PDA

View Full Version : Geldof blasts 'sick' eBay sales



Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 15:34
Bob Geldof has branded the sale of Live 8 tickets on the internet auction site eBay "sick profiteering".

The Live 8 organiser called on the website to ban sales of the tickets for the London show, which were won through a text competition.

Scores of pairs of tickets have already been put up on the site with some pairs being offered for £1,000.

Bands including Coldplay, U2 and Pink Floyd will play at the Hyde Park show on 2 July.
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp
Geldof demanded the immediate removal of tickets being sold on the site.

He said: "I am sick with this. It is a disgrace. It is completely against the interests of the poor. It is filthy money made on the back of the poorest people on the planet. Stick it where it belongs".

Geldof blasts 'sick' eBay sales (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/4090774.stm)

How does reselling your Live 8 ticket disadvantage anybody? St Bob's charity still gets the same amount of do$h and the original owner has made some money for themselves, on which they will of course pay tax ( ;) ), a proportion of which will end up in the UK's aid budget. Does someone need to explain to St Bob that this is in fact a good thing?

AtW
14th June 2005, 15:38
I like Geldof for usage of strong words to express his feelings: it makes refreshing reading and he is not shy to repeat F-word i public.

As for resale on ebay then its really Geldof's fault -- they should have set market prices for their tickets in the first place, with first 1000 tickets auctioned on that ebay, and only when all rich fools who want to buy ticket for extortionate prices disapper, remaining tickets go to lottery.

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 15:42
Of course, what St Bob is really saying is that we should all feel guilty at having or making money when there are poor people in the world. For myself, I salute his personal courage when it comes to looking at his own bank statement every month. It must take extraordinary force of character to have as much money as he has and not to have given it all away to charity.

WageSlave1
14th June 2005, 15:48
Lucifer, what a cynic you are. Bob is a living saint, a true martyr to the poor and needy. He had it all; worldwide fame, talent and a beautiful woman. But he gave it all up to concentrate on charity.

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 15:50
Slave, stop, stop, you're making me cry. I take it all back. :lol

NumptyCorner
14th June 2005, 15:52
Forget BG and his shite concert these chuntes who use ebay to make money reselling tickets should be shot. Was a time when you could get a festival ticket, or a ticket to see a band without having to compete with every Tom Dick and Harriot out to make a quick buck. Seems every chav is a ticket agent these days.>:

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 15:55
these chuntes who use ebay to make money reselling tickets should be shot
Blimey, another "right on, comrade" type. That's two in one afternoon. Don't worry, Numpty, anyone who tries to make money out of a commodity in high demand but short supply will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes. ;)

http://www.lindsayfincher.com/news/soviet_poster_didyouvolunteer.jpg

ZitMeister
14th June 2005, 15:59
He'll probably have to sell his own tickets on e-bay to raise money as the other members of the Boomtown Rats are taking him to court. They claim he owes them unpaid royalties that could run into millions of pounds.

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 16:01
They claim he owes them unpaid royalties that could run into millions of pounds
And I bet you he tells them that they'd be taking the food out of orphans' mouths if they took him to court. You can feel those heartstrings tugging already.

NumptyCorner
14th June 2005, 16:03
Blimey, another "right on, comrade" type. That's two in one afternoon. Don't worry, Numpty, anyone who tries to make money out of a commodity in high demand but short supply will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes

Music is for music fans, chunts that have no interest in the music shouldn't be buying the tickets. At least Glastonbury have latched onto these chancers and only issue named tickets

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 16:08
Music is for music fans, chunts that have no interest in the music shouldn't be buying the tickets. At least Glastonbury have latched onto these chancers and only issue named tickets
Numpty, what you mean is you had to pay a price above cover for a ticket sometime and you didn't like it. In a free market, any commodity will find its true value. Anything else (like named tickets) is in effect rigging the market.

