Political party Push Bill to Outlaw Bots From Snatching Up Online Goods

[aisle9]

1 hour ago, Elisis said:

No? All it is is placing a cap on what a product would be sold at. Like Antitrust law does. There is legal precedent for matters like this.

 

Why do you feel that the rights of companies should be of a higher priority than those of consumers?

Antitrust law exists to make sure one entity does not corner and control a market. That would not apply here for any number of reasons. One, there isn't one bot operator, and the bot operators aren't colluding with each other on prices. Two, there are multiple retail outlets offering these cards, and they're not (as far as we know) colluding with any bot operators on pricing or availability.

 

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

I'm not sure why it being legal would be relevant here, we're talking about making it illegal.

 

As for why, without going too much into the politics, the government should be interested in the well being of its citizens; scalpers artificially inflating the price of goods people might need is not conducive to that good. It's not just graphics cards that get scalped, and even if it were it's not just "gamers" who want them; some people need them to work, believe it or not.

 

Since scalping brings exactly 0 value to society and arguably worsens problems like inflation, on top of making goods unattainable for people who need them, I think it's perfectly reasonable to regulate against them.

No, by definition they are not. If you intend to resell the goods for profit you're not a consumer, you're a useless middle man.

If you purchased 100 graphics cards 200 milliseconds after they became available I think it's a safe enough assumption. That's the only reason you'd use a bot anyway.

No, because manufacturers and retailers are not in competition with consumers for goods. This is really basic stuff about how the market works. If you want to purchase in bulk you should strike a supply deal with the manufacturer, like retailers do. While I have... opinions... about how the market works in general, it's certainly a lot better when it doesn't include a pointless middle man between the retailer and the consumer.

You'd be writing an unenforceable law that would be shot down by the courts the second it was sued over.

 

I agree that price gouging is wrong and should be regulated, but GPUs are not a critical item. Gas is a critical item. Bread is critical. No one will die if you can't play Cyberpunk 2077 at 4K this year. They might die if they can't afford milk.

 

And stop with "scalping". That's a BS word being used out of context. Reselling != scalping. Scalping is illegal. Reselling is not. If you buy a GPU for MSRP then resell it for MSRP x3, you're an asshole, but you're a reseller, not a scalper. Maybe someone wants to add "reselling GPUs" to the definition of scalper, but until it's in there, there's nothing illegal about reselling. GPUs are a luxury item, and as such they should not be subject to any form of price control, period. Price controls exist to make sure you can drive your car, eat your dinner and wipe your ass. They do not exist to ensure access to luxury items.

 

For whatever it's worth, I'm not "pro scalper" or whatever. I'm 100% against using government to get a new toy. Regulation should be a last resort to solving a critical problem, not a way to make sure that everyone gets a shiny new RTX 3080 Ti for Christmas.

[Heliian]

Yes, just ban bot buying.  No need to differentiate to what products.  Consumer protection is a good thing. 

[Donut417]

7 minutes ago, Heliian said:

Yes, just ban bot buying.  No need to differentiate to what products.  Consumer protection is a good thing. 

But you cant. How do you know its a bot? You cant know. And the government has no way to enforce any such law. Its like copy right law, how many people in the US are pirates? Probably a good number. Rarely do you see the DOJ prosecute someone for copyright infringement. 

[Kisai]

19 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

All bills that intend to capture this kind of behaviour will also capture legit people as well.

 

Since the house flipping was brought up, we introduced speculative buyers tax here...and there are already businesses who have to pay heafty taxes (because they were zones as commercial/residential but utilized the space as commercial).  A guy who lived in his house for 20+ years, also will likely be forced out of his home because he can't afford the speculative buyers tax on his home (just because his wife who lives in the US makes more than him).  The list continues...a lot of the "solutions" I could see having unforeseen ripple effects.  Actually, I could see laws like this making it so that companies like TicketMaster secure an even stronger foothold on their market.

