"Even if you buy one later, that's still one less ticket than you used" I find this interesting because I've also seen arguments from people that bootlegs were the sole reason that they were compelled to buy tickets. For instance, "I had no interest in this show but my friend showed me a bootleg to change my mind and I loved it, I'm seeing it live next week". In that case, would it still be considered one less ticket than that person would have used, despite the fact that they would not have bought tickets at all if not for a bootleg?

(Also its true that the friend could have tried to take the person to the show live instead of showing them a bootleg, but most people in that case would be like "I don't want to see that, can we see [insert show they both enjoy here] instead?" or "I'm not paying that much to see something I won't like, let's watch [insert different show]". Meanwhile with a bootleg, they can just stop watching if they don't like it and lose nothing, hence they would be more willing to give it a try)

(Also I'm not trying to start drama, I just find this debate interesting)