On the Friday, March 27, 2026, episode of The Excerpt podcast:High fees, limited options, and frustrating presales define concert ticketing today. Will a DOJ settlement with Live Nation and Ticketmaster change the checkout experience, or leave the system largely intact? Former Acting Assistant Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division Doha Mekki joins USA TODAY's The Excerpt for a look at what comes next in the multi-state antitrust case.
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it.This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts:True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here
Dana Taylor:
Buying concert tickets already means high fees and limited choices, and you can add to that the headache of frustrating pre-sales. So how much does a proposed Department of Justice settlement with Live Nation and Ticketmaster loosen their grip on the market? Will the current system remain largely unchanged, or will fans actually notice a difference when they check out?
Hello, and welcome to USA TODAY's The Excerpt. I'm Dana Taylor. Today is Friday, March 27th, 2026. Joining me to discuss the split over the settlement of the antitrust case brought by the Biden DOJ, which ultimately included over 40 states, is former acting assistant attorney general for the US Department of Justice Antitrust Division, Doha Mekki. It's nice to have you here, Doha.
Doha Mekki:
Thank you so much for having me.
Dana Taylor:
Before we dive into the terms of the recent settlement, can you walk me through how we got here? Anyone who's bought tickets for a live show is likely familiar with Ticketmaster, but lay out for me how Live Nation and Ticketmaster operate.
Doha Mekki:
So going way back to 2024, the Justice Department, alongside 40 state attorneys general, filed a sweeping monopolization lawsuit that alleged a number of things. But really the core of it was that Live Nation had a stranglehold over the live music ecosystem, and the center of the live music ecosystem was that Live Nation really had four or five parts of its business that it used to really have a lot of bottlenecks, and choke points over the music experience that fans and artists and everyone in between had in this industry.
And so for example, it promotes tours. We allege that it controls about 60% of concert promotions at major concert venues. It owns or controls a number of venues, hundreds in fact, across North America. It owns amphitheaters. More than 60 of the top 100 amphitheaters in the United States. It owns a number of arenas, and even makes money advertising inside the venues that it owns and operates. It manages artists directly, more than 400 artists, we alleged in the complaint. And most famously, the place where fans tend to interact with Live Nation's subsidiary Ticketmaster most directly, has a stranglehold over the ticketing market. It controls up to 80% of primary ticketing at major concert venues across the United States.
And so, what's the upshot of all of this? This is what monopolization, and really the cornerstone of antitrust cases, are all about. It has leverage across multiple layers of the business. And so you really have a whack-a-mole problem. If you try to fix any one of these things, it can really leverage its power and control and ability to dominate any other part of the stack. And so, over more than a hundred pages, the United States and more than 40 state attorneys general sought to break up Ticketmaster, and went to a federal judge, and sought a jury demand to do just that in the Southern District of New York.
Dana Taylor:
Can you speak to the timing of this deal? So the timing is extraordinary.
Doha Mekki:
As I mentioned, the lawsuit was filed in May 2024. And typically, antitrust cases take a very long time, but this one went to trial fairly quickly. So it started in March of 2026, so earlier this month. But leading up to the trial, there were leaks and reporting in the press that there might be a settlement. But the trial started, and witnesses were examined. And by all accounts, during that first week, the trial was going very well for the government. Witnesses were being examined, and told a story that really spoke to the story that the government was laying out in the complaint.
But then out of nowhere, during what should have been the second week of testimony, the lead lawyer for the Justice Department stood up and told the court that the DOJ had reached a settlement, and the states largely had just been told of this settlement. And the picture that was painted from the reporting in the court was that this was really a surprise, and certainly it sounded like the judge had been surprised by the settlement. And there were a number of ramifications from these very unusual proceedings, from what should have been week two of a blockbuster, rather historic antitrust trial.
Dana Taylor:
With the DOJ's settlement, what's next for the state attorneys general, who for now are still pushing forward?
Doha Mekki:
Well, to appreciate where we are, you have to understand what is and what is not in the DOJ settlement. The DOJ's settlement should be many, many pages long. It should be very detailed. But instead, what the public saw was a term sheet that specifies at a very high level, a very weak settlement that really cements Live Nation's dominance, that will cement Live Nation's technology as the preferred ticketing infrastructure. That divests ownership or control of a number of, I think, 13 secondary venues. But really doesn't specify a lot of detail about exactly how the settlement works. And so, it really does not do much to satisfy the very serious competition concerns that were laid out in the complaint.
And so what you have is a small handful of states that are going to go along with this very odd deal that the Justice Department seems content to take, and that frankly is a big victory for Live Nation and its monopoly. But you have a number of other states that are vowing to fight on. And despite these very unfortunate circumstances, they have hired a very formidable outside lawyer named Jeff Kessler to lead the charge, and the state attorneys general themselves, including AG Tish James, Jeff Jackson of North Carolina, Phil Weiser in Colorado, and a number of other attorneys general, Jonathan Skrmetti in Tennessee, are continuing to litigate. These are not ideal circumstances by any means, after being sandbagged by the Justice Department, but trial continues. And witnesses are continuing to be examined, and a jury continues to hear evidence.
