Why does the Justice Department want to break up Live Nation?

The Justice Department seeks to break up Live Nation because it allegedly maintains a stranglehold over the live events industry, partly by penalizing venues that do not use its Ticketmaster unit.

What are the alleged consequences for venues that switch from Ticketmaster?

Venues that switch from Ticketmaster to a rival ticketer have reportedly lost concerts and significant revenue, with one estimate suggesting a loss of over $300,000 per event.

What is Live Nation's defense against the antitrust lawsuit?

Live Nation denies operating an illegal monopoly and argues that the government has not provided sufficient evidence of harm caused by its practices, citing only a few instances of alleged concert withholding over many years.

Home / Business and Economy / Justice Dept. Seeks Live Nation Breakup Over Monopoly Claims

Justice Dept. Seeks Live Nation Breakup Over Monopoly Claims

23 Jan

•

Summary

DOJ wants Live Nation broken up due to alleged live event industry monopoly.
Venues switching from Ticketmaster lost concerts and revenue.
Live Nation controls significant market share in ticketing and promotion.

Justice Dept. Seeks Live Nation Breakup Over Monopoly Claims

The U.S. Justice Department has urged a federal judge to order the breakup of Live Nation Entertainment Inc., asserting the company wields excessive control over the live events sector. This alleged dominance is partly attributed to practices that penalize venues for not utilizing its Ticketmaster ticketing services.

Venues reportedly forfeit substantial revenue, averaging over $300,000 per concert, if they switch from Ticketmaster to a competitor. The government's lawsuit, filed in 2024, highlights instances like New York's Barclays Center experiencing concert losses after changing ticketing providers.

Live Nation, which merged with Ticketmaster in 2010, vehemently denies operating an illegal monopoly. The company has requested the court dismiss the government's suit without a trial, which had been scheduled for March 2. The judge has not yet announced a ruling on this request.