ticket the day of release (January 28) or purchase a ticket on StubHub. Both options got worse this year thanks to the new policy. Since buying the day of release was the only way to purchase $12 upper-bleacher seats, more people presumably lined up on January 28, so the odds of getting a cheap ticket were reduced.

Let’s say the tickets were sold out, and you go to StubHub to buy a ticket. The prices on StubHub will be higher, since the supply of tickets that can be resold has also been reduced. In one act the Red Sox have made it harder to buy the cheapest tickets and made the tickets available for resale more expensive. Neither of these measures helps the average fan.

Likewise, season ticket holders will now have more control over ticket distribution. In Fenway Park only a small portion of tickets are released for individual game sales. Under the model the Red Sox are promoting, these season-ticket holders will act as gatekeepers for ticket distribution. They are more likely to allocate them to close relatives or friends than individual-game ticket holders are. This will create a small group of elites with lots of tickets and make it harder for those tickets to be distributed more evenly.

In effect the Red Sox are promoting a form of a sports-ticket aristocracy. They’re nominating an elite class that gets to distribute a scarce resource by their own whims and desires in the name of public welfare. Sound vaguely familiar?

Occupy Fenway Park.

comments powered by Disqus

CURRENT ISSUE

May 2013

From natural systems to human systems, we start to notice patterns in nature that are products of good flow. Adrian Bejan discusses this crucial insight--and how it makes freedom even more needful--in this month's interview. Zachary Caceres looks at what emergence can tell us about the universe, the market, the heart, and the sacred; Mike Reid recounts the tragedies produced when the State tries to impose its order on people who have already developed their own; Gary Galles channels Leonard Read: the State is a clenched fist, he says, so it cannot create; Brad Taylor says democracy might just be another imposed order in some situations; Karl Borden wonders whether an individual's right to be left alone can be part of the order of things; and much, much more.Download Free PDF

PAST ISSUES

SUBSCRIBE

RENEW YOUR SUBSCRIPTION

THE ARENA

The Arena is a monthly debate feature designed to help readers explore issues of concern to classical liberals/libertarians.

This month, the issue is Gay Marriage. The proposition is: Gay Marriage Expands Liberty. Richard Lorenc will be arguing for the proposition. Steve Esposito will be arguing against the proposition.

img E-mail Subscription

VIEW PRIVACY POLICY