00:00Jen, I guess we've got to start with $1.72 because I'm not going to be able to get past
00:04that. What's the mask that the jury used to come up with this fee, and why is this important?
00:13So that fee was actually derived by an expert economist that had been hired by the plaintiffs for the purposes
00:20of the state laws that they alleged were violated to determine what the damages amount should be. And I know
00:25that $1.72 amount seems very low. And I think when it came out in trial, we all were a
00:31bit surprised as well. But you have to realize that that's for every single ticket sold for a fairly long
00:37span of years in 24 states.
00:40So the total amount will really add up. I mean, theoretically, that total amount would be in the multi-millions,
00:46possibly even more. So while it sounds low, it could still end up being a pretty big recovery for the
00:53states that are still in as plaintiffs. But it wasn't really the jury's math. It was the expert's math that
00:58the juries decided to accept.
00:59Who's experts?
01:01The expert hired by the plaintiffs, Dr. Rosa Abrantes-Metz.
01:06Okay.
01:06Asking you shall get the answer, Carol.
01:09Yeah, she knows.
01:10I should know my audience. Is significant this ruling and does it have implications for others?
01:17I think this ruling is significant because honestly, it's been over the years very, very difficult for plaintiffs to win
01:23monopolization suits against big companies. And in particular, a suit like this one where the federal government is no longer
01:30in the case because they settled.
01:31And it's a group of states only going out on their own.
01:36And it just shows that plaintiffs can win these monopolization suits where they have compelling evidence, even where it's really
01:45hard fought by the defense.
01:46Because I have to say, having been to quite a bit of that trial, the defense put on a really
01:50good case as well.
01:51And at the end, I think most people who had been watching weren't too sure how this was going to
01:55come out.
01:55I'm looking at some other companies that may be affected by this competitor.
02:00StubHub up 3 percent.
02:01Shares quickly moved higher after this.
02:03Vivid Seats up as much as 8 percent or 8 percent as we speak right now.
02:10Apart from the $1.72 cents per ticket, Jen, a remedy that could include a breakup.
02:16Is that realistic here?
02:19I think the states will go for that.
02:21I don't know how realistic it is.
02:23I think that's a tall ask for any judge and would be stuck in appeals for years.
02:27Because if the judge did order something like that, Live Nation would certainly appeal and ask for it to be
02:33stayed.
02:33And I certainly think it would be stayed.
02:35I'm not exactly sure what the judge can do here.
02:37Because, you know, the issue is that Live Nation really has power in so many different components of the concert
02:44experience from, you know, A to the N to the concert that it blocks out all those other competitors.
02:50Those companies that you just named that where stock has reacted is because they all claim to be blocked out
02:55of the market by Ticketmaster and Live Nation's tactics.
02:59So what they're all hoping is that there's a remedy here that stops Live Nation from really preventing some of
03:05these other ticketing agents to get in there and ticket venues for big shows.
03:09And that's what the judge is really going to have to do.
03:11It's now up to the states to proffer something, to suggest what they think is the right breakup, in addition
03:18to a divestiture of Ticketmaster.
03:20Because they have to have an alternative in case the judge isn't willing to stick his neck out that far.
03:24I mean, Jen, you look at this stuff all the time.
03:26Pretty clear cut.
03:26But, I mean, I think some of us are thinking, yeah, like there's not a lot of choices when you
03:31go to buy tickets.
03:32And it's a little frustrating when you're trying to make sense of fees and the cost.
03:35But, like, you know, is it kind of like, yeah, it was just a matter of time before this had
03:41to be looked at?
03:43You know, I see it that way.
03:45Absolutely.
03:46And I think that there's a history here by which Live Nation has behaved badly, according to the government.
03:52They entered a consent order in 2010 when they acquired Ticketmaster, and they were foundmen several years later during the
03:58first Trump administration to have violated that order.
04:00The order was clarified, supplemented, and extended.
04:03And apparently they're still violating that order.
04:05So, yes, Carol, for people who've been watching, they think something has to be done beyond just telling the company
04:11you must behave in a certain way that the company ignores.
04:14I got to say, there's got to be a point when I think about all the things we talk about,
04:19blockchain and digital, like, why can't you just go on a site and just pay for it directly, right?
04:26So the money goes to the performers and everybody who's involved in the production and not just all these extra
04:32fees that make you wonder, what's up?
04:34Well, I think the venue, venues have exclusive agreements with these ticketers, right?
04:40But why? Why not have all the money just go right to the venues and the performers and the people
04:45who actually are putting on the production?
04:46Why do we need all these intermediaries?
04:49The company that has control over most of the industry has set it up in such a complicated way that
04:53it benefits their bottom line and not necessarily the artists or the venue's bottom line.
04:58And that was a big part of this trial.
05:00And that was a big part of this trial.
Comments