Hmmm. Somehow I missed that this wasn’t a raffle in the “buy a ticket” sense but in a free entry sense. That being the case, don’t do it. Regardless of who’s right and who’s not it would cause ill feelings if you won and sold the tickets.
Why on earth would you take part in a raffle for something you don’t want??
In this particular circumstance, I think selling the tickets if you won them would be pretty jerky. Like some bully taking another kid’s toy just because he’s having fun with it.
On the other hand, if it was some kind of random free giveaway, and you just ended up with the tickets through no effort of your own - selling them then would be fine.
Whoa, I must’ve skimmed over the part where the raffle was free! Okay, then that would be seriously in bad form.
But the tickets aren’t a gift; they’re a prize.
Donated to their workplace. If their employers had shelled out so it was some workplace morale thing, sure, but donating tickets to an organization suggests that the donor wanted them to go to a worthy recipient who wanted to use them. (Or else to raise money for a worthy cause).
The free draw was determined to be a fair way of distributing the donation them to someone who would appreciate them. There was no investment needed to put your name in the hat. There is no way to earn the “prize”. They were trying to find a fair way to distribute the tickets to someone who wanted them.
Dammit, screwed up my edit. The point is, the “prize” is not from a true contest.
It’s like if I had two playoff tickets and decided to take one of my buddies with me. Two of them both want to go and I don’t want to play favourites and choose bewteen them, so we flip a coin. It’s a fair solution.
Not at all like a “contest” to see who sells the most stuff at work, or a 50/50 raffle where you invest $5 and then the winner gets half the pot.
There are very different intentions.
Definitely not the right thing to do, ethically, morally, or professionally.
If it was a conventional competition, for example:
-A raffle where the tickets cost, and you can purchase as many of them as you wish
-A compo in a magazine where there’s just a prize on offer and you get one free entry, but you’re not connected in any way to the company running it
Then I’d say it’s absolutely fine to sell the prize if you win - in fact I won a bunch of computer gear from a magazine a year or two ago and sold it immediately (although I wanted to keep it) because I needed the dough.
But this is a draw for a pair of tickets that have been given to a group to allot to interested parties. I don’t think it’s necessarily unethical to win them and sell them, but I don’t think it’s a good idea because of the friction it could cause in your workplace. Is it worth being considered an asshole over?
If you really want to get a fair crack of the whip, why not enter the raffle, and (if you win) give the tickets to your favourite co-worker that wants them - maybe on the unwritten understanding that you’d appreciate a six-pack of beer in return.
Several posters have expressed surprise that someone would enter a drawing for tickets they don’t want. Everyone who enters the drawing wants the tickets, its just that some people want them in order to attend the game, others want them to give to friends, others want them to sell and pocket the money.
Others have said that they wouldn’t enter the contest if they didn’t intend to enjoy the tickets. Everyone who enters the contest intends to enjoy the tickets. Some will enjoy attending the game, others will enjoy giving the tickets to friends, others will enjoy selling the tickets and taking their SO out for dinner.
Same goes for interested. Everyone is interested…just for different reasons.
It has been speculated that the intent of the donation was to distribute tickets to people who intended to go to the game, and if this was the case it should be explicitly specified by the donor and policed by those holding the raffle, although this seems a bit ridiculous. What if someone enters the contest intending to go to the game, then changes their mind after they’ve won?
I suspect that the intent of the donation was to dump some extra tickets that wouldn’t be used otherwise and to gain some good will for the donor. If they are giving them away I imagine they couldn’t care less what happens to the tickets.
In the absence of any explicit instruction on the part of the donor I see no reason why the winner can’t do what they please with the tickets. No ethical or moral reason not to sell them and enjoy the proceeds.
I, too, would refrain from broadcasting my intention to sell them in the office – not because there is anything wrong in doing so, but because this thread demonstrates that the world is full of sore losers and people who cannot mind their own business.
I wanted to chime in as someone who’s been in almost the same situation (although not entirely on purpose). I entered a (free) drawing at work for some tickets to a Ben Harper concert. At the time, I knew nothing of Ben Harper’s music, and wasn’t even sure I’d want to go. When the email to enter came around, I figured it wouldn’t hurt to enter. I even thought “I could just eBay them.”
When I won, I felt uneasy about selling the tickets on eBay. What if people at work asked me about it? I ended up feeling guilty about it, and went to the concert. And it was awesome. I had a great time, as did my friend who I brought with me, who loves Ben Harper and had already been planning to go but had lost her ticket. I probably would not have spent money of my own on the concert, but I’m glad that the opportunity for me to try something new arose.
I completely agree that, ethically, you have no obligation not to sell something you win in this way. You won it; it’s yours; do what you will. However, it’s incredibly tacky to enter with the intention of doing so, and almost certainly not worth the personal and career ill-will that it will likely bring. In future raffles, I chose not to enter when I knew that I would not use whatever was raffled off.
