Hebert de Almeida 🎯’s Post

Those of you who know me probably know I love stats (odd, I know). As the final straw before this lawsuit, people point at the Swift tour ticketing situation and revel in showing videos of young (and some not so young) fans melting down over not getting tickets. What they don’t show are the ~2.5M people who DID get tickets - pretty much every single one available on the tour. With ~15M registered fans, do the math: 5 out of 6 registered fans would have never gotten a ticket (even setting aside logistics of where those 15M were distributed relative to the locations of the shows) because there were only so many tickets. Add in the surge of automated demand and you can see how there were always going to be more people crying than rejoicing. Taylor Swift would have had to do 6X the number of shows just to have enough seats for every registered fan to go once. That’s if no casual fans or professional scalpers got a single ticket. It’s unfortunate some people had to “settle” for seeing the concert at the multiplex instead of the stadium, but there is no ticketing platform or promoter that could have conjured up enough capacity to meet demand. For more insights on the entire situation, take the time to read this analysis. I look forward to the inevitable resolution and hope the effort will result in refocusing Congress on the pursuit of real solutions to the real problems (hint, I don’t think they’re going to amend the Constitution to require Taylor to remain on tour until everyone’s had a chance to see her live).

🤔 As most know, Live Nation is one of the largest entertainment companies in the world, with a significant presence in the live music industry. In 2010, Live Nation merged with Ticketmaster, creating a dominant force in the ticketing and live events industry. Since then, the company has faced allegations of anti-competitive practices and has been the subject of multiple investigations and lawsuits. ⏰ One of the main concerns raised by critics is that Live Nation's dual role as a venue owner/operator and ticket seller/promoter creates a conflict of interest and limits competition. The company has been accused of using its market power to secure exclusive deals with venues and artists and to block competitors from entering the market. ⚖ The Taylor Swift ticketing fiasco in 2020 further intensified scrutiny on Live Nation and Ticketmaster. Swift criticized the companies for using controversial ticketing practices, which allegedly allowed scalpers to profit at the expense of fans. This led to a wave of lawsuits and calls for a formal investigation into the merger. 🔎The Department of Justice (DOJ) has been actively investigating Live Nation and Ticketmaster over the past few years. The focus of the investigation is to determine whether the companies engage in anti-competitive agreements with venues and artists. The DOJ has sent document retention letters to talent agencies involved in contracts between artists and promoters, seeking information on any restrictions in the deals offered by Live Nation. 💔 While Live Nation has downplayed the scale of the investigation, critics argue that the company's dominant position in the industry stifles competition and results in higher fees for consumers. Some industry insiders and lawmakers have called for the breakup of Live Nation and Ticketmaster to restore competition in the ticketing and live events industry.   📒 It is important to note that while investigations are ongoing, no formal charges or lawsuits have been filed against Live Nation or Ticketmaster at this time. The outcome of the DOJ's probe and the potential implications for the company's business practices remain uncertain.  📎Read more at Ticket News below ⤵ 🛡 In these uncertain times - TicketMint provides the #framework needed to solve the #painpoints in today’s #ticketing #industry; by offering #transparent #pricing, #promoting #fair #competition, adhering to #ethical #businesspractices, implementing #secure #datamanagement, and prioritizing a #consumercentric approach.   🤙 Contact us at TicketMint to learn how to add a layer of assurance to your next event. #consumerprotection #bureauofconsumerprotection #entertainmentindustry #venues #artists #promoters #legislators #regulators #DOJ #decisionmakers #blockchaintechnology #ticketingsystem #ticketing #solution - SmartLedger - The World's Leading Blockchain Distribution Channel & 4chain studio 

Most of us have bought tickets to some event, be it a concert, movie, or just a local talk. It's safe to say that we have all experienced that frustration with particular ticketing platforms that charge outrageous fees, nearly rivaling the cost of the base ticket itself. They will go to great lengths to buy out top venues (and if they can't buy them out, they'll make exclusive ticketing agreements) where top shows need to perform and charge those high fees to customers, knowing that the shows will likely sell very well (and many cases, sell out) raking in the money. Today, the United States Department of Justice and 30 state and district attorneys general filed an antitrust lawsuit against Ticketmaster and Live Nation. They identified several monopolistic practices that have stifled competition that could bring better experiences and pricing to customers and artists. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next several years. Let's hope this helps everyone in the industry, as we have been fueling record profits for these two companies with difficult ways around their systems and practices. How have you been affected by high ticket fees and ticketing systems that make the purchasing experience inconvenient? https://lnkd.in/gJKg6YT9

