Ticketmaster’s monopoly verdict opens the door to real reform

In a win for the 33 states and the District of Columbia that pursued the case to trial, a jury recently decided that Live Nation-Ticketmaster is a monopoly in violation of federal and state antitrust laws. Court remedies and financial penalties are expected to come from the judge overseeing the case, but the question is when, and what should the states that brought this case be doing to ensure that consumers see real relief sooner rather than later? The evidence presented in court made clear why this monopolization ruling was warranted. Private internal messages showed Live Nation-Ticketmaster executives openly discussing their ability to “gouge” fans and joking about “robbing them blind” because consumers often have nowhere else to turn to purchase tickets. The court testimony showed that Ticketmaster controls roughly 86 percent of primary ticketing at major venues, while its parent company, Live Nation, owns or controls 78 percent of large amphitheaters. This degree of control is vertical integration — one company dominating multiple layers of the supply chain — in its clearest form, which reduces meaningful competition and raises prices. Given these marketplace realities, it is little wonder why Live Nation sells roughly 10 times as many tickets as its closest rival, and why the case’s jury ultimately concluded that the company was ready, willing and able to overcharge consumers. However, the jury’s verdict, although encouraging, will not fix the problem on its own. The Live Nation-Ticketmaster case is now headed into what may be a prolonged appeals process stretching over years — a reality the company’s leadership has acknowledged, describing the ruling in an all-staff e-mail as just “one step in a much longer legal process” and emphasizing that, for now, it remains “business as usual.” With Ticketmaster signaling its intent to contest the outcome aggressively and drag out the litigation, any meaningful accountability may arrive only in the distant future, rather than offering anything close to timely relief. That is precisely why the states should use their leverage now — while the verdict is fresh — to press for a settlement that locks in real consumer protections, rather than waiting years for appeals to run their course. And if Ticketmaster delays such relief, Congress is already moving forward in parallel with the states, a prospect that provides those states with even more settlement leverage. Congress has already advanced a blueprint for exactly the kind of relief the states should seek in a settlement. The TICKET Act, which has bipartisan support, would require all-in pricing so consumers see the full cost of tickets (inclusive of fees) upfront — just like they do when purchasing airline tickets — while ensuring that all ticketing companies provide full refunds for canceled events. The bill already passed the House of Representatives on a 409-15 vote, and it now awaits a Senate vote. But implementing this transparency measure, although long overdue and a critical starting point for the ticketing reform conversation, won’t be enough to fix the industry’s problems on its own. The states should also push for settlement terms that open the marketplace up to more competition. That conversation should start with protecting fans’ freedom to transfer or resell tickets onto their ticketing platform of choice. Ticketmaster has increasingly pushed non-transferable tickets through its SafeTix technology, which prevents tickets from being resold anywhere but Ticketmaster’s own marketplace — solidifying the company’s marketplace dominance. The Department of Justice and the states’ complaint says that a primary motivation behind its push for a non-transferrable ticket was to “make it more difficult for a fan who wishes to buy or sell … to use a rival [ticketing] platform,” with Ticketmaster calling SafeTix a “product enhancement for market share” and an opportunity to “reduce [Ticketmaster’s] economic risk.” There is nothing pro-competitive about a monopoly imposing regulatory roadblocks on its competition, and any settlement should prohibit the practice. How much more monopoly behavior do fans have to put up with? This market should also move the industry toward a more open distribution system. Airline tickets offer a useful model for what real competition looks like. Consumers can book the same seat across multiple platforms — whether directly through the airline or via sites like Expedia or KAYAK — with each platform competing on price, convenience and service. Once a seat is purchased, it’s simply marked as unavailable across the system. The comedy, concert and sporting ticketing marketplace should work the same way. It should be open and interoperable so that no single gatekeeper can control consumers’ access from start to finish. Major antitrust cases do not come along often, and when they do, they offer a rare opportunity to reset the rules of the road. By evaluating the evidence and reaching a verdict, the jury has done its job. The states should press for a settlement that delivers meaningful reform now, while the verdict gives them maximum leverage. At the same time, the Senate should step up and legislate for an open market. How nice would that be, state lawyers racing Congress to make America more open for fans? We can’t wait to see who wins this race, because if one of them doesn’t get there, America loses. Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican, is a former attorney general for the Commonwealth of Virginia. Drew Ketterer, a Democrat, is a former attorney general for the State of Maine.