The jury is about to decide the fate of Ticketmaster

consumer Complaints about Ticketmaster Very large in state attorneys general offices compared to Pennsylvania offices It comes with overt appeal Residents who file a complaint against the company should be patient to get a response. That kind of pressure has prompted more than 30 states to press ahead with allegations that Live Nation-Ticketmaster illegally monopolized parts of the concert industry, even as the federal government settled its claims. Soon it will be up to a jury to decide whether the ways Live Nation-Ticketmaster conducts its business are not only frustrating, but also illegal.

The antitrust trial that began March 2 against Live Nation-Ticketmaster is coming to a close on Thursday. State aides who have not yet filed their claims The Ministry of Justice settled One week in gambling. They were betting that they would not only be able to win the case, but also get more relief for their constituents, permanently changing the competitive dynamics of concert touring in the United States, including through the potential collapse of the industry’s mainstay. The states argued that Live Nation-Ticketmaster maintained its monopoly power by engaging in anti-competitive conduct, including leveraging its power in concert promotion and its broad control over amphitheaters across the country to force concert venues to use its ticketing platform, even when they preferred not to do so.

Live Nation responded to this narrative, calling witnesses from its employees and other industry players who testified to the quality of its services and the fierce competition it faces. If the jury buys this argument, the Justice Department’s deal may look better than its critics initially imagined. But the ruling in favor of the states opens up the possibility of sweeping change in the industry.

The trial faced rocky moments almost from the jump, after the Justice Department settlement left plaintiffs in the state scrambling to file a lawsuit On their own. The judge accused both Live Nation and the Justice Department of failing to inform him of the status of the deal early enough, and the settlement itself exacerbated the problem. Drawn criticism Of the players in the concert industry and some of the countries moving forward.

It may take a few hours or days for the jury to reach a verdict, and reaching a finding in favor of the states may be the first step toward breaking up the company. But whatever they decide, it will almost certainly lead to a long road of appeals.

One story the jury heard throughout the trial revolved around a dispute between former Barclays Center CEO John Abbamondi and Live Nation’s Michael Rapinoe. Abamondi was the government’s first witness, being questioned by the Department of Justice while they were still a party to the case. he She described a phone call He claimed that Rapino implicitly threatened to pull concerts from the arena if she did not continue the ticket deal with Ticketmaster. In a Call recording As Rapinoe plays court, he drops an F-bomb and gets audibly upset, saying it could be a “tough time delivering tickets or concerts with a new competitor in town.” It was this kind of alleged threat that prompted SeatGeek Offer retaliation insurance to the venues that tried to win from Ticketmaster, SeatGeek’s CEO later testified.

When Rapinoe took the stand, he said his frustration was aimed at a dispute over Abamondi’s interpretation of Barclays’ existing contract with Ticketmaster. He was simply conveying the fact that the new arena nearby would likely take business from Barclays. He claimed that Abamondi was “trying to set me up” by bringing up the topic of promoting the concert in that discussion. Bloomberg I mentionedthat he expected an opportunity to match SeatGeek’s offer and “made a mistake” when it was rejected.

The states also subpoenaed Ben Baker, a Live Nation employee whose internal conversations with a colleague bragged about “robbing” “blind” fans of costs for things like parking. Baker, who is now head of ticketing for Live Nation venues, said the 2022 talks were “immature and unfortunate”. Bloomberg I mentioned. Rapinoe condemned the behavior, said he was unaware of it until this trial, and said he intended to “deal with” the case that week.

The jury also heard from the CEO of Oak View Group, a venue management company that struck a deal with Ticketmaster that incentivized it to direct venues to use the ticketing platform. In a separate case, the Justice Department charged former OVG CEO Tim Leiweke with bid rigging, which led his company to… Signing a non-prosecution agreement Last year’s recognition of the ranking It is understood that it is with Ticketmaster. (It was for wiki He was later pardoned by President Donald Trump). On the stand in the monopoly case, current OVG CEO Chris Granger testified that he did not know why OVG did not disclose the Ticketmaster deal to customers, but that “we should have done so,” Law360 I mentioned. However, he emphasized that Ticketmaster is a superior platform over competitors like SeatGeek and AXS.

