The live music industry in the US is booming. Since the decline of CD sales and the advent of music streaming, performing artists have turned to tours to earn more of their income, and ticket prices have skyrocketed. Increasingly, one company has come to profit: Live Nation Entertainment Inc. and its Ticketmaster arm.
In a major antitrust verdict, a New York federal jury concluded on April 15 that Live Nation illegally monopolized the live events industry and overcharged fans.
The case began in 2024 when the Justice Department and more than three dozen state attorneys general sued Live Nation. A week into the trial, which began March 2, 2026, the federal government and half a dozen states reached a settlement. But a coalition of 33 states and Washington, DC continued fighting in court to force a breakup of the company.
Live Nation's monopoly led concertgoers to overpay by $1.72 per ticket, the jury found.
How does concert ticketing work in the US?
Concert venues have contracts with ticketing services such as Ticketmaster, AEG's AXS or CTS Eventim AG. These arrangements are often exclusive.
A concert ticket includes the "face value," or base cost, and service fees, which cover facility maintenance and ticketing platform costs such as payment processing and customer support. In preparation for a tour, an artist and their team determine the face value of the ticket. For every ticket sold, the face value is paid to the artist, who pockets the money after expenses, which include travel and labor costs. The venue separately sets the fees, which it shares with the ticketer based on a percentage split set out in the contract. Ticketmaster has significant influence over the fee level and structure when it contracts with a venue. A 2018 Government Accountability Office study found that on average, fees accounted for 27% of the overall ticket price.
There is also a sizable secondary market, where companies such as StubHub Inc. and SeatGeek Inc. allow customers who've already purchased tickets to resell them. Ticketmaster sells tickets both on the primary and resale markets.
How much have concert prices increased in the US?
Ticket prices have surged over the last 25 years. In 1996, the average face value for a ticket to see one of the world's 100 top-grossing artists was $25.81 in the US, according to data from Pollstar, equivalent to $53.18 today after adjusting for inflation. By 2024, the average face value for a ticket was $136.45 -- equivalent to $142.15 today -- an increase of more than 150%.
Why have concert ticket prices increased so much?
There are several factors behind the increase. In the past, artists often set the face value of concert tickets moderately to promote album sales. But few people today buy vinyl records or CDs, and revenue from streaming isn't as lucrative as the physical album sales were. That has made touring count for a greater proportion -- about 70% -- of artists' income, leading them to charge higher prices.
In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, live events such as concerts experienced a significant boom. The increased demand contributed to higher prices for fans.
Then there's the secondary ticket market. Ticket resale has existed for decades but became ubiquitous in the early 2000s following the advent of online marketplaces. These platforms have reshaped how concerts are priced in two ways.
First, tickets on the secondary market are more expensive. A secondary ticketer often charges additional fees to both the buyer and seller. The 2018 Government Accountability Office study found fees for secondary tickets ranged from 20% to 56% of the face value of the ticket, with an average fee of about 31%, compared with the 27% figure for the primary market. Some US states restrict ticket resales, including by capping prices for such transactions.
Some musical acts, such as Pearl Jam and Kid Rock, have asked Ticketmaster or other platforms to turn off their resale functions.
Second, the resale market has indirectly changed pricing in the primary market. Artists earn money only from the initial sale of a ticket. If a buyer later resells that ticket on the secondary market for a higher price, the artist receives none of the additional revenue. As fans proved willing to pay much more for high-demand seats on resale sites, artists and concert promoters realized they should be charging a lot more. In response, ticketing companies introduced dynamic pricing tools that automatically raise prices when demand is strong, allowing artists and promoters to capture more of that value upfront rather than leaving it to resellers on the secondary market.
What role do fees play in raising ticket prices?
As face values have increased in recent decades, fees imposed by Ticketmaster have increased too. During testimony, Live Nation Chief Executive Officer Michael Rapino acknowledged that the company's fees have increased over time. Rapino said the increases have been in line with those charged by other ticketing companies such as AXS and SeatGeek.
