The Ticketmaster Breakup Trial Just Got Messier

0:00It's one of the biggest antitrust trials in the country. The fight to break up the concert giant live nation and its ticketing arm, Ticketmaster. And in the weeks leading up to the trial, our colleague Dave Michaels kept hearing the same thing. I was checking in very often and I was told without any doubt from sources on both sides it's going. And when the trial finally began this month, the Justice Department came out swinging. The trial had started on March 2nd and the first week had gone really well for the Justice Department. They had put on some of their strongest witnesses, people who were talking about the Justice Department's theory of this case, which is that live nation and Ticketmaster kind of work in combination to lock up all parts of this entertainment business.

1:01The trial was expected to last months, but after just one week, a bombshell. Live Nation has reached a surprise settlement in its antitrust case with the Justice Department. The two sides now reaching a tentative agreement that avoids breaking up the world's largest live entertainment company. Under the surprise deal, there would be new limits on exclusivity, fees, and venue access. But there would be no break up of live nation and Ticketmaster. So we got a settlement. Is the case over? Well, the Justice Department was quarterbacking this trial and they're out of the game now, but that doesn't mean the trial is over. They're going to have to hand the ball off and it'll continue. Welcome to the journal, our show about money, business, and power. I'm Jessica Mendoza. It's Monday, March 16th.

2:05Coming up on the show, deal or no deal, while the live nation antitrust trial lives on. This episode of the journal is presented by Intuit Enterprise Suite. If your finance team spends more time finding data than using it, if there's one entity here and one here and one here, if scaling your business feels like starting over, you need the Intuit ERP. Intuit Enterprise Suite. The AI Native ERP is here. From the makers of QuickBooks, learn more at Intuit.com slash ERP. Brought to you by Apple Card. Hey, you could be earning 2% daily cash back on that purchase. And that one. And even that one. That's because Apple Card users earn 2% daily cash back on every purchase, including everyday items you buy online or in store. When using their Apple Card with Apple Pay, not an Apple Card customer, you can apply in the wallet app on iPhone.

3:10Subject to credit approval. Apple Card issued by Goldman Sachsbank USA Salt Lake City Branch. Terms and more at Apple.co slash benefits. Live Nation isn't just a concert company. As our colleague Dave Michaels puts it, it's a fortress that was built over time. Not with stone walls, but with contracts, exclusivity deals that give it control over key parts of the live entertainment business. Live Nation has four or five different segments to its business. It promotes tours. It's a promoter. It owns venues. It owns amphitheaters. It owns arenas. It can make money from advertising inside of its venues or at the venues it operates. And then there's ticketing. Live Nation owns ticket master, which has an up to 80% market share in ticketing.

4:12The Justice Department's antitrust division sued Live Nation in 2024, alleging it's an illegal monopoly. I mean, there was bipartisan frustration with ticket master in Live Nation. So there was bipartisan buy-in on the lawsuit. So there were almost 40 attorneys general who joined the lawsuit. And there were there were AG's from Republican states like Texas and Tennessee and Utah. A main goal of the antitrust case was to force Live Nation to shed ticket master opening up the market for more competition. The state attorneys general said they were standing up for residents fed up with junk fees and a ticketing system dominated by ticket master. So Dave, cut to this month. The trial finally begins. Who does the jury hear from? We go into witnesses and that first witness is John Abamandi who's running the Barclays Center. He's one of their key witnesses. He's there to tell the jury that you can't get good shows if you don't use ticket master.

5:17And you will feel the threats of Live Nation if you break with ticket master. To underscore this point, Abamandi testified about ending an agreement with ticket master in 2021 and switching to a ticketing competitor, SeatGeek. That's when he says his phone rang. Live Nation CEO, Michael Rapinoe, was on the line. And they played a recording in court between him and Michael Rapinoe, the CEO of Live Nation. It was a very testy call. But it doesn't deliver us what we need. I told you that. And the CEO of Live Nation said, A newer venue had recently opened in the New York area. And Abamandi testified that he viewed the call from Live Nation's Rapinoe as a quote, veil threat. And kind of in a nutshell, that's the government's theory of this case that Live Nation will threaten you. Until you stick with ticket master.

6:22Over the week of testimony, more witnesses spoke about pressure. SeatGeek's CEO testified that ticket master's tactics got so aggressive that they had to offer venues something called retaliation insurance. Which means that it would pay the arena in the event that it lost an event because it switched from ticket master to SeatGeek. So it sounds like things were escalating. And wasn't Michael Rapinoe the CEO of Live Nation set to take the stand as well? They were supposed to get to Michael Rapinoe in that second week. That would have been the Justice Department's chance to really grill. Frankly, like the executive who's kind of credited with building up this very dominant company. And through conduct that the Justice Department says was really anti-competitive. But the Justice Department never got Rapino on the stand. That's because, as it turned out, a deal was being hammered out behind the scenes.

