Tagged: monopolistic power

“In 2010, when the Justice Department allowed the two most dominant companies in the live music business — Live Nation and Ticketmaster — to merge, many greeted the news with dread. Live Nation was already the world’s biggest concert promoter. Ticketmaster had for years been the leading ticket provider. Critics warned that the merger would create an industry monolith, one capable of crippling competitors in the ticketing business. Federal officials tried to reassure the skeptics. They pointed to a consent decree, or legal settlement, they had negotiated as part of the merger approval. Its terms were strict, they said: It would boost competition and block monopolistic behavior by the new, larger Live Nation…Eight years after the merger, the ticketing business is still dominated by Live Nation and its operations extend into nearly every aspect of the concert world. Ticket prices are at record highs. Service fees are far from reduced. And Ticketmaster, part of the Live Nation empire, still tickets 80 of the top 100 arenas in the country. No other company has more than a handful. No competitor has risen to challenge its pre-eminence. Now Department of Justice officials are looking into serious accusations about Live Nation’s behavior in the marketplace. They have been reviewing complaints that Live Nation, which manages 500 artists, including U2 and Miley Cyrus, has used its control over concert tours to pressure venues into contracting with its subsidiary, Ticketmaster. The company’s chief competitor, AEG, has told the officials that venues it manages that serve Atlanta; Las Vegas; Minneapolis; Salt Lake City; Louisville, Ky.; and Oakland, Calif., were told they would lose valuable shows if Ticketmaster was not used as a vendor, a possible violation of antitrust law.”

Not only does Live Nation have a monopoly on the concern promotion & ticketing business, but Live Nation (as well as AEG and others) have a race-based monopoly over concerts and ticketing since most of their employees are white and/or “Jewish,” and they maintain employment practices, policies and procedures that prevent qualified African Americans and people of color from being hired to higher-status, higher-paying positions within the company.

Source: Graham Bowley and Ben Sisario. “Live Nations Rules Music Ticketing, Some Say With Threats.” The New York Times. April 1, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/01/arts/music/live-nation-ticketmaster.html.

“‘There is no such thing as black power in Hollywood,’ [Tim] Reid states emphatically. ‘What you have are a lot of Blacks with vanity opportunities, but this does not mean they have any real power.’ Reid, who heads his own company and is awaiting the national release of his latest film ‘Once Upon A Time…When We Were Colored,’ believes that things would be a lot better if blacks were, so to speak, taught to fish rather being the recipients of handouts. ‘The studios will give you the money to make a picture,’ he explains, ‘but this does not lead to wealth or empowerment, and the only way we are going to get the kind of power in which we can determine what picture is made and how it’s distributed is through self-reliance. Practicing what he preaches, all of Reid’s movies are partly financed by Black investors and partners such as Black Entertainment Television and boxing promoter, Butch Lewis. ‘Until we are self-sufficient like the late Oscar Micheaux, until we have our own infrastructure, we cannot talk about having any power,’ Reid asserts. ‘We know how to make movies. That’s not the problem. What we need are the theaters, like Magic Johnson is doing, and the distributors. This is the road to economic power…this is how you create wealth.'”

Source: Herb Boyd. “Who Really Has The Power In Hollywood?” The Crisis. pg.10. February-March 1996.

“Almost by definition, the precise client in a public interest lawsuit is hard to determine. If the private attorney general speaks for the public, then it would seem that the public is the true client—or that no one in particular is the client. The term deflects attention away from the precise rights or particular interests of the moving party, encouraging instead a focus on the general claims about ‘the law’ or ‘the issue’ which the lawsuit raises.”

Source: Jeremy A. Rabkin, The Secret Life of the Private Attorney General, Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 61, pg. 181. 1998.