Listen to the article
The antitrust trial against Live Nation and Ticketmaster resumed Monday in a New York federal court with 36 states and the District of Columbia continuing their legal battle, despite the U.S. Justice Department’s withdrawal following a settlement last week.
Judge Arun Subramanian informed jurors that Arkansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota had joined the federal government in settling their claims, leaving the remaining states to pursue the case independently.
Testimony resumed with Jay Marciano, CEO of AEG Presents, Live Nation’s primary competitor, who described significant challenges in competing with Live Nation’s business practices. Marciano testified that his company struggles to overcome exclusive contracts used by Live Nation and Ticketmaster to maintain industry dominance in the United States.
“A more competitive environment exists in Europe, where consumers pay 15% fees on tickets rather than the 25% it costs concertgoers in the United States,” Marciano told the court. He advocated for allowing multiple ticketing companies to sell every show, arguing that “fans are rewarded” in such a system. Under cross-examination, however, Marciano acknowledged that AEG is also a major industry player, with annual revenues from events serving over 100 million customers.
Robert Roux, Live Nation’s president of live concerts, later testified, characterizing his company as an “artist-first” organization that performs 90% of its shows in smaller venues. These smaller venues, he explained, allow Live Nation to develop artists who may eventually perform in stadiums, arenas, and amphitheaters that draw larger audiences and generate higher revenue.
Roux emphasized the industry’s competitive nature, stating that rivals like AEG cause Live Nation to “change its offers to artists all the time” to retain or attract clients. He described the concert promotion business as “high risk, low-margin,” where companies must pay guaranteed money to artists, often in advance, without assurance of successful ticket sales.
“One tour required an advance payment to cover roughly $20 million in pre-tour costs, including the rental of 87 semitractor trailers to haul everything needed for the show,” Roux testified.
When questioned by a Live Nation attorney, Roux rejected allegations that the company forces artists to perform at specific venues or withholds shows from venues that refuse to use Ticketmaster. “Not true,” he stated firmly.
The trial faced potential derailment last week when states requested a mistrial after U.S. government lawyers announced their tentative settlement. Judge Subramanian urged states to negotiate with Live Nation, which led to the states withdrawing their mistrial request. By Friday, seven states indicated they were close to joining the federal government’s settlement, but the judge ruled that any state without a finalized agreement by Monday would remain in the case.
The states’ central claim alleges that Live Nation and Ticketmaster maintain a virtual monopoly by “blocking competition and driving up prices for fans” through threats, retaliation, and other anticompetitive tactics across concert promotion and ticketing.
Live Nation’s defense team has worked to demonstrate to jurors that the entertainment and ticketing business is more complex than portrayed by the states, arguing that artists, sports teams, and venues ultimately control pricing and ticket distribution decisions, making industry monopolization impossible.
The Justice Department’s settlement, announced last week, aims to open some ticketing to rival companies and potentially lower consumer costs. However, numerous states have criticized the agreement as insufficient, claiming the federal government failed to secure adequate concessions from Live Nation.
The case highlights ongoing tensions in the live entertainment industry, where ticketing practices and fees have faced increasing scrutiny from consumers, artists, and regulators in recent years.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
11 Comments
This antitrust trial is crucial for addressing the lack of competition in the live events ticketing industry. Live Nation’s dominance and exclusionary tactics have hurt consumers for too long. Allowing multiple ticketing providers could lead to lower fees and better service for fans.
I agree, more competition in this space is needed. The 25% ticket fees in the US are exorbitant compared to Europe – consumers deserve better options.
The comparison to Europe’s 15% ticketing fees versus the 25% in the US is quite striking. Something is clearly broken in the American live events ticketing system. I’m hopeful the court can find a solution that benefits consumers.
Absolutely, the stark difference in fees is quite telling. Consumers deserve better options and fairer pricing in the US market.
While I understand the desire for more competition, I’m curious how the court will balance that against the potential operational complexities and costs of having multiple ticketing providers per event. There may be practical limitations to achieving the ideal ‘open’ system the states are seeking.
That’s a fair point. The court will need to carefully weigh the pros and cons and find the right balance. Increased competition is the goal, but can’t come at the expense of major operational hurdles.
This trial is an important test case for antitrust enforcement in the digital age. Live Nation’s vertical integration and alleged anti-competitive practices have gone unchecked for too long. I hope the court can find a way to inject more competition into the live events ticketing market.
Interesting to see the states pushing this case forward even after the DOJ settlement. The exclusive contracts and high fees charged by the Live Nation/Ticketmaster monopoly are definitely concerning. I hope the court can find a way to increase competition in this market.
Yes, the states are taking a bold stance here. The DOJ settlement doesn’t seem to have gone far enough in addressing the core competition issues.
Kudos to the states for pursuing this case even after the DOJ settlement. Ticketmaster’s dominance has allowed them to charge exorbitant fees that hurt consumers. A more competitive market could drive down costs and improve the overall fan experience.
The testimony from AEG’s CEO about the challenges in competing with Live Nation’s practices is quite telling. A more open, competitive ticketing landscape would benefit consumers greatly. Hopefully the court can find a way to rein in Live Nation’s dominance.