 

(Also at least here, heritage homes have strict regulations on them, like requiring certain maintenance)

 

Honestly, the best way this could be reduced is making companies not sell to the same address, or same credit card.  Sure there will be people who utilize multiple addresses and cards, but that greatly reduced the impact.

You do realize we're in the same region right?

 

I have no sympathy for people who own two homes and only live in one of them. If you want to be a landlord and rent out a home, that better be a home you lived in for the previous 2 years. Likewise commercial scale renting should only be permitted if the company owns the entire building (eg a "rental" building, not "18 condos of a 300 unit building", and certainly not "residential portion of a mixed use property") and honestly in BC, strata (condo) buildings should never have existed, because of the leaky condos were the result, and we stupidly let it continue with condos not having permanent condensation-removal systems in place. All it takes is a one-day power outage and the building is screwed if it rains or snows during it.

 

That said. Going back to smaller property like computers, gpu's and concert tickets.

 

There's only two solutions for anti-botting/anti-scalping. You either go after the scalping directly, or you go after the under-the-table unreported taxes.

 

People, reselling things over 10% of the retail value, are scammers, and should be treated as such. Do you really think anyone who bought a RTX 3080 or a PS5 and sold it immediately is going to report that on their taxes? No. They're going to list it on craigslist first and get cash for it. The ones selling it on eBay are the real idiots, since paypal does report to the tax authorities.

 

There are people, who somehow got entire pallets of PS5's to sell on eBay, and this happens every black-friday to christmas, every year. Some hot item, some opportunistic asshat manages to get ahold of pallets of the hot item. 

 

So let's address "how did they get a pallet of stuff?" Clearly they're a real store and are scalping their own stock, or they used their connections to order stock they don't even sell normally. Consider a place like Gamestop ordering several pallets of GPU's and PS5's, but only selling 1 PS5 in the store, and the employees all buy up their own stock using their employee discounts and sell them on on craigslist and ebay.

 

That's not bot activity. Bestbuy, Walmart, Real Canadian Superstore/Loblaws all do this. They order things and just sit on them, and it depends who is managing the store.

 

Bot activity is going after the scraps that are making it into the retail channel after this. It would not surprise me if bestbuy suddenly has new stock of Founders cards the day after christmas.

 

 

[darknessblade]

On 12/1/2021 at 3:15 AM, Ykcud said:

I can only hope this passes in time, but I suspect that the scalpers won't even listen to the law. Maybe, just maybe, this will get the ball rolling for bringing down prices for GPUs, but I am not holding my breath. These GPU prices have been here for a while and almost feels like a dystopian normal now.

Worst part is that bill only affects users in the USA. so a scalper that lives in Mexico, or Canada [or any other country] is not affected by that bill, and can still scalp as much as they want. then sell it to people in the USA at inflated prices.

[sof006]

I'm in no hurry to buy any new PC parts or a games console but it would be nice to know I can buy a PS5 in the future and actually be ABLE to buy one.

[adarw]

4 minutes ago, sof006 said:

I'm in no hurry to buy any new PC parts or a games console but it would be nice to know I can buy a PS5 in the future and actually be ABLE to buy one.

has rtx 3080

[Donut417]

3 hours ago, darknessblade said:

Worst part is that bill only affects users in the USA.

Worst part is this can never be enforced. Doesn't matter what the law says. Case in point the law says Eureka Road down by Detroit Metro Airport is 55 MPH. People do 70 MPH, because no one give a shit. The government has NO way to enforce such rules. 

 

3 hours ago, darknessblade said:

then sell it to people in the USA at inflated prices.

I doubt many will buy a card from Canada or Mexico. Remember the tariffs on China. GPU's tend to have components made in China, meaning the person buying it in the US would be responsible for paying such tariffs. That means it would further increase the price. The cards already in the US already have the tariffs paid for. 

