> "The sort of artist who is big enough to use live nation also wants a pay day for going on tour. They want the door, they want to sell their merch, they want a cut of the 20$ beer you buy."
This is true, of course, but the rest of your claims are pretty speculative. Big bands were touring long before the TicketMaster monopoly became a thing.
A competitive marketplace benefits both suppliers (ie: the bands) as well as consumers. Why wouldn't a band want to play several ticketing companies off against each other to see who can offer them the best deal? It's also not in a band's best interest to rip off their own fans: they want to keep tickets cheap enough to make sure that the stadiums get filled.
In Europe there is a much more competitive market in the ticketing/events space, where LiveNation/Ticketmaster competes against multiple big players like Eventim, AXS, See Tickets, as well as innumerable secondary and resale-market ticketing companies like Viagogo/Stubhub, DICE, Ticketswap, etc. And there's certainly no shortage of big bands on tour.
>> This is true, of course, but the rest of your claims are pretty speculative. Big bands were touring long before the TicketMaster monopoly became a thing.
Ticketmaster is the result of consolidating all the regional ticking systems that existed back when printing and retail sales were a thing. This lawsuit is against Live Nation, that Ticketmaster is a part of... It's the evolution of what Bill Graham started. Your thinking ticket master is the problem but promoters are the ones maximizing value from ever aspect of the experience.
Bill Graham made EVERYONE money, and it all came from the fans...
>> Why wouldn't a band want to play several ticketing companies off against each other
Ticketing is a zero sum game... You dont really need paper tickets or local markets. If ticket master dies ... "oh no were auctioning tickets now the other tech is hard" is going to the excuse.
>> It's also not in a band's best interest to rip off their own fans... There are two artists who give a shit about this.
I did point that out, there are a few... but there aren't many. The only money is in touring and licensing. There are lots of artists who say this, and push low "ticket prices" and take their cut of the "high fees". The only ones who give a shit: non transferable tickets. It cuts out the secondary market (and means they, or their promoter, can sell there themselves...
>> In Europe there is a much more competitive market in the ticketing/events space... And there's certainly no shortage of big bands on tour.
It isnt that much different. AEG is 2nd after LN/TM and owns O2 they also own AXS, and Eventim, independent but now into venues in joint deal with AEG... It's a bit of an insestuous circle jerk not as "free" as it appears.
Europe as a market is still a region in America. Taylor Swift is doing as many dates in Indiana as she is in any EU city...
>> secondary and resale-market ticketing companies like Viagogo/Stubhub, DICE, Ticketswap
Here is the well known inside secret, why do shows still have "promoters" instead of marketing departments? Because lots of these secondary sales were never primary sales.
This is true, of course, but the rest of your claims are pretty speculative. Big bands were touring long before the TicketMaster monopoly became a thing.
A competitive marketplace benefits both suppliers (ie: the bands) as well as consumers. Why wouldn't a band want to play several ticketing companies off against each other to see who can offer them the best deal? It's also not in a band's best interest to rip off their own fans: they want to keep tickets cheap enough to make sure that the stadiums get filled.
In Europe there is a much more competitive market in the ticketing/events space, where LiveNation/Ticketmaster competes against multiple big players like Eventim, AXS, See Tickets, as well as innumerable secondary and resale-market ticketing companies like Viagogo/Stubhub, DICE, Ticketswap, etc. And there's certainly no shortage of big bands on tour.