3 ms·

You're bringing up the past, they are talking about the present, which is absolutely accurate.

IshKebab 3y ago
OP asked why nobody has beaten TM. The answer cannot be "because they have a vertically integrated monopoly" because in the past that wasn't true and nobody was able to beat them then either.
- latchkey 3y ago
  Even if a venue isn't owned my LN, they still use TM for ticketing because otherwise their booking agents won't be able to get the Clear Channel artists to come. It has been that way for a LONG time. Before LN, it was CC. Source: I used to own a night club in San Francisco.
  - cbsmith 3y ago
    Yeah, no: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Nation_(events_promoter) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Nation_(events_promoter) "Founded in 1996 by Robert F. X. Sillerman as SFX Entertainment, the company's business was built around consolidating concert promoters into a national entity to counter the oversized influence of ticket behemoth Ticketmaster." It's kind of amazing how the present distorts our perspective of the past.
    - latchkey 3y ago
      What are you no about? Like I said, before LN, it was CC.
      - cbsmith 3y ago
        It was formed to compete with TM, because TM had too much market power. In other words, you didn't need to use TM if you were using CC from a business/monopoly standpoint --in fact it was against their interests. However, CC/LN often went with TM anyway because it worked out better for them.
        latchkey 3y ago
        And what happened? They joined TM and CC.
        cbsmith 3y ago
        No, LN was spun off from CC and after years of trying & failing to compete with TM, then acquired TM. The point being: TM already had the market power before LN was on the scene, and all of LN's market power wasn't enough to get people to use their ticketing platform instead of TM. Saying LN is the reason everyone uses TM is very much getting it backwards.
cbsmith 3y ago
So LN's market share in venues and acts is smaller than TM's market share for ticketing, and LN tried to use their venue/promotion business to launch their own ticketing platform and couldn't compete with TM... but right now the only reason people use TM is because of LN? Surely, if LN's dominance is what is needed to lock up the ticketing market, LN's ticketing platform should have been able to compete with TM quite well, and TM should have been struggling to succeed in the ticketing market prior to being acquired by LN.

OP asked why nobody has beaten TM. The answer cannot be "because they have a vertically integrated monopoly" because in the past that wasn't true and nobody was able to beat them then either.

latchkey 3y ago
Even if a venue isn't owned my LN, they still use TM for ticketing because otherwise their booking agents won't be able to get the Clear Channel artists to come. It has been that way for a LONG time. Before LN, it was CC. Source: I used to own a night club in San Francisco.
- cbsmith 3y ago
  Yeah, no: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Nation_(events_promoter) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Nation_(events_promoter) "Founded in 1996 by Robert F. X. Sillerman as SFX Entertainment, the company's business was built around consolidating concert promoters into a national entity to counter the oversized influence of ticket behemoth Ticketmaster." It's kind of amazing how the present distorts our perspective of the past.
  - latchkey 3y ago
    What are you no about? Like I said, before LN, it was CC.
    - cbsmith 3y ago
      It was formed to compete with TM, because TM had too much market power. In other words, you didn't need to use TM if you were using CC from a business/monopoly standpoint --in fact it was against their interests. However, CC/LN often went with TM anyway because it worked out better for them.
      - latchkey 3y ago
        And what happened? They joined TM and CC.
        cbsmith 3y ago
        No, LN was spun off from CC and after years of trying & failing to compete with TM, then acquired TM. The point being: TM already had the market power before LN was on the scene, and all of LN's market power wasn't enough to get people to use their ticketing platform instead of TM. Saying LN is the reason everyone uses TM is very much getting it backwards.

cbsmith 3y ago

So LN's market share in venues and acts is smaller than TM's market share for ticketing, and LN tried to use their venue/promotion business to launch their own ticketing platform and couldn't compete with TM... but right now the only reason people use TM is because of LN? Surely, if LN's dominance is what is needed to lock up the ticketing market, LN's ticketing platform should have been able to compete with TM quite well, and TM should have been struggling to succeed in the ticketing market prior to being acquired by LN.