Talk:StubHub

Archives (Index)

1 2

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

History update 2

Hi editors, my next request is in two parts.

First, I propose changing the heading 2000–2007 to Founding and early years as this is more descriptive.

For the second, I propose changing up the remainder of the 2000–2007 subsection in the following way:

Extended content

−

After having a falling out with Fluhr in 2005, Baker left the company, retaining 10% ownership.In 2005, the company raised between $10 million and $25 million from [[Pequot Ventures]] (now [[FirstMark Capital]]). That year, the company generated $50 million in revenue, was cash flow positive. and generated over $200 million in sales.In 2006, ''[[Inc. (magazine)|Inc.]]'' ranked StubHub as the eighth fastest growing private company in America on its annual "Inc. 500" list.[[File:EBayTorontoOffice2.JPG|thumb|eBay, PayPal, Kijiji, and StubHub in Toronto]]StubHub's acquisition by eBay was announced in January 2007 for a reported $310 million; the company went public under eBay. According to [[CNN Money]], 2007 was a very successful year for the company, handling five million individual transactions, more than in the previous six years combined of its history. Staffing at StubHub had increased to 350 workers by the time of the sale. Following the acquisition, Fluhr left the company, and [[Chris Tsakalakis]] became the CEO.

+

Fluhr described a 2004 falling out between himself and Baker over the company direction. Baker wanted to develop partnerships with sports leagues while Fluhr preferred to focus on building the StubHub brand. The difference in direction led to Baker leaving the company while retaining a 10 percent ownership stake. Baker founded competing agency [[Viagogo]] to operate in European markets in 2006. StubHub had a positive [[cash flow]] in 2005 with sales of approximately <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$</span>200 million and revenues of approximately <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$</span>50 million. The company successfully lobbied for law changes in New York, Florida, and Pennsylvania regarding ticket sales and the amount above face value for which tickets could be sold. StubHub made approximately <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$</span>6,500 in campaign donations to Florida legislators while lobbying for the law change in that state. In 2006, the value of tickets sold on the platform was approximately <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$</span>400 million and it generated approximately <span style="white-space: nowrap">US$</span>100 million in revenue. The company employed approximately 350 people at 12 locations.

References

Rendered out, it looks like this:

Fluhr described a 2004 falling out between himself and Baker over the company direction. Baker wanted to develop partnerships with sports leagues while Fluhr preferred to focus on building the StubHub brand. The difference in direction led to Baker leaving the company while retaining a 10 percent ownership stake. Baker founded competing agency Viagogo to operate in European markets in 2006. StubHub had a positive cash flow in 2005 with sales of approximately US$200 million and revenues of approximately US$50 million. The company successfully lobbied for law changes in New York, Florida, and Pennsylvania regarding ticket sales and the amount above face value for which tickets could be sold. StubHub made approximately US$6,500 in campaign donations to Florida legislators while lobbying for the law change in that state. In 2006, the value of tickets sold on the platform was approximately US$400 million and it generated approximately US$100 million in revenue. The company employed approximately 350 people at 12 locations.

References

• Source 3 is already cited in the article. It is "CNN12", this story

This does several things:

• Condenses content and removes potentially biased language (e.g. 2007 was a very successful year for the company)
• Removes sentences about investment from Pequot (poor sourcing) and Inc. 500 listing (comes off a bit promotional, though I understand if editors prefer to keep this because the source is solid)
• Explains the context of the falling out between Fluhr and Baker more
• Removes mention of the eBay acquisition (preserves chronology of the section, acquisition to be added back in the next edit request, my draft/diff shows where I intend to suggest it goes)
• Removes Fluhr/Tsakalakis transition to preserve chronology (will be added to the next subsection in the next edit request)
• Adds content related to lobbying efforts to fit better into chronology
• Updates sources and makes Manual of Style fixes where needed

Please let me know what you think! Stephanie BINK (talk) 21:11, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

1. Done Subsection title changed. Uncontroversial edit based on the assumption of future edits.

2. Partly done: I've implemented the new prose as it is detailed, sourced, and WP:NPOV compliant. However, I've retained the line on eBay's aquisition of the company since this is an important part of the prose that shouldn't be omitted until updated.

@Stephanie BINK: really great work on this article so far! I'll see if I can keep an eye out for requests on this page to review if you continue your updates. --^The Robot Parade 05:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Full update

After review by myself and Encoded, I have implemented this version of userspace draft per COI request. Leaving this message so there is a link to the history showing the changes worked on prior to implementation. CNMall41 (talk) 00:31, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Stephanie BINK:, if you could also resolve the reftag issue with "Billboard6." It is being used twice. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@CNMall41 Thanks for moving this across! Apologies for missing your message on the draft's page I've been off WP for a little while with exams. Thanks, Encoded  Talk 💬 11:55, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Small updates

@CNMall41 and Encoded: thank you again for reviewing this. I took care of the reference issue. I was taking a look back at the changes and I think we are all in agreement about everything, though I have two small suggestions based on the feedback from the draft.

First, I suggest making some small tweaks to the sentence on the Toronto Star article to ensure everything is properly attributed. To that end, I propose changing

• According to a November 9, 2017 article published in The Toronto Star, Lavallée was able to expand his business using "exploitative tactics" that "gam[e] the ticket marketplace and put entertainment beyond the reach of millions of fans who can’t compete with large-scale scalping operations."

To

• Legislators in the UK, US, and Canada said Lavallee expanded his business using "exploitative tactics" that manipulate the secondary ticketing marketplace and "(put) entertainment beyond the reach of millions of fans who can’t compete with large-scale scalping operations."

Why: The current sentence makes it sound like that is the Star's analysis, but the actual claim comes from lawmakers. This just makes it extra clear who said what.

Second, I suggest adding the following sentence immediately after the previous sentence:

• Prior to October 2017, Lavallée used his company, I Want Ticket Inc, which was "registered on the British Isle of Man, to post on StubHub in the U.K."

References

Why: This sentence was in the previous version of the article but not in my draft. I removed it because I didn't think it necessary, but wanted to draw attention to it here for the sake of total transparency.

Thanks again for all your time and attention! Cheers Stephanie BINK (talk) 19:13, 20 January 2026 (UTC)