Breaking Down Madigan's Lolla Investigation

By Marcus Gilmer in Arts & Entertainment on Jun 29, 2010 6:20PM

Last week, Vocalo's Jim DeRogatis broke the news that state Attorney General Lisa Madigan was investigating anti-trust allegations related to the Lollapalooza radius clause which limits the dates on which a band playing the festival can play within a certain radius (estimated to be as much as 300 miles in some cases) of Chicago. Interesting conversations about the actual limits of the clause broke out in our comments and in other publications. Brent DiCrescenzo had a solid write-up for Time Out that observed other local fests' similar clauses as well as the flexibility given to many bands in the clause.

So why are these contracts still being written in such a manner? If the radius clause is hardly being adhered to, let’s rewrite it. You’re not going to do away with these clauses, as it is legitimately in these festival’s interest to not allow the big draws to suck away tickets sales with competing gigs.

There is also the case to be made that after, say, the Constellations play Lollapalooza in August before thousands of people, they’ll draw better at a Chicago club like Lincoln Hall or Bottom Lounge the next time they pass through town. Most of these acts (who, by the way, are largely buzzed-about indie acts) tend to come back in the Fall. If Lisa Madigan is dying to see Wavves, fret not. Those dudes’ll come back soon. Besides, to make the claim that Lollapalooza is monopolizing concert booking is to say that there are only 150 bands in the world. There are many more.

It's a good point. And, in a way, DeRo has answered with another lengthy post on the matter which addresses this issue but also delves a bit deeper into the investigation and a few "what ifs" involved. It's something of an FAQ that asks questions including if the AG investigation will look into the festival's financial deal with the city's Parkways Foundation and if the investigation is a result of a rivalry between Lollapalooza promoters C3 and other smaller promoters. It's a solid write-up that shows that the investigation has more depth than just an argument over the radius clause.