Business

StubHub persists, serves up Yanks tix for $8

The Yankees may think they got rid of StubHub by signing a deal with TicketMaster — but that’s not the case.

Readers will remember that the Yanks were annoyed that StubHub wouldn’t set a minimum price on the Yankee Stadium tickets fans were reselling on its site.

So, in a rage against the free-market system, the Bombers bolted from Major League Baseball’s deal with StubHub.

But I told you months ago that wouldn’t be the end of it — and it isn’t.

Recently StubHub sent out an e-mail saying “MLB 2013 Tickets Are Here.” And, sure enough, there are plenty of Yankee tickets in the batch. Thousands of spring training tickets are listed for as little as $9. And there are also thousands of other tickets for regular season games at prices below what the Yankees are asking.

For the April 18 game against the Diamondbacks, for instance, StubHub recently had 2,720 tickets listed. And the cheapest ones were being offered at $8, which includes delivery and service fee.

If fans buy from the Stadium directly, those same seats are $20. The cheapest seats — those in the bleachers — cost more than $12 if bought from the Yanks.

***

Let me start out with the truth about the federal budget deficit — it was really $6.6 trillion in the 2012 fiscal year ended last September, when you force Uncle Sam to employ the same kind of accounting companies are forced to use.

It wasn’t the $1.1 trillion that Washington claims.

The $1.1 trillion figure is only the cash shortfall. It doesn’t take into account long-term obligations like retirement pay, medical benefits for retirees, Social Security benefits and the like.

So when the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected this week that the $1.1 trillion deficit would decline to just $845 billion in the current fiscal year, there should have been a one-second cheer followed by automatic derision from people who understand this stuff.

But instead, the media reported the $845 billion projection as if it were something important.

Let me put it in perspective. Even at $845 billion, the annual cash deficit is enormous, especially after a $1.3 trillion shortfall in 2010 and $1.4 trillion in 2009. It used to be rare that the deficit topped $200 billion — and even back then, those who understand these things were disturbed.

The CBO’s projection of a $845 billion deficit this year is laughable for this other reason: How can anyone project a budget deficit when Congress and the White House can’t come up with a budget?

As you know, Washington is now supposed to be discussing spending cuts (as the Republicans want) and tax increases (as the Democrats are insisting on), and the two sides are getting nowhere. It looks as if it will be months before the talks get serious, even though the government has had to temporarily suspend its debt ceiling.

So how’d the CBO come up with a number? One sentence explains it: “If the current laws that govern federal taxes and spending do not change, the budget deficit will shrink this year to $845 billion…,” the CBO said in its report.

But, of course, taxes and spending will change. And those changes will alter the CBO’s view that the economy will be able to grow even a paltry 1.4 percent in 2013 which, in turn, will change revenue projections.

Why did the CBO even waste the paper its report was printed on?

As I said the other day, the whole situation in Washington is getting confounding. And what makes it even more curious is the fact that the Justice Department chose now — four years into an investigation — to sue Standard & Poor’s for fraudulently rating mortgage-backed securities.

If S&P and the other ratings agencies don’t toe the line, some of the secrets of the true US budget deficit might come out. The thinking in the Obama administration must be that intimidating S&P with a lawsuit will make it easier to control.

***

A Wall Street veteran is trying to blow the whistle on the mutual-fund industry. But he must be using a dog whistle, because humans don’t seem to be responding.

Sy Sacks, who has been in the industry for 50 years, says mutual-fund pricing inequities are costing investors $10 billion a year.

Sacks says mutual-fund costs are currently paid by all shareholders based on the number of shares they own.

“This gives new investors and those liquidating shares an unfair price advantage over existing shareholders, which are usually long-term investors,” says Sacks.

Sacks says he’s come up with a model to fix that problem — but as usual, nobody wants to listen.

***

A little buffet restaurant on Long Island has found a unique way to price its meals.

Because it’s an all-you-eat sushi place, Minado, on Carle Place, charges for children by their height. Under 5 feet tall and the child is charged half the adult price; under 4 feet, a quarter of the adult price; and under 3 feet eat free.

That may not be a bad idea for adults too — only in that case they could be charged by their weight. Lawsuits, of course, would result, but the issue would be intriguing to those of us in the press.

In case your kids are too tall or you are a sushi-hater like me, you have plenty of other dining choices.