Live Nation/Ticketmaster Monopoly Exposed: Experts Predict Systemic Failure, Legal Fallout Looms
A jury found Live Nation and Ticketmaster maintained an illegal, anticompetitive monopoly over major concert ticketing and venues. The core issue is the structure of their combined market power.
The division among commenters is stark: some demand mandatory structural breakups, with 'dylanmorgan' proposing splitting the entity into eight geographically defined competitors. Others argue the US legal system is inherently incapable of dismantling such behemoths, citing past failures. 'DandomRude' dismisses the ruling as likely resulting in only a 'ridiculously small fine.' Meanwhile, 'chemical_cutthroat' points out the actual potential financial penalty is minuscule compared to the company's yearly revenue.
The weight of opinion suggests deep cynicism. While the monopoly is legally flagged, the prevailing view is that the legal remedy will be toothless. The actionable consensus demands radical structural separation, acknowledging the US system's documented tendency to let corporations 'return to business as usual.'
Key Points
The US legal system will protect the monopoly, rendering structural remedies impossible.
'DandomRude' states the 'behemoth won’t be taken down' due to legal flaws. BarneyPiccolo supports this, calling investigations 'performative.'
Mandatory, structural breakup is the only viable fix.
'dylanmorgan' offers the specific alternative: splitting the entity into eight competing parts for built-in competition.
Jury damages, while seemingly punitive, are negligible compared to company revenue.
'chemical_cutthroat' noted the awarded damages are 'considerably smaller relative to the company's annual revenue.'
Aggressive regulatory separation is needed immediately, bypassing slow legal planning.
'givesomefucks' argues for 'immediate, aggressive action' to prevent singular corporate control.
The existing legal mechanism for breaking up a monopoly (Clayton Act) is rarely enforced.
'HailSeitan' mentioned the requirement for the judge to terminate the monopoly, noting its rare historical application.
Source Discussions (3)
This report was synthesized from the following Lemmy discussions, ranked by community score.