Live Nation's ticketing director Ben Baker testified that Ticketmaster's fees depend on the face value of the ticket. As of September 2023, the company's standard rate card called for charging $3.25 on tickets with a face value of as much as $5.99. From there, the fees increase based on face value with the highest price range -- above $116 -- garnering a 20% fee that caps at $70.
Ticketmaster is by far the largest primary ticketer of music concerts. The company's dominance emerged after rivals like Ticketron folded or were acquired and ticket sales shifted from box offices and mail order to centralized platforms. In the antitrust case, states that sued Live Nation said its position was cemented by its 2010 merger with Ticketmaster. The plaintiffs estimated it now controls more than 80% of the market. Rapino put his company's share much lower, in the 50% range.
That control over music concert ticketing means Ticketmaster pressures venues to charge high fees without fear that venues will switch to other providers, state attorneys general that sued the company argued. The states alleged that Ticketmaster's monopoly allowed it to charge $2.30 per ticket more than its next closest rival, an overcharge that was mostly paid by concertgoers.
Does it work differently overseas?
Most venues in the US sell their tickets through a single primary ticketer. That's in contrast to Europe, where more venues use an "open model," allowing more than one ticketing company to sell tickets for the same show. Advocates of the open model argue that the competition from multiple ticketers helps drive down fees for concertgoers.
In the UK, the concert venue selects which ticketing service to use for a portion of the sales, while the promoter can pick a different ticketer for the remainder. In France, venues operate a centralized ticketing system from which multiple companies can draw ticket inventory to sell on their platforms.
What's the case the states made about Live Nation?
States that sued Live Nation alleged the company has illegally monopolized the market for primary tickets. They said the company has used its grip on concert promotion to force venues to use Ticketmaster and enter into lengthy exclusive deals that prevent rival ticketers from having an opportunity to compete. The plaintiffs said the company also has adopted policies that block competing promoters from using its amphitheaters, which forces artists to use Live Nation's concert promotion services if they want to perform at its outdoor venues. All those actions have increased the prices that consumers must pay for live music events, they said.
The states want as much as $700 million and may seek additional penalties for violations of state antitrust laws. Some also have said they want Live Nation to sell Ticketmaster.
The trial represents the third time that antitrust officials have battled with Live Nation in the past 16 years. In 2010, antitrust enforcers sued and settled with Live Nation over its acquisition of Ticketmaster, allowing the deal with conditions. Nine years later, they alleged Live Nation had breached the earlier settlement, but again agreed to an accord that imposed additional obligations on the company.
In 2024, the Justice Department sued Live Nation again for alleged antitrust violations. The Justice Department reached a third settlement with Live Nation on March 9, one week after the trial began. Six states joined the settlement.
What's Live Nation's response?
Live Nation executives deny that the company has threatened to move concerts away from venues that didn't want to use Ticketmaster. In each alleged instance cited by the states, executives say Live Nation's concert promotion business recommended a different venue for other reasons. Executives also said they don't force artists to pick particular venues, and that it's Live Nation's longstanding policy not to allow outside promoters at its amphitheaters.
The company argues that most of the pricing decisions are out of its hands: Artists set the face value of the tickets and the venue controls the level of fees. The majority of the concerts that Live Nation promotes -- around 80%, according to Rapino -- take place at venues the company doesn't own or operate.
Rapino testified that prices are lower in European countries because they have stricter regulation on ticket resale, effectively barring some of the most inflated prices.
Ticketmaster dominates sales for amphitheaters and arenas but not other venue types such as sports stadiums, theaters and clubs. The company contests the states' allegations that it controls a dominant position in the concert ticketing space, noting that its market share is smaller if the full range of concert venues is considered.
Live Nation is likely to appeal the verdict and any remedy order issued by the judge to the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.