In theory? I prefer that approach.
In practice? Oh yeah, I totally legally sold my stupidly and unnecessarily expensive limited edition shoes to someone for sticker price. On a completely unrelated note, they gave me an extra 500 dollars for no apparent reason"
“No resale” sidesteps all of that while also removing the bad PR of “and all 5000 cybertrucks were on facebook marketplace two days later”.
The issue is not the no resale for N months policy. That is, ironically, more pro consumer than not. The issue is that it is being applied to a shitty product with prototype teething issues where the scarcity was artificially induced due to poor design processes.
Now, if we want to have a DIFFERENT discussion about how most of these “prestige” products are marketed through artificially induced scarcity then… yeah. But in a world where people want to buy something with a ridiculously limited run? I would rather the people fighting over who gets to buy it actually “want” it rather than just the same scalper bots we see in everything else.