Dana Taylor:
Advertisement
Doha, let's talk about ticket prices. Do the terms favor consumers? And is there wiggle room here for Ticketmaster to offset any losses tied to capped fees?
Doha Mekki:
As I look at this term sheet, I have more questions than answers. I've been practicing antitrust law for a very long time, and what I see is a set of conditions that really favors Live Nation, and really cements dominance, and really protects its ability to continue to charge extraordinarily high prices. And really does nothing to bring about market forces to compete away high prices. It does curious things like cap fees, in some places. But as we talked about earlier, when you have dominance in five different parts of the stack, what does it mean to cap fees in one of them? When you can really recoup those high fees in another part of the stack. You're really part of a shell game. And so it's very unfortunate that the Justice Department has signaled that it's willing to participate in that kind of scheme.
So it remains to be seen what actually happens here, but I think there's a reason that the lion's share of state attorneys general are not satisfied with the settlement, and that they are continuing to litigate. The original plaintiffs were crystal clear that a breakup would be required to restore competition to this market, and to help prices come down in this space.
Dana Taylor:
Beyond higher ticket prices, when we look at who gets booked, does Live Nation's hold on the market limit the artists we get to see and the venues they're allowed to play in?
Doha Mekki:
I'm so glad you asked about the artists and the venues. So much of the attention in this case focuses on ticket prices. And for good reason, right? That's how so many of us as consumers first get to know Live Nation's monopoly. But just as important in this story is the artists, the working artists. Not the famous ones that are able to sell out the largest amphitheaters in the world, but the touring folks who are less known, the working artists. And the folks for whom Live Nation is able to really coerce a lot of their economic opportunities, the venues that are afraid to get sideways with Live Nation. And that's a theme that pervades this entire case. And if you listen to some of the testimony that's already taken place, the jury has now heard hours of evidence from people, one by one, including a recorded conversation with a executive affiliated with the Barclays Center and executives from StubHub, about how there are subtle threats, if you don't work with this company.
And that's what's at stake when you are litigating these monopolization cases. It is fear, right? It's the arbitrary coercion of a powerful corporation that can threaten your economic opportunities if you do not play ball. And that is inconsistent with what we should be standing for as a country, and what we have stood for, apparently until recently when we have given way to the whims of a tyrannical monopoly.
Dana Taylor:
We saw the chaos with Taylor Swift's Eras tour ticketing. More than three decades ago, Pearl Jam tried to fight this battle with Ticketmaster, they lost. There have also been previous settlements with Ticketmaster. Despite those things, why do you believe the system has remained largely unchanged?
Doha Mekki:
There is a long, now bipartisan tradition, of failed settlements in the live music and ticketing industry. And I can't get into why, at particular moments, those particular settlements have failed. But you can look at the particular conditions that have been imposed on this monopoly, and see that behavioral restrictions have not worked. They have not brought about the kinds of competitive market conditions that really restore competition to the market. And to me, doubling down on behavioral restrictions, price caps, and many of the same kinds of unsuccessful terms and conditions that we've seen in the past, is asking for the same kinds of failures that we've seen in the past. And so that's why it's particularly concerning to see the administration revisit similar failed strategies.
Dana Taylor:
Finally, Doha, what's the bottom line for ticket buyers here, and what will you be watching out for next with this case?
Doha Mekki:
I will be watching some of the reporting around settlement discussions with the remaining states, and I will be curious to see the final paper on the announced settlement with the Justice Department. Any final agreement with the United States has to be subject to something called the Tunney Act, which is a very important Nixon era statute that is essentially a sunlight law, that requires a federal judge to say that the settlement is actually in the public interest. And it's an unfortunate fact right now that some recent settlements involving the Justice Department have raised fairly serious questions around undue influence, and lobbying. And unfortunately, the Live Nation case similarly has triggered questions around the conditions that precipitated this particular settlement. And so we will see how this shakes out. And in fact, I believe there was an order in the Live Nation case, alerting the parties that, of course, there would be a Tunney Act review of the settlement.
Dana Taylor:
Life Nation CEO Michael Rapino said in his statement that they've never relied on exclusivity to drive their ticketing business. He says they succeed by having the best products, services, and people in the industry.
Doha, thank you so much for taking the time to join me on The Excerpt.
Doha Mekki:
Thank you for having me.
Dana Taylor:
Thanks to our senior producer, Kaely Monahan for her production assistance. Our executive producer is Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcasts@usatoday.com. Thanks for listening, I'm Dana Taylor. I'll be back Monday morning with another episode of USA TODAY's The Excerpt.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:What does Live Nation DOJ settlement mean for ticket sales? | The Excerpt
On the Friday, March 27, 2026, episode of The Excerpt podcast:High fees, limited options, and frustrating presales define...
UConn Huskies forward 
