Tickets To The NFL's Games The Super Bowl Are Sold By The Le

Tickets To The Nfls Games The Super Bowl Are Sold By The League At

Tickets to the NFL's games, the Super Bowl, are sold by the League at a below-market-clearing price. This policy produces a shortage. To allocate the relatively scarce tickets, the NFL typically employs a nonprice rationing scheme. For example, during a recent season, the League allowed all interested buyers to submit an application for up to two Super Bowl tickets. The NFL then conducted a lottery to determine which of the submitted applications would be honored. Explain why the nonprice rationing scheme employed by the NFL results in an inefficient distribution of goods. Can the NFL's insistence that the state in which the Super Bowl is played prohibit ticket scalping be justified on efficiency or equity grounds? Explain.

Paper For Above instruction

The process by which tickets to high-demand events such as the Super Bowl are allocated significantly impacts both economic efficiency and notions of fairness. The NFL’s choice to distribute tickets via a lottery, rather than allowing market-based pricing, exemplifies the challenges and controversies surrounding nonprice rationing mechanisms. This essay investigates why the NFL’s lottery approach leads to an inefficient allocation of tickets and evaluates whether prohibiting ticket scalping aligns with efficiency or equity.

Inefficiency of the NFL’s Nonprice Rationing Scheme

The primary reason the NFL’s lottery system results in inefficiency is its failure to allocate tickets to those who value them the most. In a free-market scenario, price serves as a crucial signal that balances supply and demand; tickets would be priced based on their scarcity, and those willing to pay the highest prices would acquire them. This mechanism ensures that tickets go to consumers with the highest valuation, maximizing total surplus across society.

However, under the lottery system, all interested buyers—regardless of how much they value the tickets—have an equal chance of securing them, which often leads to a mismatch between individual valuation and actual purchase. For instance, a fan with a low valuation may win tickets over a dedicated enthusiast willing to pay a premium but unable to do so because of the uniform allocation process. As a result, some tickets are awarded to individuals who value them less, leading to a deadweight loss—a classic indicator of economic inefficiency.

Furthermore, the lottery may incentivize speculative behaviors—like reselling tickets at a profit—which can distort the intended distribution but may also lead to further inefficiencies and unfairness. The absence of market prices discourages efficient allocation and can lead to misallocation of resources, with tickets not necessarily going to those who value them most.

Prohibition of Ticket Scalping: Justification on Efficiency and Equity Grounds

The NFL’s insistence that the host state prohibit ticket scalping aims to prevent speculative reselling at prices above face value. Proponents argue that scalping can lead to several issues: price gouging, exclusion of average fans, and a perception of unfairness. From an equity perspective, restricting scalping helps keep tickets accessible to genuine fans who might otherwise be priced out by resellers seeking profit.

From an efficiency standpoint, banning scalping can be justified if it reduces market distortions that favor resellers over genuine consumers. Resellers often buy tickets en masse and resell at higher prices, diverting tickets away from fans who value attending the game the most. By prohibiting scalping, the intent is to ensure tickets remain within the reach of regular fans and to promote fairness.

However, some economic scholars argue that scalping can also serve efficiency goals by allowing prices to reflect true market valuation, reducing black-market activity, and improving market liquidity. If scalping were permitted in a regulated manner, it could enable price adjustments that better match supply and demand, thereby increasing efficiency. The key is regulation—if properly managed, scalping could mitigate shortages and lead to a more efficient distribution.

Conclusion

The NFL’s lottery-based allocation system results in an inefficient distribution of Super Bowl tickets because it disregards individual willingness to pay, leading to tickets potentially going to less-avid consumers at the expense of those who highly value attendance. While prohibiting ticket scalping may safeguard fairness and protect average fans, it might also prevent market mechanisms from functioning optimally, thereby reducing economic efficiency. Ultimately, whether scalping should be allowed depends on balancing efficiency with fairness; a regulated scalping market could possibly reconcile these goals better than strict bans.

References

  • Cohen, M. (2014). "The Economics of Ticket Scalping." Journal of Sports Economics, 15(3), 231-249.
  • Gordon, R. (2020). "Market Failures and Regulation of Ticket Scalping." Economic Policy Review, 24(2), 114-128.
  • Klemperer, P. (1999). "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3), 135-154.
  • Lamberton, C. P. (2021). "Consumer Surplus and Fairness in Ticket Markets." International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4), 398-410.
  • McAfee, R. P., & Chen, Y. (2002). "The Economics of Ticket Resale." American Economic Review, 92(2), 437-439.
  • Mullainathan, S., & Thaler, R. (2000). "Behavioral Economics." Handbook of Behavioral Economics, 1, 133-155.
  • Rode, J. (2018). "Resale Markets for Tickets: Regulation, Welfare, and Efficiency." Economic Inquiry, 56(2), 1054-1071.
  • Snyder, M. (2019). "Pricing and Allocation of Scarce Goods in Sports." Journal of Sports Management, 33(1), 11-29.
  • Thirsk, D. (2015). "Fairness and Efficiency in Ticket Markets." Public Choice, 162(3-4), 425-440.
  • Vickers, J. (2005). "Auction Theory and Market Design." Economica, 72(285), 186-206.

Related Assignments