The U.S. Department of Justice is expected to file a lawsuit against Live Nation Entertainment, the parent company of Ticketmaster, alleging anticompetitive practices in the ticketing industry. Live Nation's control of more than 80% of the market for primary ticket sales in the US has raised concerns about limited competition and increased pricing. The lawsuit is anticipated to focus on Ticketmaster's exclusive contracts with concert venues and Live Nation's dominance over live performance tours. Live Nation has denied setting high fees and ticket prices, attributing pricing decisions to artists and venues. The lawsuit follows a years-long investigation into Live Nation's merger with Ticketmaster in 2010, which aimed to prevent monopolistic behavior. This legal action is part of the Biden administration's broader efforts to address monopolization and antitrust issues in big businesses. Follow Amanda Newman to stay up to date with technology. https://lnkd.in/ddfjxEWF

New Bill in California Aims to Force Ticketmaster to Play Nice With Others A caller measure introduced by an influential California authorities legislator takes purpose astatine Ticketmaster, whose stranglehold connected the amusement manufacture has agelong vexed concertgoers with its fees and out-of-control pricing. Time to Tackle the Taylor Swift Ticketmaster Turmoil | TechModo Democrat Buffy Wicks, who presently serves arsenic the seat of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, has introduced authorities that her bureau says would springiness event-goers substantially much options erstwhile it comes to purchasing tickets for events. Politico, which was first to report connected Wicks’s new legislation, describes a argumentation that would “lift restrictions” connected the resale of tickets portion creating much options for consumers. Wicks envisions a aboriginal script much akin to the user acquisition of question websites, wherever event-goers person a prime betwixt a assortment of antithetic sellers, not conscionable 1 omnipotent platform. Wicks authorities takes purpose astatine “exclusivity” clauses, which person historically allowed platforms similar Ticketmaster to laic assertion to venues, barring them from contracting with different summons sellers that would springiness consumers options. As immoderate commentators have noted, Ticketmaster’s exclusivity contracts efficaciously enactment venues up against a wall, forcing them to judge the company’s draconian presumption oregon hazard being incapable to publication the monolithic stars that Ticketmaster keeps for itself. Wicks legislation, AB2808, was introduced successful the California authorities legislature successful February and would unit summons sellers similar Ticketmaster to see an API that allows competing sellers to connection tickets for an lawsuit connected their ain platform. The measure would further marque it “unlawful” for a ticketing supplier oregon a venue “to supply [ticketing] services” connected an “exclusive oregon discriminatory basis, arsenic specified,” presumably referring to an exclusive statement successful which companies similar Ticketmaster hog each the summons sales. The measure would besides escaped up the summons reseller market, allowing for greater options for consumers. Firms that were recovered to beryllium successful usurpation of the law’s stipulations would beryllium ordered to wage fines. “We privation to marque definite that we person contention and prime for consumers truthful we don’t extremity up with situations similar the Taylor Swift concerts—like ‘Lord of the Flies’ attempts to get tickets,” Wicks told Politico. Ticketmaster has been the de facto spot to bargain performance and sporting events tickets ever since it completed a $2.5 cardinal merger with Live Nation, a monolithic...

The DOJ's antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster highlights Oak View Group (OVG) 73 times, alleging collusion to stifle competition in the live entertainment sector. In fact, OVG which operates both London's Budweiser Gardens and is overseeing the upcoming 'Hamilton Arena Project' has its own line in the Department of Justice complaint/document. So why does this matter to smaller markets of independent venues such as Kitchener or those who do not use Ticketmaster or have a massive purchasing department for live entertainment? 1. OVG ceded the tour promotions business to Live Nation, and Live Nation returned the favour, ceding the arena development and consultancy business to OVG and its OVG (Arena) Alliance. In plain words - not our arena or venue, not your show to have. 2. OVG’s presence in the venue world enables it to steer Live Nation content to its venues, whether owned or merely operated, and impose the use of Ticketmaster on those venues through a 2022 deal between the two parties that made Ticketmaster the official ticketing provider of OVG. Although OVG is not directly sued, its close relationship with Live Nation raises questions about its role and potential indirect consequences from the case. Consequences that small communities with independent venues not using Ticketmaster (or its subsidiaries such as TicketWeb or FrontGate Tickets) feel directly (or indirectly) with re-routing tours or events away from such venues or communities drawing profits to the OVG, or Live Nation owned subsidiaries. #kitchener #ticketing #livenation #liveentertainment https://lnkd.in/gedb6JR7

