In the Italian live music market there is no abuse of a dominant position by Ticketone. This was established by the sentence of the Lazio TAR which annulled the Antitrust ruling against the subsidiary of Cts Eventim, recognizing the groundlessness of the accusations. In January 2021 the Antitrust Authority had raised a fine of over 10 million to Ticketone which, according to the accusatory theorem, would have implemented “a complex abusive strategy of an exclusionary nature that would have precluded competing ticketing operators the possibility to sell, in any way and through any channel, a particularly high share of tickets for live pop music events ».
The findings of the Antitrust
All based on the complaints of Sol Eventi, Zed Entertainment‘s World and Ticketmaster Italia. “Immediately”, reads the note from the company led by Stefano Lionetti, “Ticketone had firmly rejected the statements contained in the provision of the Agcm and therefore appealed to the competent Administrative Court, confident that this provision would also be revoked by the TAR so as then affectionately happened “. With a decision that enters into the merits of the matter, the Lazio TAR, in the sentence of 24 March 2022, annulled the Antitrust provision declaring it illegitimate, stating that” the complaints formulated by the applicants on the non-existence of the conditions for ascertaining the existence of an abuse of a dominant position “. In short, the sentence accepted TicketOne’s defenses with which it had been shown that the accusatory thesis of Agcm was not supported by “an adequate preliminary investigation” and above all it did not take into account the “impossibility of challenging a concentration in terms of abuse of dominant position pursuant to art. 102 Tfue “.
Investigation started in 2018
The investigation that led to the sanction dates back to 2018. Exactly one year after the expiry of the Panischi agreement which had kept the main Italian promoters tied to Ticketone for 15 years. The scenario now sees more ticketing operators coexist: Ticketone is certainly the leader, but alongside it Ticketmaster, a subsidiary of the American giant Live Nation, and Vivaticket, in the hands of the Bahrain Investicorp fund, operate. The procedure referred only to the pop music market segment which, according to the Siae yearbook relating to 2019, before the Covid avalanche in short, was affected by 18,223 events, handled 1.2 million admissions for a box office expenditure of 386, 1 million and a total turnover of 468.6 million. In this segment, the ticketing turnover, strict sensewould revolve around 50 million.
The accusatory hypothesis
The Antitrust assumed that the strategy implemented by TicketOne was articulated in a series of conducts, implemented at least since 2013 and still ongoing, which would consist in the stipulation of exclusive contracts with producers and organizers of live pop music events, in the acquisitions of the national promoters Di and Gi Srl, Friends & Partners SpA, Vertigo Srl and Vivo Concerti Srl, in the imposition of the exclusivity on local promoters, in the stipulation of commercial agreements with smaller or local ticketing operators and in the conduct of retaliation and boycott against the Zed group, also to exclude Ticketmaster, a subsidiary of the Live Nation group from the relevant market.
Second victory at the Lazio Tar
The group’s strategy, according to the Guarantor’s theorem, would also have damaged consumers because the alleged dominant company could have charged higher commissions for the sale of tickets for live music events than those of its competitors, also limiting the possibilities of choice and purchase. of consumers between the different ticketing operators (the so-called “multihoming”). All charges returned to the sender by the administrative justice provision. It was not the first time that Ticketone ended up in the antitrust crosshairs. Already in 2017, the Authority had raised a one million fine to the subsidiary Cts Eventim, seeing its responsibilities in the phenomenon of secondary ticketing, that is, online bagaring. A year later, the Lazio TAR accepted the request for cancellation of the fine, judging the company unrelated to any responsibility in the matter. And so does the Council of State.