[IkeaGnome]

8 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

I doubt many will buy a card from Canada or Mexico. Remember the tariffs on China. GPU's tend to have components made in China, meaning the person buying it in the US would be responsible for paying such tariffs. That means it would further increase the price. The cards already in the US already have the tariffs paid for. 

You'd get plenty of people that don't realize that and get hit with tariffs on import.

[sof006]

9 hours ago, adarw said:

has rtx 3080

I pre ordered mine on the day the card was announced, hence why I have mine. 

[DuckDodgers]

The problem with consumer electronics scalping is tangential to the pricing havoc in the real estate market. Too much liquidity is looking for quick turn around and ways to escape inflation, thus any captive market/commodity is now a target for these middle-man "investors" and speculators. It just happened that the crypto mining poured a high-octane fuel in the supply-demand chain.

[cj09beira]

On 12/1/2021 at 8:34 PM, Sauron said:

They can be forced to take preventative measures. Be it captcha or something else, so long as it satisfies the criteria set by the relevant authorities. You're not going to catch every bot, the goal should be to make bot use inefficient enough that it's not worth it anymore.

that's just going to make online shopping a pain in the ass with little effect on the actual problem.

On 12/1/2021 at 9:27 PM, Elisis said:

Because it artificially inflates prices for true consumers. No, bot operators are not real consumers as they act more as resellers.

it isn't artificially increasing the price, because they aren't restricting supply, its placing the price to where it should be from a supply/demand point of view, the market is trading constantly empty shelves to easier time getting a card for a higher price. the moment there is enough supply "scalpers" will be forced to reduce prices.

On 12/1/2021 at 9:34 PM, adarw said:

"

Market manipulation is the act of artificially inflating or deflating the price of a security or otherwise influencing the behavior of the market for personal gain. Manipulation is illegal in most cases, but it can be difficult for regulators and other authorities to detect, such as with omnibus accounts. "

 

scalping is price manipulation.

really dont think this is a case of market manipulation, i would argue that in this case the manipulation is the MSRP forcing the price lower when the market conditions don't support such price. 

On 12/2/2021 at 3:55 AM, Kisai said:

You do realize we're in the same region right?

 

I have no sympathy for people who own two homes and only live in one of them. If you want to be a landlord and rent out a home, that better be a home you lived in for the previous 2 years. Likewise commercial scale renting should only be permitted if the company owns the entire building (eg a "rental" building, not "18 condos of a 300 unit building", and certainly not "residential portion of a mixed use property") and honestly in BC, strata (condo) buildings should never have existed, because of the leaky condos were the result, and we stupidly let it continue with condos not having permanent condensation-removal systems in place. All it takes is a one-day power outage and the building is screwed if it rains or snows during it.

 

That said. Going back to smaller property like computers, gpu's and concert tickets.

 

There's only two solutions for anti-botting/anti-scalping. You either go after the scalping directly, or you go after the under-the-table unreported taxes.

 

People, reselling things over 10% of the retail value, are scammers, and should be treated as such. Do you really think anyone who bought a RTX 3080 or a PS5 and sold it immediately is going to report that on their taxes? No. They're going to list it on craigslist first and get cash for it. The ones selling it on eBay are the real idiots, since paypal does report to the tax authorities.

 

There are people, who somehow got entire pallets of PS5's to sell on eBay, and this happens every black-friday to christmas, every year. Some hot item, some opportunistic asshat manages to get ahold of pallets of the hot item. 

 

So let's address "how did they get a pallet of stuff?" Clearly they're a real store and are scalping their own stock, or they used their connections to order stock they don't even sell normally. Consider a place like Gamestop ordering several pallets of GPU's and PS5's, but only selling 1 PS5 in the store, and the employees all buy up their own stock using their employee discounts and sell them on on craigslist and ebay.

 

That's not bot activity. Bestbuy, Walmart, Real Canadian Superstore/Loblaws all do this. They order things and just sit on them, and it depends who is managing the store.