I’d like to understand further the notion that selling these tickets is “tacky”. I don’t think people feel the same way about other objects.
It seems to me that the sense is that the nature of the object - tickets - demands different behavior and implies a contract for the raffle. I’m not sure why other objects aren’t treated the same way. For example, if the donor had given a television to the office and we want to divine their intention for the use of the donation, we would have to assume that they want it to go to someone for the purpose of watching television. Is it tacky to sell the television if you win, but you’ve already got a television? Is it tacky to sell the television if you just don’t like it as much as your current television? What if the donation was a Corvette? Surely they want the donation to go to someone who would enjoy driving a Corvette. Anyone who enters the raffle with the intention of selling the Corvette and buying a Prius is tacky?
In this day and age everyone should realize that tickets are a commodity, and they are regularly bought and sold. A donor must realize that when they give away tickets there is some chance that they’ll be sold on.
So tell me, is intending to sell anything from a raffle tacky, or is it just tickets? And if the latter, why are they so special?
If you do not get why it would be poor form to accept them with the intention of selling them on eBay, then I assure you that your co-workers have a nice label for you, too.
Educate me.
Would it be “poor form” in the case of the television? The Corvette?
If not, why not?
Why is it not “poor form” to insert your nose into what someone else does with their winnings? In my opinion, the coworker in the OP that wants to control people’s use of their prize (in order to increase his/her own chance of winning, no less) is the pinnacle of poor form.
The OP was talking about tickets to an event. You can easily put a price tag on an object such as a television, because it’s hardly unique or extraordinary. You cannot easily put a price tag on an *experience * because it varies so widely from person to person. Why would I want to enter a raffle like the one described in the OP if I had no interest in attending the event?
Not that there’s a big difference between a fundraising raffle and the one depicted in the OP. In the former, their goal is to simply raise cash and they don’t really care what the winner does with the television/car/etc. In the OP, the purpose of the raffle was clearly not to raise money but rather to garner good will by allowing a business associate to attend a highly coveted event, for free. Entering that raffle with the intention of converting it to cash is tacky because it negates the donor’s intentions. The tickets were his to do with as he pleased. If he wanted them to go to the highest bidder, he would have sold them himself.
As I noted earlier, I was in a very similar situation as the OP. In my case it was NASCAR tickets with a special access pass. I am not at all interested in auto racing and this item could have sold for big bucks on eBay or craigslist. Since I wasn’t interested, I declined to enter.
The co-worker who won was a NASCAR nut. She was so happy that she won and had an experience that she likely never would have had otherwise. This wasn’t a random stranger, it was a co-worker. It was great to listen to her happily recount her experience and see her pictures.
If you can’t understand why it would be an asshole move to deprive a fellow co-worker of an experience like that for some cash, I don’t think it can ever be explained to you.
The co-worker is not focusing on YOU, but rather protecting the intent of the donor. Clearly the DONOR wanted to control people’s use of the prize, which is why he didn’t put it for sale on eBay himself.
As a gesture of good will, my husband’s partner offers up his 4th row behind the dugout Reds seats to co-workers and clients all the time. He’s never offered up a television or a Corvette. And it would be quite odd (and, BTW, illegal) for him to do so.
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned yet, but I think would make selling the tickets on Ebay unethical, is if there is any chance the original owner of the tickets could get in trouble if it was found out the tickets were scalped.
I don’t know how many other organizations have similar rules, but if you are a box holder at Churchill Downs, and it is found that you have sold your tickets to anyone over the listed price, you will not be allowed to be a box holder the next year.
The folks at CD take this rule very seriously, I know folks that lost their rights to their box over this. If a boxholder finds they have two extra tickets for the Derby, they will generally offer them to a friend at face value. The friend then buys all the drinks that day, or will take the boxholder out to dinner or something. Even among friends they don’t violate the rules.
I would find out if there are any rules like this in place. It would be most unfair to get the generous donor in trouble. Chances are the donor knows he could have sold the tickets on Ebay for some cash, but for some reason he chose not to do that, but to donate them instead.
I would also want to find out if these two sets of two tickets were in a box that two other people would be sharing. If that is the case, by selling them on ebay may cause a problem for the two legimate ticket holders if the “guests” acted up in anyway. Some fans can be obnoxious, and if your tickets were bought by kids who swore at the players, got drunk and threw things, etc, then that would be very unfair to those who they had to sit next to. The original box holder may have donated them to your company, with the expectation that anyone from your company who used them would be considerate, and act responsibly at the game.
If you don’t want to bother to find out the details about these tickets, I just wouldn’t enter the drawing. I don’t know what kind of price you might expect to get, but it wouldn’t be worth it if selling them caused harm to the original ticket holder. That is the part that would be unethical to me. I think it would be fair to say the original ticket holder donated these tickets with the expectation that they would be used by someone from your company, not sold on Ebay.
