need help please.

blushresponse

New member
okay here's the situation. about 2 months ago my friend bought the killers ticket (standing pen). He decided to sell it because he has something on. I only knew it as the day came nearer. so, he sold it to someone for 220.(actual price 151). This is confirmed about 2 weeks back, by the buyer. So, now that it is cancelled he told the buyer he can only return 151 (actual price). But the buyer wants the whole 220! He told him/her you took a risk on buying 3rd party ticket and you lost the money, too bad. What should he do? Need suggestions!
 
Too damn bad for the buyer, it isn't your friend's obligation to pay the full 220, since he couldn't foresee that the concert would have been canceled.
 
i'd return the actual price of $151, plus half of the difference. to me, this is what's fair. if the buyer's nice, i'd even refund the $220 in full.
 
How does a refund policy work with SISTIC? Do you have to reproduce your ID& can you refund a tix on behalf of someone?

If one can, then he should go to the counter for a refund. It's too bad it's only worth $151 but that's what one has to risk when buying 'scalped' tix. It's business, the cancellation was an unforeseen circumstances.

Innuendo has a good point, you could return half of the 'extra', if you wanna sleep easier I guess.
 
yeah, you must produce the ic of the buyer and the tix to get the refund. now, the ticket is with the buyer still. i think innuedo made a good suggestion. thanks guys will till my friend.
 
congratulate your friend on my behalf on the profit. Don't listen to the buyer, he made a stupid deal and he has to stick with it.
 
Your friend should take back the ticket, refund back the $220 to him.
Then get the $151 refund from Sistic.
That's only fair.

Unless his intention is to make $69 profit no matter what.
 
Technically his friend doesn't need to do squat, giving the 151 refund is sort of an act of charity, so the buyer should just accept it. It's his own bad luck and his own fault for not buying the tickets direct from SISTIC. But if he choose to refund fully then good for him, although he is making a loss(through time and money spent buying the tickets and reselling them and now doing it again). The buyer should think of all this stuff before expecting a full refund.
 
Technically his friend doesn't need to do squat, giving the 151 refund is sort of an act of charity, so the buyer should just accept it. It's his own bad luck and his own fault for not buying the tickets direct from SISTIC. But if he choose to refund fully then good for him, although he is making a loss(through time and money spent buying the tickets and reselling them and now doing it again). The buyer should think of all this stuff before expecting a full refund.
buyer dun need to think they just want their $$$ back!
 
real simple - ask your friend to put himself in the "buyers" shoes ....

what would he want ... ????

I SAY: PAY WHATEVER HE GOT FROM THE BUYER BACK IN FULL
 
The seller didn't offer refund,SISTIC did.

The buyer chose to buy from an 'unofficial' seller, therefore the buyer should accept certain responsibilities. He made the choice of buying it at an agreed price instead of the official price.

If I was in the buyer's shoes, I know that I'm taking a risk.

This isn't about morals, this is about business.

To the threadstarter , do what you feel is right not what others think is right.

You wanna refudn full, good on ya. You don't wanna give a full refund, it's your business right.
 
this is simple. the buyer basically bought black market tickets, but that is not the point. seller sold. buyer bought. the deal was completed. end of story. whatever happens from that point on is the buyer's responsibility. basically what the seller is offering by refunding $150 is to do something for the buyer, which the buyer is supposed to do himself. that in itself is already goodwill.

if i sell you japan airline shares at a mark-up, and then japan airlines goes bankrupt the next day, is that my problem?

if i sell you a $5000 guitar, and then after the deal you kena langgar by a bus and the guitar smashes into pieces to become 10cents worth of firewood, am i supposed to buy it back for $5000?

if man united buys owen hargreaves from bayern munich for 17 million pounds, and then hargreaves becomes injured forever, is bayern munich obliged to buy him back for 17 million pounds?
 
Last edited:
^ your analogies don't hold water to the situation. because in the TS' friend's buyer-seller situation, the ticket issuer is there to offer refund. see the difference?
 
The buyer can't refund using just the tickets, if what I read was correct a few posts back, he needs the person who bought the tickets originally(the seller) to show SISTIC his I.C or something. But for the extra he paid to get the tickets, no he shouldn't get back even a cent. He took the risk and has to accept the loss. If it was in pure business terms, the seller isn't even obligated to help him refund the money, he's doing it out of kindness. buyer should be happy about that and stfu.
 
i've already posted what i think, so just a side-thought: from most of the posts above, one can really see each has a different way of transacting 'business'. point is, this is quite a good window to look into and consider who to avoid dealing with in the buy-and-sell sections. for me, at least. (i mean, like that analogy-ridden remark, how asinine can one get.)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top