10 ms·

TicketMaster's continued existence makes a mockery of everything we learned about antitrust laws.

jimt1234 2y ago
Correct. If it was possible for me to not do business with TicketMaster, I would, but it's just not possible. Pretty much any concert or sporting event I'm interested in requires me to use TicketMaster.
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  You can drive to the venue and buy tickets from the box office, usually. I've done this more than once to deny TicketMaster all fees.
  - jmholla 2y ago
    So many venues these days do not have an in person option for buying tickets. (And they often still charge convenience fees to add salt into the wound.)
  - razakel 2y ago
    TicketMaster probably owns the venue, though.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Antitrust laws as they exist are useless. They require a bar that is impossible to prove in real life. We need new laws that are flexible and allow a lot more power to split up and fine large companies
- kazinator 2y ago
  Good thing Trump was elected, then; now moral controls over corporations are on the fast track!
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - akira2501 2y ago
    Every President and Member of Congress for the past 20 years has failed on this account. I think a different lens to view this through would be more useful.
    - kazinator 2y ago
      The lens that the government is that the beck and call of corporations no matter who is in power?
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - DidYaWipe 2y ago
    This is clearly sarcasm.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > They require a bar that is impossible to prove in real life. Hardly. Discovery is an amazingly powerful tool. The problem seems to be most of these cases are argued in front of bench trials and not jury trials. Judges are often swayed by technocratic arguments and can be easily convinced to ignore the impact of monopolies on labor markets in favor of the simple consumer pricing argument. > and allow a lot more power to split up and fine large companies We already have that power. You might ask why the DOJ has refused to use it in the past two decades.
  - inetknght 2y ago
    > The problem seems to be most of these cases are argued in front of bench trials and not jury trials. That's a feature of all arbitration dictatorgreements I've seen.

Correct. If it was possible for me to not do business with TicketMaster, I would, but it's just not possible. Pretty much any concert or sporting event I'm interested in requires me to use TicketMaster.

DidYaWipe 2y ago
You can drive to the venue and buy tickets from the box office, usually. I've done this more than once to deny TicketMaster all fees.
- jmholla 2y ago
  So many venues these days do not have an in person option for buying tickets. (And they often still charge convenience fees to add salt into the wound.)
- razakel 2y ago
  TicketMaster probably owns the venue, though.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Antitrust laws as they exist are useless. They require a bar that is impossible to prove in real life. We need new laws that are flexible and allow a lot more power to split up and fine large companies

kazinator 2y ago
Good thing Trump was elected, then; now moral controls over corporations are on the fast track!
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- akira2501 2y ago
  Every President and Member of Congress for the past 20 years has failed on this account. I think a different lens to view this through would be more useful.
  - kazinator 2y ago
    The lens that the government is that the beck and call of corporations no matter who is in power?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  This is clearly sarcasm.
akira2501 2y ago
> They require a bar that is impossible to prove in real life. Hardly. Discovery is an amazingly powerful tool. The problem seems to be most of these cases are argued in front of bench trials and not jury trials. Judges are often swayed by technocratic arguments and can be easily convinced to ignore the impact of monopolies on labor markets in favor of the simple consumer pricing argument. > and allow a lot more power to split up and fine large companies We already have that power. You might ask why the DOJ has refused to use it in the past two decades.
- inetknght 2y ago
  > The problem seems to be most of these cases are argued in front of bench trials and not jury trials. That's a feature of all arbitration dictatorgreements I've seen.