"Churchill Downs guards the names of its Kentucky Derby ticket holders so closely that only two executives at the track have access to the entire list, the company has said in court papers.
It considers the roster a trade secret, and its security sentinels scan sites such as eBay to catch people who resell tickets bestowed on them by the track. Then it cuts off their future supply." *
*"Churchill Downs is not the only business that goes after scalpers: The Boston Red Sox and the New England Patriots also take away tickets from those caught reselling, and the Sox last November sued StubHub, the San Francisco-based ticket exchange, to try to staunch the flow.
Some rock bands have been even more aggressive. Tom Petty last year voided 1,400 fan club concert tickets that fell into the hands of scalpers, and to cut out brokers entirely, Coldplay auctions tickets online to registered fans only."*
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070430/DERBYFUN/704300415/-1/SPORTS0801
Yes, in line with what others said, given the nature of the item and the fact that the donor is an outside friend of the company, we presume the intention of the donor is that the recipient actually go to the game, and that the rules of the raffle should be honest to the intention of the donor.
With a Corvette, well, it seems unlikely that someone would just drop off a Corvette at reception and say “Find someone who might like this”, that is, it’s unlikely that a Corvette would be donated with the same intentions. We’d have to have more specific details, but of all possible scenarios this one would be very unlikely. Ditto for a TV.
As mentioned, if there’s a way to clarify why the tickets were donated, then OP is free to do so, and the result might indicate that selling the tickets is acceptable. But without any other information, you have to go with your best guess.
I appreciate the responses, mostly.
It seems that the argument against selling the tickets hinges largely on the presumed intent of the donor. With lots of weaseling thrown in for good measure.
Regarding intent, I have been on both the giving and receiving end of tickets to various events, and, when giving, my intention is to make a nice gift to the recipient. I haven’t and wouldn’t give a second thought to what the winner did with the tickets. I certainly wouldn’t judge them, or consider them an “asshole” for selling them. They won them, fair and square, and I hope they enjoy them in any way they choose. In fact I’d hope that anyone who tried to control what others did with their prize would be excluded from winning any prize I ever donated in the future. It appears that others feel differently about gifts they give. They give them with strings attached…well, that is their choice.
Regarding the television and Corvette. Much weaseling here.
TVs and Corvettes are easier to convert to cash than tickets? I don’t think so.
TVs and Corvettes aren’t an experience? I beg to differ. The experience of owning and driving a Corvette is much more a pleasurable experience to many than attending a college basketball game. The experience of watching your favorite college basketball team on a new TV for years to come would probably be a great experience for many people.
TVs and Corvettes aren’t likely to be donated? Corvettes maybe, but I’ve seen TVs donated and raffled off, as well as MANY other things of value…trips, sporting goods, gift cards. If you don’t like the Corvette example, quit weaseling and pick your own piece of swag and tell me to what extent you’ve got to use the thing before you’ve satisfied your implied contract to meet the presumed intent of the donor. I saw a quadriplegic guy win a basketball once, should he have been excluded from the drawing since he had no intent to use the basketball? Why shouldn’t he be able to give the prize to his nephew, or sell it on ebay?
FWIW I don’t think it is the entrants’ responsibility to “protect the intent of the donor” by trying to cajole their coworkers into not entering so that they have a better chance of winning. Nor do I think the entrants are particularly adept at divining the intent of the donor, since it has been stated here that “clearly the DONOR wanted to control people’s use of the prize” although there is no evidence of that, and it would be absolutely untrue if I were the donor. If the donor were unlike me and others that I associate with, and wanted to control how the prize was used they should have made that explicit and then figured out some way to enforce their petty whims on the winner. Which is, of course, absurd. Such strings are always the responsibility of the donor - when donations are made to schools, charities, hospitals, whatever, if the donor wants them used for certain purposes they must explicitly state so. It is not for others to speculate and quibble over after the donation has been made.
hajario, in your case, if you believed that the explicit intent of the donor was to have someone from your office who would enjoy the race, attend the race, rather than giving a gift without strings attached, why didn’t you enter the contest and then (if you won) give the tickets to the co-worker who would have most enjoyed the race? You would have doubled that persons chances by entering the contest. And you would have been free to do so because you won a prize and are free to distribute it as you see fit.
Well, whatever, this thread certainly has made me think twice about what to do the next time I donate something.
Echoing “they’re yours to do with as you please” sentiments.
A few years ago, I won a Sopranos box DVD set on a radio show. I am in the minority that has zero interest in the show, so I sold it on Ebay with plastic shrinkwrap still intact. Got $60 for them–nice for me, super cheap for the buyer. Everyone was happy.