Scenario: you basically won the Ticketmaster lottery and have tickets to one of your all-time favorite performers. You’ve seen the act before, but this is a new and intriguing version. You have the cheapest tickets, but it’s a small venue so you’re very close no matter what. You’re offered thousands of dollars for these cheap tickets.
Would you sell, or go to the concert?
Academic question–not looking for advice; just interested in perspectives.
I would go.
Bruce? 
Depends on how much of a difference that extra cash would mean to you. Depends on the likelihood of seeing them again in the future. Given where I am now, I’d probably go. (assuming it was an act I truly, truly enjoyed instead of the one I’m thinking prompted this question who I could give or take). In other points in my life, I’d probably sell.
I would compare the NPV of selling with that of going. Will have to do market research for that. 
Yeah. I wrote it for people to assume the act that mattered to THEM.
Of course it’s Bruce tickets. I didn’t enter and I didn’t get them, but someone close to me did. We know what we’re doing, but I honestly can understand different viewpoints. And honestly astonished at the prices being bandied around on Stubhub.
Sell.
I guess it’s similar to what Hamilton ticket holders have faced as well.
If I’d get more out of using the money for something else I needed (home repair)or could enjoy more (like a trip) than seeing an act I’d already seen, I’d be likely to sell.
Sell, sell sell. No concert is worth thousands of dollars.
Agree with Tatin. Sell. Especially if it’s Bruce (ugh). Nobody is worth that kind of money, unless you’re extremely wealthy, or obsessed. You might be standing next to someone smoking something obnoxious, yelling loudly, or being annoying, anyways. I’d sell as fast as I could.
^Agreed. But if you never had the thousands in the first place, is that the same as spending them on it?
^Agreed. But if you never had the thousands in the first place, is that the same as spending them on it?"
Go back to the lottery analogy. Would you give a winning ticket to someone? Only cost a dollar at the start.
It boils down to the risk-benefit ratio–how upset would you be if you don’t go and it’s super great?
Maybe not exactly, cousin Garland, however, perhaps it’s even better. It would be like making all that money tax free. 
Depends on my situation at the time.
Would I have the opportunity/resources to see the act again soon? Then I might sell.
Do I need the money for something pressing? Then I’d likely sell.
Would I be going with someone else that I would be creating a memory with? Spouse? Child? Dear Friend?
Then I’d likely go. The future is not guaranteed - make those memories.
If it was a concert I was dying to see again, a musician I loved, I’d go. I wouldn’t be one of the fools paying thousands of dollars to go, but if I had the tickets at ticketmaster price, I’d go. If I didnt really care all that much one way or the other, and the thousands of dollars were needed and could be put to very good use. I’d sell and not look back.
" But if you never had the thousands in the first place, is that the same as spending them on it?"
Economics 101. Now you do. You have an asset worth what ever someone is willing to pay for it that expires during the date and time of the show. It’s opportunity cost in a way - by choosing to go to the concert, you are out $XXXX - face value of ticket, the profit you could make on that asset by selling it.
Looks to be around $1,000 currently give or take a little based on cheapest tickets on stubhub and face value of ticket for this real life example.
Like dos said–you have a ticket that has now gained a known value (with expiration date).
You either take the profit gained or in essence you are paying the new price.
The difference to you is whether the money (transferable to a future experience) or THIS experience is more valuable.
yeah, we’re seeing about 1500 a piece for our 75 dollar tickets.
But throwing out there: we only have them because we intended to go. So if we were the sellling types, we wouldn’t have them in the first place.
Sort of feel like it’s a principle: like the world is a better place if people don’t automatically do what’s just best for them.
There are other, non-monetary gains, to consider.
(I’m devil’s advocating the side we plan to take, since most people are leaning the other way here. I get your all’s thinking, but at the same time, I am most persuaded by @doschicos “Economics 101” comment, because that is definitely what I do not want to let dictate my life. At the same time, I will honestly say that at some price, I could change my mind. But again, the tickets aren’t really mine anyhoo.)
I am mulling this over. It seems to me at any point in my life I could have afforded the $75 tickets, I would not have felt the need to sell them for $1500.
When we have tickets we can’t use, we give them away. However, we have never given away tickets going for $1500. At least as far as I know. Locally, if an event is sold out, we leave our extra ticket at the box office and ask they give them to a student.
“But throwing out there: we only have them because we intended to go. So if we were the selling types, we wouldn’t have them in the first place.”
Well, some would as they make money buying and selling tickets like this, hence the very robust secondary market on stubhub, Ticketmaster, scalpers, etc.
“There are other, non-monetary gains, to consider.”
There is a benefit you value above the face value of the tickets that has both meaning and economic value to you. It will vary from person to person depending how much you value the extra cash and how much you value a night with The Boss. At some price you would sell, but for you it might not be the current market price. Gotta love a free market system.
BTW, I find it so odd that scalping has become a legitimate, online, legal business now through online platforms. I also wonder if artists ever feel ripped off by not selling their tickets at higher prices in the first place. Of course they’d probably face some fan backlash and bad press if it was deemed they charged “too much”. Maybe they should just auction a bunch and give a certain percentage to their charities of choice instead of middle men. :-??