For example, you might say this is ridiculous: "Property is for house fans, chunts that have no interest in the place as a home shouldn't be buying the property. At least Nationwide have latched onto these chancers and only issue mortgages to people who want to live in the house themselves" but it is, in effect, the same thing.

TonyEnglish
14th June 2005, 16:09
But surely this is a symptom of him (geldof) being naive. You offer somebody the chance of 2 tickets to a show at a cost of £1.50 a pair. However the market worth of these tickets is massively more than this. Why should somebody be critisised for selling them. The old adage that everybody has their price comes into play. So if you were offered £1k, 10K or 100k would you still not sell. I know I would.

widgetdance
14th June 2005, 16:16
As the tickets have not yet been issued, why doesnt Sir Bob have each one issued to the name and address of each winner. ID to be produced at event.
Problem solved.

It is his own fault if he didnt see this coming.

NumptyCorner
14th June 2005, 16:17
Numpty, what you mean is you had to pay a price above cover for a ticket sometime and you didn't like it. In a free market, any commodity will find its true value. Anything else (like named tickets) is in effect rigging the market.


I don't buy your arguement, the Bands want to sell the tickets to the fans, the fans want to buy the tickets, thanks to the internet some people who don't like music see an opportunity to make money at the expense of the fans. Remember the tickets already have a cut for the promoter, the venue and the agency that sells them. Alot of bands don't want their fans ripped off, see Pearl Jam who buycotted ticketmaster, Michael Evas who has changed the glasto ticjet system to fook up the touts etc.

I do not get stung, because i'd rather not go that give money to some grubby little sh1t, more than I would one outside the venue. Tickets are/were always available from touts for those who wanted tickets desperately enough. Now it's a race against time with these feckwits. Anyway the bands/festivals are latching on so it won't be happening too much longer.

MarillionFan
14th June 2005, 16:23
Great. So ffffing what. So someone wants to sell their tickets and someone wants to buy them.

Read some namby pamby sh1t on Ebay from people with comments like '50000 children died man and you're making money off it'

What toss! :rolleyes

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 17:03
I don't buy your arguement
Numpty, the argument is sound. You are advocating for a variety of reasons rigging the market, in effect fixing the value of the commodity at below its market worth. Many people agree that is a sound approach. Most of them ran the economic bureaux of communist countries.

I hear what you're saying, but as a filthy capitalist scum who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes, I cannot condone it.

TonyEnglish
14th June 2005, 17:11
People will always buy and sell things like this because their value to one person is greater than it is to another. The moment this was announced, my first thought was that there would be loads of tickets on EBay. It was obvious really. Geldof may think he is being moral about this but I would say it shows up his stupidity more than anything else. Why didn't he sell the tickets for a proper price and the proceeds could actually do some good. Instead he practically gives them away leading to 100% pure profit.

NumptyCorner
14th June 2005, 17:13
Numpty, the argument is sound. You are advocating for a variety of reasons rigging the market, in effect fixing the value of the commodity at below its market worth. Many people agree that is a sound approach. Most of them ran the economic bureaux of communist countries.

I hear what you're saying, but as a filthy capitalist scum who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes, I cannot condone it.

Come on, not everything in life should be decided by economics we aren't talking about bread, there was a time you could buy your tickets anytime within the first month, now they can sell out in a day and be on ebay in a few hours this is not a normal market situation. The band et al have decided a price for their product which the fans accept, but now supply is being artificially restricted there is no need whatsoever for these middlemen.

These people (I'm not talking about geldof and africa that's far too emotive) are scum. They are the same people who auction themselves as 'friends' they have no understanding of common decency.

Your pro-arguement could quite easily be applied to recruitment consultants who do actually add some value for their sometimes large cut. The next person who complains about their agent stuffing them I'll point them in your direction and you can explain the laws of supply and demand to them and how it's all perfectly reasonable.

BTW I am as much of a communist as you are evidently a music fan.

