Live Nation Employee Mocks Customers as 'So Stupid' in Court-Released Internal Messages
Newly revealed incendiary internal messages, in which a Live Nation employee derides customers as "so stupid" and boasts that the company is "robbing them blind, baby," are gaining significant public attention during an ongoing antitrust trial. The messages, spanning from late 2021 through early 2023 on the online work platform Slack, were highlighted in a recent court filing by government lawyers and released into the public record.
Antitrust Allegations and Legal Proceedings
At the trial in Manhattan federal court, lawyers representing the federal government and 39 states, along with the District of Columbia, allege that Live Nation and Ticketmaster have been suppressing competition and inflating prices for fans. They claim the companies use threats, retaliation, and other tactics to "suffocate the competition" by controlling nearly every aspect of the entertainment industry, from concert promotion to ticketing. In contrast, Live Nation and Ticketmaster maintain that artists, sports teams, and venues are responsible for setting prices and determining ticket sales methods.
Government lawyers argue that the internal messages should be admitted as evidence, describing them as "candid, internal messages" in which Ben Baker, a regional director of ticketing at the time, "calls fans 'so stupid,' explains that he 'gouge(s)' them, and brags that Live Nation is 'robbing them blind, baby.'" Baker, who has since been promoted to head of ticketing for Venue Nation, made these comments while discussing VIP area access prices at the MidFlorida Credit Union Amphitheatre in Tampa. He wrote that the prices are "outrageous," adding, "these people are so stupid" and "I almost feel bad taking advantage of them," followed by "BAHAHAHAHAHA."
Defense and Counterarguments
Live Nation is seeking to have the exhibits disqualified from the trial, asserting that the messages reflect "off-the-cuff banter, not policy" between two personal friends who do not work together. The company's lawyers contend that the exhibits are irrelevant to the antitrust claims, noting they involve "passing references to non-ticket ancillary products—such as VIP club access, premier parking, or lawn chair rentals—sold to concertgoers" at amphitheaters in Florida and Virginia.
However, lawyers for the plaintiff states and the U.S. government counter that "excessive prices for ancillary services are directly relevant" to their claims, arguing that "ancillaries are a significant way that Live Nation monetizes its monopoly position in the amphitheater market." In a statement, Live Nation responded that the Slack exchange "from one junior staffer to a friend absolutely doesn't reflect our values or how we operate," adding that leadership only learned of the messages when they became public and will investigate promptly.
Trial Status and Negotiations
The trial's future is uncertain following the federal government's announcement this week of a settlement with Live Nation, which would grant competitors some access to ticket sales from which they are currently excluded. Lawyers for more than two dozen states have requested that the ongoing trial be scrapped and a new jury selected in the coming weeks. The current jury, which began hearing evidence last week, was instructed to stay home this week with expectations of resuming on Monday.
Judge Arun Subramanian has encouraged lawyers for the states and Live Nation to negotiate this week, requesting an update by late Friday on whether a deal has been reached. Although parties have not publicly discussed the progress of talks, a Live Nation lawyer indicated at a court hearing on Tuesday that a swift agreement with all states is unlikely. In a letter to the judge on Thursday, a states' lawyer suggested the trial is likely to resume, emphasizing the need for a ruling on the admissibility of the Slack messages, as it will have a "material impact" on witness selection as states "prepare to resume trial next week."
The arguments over the exhibits emerged after media outlets, including Bloomberg News, The New York Times, MLex, and Inner City Press, requested their release, underscoring the high-stakes nature of this legal battle in the entertainment industry.
