10 More States Join Live Nation Antitrust Suit In Amended Complaint

Ten more states have signed on to the wide-ranging antitrust suit alleging monopolistic practices by Live Nation and Ticketmaster.

The Department of Justice announced Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Utah and Vermont have joined the suit; 40 states and the District of Columbia are now included as plaintiffs in the case.

The DOJ filed its amended complaint against the live giant and its ticketing subsidiary Aug. 19 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, adding more alleged details to the case, first filed in May.

Live Nation says the new version of the complaint offers “nothing new.”

“The lawsuit still won’t solve the issues fans care about relating to ticket prices, service fees, and access to in-demand shows. We look forward to sharing more facts as the case progresses,” the company said through a spokesperson.

The suit attacks Live Nation’s “flywheel” strategy as reinforcing its market position and driving out competitors.

Specifically, the suit alleges a variety of tactics the DOJ says are used to “eliminate competition and monopolize markets.” Among them, Live Nation’s relationship with Oak View Group (Pollstar‘s parent company), which the Justice Department says “avoided bidding against Live Nation for artist talent and influenced venues to sign exclusive agreements with Ticketmaster.”

The suit also claims Live Nation used its influence to stymie TEG’s attempts to expand its promotion business into the United States. According to the suit, Live Nation attempted to prevent TEG from using StubHub as a ticketer for a concert at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum by refusing to honor any seats sold through StubHub. The amended complaint says that Live Nation encouraged private-equity firm Silver Lake — an investor in, among other things, OVG — to eliminate its interest in TEG and that the firm has asked, via OVG executives, if Live Nation would be interested in acquiring the promoter.

The DOJ alleges Live Nation threatens — usually implicitly, though, the suit claims, sometimes more directly — venues that if they don’t use Ticketmaster, they will not get the promoter’s top tours. And, the suit claims, it works the other way: if an artist refuses to use Live Nation as a promoter, they can expect to be denied a spot at a Live Nation- owned venue.

In July, Live Nation asked Judge Arun Subramanian to move the case to the D.C. District Court, saying its the appropriate venue due to the mandates in the 2010 consent decree allowing the merger of LN and Ticketmaster. The DOJ and plaintiff states oppose the venue change.