Live Nation-DOJ Antitrust Trial Kicks-Off In NYC With Opening Arguments Staking Out Positions

By Andrew Flanagan

NEW YORK — A landmark antitrust case brought against Live Nation and Ticketmaster by the United States, 39 state attorneys general and the District of Columbia finally began in earnest Tuesday (March 3) morning in a Southern District of New York courthouse in Manhattan.

The trial is expected to run for five-to-six weeks and its outcome could have a massive impact the live business and how it operates.

The suit, first brought by the Department of Justice against the conglomerate in 2024 and having spent 15 months in the discovery process, accuses Live Nation and Ticketmaster of operating a monopoly across the live music industry—an accusation the promoter vigorously disputes.

“In Live Nation’s words,” the government’s amended complaint from Aug. 2024 reads, “it is the ‘largest live entertainment company in the world,’ the ‘largest producer of live music concerts in the world,’ and ‘the world’s leading live entertainment ticketing sales and marketing company.’ Indeed, Live Nation is all these things, to the detriment of fans, artists, venues, and competition.”

That’s the foundation of a case that the government will lay out in the coming weeks, as explained Tuesday by lead attorney David Dahlquist in the Department of Justice’s opening argument. “Competition is a guiding principle in America,” he told the court. “Healthy competition helps markets work efficiently – this is not one of those markets,” Dahlquist declaimed to the diverse panel of jurors. (A spokesperson for Live Nation wrote to Pollstar that “there is more competition than ever in the live events market – which is why Ticketmaster’s market share has declined since 2010.”)

Dahlquist went on to argue that Live Nation and Ticketmaster have artificially suppressed three cornerstones of a healthy market for live entertainment: price, choice and quality. Dahlquist asserted Ticketmaster maintains an 86% market share in primary ticketing, alleging creative economics around pricing; that the company’s leverage in the market reduces artists’ choice of promoters and ticketing solutions; and that Ticketmaster’s customer experience (i.e. quality) would be improved if it had to compete on an even playing field with competitors like SeatGeek or AXS. 

Live Nation attorney David Marriott during his opening statements later in the day counterclaimed that Ticketmaster’s primary ticketing share stands at around 40%, if sports are folded into that calculus.

After a brief opening argument from the state attorneys general that reiterated much of the federal government’s case, it was Live Nation’s turn to respond. “Live Nation and Ticketmaster may be corporations, but they’re made up of men and women trying to bring joy to people’s lives,” Marriott said.

The Live Nation lawyer later broke down the math behind a ticket purchase, from Ticketmaster’s perspective: For a $100 ticket, $74 goes to the artist; $4 to the promoter; $2 to the credit card company; $15 to the venue; and $5 to Ticketmaster. Of that $5, Marriott claimed, $1.41 is profit – a non-monopolistic amount of return, the argument goes. The DOJ had argued that Ticketmaster received a larger share.

The government’s goal is the suit will result in Live Nation and Ticketmaster being separated (“at minimum” the DoJ said in their complaint) – what’s known as divestiture. The government is also seeking damages on behalf of people in the states named in the case who purchased tickets through Ticketmaster.

Less than two weeks ago, Live Nation was attempting to settle after Judge Arun Subramanian struck a portion of the government’s case, around Live Nation’s concert promotion business, from the trial.

Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino is expected to testify in the case this week, with several other high-profile executives also scheduled.