5 ms·

ffs, artists aren’t in control of these prices or venues. LiveNation is. Remember LiveNation? Yeah, those assholes.

lotsofpulp 6mo ago
Livenation provides a useful role as a punching bag to the most popular artists. They need to seem accessible to the commoners, but their demand is so high, they can earn more money catering only to those willing to pay them the most.
- kevinsync 6mo ago
  Yes, Live Nation and Ticketmaster literally serve as "the bad guy" in the transaction. The truth is, due to market realities, ticket prices (MSRP, not reseller prices) need to be high so that everybody gets their cut. All those fees people lose their minds about? Those more or less pay out the promoters, because the artists are too chickenshit to roll the full costs into their bare ticket prices, and unrealistic ticket prices signal to fans that the artist "really has their best interests in mind". But it's all smoke and mirrors lol, if promoters don't get paid, no shows happen; if no shows happen, venues don't get paid. If there are no promoters or venues, shows are dead and artists don't get paid. Considering all of that, everybody in the chain prefers and benefits from sold-out shows for myriad reasons, and all live performance is theatre at its core anyways, so IMO what's a little extra theatre on top to make sure the shows go on in this year of our Lord 2026, where very little is cheap and affordable?
  - CPLX 6mo ago
    This is not a reasonable take on what's actually happening. It's never been a reasonable take, but posting this today after Live Nation has literally just been found liable by a jury shows deep confusion. The ticket prices are not high because of market realities. They're high because of illegal monopoly behavior that inflates costs and then steals the money and gives it to Michael Rapino and his friends. The behavior of Live Nation has been shown to be much closer to organized crime than what most people think of as standard business practice. There's extensive on-the-record testimony and an official federal court verdict backing up my side of this argument.
    - reactordev 6mo ago
      1000% this.
    - lotsofpulp 6mo ago
      Livenation’s profit margins are not very impressive for a business that supposedly has pricing power. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LYV/live-nation-entertainment/profit-margins https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LYV/live-nation-en... Are you suggesting Livenation’s leaders (Rapino, etc) are stealing from the other shareholders? Looks like Liberty Live Group owns 30% of Livenation? And Rapino owns less than 2%, per Yahoo Finance. https://www.libertyliveholdings.com/about https://www.libertyliveholdings.com/about Page 31 of Livenation’s 2025 10-K shows $25B revenue, $19B direct operating expenses, and $4B selling, general, and admin expenses. I wonder how much of the expenses is not going to performers and the expenses of operating venues. https://investors.livenationentertainment.com/sec-filings/annual-reports/content/0001335258-26-000009/0001335258-26-000009.pdf https://investors.livenationentertainment.com/sec-filings/an...
      - sdellis 6mo ago
        I don't think anyone is suggesting that Rapino is stealing from shareholders. We don't know how that money is spent or disbursed. What is clear from the case and settlement is that they were illegally maintaining a monopoly in the live entertainment industry that had stifled innovation and competition, and resulted in higher ticket prices for music fans.
        lotsofpulp 6mo ago
        The claim was that Livenation (or a few insiders) is benefiting from the higher prices. But the financials (low profit margins) don’t show that (absent fraud). In which case, the benefit of the higher prices would be going to (some) performers. Which supports the claim that Livenation is useful as a punching bag for the most popular performers.
        reactordev 6mo ago

Livenation provides a useful role as a punching bag to the most popular artists. They need to seem accessible to the commoners, but their demand is so high, they can earn more money catering only to those willing to pay them the most.

kevinsync 6mo ago
Yes, Live Nation and Ticketmaster literally serve as "the bad guy" in the transaction. The truth is, due to market realities, ticket prices (MSRP, not reseller prices) need to be high so that everybody gets their cut. All those fees people lose their minds about? Those more or less pay out the promoters, because the artists are too chickenshit to roll the full costs into their bare ticket prices, and unrealistic ticket prices signal to fans that the artist "really has their best interests in mind". But it's all smoke and mirrors lol, if promoters don't get paid, no shows happen; if no shows happen, venues don't get paid. If there are no promoters or venues, shows are dead and artists don't get paid. Considering all of that, everybody in the chain prefers and benefits from sold-out shows for myriad reasons, and all live performance is theatre at its core anyways, so IMO what's a little extra theatre on top to make sure the shows go on in this year of our Lord 2026, where very little is cheap and affordable?
- CPLX 6mo ago
  This is not a reasonable take on what's actually happening. It's never been a reasonable take, but posting this today after Live Nation has literally just been found liable by a jury shows deep confusion. The ticket prices are not high because of market realities. They're high because of illegal monopoly behavior that inflates costs and then steals the money and gives it to Michael Rapino and his friends. The behavior of Live Nation has been shown to be much closer to organized crime than what most people think of as standard business practice. There's extensive on-the-record testimony and an official federal court verdict backing up my side of this argument.
  - reactordev 6mo ago
    1000% this.
  - lotsofpulp 6mo ago
    Livenation’s profit margins are not very impressive for a business that supposedly has pricing power. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LYV/live-nation-entertainment/profit-margins https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/LYV/live-nation-en... Are you suggesting Livenation’s leaders (Rapino, etc) are stealing from the other shareholders? Looks like Liberty Live Group owns 30% of Livenation? And Rapino owns less than 2%, per Yahoo Finance. https://www.libertyliveholdings.com/about https://www.libertyliveholdings.com/about Page 31 of Livenation’s 2025 10-K shows $25B revenue, $19B direct operating expenses, and $4B selling, general, and admin expenses. I wonder how much of the expenses is not going to performers and the expenses of operating venues. https://investors.livenationentertainment.com/sec-filings/annual-reports/content/0001335258-26-000009/0001335258-26-000009.pdf https://investors.livenationentertainment.com/sec-filings/an...
    - sdellis 6mo ago
      I don't think anyone is suggesting that Rapino is stealing from shareholders. We don't know how that money is spent or disbursed. What is clear from the case and settlement is that they were illegally maintaining a monopoly in the live entertainment industry that had stifled innovation and competition, and resulted in higher ticket prices for music fans.
      - lotsofpulp 6mo ago
        The claim was that Livenation (or a few insiders) is benefiting from the higher prices. But the financials (low profit margins) don’t show that (absent fraud). In which case, the benefit of the higher prices would be going to (some) performers. Which supports the claim that Livenation is useful as a punching bag for the most popular performers.
        reactordev 6mo ago