That "Economics" section REEKS of a greasy, weaselly attempt to JUSTIFY scalping. Anyone else getting that? I'm ready to cut it. --M Sipher 17:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's... I don't think we need that section.--RosicrucianTalk 17:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to ditch it. I'm still pissed off about The Dark Knight Movie Masters being scalped up the arse, and I don't need anybody to justify it to me. --FFN 05:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Eh. I found it vaguely valid, in a "here is WHY scalpers do what they do" way. I think jazzed up with some quality TF Wiki Brand Sarcasm(tm), it's a viable part of the article. Just saying "scalpers are greedy shitheels" is RIGHT, but it doesn't really touch on the rationale beyond "those guys are shitheads." After all, if people weren't willing to pay five times retail to get something nownownownownowNOWNOWNOW, the scalpers would be unemployed. -hx 17:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- I thought the section itself was okay- but incomplete. Like it has 2 parts of a 3 part equation. It explains the economic model in operation (which is entirely valid,) but doesn't deconstruct it again to show the negative results of aggressive scalping. -Derik 21:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'd buy that. For four times MSRP on eBay with $20 shipping. -hx 23:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- I thought the section itself was okay- but incomplete. Like it has 2 parts of a 3 part equation. It explains the economic model in operation (which is entirely valid,) but doesn't deconstruct it again to show the negative results of aggressive scalping. -Derik 21:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)