MPs have renewed their call for a full competition investigation into Britain’s live music industry, putting Live Nation’s influence over ticketing, venues and festivals back under scrutiny.
On 18 October, Parliament’s Business, Innovation, Science and Trade Committee pressed the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to open a market investigation before the end of 2026. The committee first made the recommendation in May. The crucial distinction is that the CMA has not yet announced a full market investigation: this is a renewed demand from MPs, not a finding of unlawful conduct by the regulator.
Who controls the tickets?
The committee’s figures are striking. According to evidence in its report, Live Nation directly controlled 58% of the 23.1 million primary tickets on sale in the UK in 2025, rising to 66% when tickets controlled by affiliated companies were included. Those figures concern tickets on sale, not a claim that the company owns two-thirds of British music venues.
Live Nation operates across concert promotion, venues, festivals and ticketing, including Ticketmaster. That reach is central to MPs’ concerns: a business involved in several stages of a tour may have advantages that smaller, independent operators struggle to match.
The committee raised questions about exclusivity agreements, access to venues, the handling of customer data and the ability of independent promoters to compete. Its earlier inquiry described a ‘climate of fear’, noting that some contributors wanted to give evidence confidentially.
Why this matters to grassroots music
For a fan, competition can seem like an argument about booking fees. For an emerging band, an independent promoter or a small venue, it can shape which artists get booked, how tours are routed and whether there is room for businesses outside the biggest networks.
The committee also highlighted the slow adoption of the voluntary levy on arena and stadium tickets intended to support grassroots music. MPs attributed much of the limited uptake to Live Nation not implementing the scheme. That makes this more than a dispute about ticketing giants: it is also about whether success at the top of live music is helping sustain the smaller rooms where careers begin.
We’ve previously examined the pressures behind the grassroots ticket levy and VAT debate, while our report on Manchester’s grassroots venue network explored the importance of keeping local live-music infrastructure visible. Competition is another piece of that same puzzle.
What Live Nation says — and what happens next
Live Nation disputes the picture presented by some of the committee’s evidence. In its written response to MPs, the company challenged comparisons between overall ticket figures and its own arena and stadium ticket sales, and argued that concert promotion is highly competitive, citing rival promoters including AEG Presents, TEG and CTS Eventim. Those objections matter: ticketing control, concert promotion and venue ownership are related but distinct markets, and the figures should not be treated as interchangeable.
The committee nevertheless believes the concerns are serious enough to warrant an independent, market-wide examination. Its 58% and 66% ticket figures are drawn from evidence submitted to the inquiry, rather than an established CMA ruling on market dominance.
Its chair, Liam Byrne MP, argues that the industry should reward talent rather than market power. The committee is writing to the CMA again to seek details and a timeline for its next steps.
A market investigation would be a process for gathering evidence and assessing competition across the sector, not an automatic verdict against Live Nation. It could examine other major operators as well. Until the CMA acts, the MPs’ allegations and recommendations must be distinguished from established regulatory findings.
The Imminent Infinity view
British live music needs big tours and thriving arenas. But it also needs the independent promoter taking a chance on an unknown band, the small venue offering a first headline slot and a ticketing market where alternatives can compete.
If the system works fairly, scrutiny should help demonstrate that. If it doesn’t, the industry deserves to know where the barriers are and what can be done about them. The question is no longer simply whether Live Nation is big. It is whether the structure of the market gives everyone else a fair chance.
Sources: UK Parliament, 18 October 2026; Parliamentary committee report on competition in UK live music; Live Nation’s written evidence to Parliament.
