June 8, 2026
Paying for drama, plus fees
Ask HN: Why hasn't there been a real competitor to Ticketmaster yet?
Fans are furious, but commenters say the real plot twist is that venues and artists love the system
TLDR: Ticketmaster’s grip may have less to do with fans and more to do with venues, promoters, and artists making more money through the current setup. Commenters were furious about scalping and monopoly-like control, with many saying Ticketmaster is the perfect bad guy because it takes the heat for everyone else.
The internet’s favorite villain is back, and the crowd is absolutely not buying the innocent act. In this Ask HN discussion, fans showed up ready to drag Ticketmaster, but the spiciest twist was this: many commenters argued that Ticketmaster isn’t winning because fans like it — it’s winning because the people behind the shows do. Venues, promoters, and even big-name artists reportedly benefit when extra fees are piled on top of the ticket price, because fans blame the ticket site instead of blaming the star on stage. Brutal? Yes. Shocking? For many readers, also yes.
The strongest opinions were pure outrage. One commenter raged about seeing Knicks tickets balloon from around $2,000 to over $10,000, calling the resale madness absurd and basically begging for a platform that stops scalpers from turning sports and concerts into luxury-only events. Others said the real issue is much bigger than scalpers: control. The hottest consensus was that Ticketmaster and Live Nation built a machine that is almost impossible to dodge, with venue ownership, exclusive deals, and software that keeps places locked in.
Then came the really cynical hot take: what if Ticketmaster is basically the designated public villain? Several commenters said everyone hates the company, but that’s exactly the point — it absorbs the backlash while artists and venues quietly collect more money. And yes, the thread had joke energy too, including one ultra-dry drive-by summary: “Bono, Geldof, livenation, cartel.” Subtle? Not even a little. Memorable? Extremely.
Key Points
- •The article describes concert ticketing as a two-sided marketplace that is difficult for smaller competitors to enter.
- •It says Ticketmaster first operated as a ticketing and IT service provider for promoters before expanding through promoter acquisitions.
- •The post argues that Ticketmaster’s market power is reinforced by control over promoter and venue relationships, limiting alternatives for fans and artists.
- •It states that fees and surcharges can serve as a pricing mechanism that benefits venues, promoters, and artists while shielding artists from direct backlash over higher prices.
- •The article argues Ticketmaster was already dominant before later venue ownership consolidation and cites Taylor Swift, AEG, and city-owned stadiums as an example.