A federal jury declared Live Nation and Ticketmaster a monopoly for stifling competition and overcharging consumers. However, ticket prices are not expected to drop immediately.
Mentioned in this story
A federal jury found that Live Nation and Ticketmaster, which merged in 2010, have been stifling competition and overcharging consumers when it comes to live events. Paul Sakuma/AP
Paul Sakuma/AP
A federal jury in Manhattan found that Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation, have been acting as a monopoly, stifling competition and overcharging consumers.
But that doesn't mean your next concert ticket will automatically be a better deal.
Wednesday's verdict is a legal win for the 33 states and Washington, D.C., that accused the company of wielding its immense power over too many aspects of the live entertainment industry, from concert promotion and artist management to venue operations and ticketing services.
The jury found that Live Nation and Ticketmaster are acting as a monopoly by stifling competition and overcharging consumers.
Live Nation and Ticketmaster merged in 2010.
Despite the jury's ruling, ticket prices are not expected to drop immediately.
The jury's decision was made in Manhattan.
Experts say first-home buyers shouldn't fear negative equity despite falling prices in Sydney and Melbourne.
Can late-night World Cup openings revive Britain's pubs?
Labor MPs call proposed NDIS changes retrogressive and misaligned with review findings.
Antarctica's west coast is missing sea ice the size of France, with temperatures soaring 20C above average.
Congress fails to renew key U.S. spy tool, Section 702, before recess.
Tensions rise over UK defence spending and national safety
See every story in News — including breaking news and analysis.
And it's vindication for the many disgruntled artists, venues and fans who say they have been paying the price. The verdict has the potential to reshape the live music industry in the U.S. But the fight isn't over.
States' attorneys general now have to argue in favor of specific "remedies and financial penalties" — as many of them put it in celebratory press releases — at a separate trial. The lead lawyer for the plaintiffs, Jeffrey Kessler, declined to comment to NPR because that trial has not been scheduled.
One remedy that many ticketing advocates and Democratic lawmakers want is for the government to force the breakup of Live Nation and Ticketmaster — which merged in 2010 — separating the concert promoter from the ticket seller.
Meanwhile, Live Nation said in a statement that "the jury's verdict is not the last word on this matter." It has not responded to NPR's request for comment.
The company said several motions are still pending in front of the court, including one to strike some expert testimony from the trial.
"Of course, Live Nation can and will appeal any unfavorable rulings on these motions," it added.
Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a visiting professor at Harvard Law School who specializes in antitrust law, said a verdict from a jury is generally harder to fight successfully than one from a judge. In any case, she said, whatever remedy the court orders would likely be paused while an appeal plays out.
"So it's not like next month … certainly not in 2026, will Live Nation be severed from Ticketmaster," she said.
Thales Teixeira, a professor at UC San Diego's Rady School of Management, says this next phase is "a little bit complicated because there's so many parties involved … that might want different things out of a potential settlement or a trial."
Beyond major restructuring, Live Nation could be forced to take steps like end exclusive contracts, cap service fees and open booking at its venues to competing platforms like SeatGeek and AXS.
The company is also likely to face financial penalties, which could include payouts to some consumers: The jury found that Live Nation overcharged customers by $1.72 per ticket in 22 states. Live Nation said that applies to only a fraction of tickets sold, and estimated total damages below $150 million (which it says the court would triple, per legal standards).
But that money most likely won't go directly to consumers, Allensworth says, unlike in a class-action lawsuit (which the company also faces). She says any judgment amount would go back to the participating states, which can use it as they see fit — most likely for some sort of consumer-related issue, not back into ticket-buyers' pockets.
"Really, here, the win for the consumers is the future and the restoration of competition, if that happens, which is why I think it's so important for the remedy to go beyond this dollar amount," she says.
A young fan tries her luck outside Taylor Swift's concert in London in August 2024. A chaotic Eras Tour presale in 2022 crashed Ticketmaster, canceled the general fueled calls for the platform to be held accountable. Alishia Abodunde/Getty Images Europe
Alishia Abodunde/Getty Images Europe
Teixeira says consumers in the U.S. have gotten used to the high cost of concert tickets, not to mention food, parking and other expenses. If anything, he says some of fans' anger may have been alleviated by Ticketmaster's implementation (to comply with federal regulations) of all-in pricing in 2025, labeling fees upfront rather than revealing them at checkout.
And he doesn't think the outcome of this case will lower ticket prices in the long term. For one, he says Live Nation can make up any lost fees in other ways, like upping the cost of a parking spot at one of the many venues it controls.
"My view is that even in the best-case scenario, if the states that have gone forward with the trial win most of their claims, I'd say very little will change for the average concertgoer," he said.
While many states' attorneys general have uniformly referred to their effort as a "coalition," Teixeira says it's possible that some could leave the process early, depending on which of their demands are met.
A version of that has happened in this case already: About half a dozen states joined a tentative $280 settlement between President Trump's Justice Department and Live Nation last month, just days into the trial.
As part of the settlement, the company agreed to do things like cap service fees at 15% and divest exclusive booking agreements with about a dozen amphitheaters, which ticketing organizations and Democratic lawmakers say does not go nearly far enough. That settlement must undergo a 60-day public comment period and get federal court approval before it can be finalized.
Just this week, several of the most vocal Democrats on this topic — including Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut — submitted a letter urging the judge in the case to "closely scrutinize this settlement," which they called insufficient.
Live Nation said in its Wednesday statement that it is confident "that the ultimate outcome of the States' case will not be materially different than what is envisioned by the DOJ settlement."
Allensworth says that Live Nation can point to the settlement to show the judge that it is already taking steps to restore competition, in hopes of less intrusive remedies. But she expects states to have the same response as the Democratic lawmakers: "It's a slap on the wrist and, your Honor, you need to impose something more meaningful here."
Even if the company is forced to split up, she says, it's not clear how long it would take for the live events landscape — which Live Nation and Ticketmaster have dominated for so long — to feel the effects. But she says the pressure of competition would undoubtedly improve the experience for venues, artists and fans alike.
"It's one of the wonderful, and I think frustrating, things about organizing our whole economy through competition, is that we don't know what new ideas will come forward," Allensworth says. "We don't know how they will affect consumers. But we do know that the best way to provide long-term consumer welfare is to have a place for new ideas to come to life."
