Offside on the Secondary Market: Where Ticketing Tactics Meets Competition Law

Earlier today (31 March 2025), Ticombo, a European ticket resale platform, announced that it filed an antitrust complaint against the International Olympic Committee – IOC, challenging its control over ticket resale markets for major sporting events like the Paris 2024 Olympics. This follows Ticombo's June 2024 complaint against UEFA, including in relation to its ticketing policies for the UEFA European Football Championship.

Meanwhile, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority is intensifying its scrutiny —investigating Ticketmaster's sales practices and issuing statements in support of legislative proposals for a resale price cap and platform licensing regime.

So, what does all this mean for stakeholders in sport? And where does competition law draw the line between protecting fans and restricting fair competition?

The Legal Landscape: Recent Developments

Ticombo's core allegation is that exclusive resale policies, imposed by event organisers, foreclose access to the secondary market and artificially constrain pricing. Whether fans are being forced to resell through official platforms or prohibited from offering tickets below face value, these practices - according to Ticombo - violate EU competition law, specifically Articles 101 and 102 TFEU.

In the UK, the CMA is arguably going further. In its recent (March 2025) response to the Government’s consultation on the resale of live event tickets, the CMA:

• Advocates for a resale price cap based on original ticket price;
• Endorses a licensing regime for platforms to improve oversight;
• Flags platform accountability as crucial to consumer protection; and
• Warns against exclusive resale channels that limit competition and inflate fees.

This increasing focus reflects a fundamental shift: ticketing policy is increasingly a competition issue, with legal scrutiny set to intensify.

Competition Law: The Framework

From a competition and consumer law perspective, the issues play out through a familiar set of legal tools:

• Abuse of Dominance (Art. 102 TFEU / Chapter 2 Competition Act 1998): Exclusive resale rights, bans on third-party platforms, and resale pricing limits may be argued to be exclusionary conduct, especially where organisers hold a dominant position.
• Anti-competitive Agreements (Art. 101 TFEU / Chapter 1 Competition Act 1998): Contractual restrictions between event organisers and platforms that limit consumer choice or price flexibility may be open to challenge as restrictive horizontal or vertical agreements.
• Consumer Harm and Market Access: Where resale restrictions reduce affordability or deny entry to rival platforms, it may be alleged that they harm market efficiency and consumer welfare - both of which are central to modern competition enforcement.

The CMA’s earlier enforcement work in this space - including action against viagogo and StubHub - has shown that regulators are willing to intervene to improve information transparency, tackle misleading pricing, and scrutinise mergers that could reduce competitive pressure.

Stakeholder Considerations

For those involved in organising, marketing, or regulating tickets for sports events - whether as a club, rights holder, ticketing partner, or promoter - the relevant questions to ask include:

• Do resale restrictions go beyond what is necessary to protect against fraud and counterfeiting or to preserve integrity?
• Are pricing rules (e.g. face-value-only resale) limiting competitive outcomes, especially in low-demand situations?
• Do exclusive resale arrangements raise barriers for alternative platforms?
• Is the consumer being given clear, fair, and transparent information on resale rights and fees?

Stakeholders should also consider whether resale policies create structural advantages for organisers' own or affiliated platforms, potentially raising the risk of discriminatory access. Favouring one resale channel to the exclusion of others can draw scrutiny, particularly where organisers act as both supplier and platform.

Final Thoughts

• Competition law is increasingly relevant in ticketing, particularly around resale rights and pricing rules.
• The CMA’s evolving stance reflects a broader regulatory shift toward consumer-focused enforcement.
• Going forward, stakeholders will need to demonstrate the effective balance of operational goals (security, fraud prevention) with competition compliance.

In an environment where enforcement is becoming more targeted and proactive, those in the live events space should work to ensure that resale policies are compliant, proportionate, and defensible.