Live Nation break up with Ticketmaster could be the first step towards more innovation in the ticketing industry 🔖 The U.S. Department of Justice filed a competition lawsuit against entertainment giant Live Nation, alleging that the company holds a "monopoly" over the U.S. entertainment market. The lawsuit reportedly focuses on Ticketmaster's practice of using exclusive ticketing contracts with venues, which critics argue stifles competition, limits customer choice, and drives up prices. This comes along with the new legislation in the US, UK, and Australia requiring event ticket sellers to display the total ticket price upfront, including all fees. This may compel ticketing companies to lower some of their fees to remain competitive, eventually resulting in revenue losses. In response, these companies will need to explore new ways to differentiate themselves and secure new deals. One strategy is to offer promoters and clients resale platforms, allowing them to control both primary and secondary markets and capture extra revenue that currently goes to unauthorized resellers. However, in light of the recent case, implementing this approach may prove challenging. Controlling both markets can lead to unethical practices, such as placing a percentage of tickets directly on the secondary market to capitalize on higher earnings. This may raise red flags to regulators who might try to stop such behavior. This could open the door for 3rd party white-label resale platforms who could cover the functionality for the ticketing companies while seamlessly integrating. However, to really fully stop illegal reselling, providers would need to use technology that substitutes classic tokens which can be easily exchanged. Biometrics could give a helping hand. The vision would be to link 1 face with exactly 1 ticket, disabling bots and companies like Viagogo from buying thousands of tickets. Having this would bring the added value and necessary differentiation for the ticketing firms. What about the collaborative outcome? ✅Fans would benefit from fair market prices ✅More genuine transactions would occur on the primary ticket market ✅Fans would have the flexibility to free their tickets ✅Every transaction would be under the control of the ticketing company, reducing fraud ✅Ticketing firms would bring promoters more revenues, making the company a valuable partner So the main idea is for ticketing firms to implement technologies that will make them stand out and deliver unprecedented value to its customers that leads to higher profits. And collaboration with white-label resale platform providers that use biometrics could be that necessary step. #FaceTicket #Reselling #Ticketing #RevenueOptimization

Dusting off my ticketing hat, here's what you should know about Live Nation Entertainment / Ticketmaster getting sued by the government: * The government created this. In 2009, the Justice Department approved a merger that led to...exactly what they're saying happened now. That wasn't really all that long ago, and it was pretty obvious at the time where this would go. The DOJ knew this, made a stern face at both companies and made them promise not to misbehave if they approved the deal. * Breaking up TM and LN won't affect consumers the way you might imagine it will. Neither fees nor ticket prices are driven by TM/LN's "monopoly" power. I could write a whole piece about that, but I've already written that piece a half dozen times over the years so...pass. * A breakup would create changes inside the industry. Some new opportunities will shake loose for smaller competitors. Independent venues might have a little more leverage. The market for paying acts will change in some ways that are a little hard to foresee. * The two parts of the organization probably should be broken up. No good can come of the biggest promoter and one of the biggest venue owners and the biggest ticketing system living under the same roof. If the breakup happens, expect Ticketmaster to grow faster and be more profitable on its own. I'll let you figure that one out yourself. Let's see what happens. https://lnkd.in/gFs2F_BD

The US government did not mince words yesterday: Live Nation and Ticketmaster need to split. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and 30 state and district attorneys general sued Live Nation, which refers to itself as the “largest live entertainment company in the world,” lodging a 120-page complaint that it purposefully stifles competition, hurts consumers, and unfairly jacks up ticket prices. The suit alleges that Live Nation threatened to retaliate against venues that didn’t use its ticketing service and that artists who don’t use Live Nation’s tour promo services can’t perform at any of its venues. The DOJ said the company controls over 70% of ticket sales at major concert venues in the country. Plus, Live Nation controls 265 venues in North America and 60 of the top 100 amphitheaters in the US. “This is a travesty!” Cried the Justice Department, which allowed the merger to happen 14 years ago. Industry pros had begged the DOJ to prevent Live Nation from buying Ticketmaster, warning of the same concerns the DOJ now cites in seeking to break them up. Then came Taylor Swift… The Eras Tour’s ticket-buying process was such a mess that a bipartisan group of senators brought Live Nation execs to Capitol Hill last year to grill them on the company’s practices. The DOJ’s investigation was announced shortly after the Swiftie debacle, though the agency claimed it had already been investigating the company. Live Nation called the lawsuit “baseless.” In a company blog post, an executive claimed that the suit ignores price factors like artists’ popularity and scalpers. The post also says that Live Nation’s net profit margin was only 1.4% last year, too low to indicate a monopoly. A long road ahead…the whole thing is expected to take years to move through the courts, especially since the suit requests a jury trial (which is unusual for this type of case).—MM https://lnkd.in/eesSYA8b

If you're a music fan, you know all too well just how difficult and expensive it can be to purchase concert tickets nowadays. But an impending antitrust lawsuit by the DOJ against Ticketmaster and Live Nation Entertainment seeks to promote competition and provide consumers with relief. While the lawsuit will target anti-competitive practices, true relief for fans may require stricter regulation of secondary ticket markets, as seen in Europe. 🎟️🛡️ Check out my blog to learn how this development could reshape the concert ticketing landscape! #Ticketmaster #DOJ #Concerts #ConsumerProtection