 

Bot activity is going after the scraps that are making it into the retail channel after this. It would not surprise me if bestbuy suddenly has new stock of Founders cards the day after christmas.

 

 

so f*** the old couple that finally was able to have some extra money so they bought a house to support their retirement.... i wouldn't want to live in your "needs to own the entire building" world.

1 hour ago, DuckDodgers said:

The problem with consumer electronics scalping is tangential to the pricing havoc in the real estate market. Too much liquidity is looking for quick turn around and ways to escape inflation, thus any captive market/commodity is now a target for these middle-man "investors" and speculators. It just happened that the crypto mining poured a high-octane fuel in the supply-demand chain.

it all comes back to the "stimulus" while the economies were closed down, everything is in tight supply.

 

imo "scalping" is completely normal in markets that are passing through big quick supply issues (in slower supply tightening retailers themselves will likely increase prices), as long as there are multiple suppliers prices will only be high when there isn't enough supply, if john and joe both want a card and there is only one, so who is prepared to pay more will likely end up with the card.

 

While they are all fighting i will just stay in the sidelines waiting patiently for the inevitable market crash (with popcorn at the ready), at which point i may get one if its good enough price/perf, as i realize that others are ready to pay much more than i am, and i have no right to get one.

No law will change the base fact that there aren't enough cards, at most we could have oiled up the transport industry by lifting some of its limitations.

 

 

[Kisai]

9 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

 

so f*** the old couple that finally was able to have some extra money so they bought a house to support their retirement.... i wouldn't want to live in such a place.

 

 

That is never the case. NEVER. You're thinking "retired couple", I'm thinking "dozens of billionaires who own 40 homes and ranches under holding companies". Retired people do not buy extra homes, why would they want they want to be a working landlord. No, try the other way around. Retired couples want to downsize, but don't want to sell the family home, so they buy a smaller home, and then rent out the large one. Hence "must have lived in it for the last 2 years"

 

You're forgetting that the vast majority of land and wealth in North America is owned by like just 100 people. https://cdn.coverstand.com/61105/609852/069f92e1f2da91b4b1ae800654cbd6a8bbfa549b.pdf

 

go to page 94. John Malone and Ted Turner owns 2 million+ acres each, that makes each of their holdings larger than the state of Delaware. The next two on the list are also larger than Delaware. Those four people own as much land the size of Vermont. Maybe they have a good reason to, maybe they don't, but if every billionaire went after 2 million acres of land, there would only be room for 1,214 of them in the US.

 

The point is, nobody on earth has a reason to own that much property. You should own ONE home. Leave the commercial rentals to the companies that actually want to invest and maintain their own buildings, not these silly REIT's that buy up buildings and property and then try to squeeze out as much rent as possible by terrorizing the existing tenants.

 

[cj09beira]

2 minutes ago, Kisai said:

That is never the case. NEVER. You're thinking "retired couple", I'm thinking "dozens of billionaires who own 40 homes and ranches under holding companies". Retired people do not buy extra homes, why would they want they want to be a working landlord. No, try the other way around. Retired couples want to downsize, but don't want to sell the family home, so they buy a smaller home, and then rent out the large one. Hence "must have lived in it for the last 2 years"

 

You're forgetting that the vast majority of land and wealth in North America is owned by like just 100 people. https://cdn.coverstand.com/61105/609852/069f92e1f2da91b4b1ae800654cbd6a8bbfa549b.pdf

 

go to page 94. John Malone and Ted Turner owns 2 million+ acres each, that makes each of their holdings larger than the state of Delaware. The next two on the list are also larger than Delaware. Those four people own as much land the size of Vermont. Maybe they have a good reason to, maybe they don't, but if every billionaire went after 2 million acres of land, there would only be room for 1,214 of them in the US.

