The answer is capitalism, I know.

But it wasn’t always like this. Why the hell are they allowed to absolutely monopolize all shows and venues? How are there not laws on this?

Is stopping going to any shows the only way to fix this? If so, that wont happen. People are gonna go see their favorite bands (and ticketmonster knows it)

I wish this one was as easy as getting rid of all my streaming services - but they really fucked us over for live shows.

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    32 minutes ago

    Ticketmaster is a perfect example of how much politicians are full of shit, all of them.

    You know those Congressional Dog & Pony Shows, where they drag out the CEOs of some industry, holler at them all day, and then go back to their office and do absolutely nothing about what they just hollered about?

    They did that with Ticketmaster in 1994, again in 2009, and again in 2023. Every 15 years or so, they get outraged in public, and do nothing. I’m sure it has nothing to do with Ticketmaster making enormous campaign contributions to everyone in office.

  • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    53 minutes ago

    The answer is capitalism, I know

    No it isnt. Its because dumb cunts keep on giving them money. Dont blame FOMO on capitalism. Every single one of us has the 100% choice of not going, and not paying those stupid prices.

    On the legal side of things, the DOJ has on going investigations into Live nation-Ticketmaster threatening venues is they use AXS or SeatGeek. Nothing has been done about, not even fines. Live nation-Ticketmaster also lobbys congress and others, and spends A LOT to make sure that its always sunny for them.

    https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-live-nation-ticketmaster-monopolizing-markets-across-live-concert

  • balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    Because people keep giving them money

    They haven’t actually got a full monopoly. You can give axs money. You can in some cases go to the box office ahead of time like it’s 1980.

    If you want to see taytay, you are indeed going to pay ticketmaster, but the only way to defeat them is by not giving them money.

  • rabber@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Was my dream to catch Rush on this tour. 1000 cad per ticket. I can go to a European metal festival for the same price and see 120 bands.

    Blame the artists too. Neil young capped tickets this year’s tour at 120 with no ability to resell.

  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Because people keep buying the tickets even though they aren’t a necessity. This should be an easy boycott.

  • Tedesche@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Unregulated capitalism. Specifically, unenforced monopoly laws, which the U.S. has been terrible at.

    • sleen@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      That is true, capitalism deserves its share of the blame but this ain’t it. Capitalism isn’t even done properly in this regard - tyranny is what this is, and for a capitalist society they sure are doing a terrible job at capitalism.

  • Mobiuthuselah@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    1 day ago

    There are currently lawsuits against them, but it takes time. This is from NC Attorney General Jeff Jackson’s newsletter earlier this year:

    "The People vs. Ticketmaster/Live Nation

    I’m forcing myself to only pick one case to go into detail about - but it’s a great one.

    Let’s say you want to make a bunch of money by supplying live entertainment, primarily the music industry.

    Well, the three big pieces in that business are:

    The venue

    The right to promote the event

    The right to sell the tickets

    Now imagine you control each of those. You own venues, and you promote the events, and you sell the tickets.

    Congratulations - you’re a monopoly.

    You’ve achieved vertical integration within your business, which means the sum of those parts has unlocked the ability to gouge customers with the confidence that they won’t be able to find a competitor to offer them a better deal. And using your monopoly to further entrench your power to charge customers higher prices is against the law.

    This is exactly what I, along with a bipartisan group of AGs, allege that Ticketmaster/Live Nation has done.

    They’ve turned concert ticket fees into something fans call the “Ticketmaster Tax.” These are the “convenience fees,” “processing fees,” and “handling fees” that add up quickly, inflating ticket prices by huge margins.

    Why can they get away with it? Because they’ve locked venues into exclusive contracts, squeezing out any chance of competition.

    But it gets worse. If venues try to resist and explore other options, Live Nation retaliates by threatening to strip venues of popular acts. The internal emails from Live Nation executives detailed in our lawsuit are explicit and awful.

    Which means, if you’re an independent venue that doesn’t use Ticketmaster, good luck booking artists. Ticketmaster controls ticket sales and Live Nation controls promotion, so artists who are promoted by Live Nation typically won’t be allowed to perform at venues that refuse to use Ticketmaster for ticketing.

    This is textbook unlawful monopoly behavior. Consumers are paying higher prices and artists and venues are suffering from reduced competition and income.

    The good news is that Live Nation just tried - but failed - to get our lawsuit dismissed. That’s a big step toward accountability, including our ultimate request that Live Nation be required to divest Ticketmaster, which it acquired in 2011 and which became the linchpin for much of their monopolistic behavior."

      • Mobiuthuselah@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        12 hours ago

        He is the most levelheaded, respectful, and transparent politician I’ve ever seen. I’ve been following him for years because he will explain what he’s working on in a way that doesn’t insult your intelligence nor play into the drama of politics. During his time in the US House of Representatives, his newsletters would sometimes explain the theatrics of government shutdowns and orchestrated outrage from other members. Even then, he didn’t name anyone specifically or sling mud. I’ve encouraged people from all kinds of political perspectives to follow his newsletters. He’s a great example of how a representative should be, and I genuinely believe that’s just part of his personal ethos.