| Type | Subsidiary of Live Nation Entertainment |
|---|---|
| Industry | Entertainment |
| Founded | 2005 |
| Headquarters | Beverly Hills, California |
| Area served | Worldwide |
| Products | Concerts Promoter Live Events Promoter |
| Revenue | US$ 4.184 billion (2007) |
| Operating income | US$ 82.14 million (2007) |
| Net income | US$ -11.94 million (2007) |
| Total assets | US$ 2.752 billion (2007) |
| Total equity | US$ 907 million (2007) |
| Employees | Full-time: 4,700 Part-time: 15,900 |
| Website | LiveNation.com |
Live Nation is a live-events company based in Beverly Hills, California, focused on concert promotions. Live Nation formed in 2005 as a spin-off from Clear Channel Communications, which then merged with Ticketmaster in 2010 to become Live Nation Entertainment.
Live Nation "signs" artists as a "record label", but predominantly takes the role of a promoter, rather than "owner of music". The deal with U2 and Madonna for example does not include copyright of the artists' future recordings. The 2007 deal signed with Jay-Z does include the rapper's future recordings.[1][2] Live Nation signed Colombian singer Shakira, Canadian band Nickelback and Mexican singer Luis Miguel.
Contents |
Annually, Live Nation promotes or produces over 22,000 events, including music concerts, with total attendance exceeding 50 million—more than the NBA, NFL, and NHL combined.[3] As of September 30, 2005, Live Nation owned or operated 117 venues, consisting of 75 US and 42 international venues. These venues include 39 amphitheatres, 58 theatres, 14 clubs, 4 arenas and 2 festival sites. In addition, through equity, booking or similar arrangements Live Nation has the right to book events at 33 additional venues.
In October 2007, Live Nation announced a new contract with pop singer Madonna throughout the next decade after her leaving Warner Music and Warner Bros. She will be the founding recording artist for the new music division Live Nation Artists, formerly Artist Nation. In July 2008, Shakira signed an estimated $70-100 million contract with Live Nation.[4][5][6][7]
In January, 2008, Live Nation sold its North American theatrical business (including the Broadway Across America business) to Key Brand Entertainment for $90.4 million. Key Brand Entertainment is a private investment company owned by British theater producer John Gore and led by senior entertainment industry executive Tom McGrath.[8]
In April 2008, a deal between Jay-Z and Live Nation for $152 million was confirmed. The deal covers financing of Jay-Z's own entertainment venture, live shows, tours and future recordings for the next 10 years.[1] Blueprint 3 was distributed by Atlantic Records, while his label, Roc Nation, is being distributed by Sony Music Entertainment.[9][10]
In 2006 Live Nation acquired House of Blues. Current locations of the House of Blues include:
(in state order alphabetically)
|
|
Current members of the board of directors of Live Nation are: Ari Emanuel, Jeffrey T. Hinson, L. Lowry Mays, Randall T. Mays, Connie McCombs McNab, James S. Kahan, Ted Enloe, Mark Shapiro, and Michael Rapino.[11]
Live Nation is currently constructing a physical recording label, Live Nation Artists, which will be a division of Live Nation International Music. The company is expected to become a major rival against Sony Music, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group with artists such as Madonna, U2, Jay-Z, Shakira and Nickelback.
As of July 30, 2008, CEO Michael Rapino is considering doing licensing deals on an artist-by-artist basis, a source inside Live Nation said. Under that scenario, Warner Music Group could end up handling the marketing, promotion and distribution of albums by the very acts that defected from it to join Live Nation: Nickelback and Madonna. "Rapino wants to outsource everything," said a second source close to the situation. "He doesn't want to build an infrastructure or carry any overhead." The move is mirrored after the "rent-a-system" model used in Hollywood, whereby one studio produces a movie but licenses all the other functions to another studio that already has a distribution and marketing infrastructure.[12]
Live Nation's talks represented the latest retrenchment from the strategy of former chairman Michael Cohl, who sought to transform the touring giant into a multi-faceted powerhouse, including a record company. News of the potential outsourcing move followed the dismissal of industry veterans Bob Ezrin, Bob Cahill and Bill Hein, all of whom were Artist Nation employees hired by Cohl to create a label infrastructure for Live Nation's newly signed acts. Instead of banking all the upside on album sales, as was once envisioned with these so-called "360 deals," Live Nation would likely collect a less lucrative outsourcing royalty of between 25 percent and 35 percent, based on other industry licensing deals. It would then be responsible for using that money to pay the artist's royalty - a fee that, at the superstar level, can come close to equaling the licensing royalty the company is apt to get from a label.[12]
On 31 March 2008, it was confirmed that Live Nation signed a 12 year deal with U2 worth an estimated $100 million (£70 million).[13] The deal includes Live Nation controlling the band's merchandise, sponsoring and their official website. In a contractual agreement with Live Nation signed in March 2008, the parties agreed that the band would receive $25 million for 1.6 million shares of the company; as of 17 December 2008, those shares were worth only just over $6 million. It was reported on 18 December 2008 that Live Nation, honoring their financial commitment, bought back the shares at a loss of $19 million.[14] The company had intended to recoup the cost of signing U2 with their most recent album, No Line on the Horizon. No Line on the Horizon achieved multi platinum status in the international market and has sold over 5 million albums to date.
|
On February 10, 2009, Live Nation and Ticketmaster Entertainment announced that they have entered into a definitive merger agreement to create a combined entity, to be called Live Nation Entertainment.[17] Ticketmaster's press release said Live Nation produces live concerts in 57 countries.[18]
The proposal has received regulatory approval in Norway and Turkey.[19]
In October 2009, the United Kingdom's Competition Commission provisionally ruled against the merger with Ticketmaster.[20]. On December 22, 2009, the Competition Commission decided to clear the proposed merger.[19]
Separate regulatory reviews of the proposal continued in the United States and Canada.[19] The United States Department of Justice approved the merger in 2010 subject to review by a federal judge after a 60-day comment period.[21] A conditions of the approval, Ticketmaster agreed to license its software to rival Anschutz Entertainment Group, and to sell its subsidiary Paciolan to Comcast Spectacor, Comcast's sporting events subsidiary.[21] The company also agreed not to interfere with competition for the ten year life of the agreement.[21]
Bruce Springsteen said "...the one thing that would make the current ticket situation even worse for the fan than it is now would be Ticketmaster and Live Nation coming up with a single system, thereby returning us to a near monopoly situation in music ticketing".[22]
In a January 25, 2010 press release, the TicketDisaster.org group—a coalition of consumer rights and anti-trust groups—also issued the following statement about the proposed Live Nation-TicketMaster merger:
"Despite its "monopoly-like dominance" controlling 70 to 80 percent of all concert ticket sales, Ticketmaster is unabashedly seeking to grow its empire - all to the detriment of the average fan. Ticketmaster is now trying to dampen competition by merging with Live Nation, the nation's largest concert promoter and second largest primary ticket seller. That merger is coming under heavy fire from consumer and industry groups and Members of Congress, particularly because of the clear anti-consumer and anti-competitive effects.
"As the Department of Justice reaches the final round of reviewing this merger, only one question must be answered: will the merger lead to increased prices, poorer service, or less innovation?"