 

The point is, nobody on earth has a reason to own that much property. You should own ONE home. Leave the commercial rentals to the companies that actually want to invest and maintain their own buildings, not these silly REIT's that buy up buildings and property and then try to squeeze out as much rent as possible by terrorizing the existing tenants.

 

i have multiple family members that did exactly what i described, neither of them is rich, as for them having a stable income from rents while also having the underlying property value is quite appealing, the wealthy having more of them doesn't make what i said any less true.

 

people should be able to own what ever they want as long as they pay for it, rents and house prices are skyrocketing because people are seeing the mud in the water, this monetary policy is not sustainable.

[Blademaster91]

47 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

that's just going to make online shopping a pain in the ass with little effect on the actual problem.

I'd rather have a slight inconvenience of having to complete a captcha than see bots clear stock out instantly then sell it on ebay for 2X the MSRP, although those captcha things don't stop bots, 2FA confirmation would at least do something to help.

48 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

it isn't artificially increasing the price, because they aren't restricting supply, its placing the price to where it should be from a supply/demand point of view, the market is trading constantly empty shelves to easier time getting a card for a higher price. the moment there is enough supply "scalpers" will be forced to reduce prices.

It is artificially increasing the price and restricting the supply when scalpers are buying up everything and selling it elsewhere, that kind of demand isn't sustainable with normal prices so scalpers are effectively controlling the market.

48 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

really dont think this is a case of market manipulation, i would argue that in this case the manipulation is the MSRP forcing the price lower when the market conditions don't support such price. 

An MSRP is supposed to keep prices from being inflated, it clearly doesn't work since retailers just match their prices to what the scalpers are charging with things like GPUs or DDR5 RAM.

[cj09beira]

5 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

I'd rather have a slight inconvenience of having to complete a captcha than see bots clear stock out instantly then sell it on ebay for 2X the MSRP, although those captcha things don't stop bots, 2FA confirmation would at least do something to help.

It is artificially increasing the price and restricting the supply when scalpers are buying up everything and selling it elsewhere, that kind of demand isn't sustainable with normal prices so scalpers are effectively controlling the market.

An MSRP is supposed to keep prices from being inflated, it clearly doesn't work since retailers just match their prices to what the scalpers are charging with things like GPUs or DDR5 RAM.

it would still be cleared out nearly instantly 

[Kisai]

9 hours ago, cj09beira said:

i have multiple family members that did exactly what i described, neither of them is rich, as for them having a stable income from rents while also having the underlying property value is quite appealing, the wealthy having more of them doesn't make what i said any less true.

I have three family members who "rented out" places when they retired. You know what else about that? Those second places were apartments, not family homes. One of them wound up living in the rental after gutting it from the the renter's demolishing the inside, and having to sell their primary home.

 

Maybe look outside your comfort zone at what owning a property entails. If you get the perfect tenant that takes care of it like their own property, yes, maybe you'll never have to go there and fix things. The reality is that people act like slumlords, buying multiple properties and then doing jack-all to maintain it.

eg: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-vancouver-wanted-all-five-sahota-owned-hotels-before-expropriating-two/

 

And then you have the "people" in the above link who bought properties let them fall apart, presumably to flip them later when the value of the land they sit on when up. 

 

9 hours ago, cj09beira said:

people should be able to own what ever they want as long as they pay for it, rents and house prices are skyrocketing because people are seeing the mud in the water, this monetary policy is not sustainable.

No no, rents are skyrocketing entirely due to AirBnB/VRBO. Instead of renting out one property to one person until they need to move, landlords are throwing out their existing renters for AirBnB illegal hotels, and converting large units into multiple bachelor-style units.

 

https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/my-burnaby-neighbours-mansion-is-really-an-illegal-nine-room-airbnb-hotel-4304974

 

Literately, every single 1940-1970's built apartment building around me has been torn down and replaced with these crappy tiny condo-strata buildings that not only are outprice the people they threw out in buying the property, but the units that are available for rent, are more than 5x as expensive for half the floor area.