Lucifer Box
14th June 2005, 17:33
Just relax, comrade, it's all a bit of fun. ;)

As it happens, yes, the same market forces should apply to the client-agent-contractor chain. Unless you are advocating fixing the price of the resource (contractors) when demand exceeds supply?

http://www.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/4/4e/Soviet_coat_of_arms.jpg

zeitghost
15th June 2005, 08:47
Well, dear old St. Bob was in full on rant mode on PM on R4 yesterday.

What a twat.

TonyEnglish
15th June 2005, 09:14
Well it looks like Saint Bob got his way in the end.

I can't see how selling a ticket won in this texting raffle was any different to selling any other prize won in a raffle. If I had won a car in a charity sponsord raffle from a £1 ticket, would I get critisism if I sold it for its market value?

dundeegeorge
15th June 2005, 09:36
Now of course all the bedbugs can come out and howl at the top of their voices whenever anything is auctioned, there's always some looney who thinks it immoral to sell something.
They should have told BG to FOAD.

TreeHugger
15th June 2005, 20:12
what annoys st bob is that he didn't think about having some system where returned tickets could be resold on ebay thus making loads of wonga for the charity.

what are people actually meant to do with tickets that they don't want anymore? give them to the homeless?

Lucifer Box
16th June 2005, 08:06
what are people actually meant to do with tickets that they don't want anymore? give them to the homeless?
Why not send them to Africa? They could make them into compost or something.

TonyEnglish
16th June 2005, 08:47
Why didn't he stick them all on ebay in the first place? They could have made a mint. Istead to dopey fecker gives them away for next to nothing and wonders why people are then selling them on for their true market worth.

zeitghost
16th June 2005, 08:52
Wonder if he's had a bath yet this year... wouldn't want to waste all those valuable skin oils.

Bundaberg Bum
18th June 2005, 05:27
How many tickets will it take to pay for this?

News24.com (SA), June 17

Blantyre—Opposition and civic groups are in uproar in the poor southern African nation of Malawi over state plans to buy a $545 000 limousine for President Bingu wa Mutharika while more than one million people face starvation.

“The decision has come at a wrong time when the country is facing serious food shortages,” Nancy Tembo, an opposition lawmaker of the Malawi Congress Party (MCP), was quoted as saying by state television on Thursday.

Malawi, which consumes two million tons of the national staple maize annually, plans to spend $50m to import 300 000 tons to avert famine following drought this year that reduced crop yields by 24%.

Finance minister Goodall Gondwe defended the move to acquire a top-of the-range Maybach 62 made by Mercedes-Benz, saying it “was necessary to buy the vehicle because of its safety features”.

Also speaking on television on Thursday, he said the country would not feel the effects as the payments would “be spread over a period of time”.

Civic groups joined opposition lawmakers in condemning the move.

“It’s something we never expected from the president. That sort of money could buy 45 000 bags of maize,” said Collins Magalasi from the watchdog Malawi Economic Justice Network.

Rafif Hajat, who heads a policy intervention institute, said with 1.3 million people facing starvation, and “excluded from debt relief, we cannot afford such luxury”.

Broken promises of a stringent budget

Mutharika, who took over from his former mentor Bakili Muluzi last year, had pledged to trim state spending, eschew luxuries and fight graft when he came to power.

Muluzi, who ruled for a decade, had drawn trenchant criticism for buying 39 new Mercedes Benz cars for his ministers three years ago at a cost of $2.5m.

About 60% of Malawi’s 11 million people live below the poverty threshold of less than $1 a day in the former British colony, which is also badly hit by the Aids pandemic.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other donors have suspended more than $75m in aid over concerns about overspending during Muluzi’s 10-year tenure.

Another Southern African fan of the Maybach, which has a 550-horsepower engine and claims to be the ultimate in refinement, is the continent’s last absolute monarch, King Mswati III of Swaziland.

In a country which also has one of the world’s highest HIV/Aids infection rates and where more than 65% of the 1.2 million inhabitants live below the poverty line, Mswati has a Maybach for himself and a new fleet of Mercedes for his dozen wives.

(Posted on June 17, 2005)