7:26While the jury was hearing testimony, Live Nation was working political back channels. Tapping consultants close to the Trump administration. We were aware that Live Nation had hired some high profile, very connected advisors. People that it wanted to petition the Trump administration for some kind of a deal. And, you know, I was aware that there was a meeting in the summer of 2025, where Kellyanne Conway, the former counselor to the president in the first Trump administration, had met with several very senior DOJ officials and talked to them about, hey, can't we get to a deal here? Can't we find some off-ramp that makes everybody happy? That off-ramp came out near the end of that first week of testimony. By Thursday, March 5, a term sheet that outlined a tentative deal had been signed by Justice Department lawyers in Live Nation. According to the settlement agreement,

8:26ticket master must allow rival companies like StubHub and SeatGeek to sell primary tickets using its ticketing technology and caps some of those frustrating service fees at 15%, but only at Live Nation owned amphitheaters. Many of the state attorneys general that had also joined the fight were blindsided. They were told they had one day to respond. And the judge overseeing the case didn't even know about the tentative deal until late that Sunday. He was really mad because they continued the case even though they had this settlement that the judge felt like he should have been told about. And he was really irate. He didn't think it was professional, like why wasn't he told? And where did this deal come from? And so what did you learn about why this deal did come from? It's important to remember that in a case like this, there can be two tracks. There can be parallel tracks going on where the trial team is there to win, win, win.

9:27They've gotten what they think are great witnesses. They're working 24-7. On the other track, in a case like this, you can have the political appointees, the senior people in the Justice Department or maybe in the administration, who believe they see a bigger picture. And these people, the Justice Department, high up are thinking, look, we're here for four years. We need to show that we're doing stuff for the voters who put President Trump in office. And if they can get a win now rather than punting this to the future, they're willing to do that because their incentives are a little bit different than the trial teams. And so ultimately, to these folks, a settlement is a win. They want to be able to say that they forced live nation to change important parts of its business. In a statement, live nation said the deal would improve the concert experience for artists and fans throughout the US.

10:31The company's stock jumped after news of the deal. So right now, it does seem like live nation is pretty content. In a call with reporters last week, a senior Justice Department official said that the deal addresses their lawsuits main concerns about anti-competitive conduct. The official added that the settlement opens up markets and would lead to prices coming down for fans. The deal means that the DOJ will stop pursuing the suit. So will many other state attorneys general who are playing tips in the case. But 25 state AGs plus DC say the deal didn't go far enough and they want to keep fighting. One of them is North Carolina's Jeff Jackson. Technically, we are still at trial. This does not get to the core issue, which is live nation's continued control over ticket master. And to live nation, is there anything you don't want to say? See you back in court. That's after the break.

11:40I say you've always wanted to sneak away for a last minute long weekend in Napa. Here's the thing. If you get smart with your money, you could do things like that. With Empower, you can start making the most out of your money so you can go out and live a little. Isn't that why we work so hard to have some fun with our money? Like treating yourself to a private wellness retreat. We're scoring incredible seats to a concert you'll never forget. So use Empower and get good at money. So you can be a little bad. Join their 19 million customers today at Empower.com. Not an Empower client paid or sponsored. This episode is brought to you by Indeed. The right hire can make or break your company, especially if you're a small business. And relying on luck to find that person isn't really the best strategy. But you know what is using Indeed sponsor jobs. You can use it to boost your job post to make sure it reaches more people with the right talents, certification, location, and more. Sponsored jobs posted directly on Indeed are 95% more likely to report a hire than non-sponsored jobs. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes.

12:40Less stress, less time, more results. When you need the right person to cut through the chaos, this is a job for Indeed sponsor jobs. And listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsor job credit to help get your job the premium status it deserves at Indeed.com slash podcast. Disco to Indeed.com slash podcast right now and support the show by saying you heard about Indeed here. Indeed.com slash podcast terms and conditions apply. Hiring now, then this is a job for Indeed sponsor jobs. Just for the record, can you just introduce yourself please? I'm Jeff Jackson. I'm the Attorney General for North Carolina. Jackson represents one of the states that sued Live Nation, along with the Justice Department. He says he was surprised when he learned that the DOJ had struck a deal with Live Nation. This is really unprecedented. I mean, we had a group of 40 attorneys general in US DOJ who was the lead in the case.

13:40And then US DOJ cut out all 40 AGs and basically did this privately and then gave us a 24 hour ultimatum as to whether we were going to sign or not. Ultimatum is the word you used. Yeah, I think that's a fair work. A bipartisan coalition of more than 25 states including New York and Tennessee rejected the federal settlement. Which means their part of the lawsuit isn't over. The Justice Department may have settled its claims but those states are continuing the trial on their own with help from a star antitrust lawyer. We talked to Jackson late last week about the case and his thoughts on the settlement. If you were to boil this down to one word the settlement, how would you characterize it? It's inadequate. The core mission for this litigation was to get it Live Nation's control over ticket master. They merged about 16 years ago and when that happened it gave Live Nation control over the three main levers in the entertainment industry. Which are the venues, the artists and the ticketing.