 

It's been a thing since the 70's, that every "home" built in Metro Vancouver area has an illegal basement suite informally known as a "mortgage helper". These are "basement suite"'s that are usually rented out by the owner, who is supposed to live on the main floor. What has been happening since the early 2000's, is that the owner of the property rents out both halves of the building and then moves out of the city, never to visit or maintain the property ever again until someone sets the thing ablaze from turning it into an illegal grow-op.

 

This is why a requirement for "AirBnB" style listings, must be that the owner of the property reside in the same property. If you do not require the owner of the BnB suite to live in the building, how are they ever going to change the sheets on the bed? Why make more work for yourself to rent out a suite that you don't live anywhere near? No, these AirBnB suite owners hire literately anyone to be a "property manager" and visit these suites to do the cleaning, but the owner never actually checks that it's being done.

 

If you can not figure out why it's a bad solution to housing for individuals to own more than one property, I've given you no less than three examples here. At least a real hotel will own the building and is responsible for the units in the building. A proper commercial rental will have an office in the building they are renting to deal with issues with the building. If a building does not have an on-site concierge/office for the tenants/owners/occupants, then it's likely being run cheaply/poorly.

[cj09beira]

4 hours ago, Kisai said:

I have three family members who "rented out" places when they retired. You know what else about that? Those second places were apartments, not family homes. One of them wound up living in the rental after gutting it from the the renter's demolishing the inside, and having to sell their primary home.

 

Maybe look outside your comfort zone at what owning a property entails. If you get the perfect tenant that takes care of it like their own property, yes, maybe you'll never have to go there and fix things. The reality is that people act like slumlords, buying multiple properties and then doing jack-all to maintain it.

eg: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/british-columbia/article-vancouver-wanted-all-five-sahota-owned-hotels-before-expropriating-two/

 

And then you have the "people" in the above link who bought properties let them fall apart, presumably to flip them later when the value of the land they sit on when up. 

 

No no, rents are skyrocketing entirely due to AirBnB/VRBO. Instead of renting out one property to one person until they need to move, landlords are throwing out their existing renters for AirBnB illegal hotels, and converting large units into multiple bachelor-style units.

 

https://www.burnabynow.com/local-news/my-burnaby-neighbours-mansion-is-really-an-illegal-nine-room-airbnb-hotel-4304974

 

Literately, every single 1940-1970's built apartment building around me has been torn down and replaced with these crappy tiny condo-strata buildings that not only are outprice the people they threw out in buying the property, but the units that are available for rent, are more than 5x as expensive for half the floor area.

 

It's been a thing since the 70's, that every "home" built in Metro Vancouver area has an illegal basement suite informally known as a "mortgage helper". These are "basement suite"'s that are usually rented out by the owner, who is supposed to live on the main floor. What has been happening since the early 2000's, is that the owner of the property rents out both halves of the building and then moves out of the city, never to visit or maintain the property ever again until someone sets the thing ablaze from turning it into an illegal grow-op.

 

This is why a requirement for "AirBnB" style listings, must be that the owner of the property reside in the same property. If you do not require the owner of the BnB suite to live in the building, how are they ever going to change the sheets on the bed? Why make more work for yourself to rent out a suite that you don't live anywhere near? No, these AirBnB suite owners hire literately anyone to be a "property manager" and visit these suites to do the cleaning, but the owner never actually checks that it's being done.

 

If you can not figure out why it's a bad solution to housing for individuals to own more than one property, I've given you no less than three examples here. At least a real hotel will own the building and is responsible for the units in the building. A proper commercial rental will have an office in the building they are renting to deal with issues with the building. If a building does not have an on-site concierge/office for the tenants/owners/occupants, then it's likely being run cheaply/poorly.

nothing you said is remotely close to justify blocking people from owning what they want to, its perfectly fine for people to let their own property rot, the same way its not illegal to be stupid.

