I was mostly thinking about console release scalping.

My issue is that people buy up all the stock and then jack the price and ruin launches for everyone. it's literally just shit. You can't buy a new console anywhere, apart from online for a vastly inflated price.

Ticket scalping, I imagine, is the same. Why should someone get to buy 60% of tickets at once, just to resell them on a corner (well, online now) for more. It's not like there was a natural case of supply and demand. it is a person using a bot to snipe tickets before a normie even has a chance, doesn't mean the prices were crap. Not even time for price discovery. Scalpers don’t add value – they profit by introducing inefficiency.

I would say ticket scalping is a net negative and should be controlled as much as possible. Literally, who likes ticket scalping?

But when it comes for someone buying a game in yen for cheaper and flipping it in the US, everyone wins. Nintendo Japan made a sale, a US customer gets a cheaper game, and the guy who was in Japan made some money, too. It's winning all the way.

The fact that the eshop prices are like the same is madness too, if it's 50 usd, it will also be 50 euro , then 50 gbp etc , so i will more often just buy from the US store, it's a digital game after all

Exactly.

I have thought a lot about this as well as the way businesses handle demand spikes. An example is how Costco and others handle spikes in demand on toilet paper. They will limit how many people can buy instead of just letting them sell out or raising the prices.

Why? Social pressure. I think economists overlook this SO MUCH. Social norms and ideas about greed have a massive affect on the market actors. Sure, Costco if it were a purely market based actor would just raise the price of the good based on demand. Over a longer time-span they will actually do this. But they usually do not for short term spikes in demand. It think its pretty obvious that the reason they don't do this is because the masses would think its terrible. Less people have a problem with limiting the amount one person can buy. That seems more fair to them.

Honestly, the pricing system is better as it does a better job of punishing those that are impulse buying and puts up a barrier to those that may not be thinking about their real need. The classic explanation about "price gouging" fits here. When a short term demand spike results in an increased price it will encourage producers to increase production while at the same time introduce time preference into the mind of those that delay their purchases. This helps supply handle the demand spike and results in those truly in need being able to get what they need.

If this were taught in schools... (pipe dream) instead of the socialist crap they train our kids on maybe companies would actually use the pure price system. But our population is so mal-educated that Costco would suffer far more from shifting to a pure price approach.

I think demand pricing is what Uber calls their approach and honestly it makes nothing but sense to me. I'm sure it is annoying when you get hit by it but it works. But, you know most people hate this. Drivers don't though... And if you really need an Uber and you get one in a high demand time its probably due to this approach.

I've given up on so much of this stuff. It seems so logical to me. We can see these approaches (market) work. But there are problems. Mostly due to brainwashing from socialist educators. They don't even realize they are socialists. That's what's so frustrating. Its not just liberals or democrats. Its pretty much all of them. The republican and Trump people are just socialists in different areas. Different markets and segments. But they are all so blind to this influence and its destructive consequences.

They can, but some conditions are invalid. For example incan sing a contract where you give my family 100 BTC and in exchange I become your slave. This would be invalid contract.