State economist Rosa Abrantes Metz testified that Ticketmaster keeps, on average, an additional $2.30 for each ticket sold, according to Court News Servicecompared to the competitor. Most of this is paid by concertgoers, she said. Her testimony turned into a legal flashpoint as the nation lived Abrantes Metz was charged with perjury By saying it relied on the way Ticketmaster internally calculates the portion of the ticket price it retains in determining its damages calculations. The company said that was a lie and moved to strike its testimony, saying its analysis falls apart without the alleged lie. Judge Arun Subramanian said he would reserve judgment on her testimony, noting that it appeared to be just a misunderstanding, not false testimony, according to the American “space” website. Inner City Press.

Ticketmaster is defending

After the states rested their case, Live Nation got a chance to call its own witnesses to complicate the narrative. Witnesses who testified in its defense said Ticketmaster offers the superior product in the market, and that the battles to promote artists and win venues are hard-fought on the merits. Adel Nour, Drake’s manager, praised Live Nation, saying they had the “fairest relationship” with the promoter who would go “above and beyond to serve him,” with multi-million dollar rewards. according to Central nervous system.

Executives said Live Nation has to compete intensely to win over artists to promote their concerts. The head of the tourism company, Omar Al-Julani, told the jury that Live Nation lost big names such as Morgan Wallen and Bruce Springsteen. “I can’t stress enough to tell you how competitive the business is,” he said. Central nervous system. Likewise, when concert venues choose a ticketing platform, Rapinoe testified, those venues make the final decisions, including on things like exclusivity arrangements. “I don’t tell the billionaire what to do where he is. He tells me,” Rapinoe testified. Bloombergapparently in reference to the owners of the place.

Jennifer Johnson, vice president of commercial strategy at Ticketmaster, testified that customers often want exclusive deals for longer periods, and that such an arrangement actually presents greater risks for Ticketmaster, Big tech companies are on trial I mentioned. Jurors heard from other witnesses that venues may want exclusive contracts for a sense of stability and continuity. Late in the trial, the plaintiffs actually They moved to voluntarily dismiss their claim Unlawful exclusive dealing against Live Nation. In cross-examination, Johnson acknowledged that until at least 2024, sales representatives were incentivized with bonuses to renew venue contracts and extend their terms.

Jurors also heard another side of the Barclays Center story from Lori Jacoby, the arena’s chief entertainment officer. Jacoby testified that things were not going smoothly at Barclays Center before the arena decided to switch back from SeatGeek to Ticketmaster. She said there were problems when tickets went on sale for The Strokes and My Chemical Romance Inner City Press. She said that made it difficult to attract artists, which is why they returned to work. Other executives also described Ticketmaster as a better option over rivals Live Nation’s The economist said There is no evidence that it exercises monopoly power.

Finally, there was another tussle between USA and Live Nation over a defense witness who returned to Live Nation after leaving rival AEG. Live Nation accused the states of “improperly attempting to dissuade a witness from testifying and/or influence his testimony,” after obtaining information about his departure from AEG. Live Nation asked the judge to impose sanctions on the states as a result, which the states did The charge was an unjustified attempt “Sweeping and damaging relief.” Subramanian The request for sanctions was partially deniedbut reserved judgment on the rest, ordering AEG to explain why they would not be made to pay financial penalties for disclosing a witness’ personal information.

However, these and other skirmishes occurred outside of the jury’s earshot, so it would not directly influence their decision. Their determination on whether Live Nation is an illegal monopoly could come down to what they see as a threat or standard business talk. If Live Nation wins, the Justice Department settlement may look more attractive to opponents. But an outcome that favors the states may lead to secession.