> Everyone is complaining about Ticketmaster but they're still giving them their money, so how are they supposed to respond?
This is why monopoly is a market failure. There isn't a market mechanism that can correct this.
This is why monopoly is a market failure. There isn't a market mechanism that can correct this.
Unclear. There are limited cities that can support a 30,000+-seat stadium. Most of them have some already. Unless there is way more demand for these venues than I realise, I'd also guess they're close to saturation, i.e. adding another venue would result in lower utilisation.
This natural monopoly in large concert venues creates a condition where winning is Pyrrhic, since it results in no profits for everyone playing.
I guarantee you that Ticketmaster's pockets are much deeper. They have entrenched themselves. This romantic notion that consumers should strike against situations like this or that smaller players should find edges in are just not realistic to me because of the entrenchment, coercion and scarcity at play here.
A very popular band in the 90s tried to fight Ticketmaster. They failed. So I just don't understand this narrative in the face of all the evidence that these tactics just don't or won't work.
https://news.yahoo.com/1994-pearl-jam-took-ticketmaster-2300...