Cronyism and industrial policy are developing at the expense of our economic vitality. Consider that between 1960 and 2007 – just before the Great Depression – the economy expanded by more than 3% per year. The property, of course, the economy has always recovered lost ground.
Things changed after the collapse of 2007-09 and the resulting economic downturn. Since then, the actual GDP growth has slowed to just 2%. While there are several driving factors, the growth of Cronyism is one of them.
Cronyism, such as the Council of Economic Development Committee Defines it, entails
The agreements between certain private interests (businesses, business interests, occupations, social groups) and government that “choose the winners” and thus also choose the losers, based on political influence despite value. Such agreements will prevent the productive redistribution of society’s resources and reduce innovation and economic development.
Cronyists are rarely presented in this way, of course. Instead, the Playbook is simple – identify a problem and then proposes an overly restrictive government plan that possessed political favoritism as a beneficial expansion of regulatory situation. While the highest costs of the regulation will be borne by smaller competitors and reduce economic growth, new burdens will also register the market power.
Unfortunately, there are many examples of this strategy. For example, large electric manufacturers supported increases in lighting standards, which effectively banned the traditional incandescent lamp. These great manufacturers happen to have a competitive advantage that produces the newest technologies that have replaced the now politically outdated incandescent lamp.
In general, the widespread acts of rattling increases the financial burden of the regulatory state for small businesses in relation to their largest competitors. In accordance with US Chamber of Commerce;
Small businesses pay an average of $ 11,700 per year per employee at regulatory expenses and the cost of regulation to smaller businesses with 50 employees or less is almost 20% higher than for the average business. The regulatory costs of federal economically significant rules for small businesses amounts to over $ 40 billion a year.
Live Nation seems to apply the same scenario to the market for live events. Live Nation is the parent company of Ticketmaster, which controls approximately 70 to 80 percent of US tickets market. And there is a big problem in the market for live entertainment – ticket scalpers often create obstacles for fans.
Thanks to these obstacles, fans end up paying unnecessary expenses. Excessive costs for fans do not benefit artists or entertainment and, making things worse, fans get less access to their preferred live performances. In addition to the additional burdens imposed on fans, artists’ visibility is reduced, which is particularly problematic for many upgraded artists.
Taking this problem is a high priority, so.
There are increasing number of strategies and technologies available to promote intermediaries. These approaches exclude scalpers and ensure that fans have immediate access to tickets. Many of these strategies directly benefit the final suppliers of the market (eg the artist and space) and the required (eg fans) and increase the competitive nature of the market. Increased competition will encourage continuing product innovations in the future.
Avoiding these competitive solutions and consistent with Cronis’s approach, Live Nation has asked FTC Ferguson President Gail Slater, FTC President Andrew Ferguson and Finance Minister Scott Bessent to impose a 20% resale price limit to address the problem.
If implemented, the 20% ceiling will benefit the living nation by preventing competition and driving the resale market to the Ticketmaster market. However, based on the results of other countries that imposed price controls, these prices will not address the access and cost issues faced by fans.
A 2025 study of prices imposed on Australia and Ireland found that ticket fraud rates were significantly higher in their purchases. Ireland introduced resale restrictions in 2021, and by 2024, scams increased so badly that law enforcement, large banks and payment applications such as Revolut were all listening to the alarm.
The administration should resist these appeals seeking rents. Protecting open and competitive markets, not price controls, is the most effective way to reduce costs and extend access to live events.
Resistance to this rattan would show that Washington is serious for attitude with consumers and competition, not the established interests. Applied to generally, this approach to the strengthening of competition rather than rattan will encourage innovation and entrepreneurship and help restore our previous economic vitality.