[Donut417]

3 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

nothing you said is remotely close to justify blocking people from owning what they want to, its perfectly fine for people to let their own property rot, the same way its not illegal to be stupid.

By that statement I should be able to go out and buy an MG42 with out any one hounding me. But I cant, because there are these things called laws and regulations. Just like some areas have rent control. Technically speaking no one owns the land free and clear. The government requires yearly tax payments. The Government has zoning laws and building codes. So you cant really just do what you want. God help you if you live in an HOA, because they wont tolerate any BS. 

 

That being said, a small land lord owning a few piece of land I have no issue with. The problem is the corporations have gotten in to the mix. They are buying up all the property and renting it out for a premium. The minuet Wall Street gets involved then the government needs to regulate because those Ass hats cant help themselves. What are we expected to have 10 people to live in a 2 bedroom apartment? Because thats where we are heading. 

[Kisai]

7 hours ago, Donut417 said:

By that statement I should be able to go out and buy an MG42 with out any one hounding me. But I cant, because there are these things called laws and regulations. Just like some areas have rent control. Technically speaking no one owns the land free and clear. The government requires yearly tax payments. The Government has zoning laws and building codes. So you cant really just do what you want. God help you if you live in an HOA, because they wont tolerate any BS. 

 

A HOA is just a strata with SFH instead of apartment-styled units. You do not own your home in a HOA any more than you own the condo/apartment in an apartment building. Yes technically you own "your space", but your interest in the common property is shared by all in the HOA/Strata/Trailer-park, and thus you can't blow holes in the walls and floor because it will destroy the entire building, and in a HOA-SFH arrangement this can mean keeping the exterior of the building and property maintained to prevent damage to neighboring properties.

 

But let's be honest about HOA's, you should not be buying into a these stupid things in the first place. You don't really own them, and you don't have the rights you would if you bought a lone property 30 miles outside the city to build your personal garbage dump.

 

7 hours ago, Donut417 said:

That being said, a small land lord owning a few piece of land I have no issue with. The problem is the corporations have gotten in to the mix. They are buying up all the property and renting it out for a premium. The minuet Wall Street gets involved then the government needs to regulate because those Ass hats cant help themselves. What are we expected to have 10 people to live in a 2 bedroom apartment? Because thats where we are heading. 

I draw the line at two properties, and the two consecutive properties must be in the same HOA/Strata for it to be reasonable that the "landlord" can keep it in a good state of repair. Heck there's entire proposals out there where a 4-bedroom unit can be "downsized" legally to two 2-bedroom units or 1 2-bed and 2 bachelor units, by actually designing them as the latter, but having interior partitions that can be sealed off should they no longer need the space. You may have seen these designs in Ski Resort timeshares. Where there is a "mystery door" in middle of the living room that opens into the neighboring unit that is a mirror of the one you're in. If you open the mystery door, you'll see another door with no means of opening it, because the second door has to be opened from the other side.

 

Anyway we should steer this back to the topic. Why should we permit, no matter how "legal" a means is, for someone to monopolize all the produced product of a manufacturer by just 

- out-bidding everyone, and then flipping it (which is what happens with real estate)

- using tools to obstruct others from even being able to purchase (such as using bots to saturate the website from being able to process orders for anyone but yourself) 

 

I actually queued this morning to pre-order the Analogue pocket. The queue was 5 minutes long. I look at it right now, and there isn't a queue, it's not even sold out. So perhaps the demand didn't arrive on time (previous Analogue consoles sold out within hours.)

 

Yet, if I wanted a PS5 or a Geforce GPU right now. There is no place to buy one in Canada, and has not been any inventory anywhere all year. I went to the Gamestop a few days ago and there was a line (for Covid reasons) but they had two PS5's at the front of the store and it made me wonder if those were empty. However I also wasn't willing to buy one even if it was in stock, because the price in the store was not MSRP. The website? Still not available.