Here's the (2018) viewpoint of somebody who actually owns and operates a concert venue in SF: https://www.dnalounge.com/backstage/log/2018/01/31.html (HN referers banned, so cut & paste into a fresh tab)
Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
321–330 of 397 posts
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's good to be calling non-government charges a tax. Fee or Commission works fine here. The line item for sellers/buyers agent isn't "tax" when you buy/sell a house despite it being a percentage.
How's that working out for the realtor's association these days with recent court decisions? I think those show that it's a bad idea as well. A nominal fee is one thing, but ticketmaster has been milking it for decades and continuously getting worse and worse about it.
I'm not going to claim Ticketmaster is charging a "honest" amount but I will claim it should be called a "fee" and not a "tax".
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#323My horror story of Ticketmaster; I recently bought standing-room-only tickets on short notice ( I reached out to support for assistance, and after several days of wasted time and run-around, they finally sent my issue to their engineering team saying they'd get back to me in 5 business days. Keep in mind I said I bought these tickets a week before the event, and they'd already wasted a few days giving me the run-arou…
> I attempted to charge back the purchase since they did not provide what I paid for (tickets I could sell), and they fought me and won somehow. This has happened to me twice now (though not with TicketMaster) and I was 100% in the right, and I lost. When I mentioned it on HN I was met with a lot of doubters. I think something has really changed regarding chargebacks.
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
Current ticketmaster tickets are electronic and often can be resold only on their system (depending on what the artist/venue has chosen as a restriction). Of course their system could limit the resale prices of the ticket, to the original price or a set percentage above it. They already take a bite of each resale I believe. They have already built the electronic ticketing and transfer system that would allow them to…
afaik, scalpers will often be selling tickets that have been bought speculatively in large blocks during pre-sale or when sale starts. this is a whole very complex side industry in itself, and being able to get those large chunks of cash up-front/early is beneficial for the artists/promoters/venues for lots of reasons. obv. this doesn't really apply to a super popular artist who is going to sell out on the first day,…
TicketMaster ~ bookrunner/sponsor; scalper ~ underwriter;
The general population cannot participate in IPOs, just like we cannot buy primary-market tickets to popular shows.
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#325Finally. Between the market dominance via Live Nation and Ticketmaster merge. The venue exclusivity contracts they insist upon. They are a grotesque monopoly.
They are but the DoJ is getting involved 30 years too late. They crushed all of the meaningful competition that long ago. Even breaking the company up into parts wouldn't suddenly fix the industry.
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ticket master sucks, but it's gonna be worse. Doing onsales is pretty hard, your basically making every one stand in line all be it virtual. No one wants to deal with that. The current all in price is just going to become the "minimum bid" put down more money and possibly get better seats. When ever one has bids in, then close them and run an algorithm to distribute seats and start charging cards. The tech is cheaper…
> Ticket master sucks, but it's gonna be worse. So what makes it better? Should we be thankful for the current status quo?
Taylor Swift cleared a billion dollars at the box office (that's tickets) she's gonna walk away with half that.
There are countries with GDP's that small. Taylor Swift made so much money selling tickets that she could be a micro nation. Thats not t-shirts, that's not concessions, that's not kickbacks. Thats half a bill on just tickets.
Look at an artist like Dave Mathews. Who went out of his way to have his own ticketing and merch platform (Music Today)... Now it is a "presale" for Citi Customers...
When money fell out of the sales of physical media concerts, merch and licensing were the only avenues left to make money. When artists get big they cash out, the fans pay for that...
I dont think the status quo is going anywhere, sadly. Like loot boxes and pay to win games the genie is out of the bottle, the only thing you can control as a consumer is your own spending. That might mean going to local shows or staying away from major artists...
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
And in court they will probably argue that this is vertical integration that creates savings they pass along to the consumer. DOJ will likely argue they are pocketing it.
Has the DOJ ever won an argument against just vertical integration in the entire history of the US?
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#328I used to work in this space. If the DOJ breaks up live nation the only group who gets screwed is the consumer. The sort of artist who is big enough to use live nation also wants a pay day for going on tour. They want the door, they want to sell their merch, they want a cut of the 20$ beer you buy. There might be 1 or 2 artist left who dont want to see you gouged on the ticket but that might not even be true any more…
Even if they don't break them up, there needs to be some limits and regulations as this scene is getting obscene: 1. I thought scalping was illegal? Maybe that has changed, or maybe there's a big loophole, but most of the big ticketing apps have essentially legalized scalping and they even have conventions for their "partners" (scalpers) where they entertain them and teach them how to buy and sell more tickets. Since…
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
And in court they will probably argue that this is vertical integration that creates savings they pass along to the consumer. DOJ will likely argue they are pocketing it.
Has the DOJ ever won an argument against just vertical integration in the entire history of the US?
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1473571/united-states-...
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2311543/united-states-...
Re: Justice Department to file antitrust suit against Live Nation
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I understand correctly Ticketmaster is still the one creating this problem, they demand exclusivity in their contracts which often means the venue has no choice if they want to participate in a large enough market to continue operating. Similarly artists have trouble securing large venues if not participating in their scheme. This is the problem with most 'monopolies', they reach a certain critical mass where they…
> they demand exclusivity in their contracts Right off the bat, exclusivity clauses shouldn't be legal, it's the definition of anti-competitive.
Freedom of association is an essential part of freedom of speech because, in many cases, and as the US Supreme Court has stated, people can engage in effective speech only when they join with others.
The only way you can take this position is IF one of the parties is subject to antitrust action. Which in this case, it is. So we have to trust antitrust!
That being said, I think that is certainly valid to argue for antitrust action to be automatic - so enforcement is not wholly dependent on subjective criteria.
I'd like to see what you think is viable.