After a high-profile antitrust lawsuit, the U.S. Justice Department said Monday that it has tentatively settled with Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation.

After merging in 2010, the combined Live Nation and Ticketmaster control the majority of ticket sales and venue bookings in the U.S., leaving talent little choice but to work with these companies. Customers have been fed up for years with dynamic pricing issues that can drive up ticket costs by thousands of dollars (often without consulting the artists), as well as the process of buying tickets — the sales for Taylor Swift’s Eras tour were so widely aggravating that they triggered government scrutiny.

According to the AP, the settlement would have Live Nation pay a fine of up to $280 million and divest at least 13 venues to give competitors more opportunity. But several states’ Attorneys General involved in the lawsuit are not appeased by the settlement.

  • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    16 hours ago

    If anyone truly thought this DOJ was ever going to break them up, I do have a couple bridges I’m looking to unload cheap…

  • kittykillinit@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Honestly, why should they?

    The customers have shown they’re willing to get fucked, so that’s what they get.

    • red_green_black@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Except customers have not. The reason people pay is because for all intents and purposes they are the only game in town.

      • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        16 hours ago

        The customers can choose to not do business with them. If the customers aren’t willing to be mildly inconvenienced to affect change, they can pay the exorbitant prices they’re obviously willing to pay.

        • Archr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Except some larger artists only post their tickets to these sites. Because they are the largest. And if the artists sell elsewhere, nothing is stopping TM/LN from scalping the tickets to resell on their own site.

          • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Customers can choose to not attend the concerts of those artists, but they won’t do that because they’re actually ok with paying the exorbitant prices. They demonstrate their approval of these prices to these artists AND to ticketmaster/livenation by continuing to pay these prices. Ultimately, the power to affect change lies with the customer and their wallet.

            • Archr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              12 hours ago

              You should avoid using generalizations so much. Not everyone is willing to pay the prices. Some people do avoid buying tickets from them, I know they aren’t my first choice.

              This “us vs them” mentality is not healthy for anyone.

      • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        16 hours ago

        It is absolutely viable to live your entire life without going to a live event. This isn’t anywhere on the pyramid of needs.

        • Archr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          16 hours ago

          So, based on your argument, airlines should be able to form monopolies? You don’t need to fly anywhere.

          Automakers? You aren’t required to drive anywhere. Just use uber/lyft/walk.

          You are right, lower class people don’t deserve entertainment. /s

      • kittykillinit@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        17 hours ago

        If customers are willing to pay it, why should the government stop businesses from charging it?

        • ilickfrogs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Customers were willing to pay for windows in the 90s but they still had actions taken against them for their monopolistic behavior regarding Internet Explorer. Your take is not only bad but is objectively wrong and at odds with antitrust and anti monopoly laws.