14:41So when they gained ticket master they sort of completed their triumvirate and then they can tell concert goers. If you don't accept these ticket prices you don't get to go see your artists. I am in the middle of a trial right now and I'm also in the middle of negotiations. So I'm not going to share publicly what all terms we feel are successful or adequate rather. But the core goal is fundamentally Live Nation's control over ticket master. Live Nation says it made several significant concessions. A company executive said the agreement is a very good outcome for artists and venues and that people calling it an adequate are not being realistic. So ultimately what is the problem here? Is it the fact that a deal was reached at all during the trial or are there specific terms in the deal that don't sit right with you? There are specific terms in the deal. It's not the fact that a deal was reached deals are reached all the time in the middle of litigation. I'm not opposed to it. It's just that this deal was inadequate. Also I should say the deal itself is really unclear. It's a five-page deal.

15:44Normally with a case of this magnitude you would expect the deal to have 30 or 40 pages of detail. We really don't know what the deal actually means yet. Let's talk through some of the provisions that we do know about and I'd love to hear what you think of them. For example, one of them is that Live Nation has to open amphitheaters that controls to other ticketing companies and that 50% of those tickets are going to be available to rivals. What's the issue with that? There's a question as to how many amphitheaters we're really talking about. What percentage of the whole that means and whether Live Nation allowing that would actually mean a significant reduction of their power that would allow real competition. Ultimately there's not enough competition in the space. Let me bring up another provision and this one is something that I think a lot of customers feel strongly about. This deal puts a 15% cap on service fees and add-ons at those amphitheaters. What do you think of it? Well we really don't know what the deal actually means because there are no details here.

16:47However, in principle we like the idea of there being a cap because clearly there has been a situation where you go to buy an $80 ticket and by the time you check out it's $130. The core issue there isn't just their willingness to do that. It's their ability to do it because of their total control over ticket master. Speaking of removing control, Live Nation also agreed to give up exclusive booking rights at 13 amphitheaters. Sure, we'll call that a step forward but this is a fraction of the total picture here. A lot of those amphitheaters are in secondary markets. I think it's a perfect example of why this is an inadequate deal. I have one more provision to bring up with you which is that the company is creating a $280 million settlement fund for the states as compensation for customers who felt like they had to pay too much for tickets. What do you say to that? First of all, we don't know where that money would go. What is to prevent them if that deal goes through and say we all signed on?

17:47What's to prevent them from just raising ticket prices 1% and immediately making up that difference? For all those reasons, Jackson says the settlement deal doesn't work. So he and other state AGs are picking up the mantle and pressing on with the case themselves. Of all the cases you could be taking, Attorney General Jackson, I'm sure there are a lot of issues that are on your desk right now. Why prioritize this one? Why is this one worth the time in the resources? Well, first of all, because my constituents want me to. I mean, I've heard very clearly from them what they think about ticket master and these prices that they're being asked to pay. But also because this sets a really important precedent. We want to show that Attorney General and the law are capable of pushing back against companies that are abusing their power over people. It would be important not just in this case, but for the business community in general to see that we are capable of coming together when the evidence is very clear that the law has been broken and pushing back and changing things going forward, not just with a slap on the wrist, but an actual change that helps actual people.

18:57Can't Live Nation argue that it's already solved the problem with the settlement? Wouldn't that make the state's case harder to prove and court down the line if you don't reach a deal now? I don't think so. I think we still have really strong evidence that the fact that Live Nation maintains its control of ticket master means that all the problems we've seen from them over the last 15 years still persist. Last week, the judge unsealed more evidence, including internal Slack messages in which Live Nation employees called customers, quote, so stupid and joked about, quote, robbing them blind. Live Nation said it was looking into the private messages and that the chats do not represent Live Nation's values. What's at stake here if you can't get a deal or you can't get a win in court? What's at stake here is the experience that millions of people have when they want to take their kid or their loved one or themselves to a concert. What is at stake here is the ability of artists to earn a living and do so with dignity.

19:58What's at stake here is whether or not there's actual competition in this marketplace or we're going to allow a monopoly to essentially drive out all that competition and then use everybody's lack of options to benefit themselves, to bonus themselves at our expense. As the trial picks back up this week, our colleague Dave Michaels says there's still a lot to iron out. What happens now, Dave? Like, could the states that are still in the trial get the break up they're hoping for? Well, anything is possible but the states have to win at trial first and only if it wins there will it get to the next phase where it asks the court to fix the problems that the jury found. At that point, Live Nation can point to whatever reach with the DOJ and say, hey, we've already solved the problem. So this has gotten a lot messier.

20:58So it sounds like we might be talking to you again. Yeah, I think so. This Odyssey isn't over yet. That's all for today, Monday, March 16th. The journal is a co-production of Spotify and the Wall Street Journal, additional reporting in this episode from Catherine Sair. Thanks for listening. See you tomorrow. The future of everything is the Wall Street Journal's flagship live event, returning to New York City May 4th through 5th. Be there as CEOs, policymakers, and innovators sit down with our journalists to answer the most pressing questions of the day. From finance, tech, and economic policy to sports, streaming, and style, we're bringing together today's most compelling newsmakers for two days of conversations on what's ahead. Listeners of this podcast can access exclusive discounted rates by visiting WSJ.com slash future. That's WSJ.com slash future.