Many companies in California struggle to get enough electricity to power their growing businesses. One Long Beach startup just raised $26 million for what it says is a quick fix for that problem.

There are limits on how much power each company can draw from the public power grid so fast-growing industries can’t just crank up their consumption whenever they want. For uninterrupted supply, they sometimes have to wait for local utilities to build capacity, which can take years.

Critical Loop — an energy tech company based in an office overlooking the Long Beach airport — has already landed major clients and investors with its power management controller. It helps companies get more power when they need it and save money by seamlessly switching between the public grid, batteries and their on-site solar panels and generators.

The company is thriving in California because there is so much unmet need for power, Critical Loop Chief Executive Bala Ramamurthy told The Times.

“The amount of power-hungry industries here in L.A., especially across ports, logistics and manufacturing, is significant,” he said. “California is at the center of many of the grid challenges we’re solving.”

The company announced Tuesday that it has raised $26 million, bringing its total funding to $49 million. The funding was led by Conifer Infrastructure Partners and Hanover.

The startup did not disclose its valuation. It plans to use the money to power sites beyond California, expanding into sites such as data centers and advanced robotics warehouses.

It says it can bring more power to companies much sooner than others, in days or weeks, rather than waiting years for utilities to upgrade local substation and expand capacity.

Founded in 2023, the startups team has grown from eight to 35 people in the past year, with hires from SpaceX, Palantir and Tesla.

The team works out of Donald Douglas Drive in Long Beach, inside a former hangar. In the sprawling space, employees work on assembling and testing hardware, including container-sized batteries and their autonomous controllers.

The firm won a bid to manage peak-load reduction at the San Diego International Airport. During peak operating hours, when all conveyor belts and baggage sorting equipment are running, the airport relies on Critical Loop’s controller to predict and manage on-site battery needs.

It took four months to set up that system, Ramamurthy said.

The startup, effectively helps industries cut their electricity bills. Utilities charge large facilities based on their highest moment of power use in a given month — not their average. For instance, one peak summer afternoon, with every conveyor belt, boarding gate and baggage sorter running at full blast, can set the airport’s electricity rate for the entire month.

Critical Loop’s system switches to on-site batteries and solar during those peak hours, then back to the grid when demand drops, saving the airport millions over years.

The company recently deployed an electric-vehicle charging fleet for the company TerraWatt in just a few months. While the local utility’s upgrade timeline was five years, Critical Loop’s setup enabled the facility to draw power from the grid for most of the year and use on-site batteries to cover peak-constrained hours.

“What’s really compelling about battery-plus-inverter based systems is this ability to deliver power quicker by boosting the available power in concert with the grid,” said Ramamurthy.

It is in a sweet spot right now as the massive buildout of the data centers that power artificial intelligence has created an insatiable demand for quick power solutions, said Taylor McNair, deputy director of Gridlab, a technical think tank.

“In general, there is increased interest in on-site generation and off-grid deployments, particularly for new data centers,” he said.

While some California billionaires and businesses have been leaving the state, Critical Loop’s presence in Southern California has grown. It has a number of projects in Los Angeles County that need extra power but can’t rely solely on the grid.

It chose to set up in Long Beach to be close to high-quality hires as well. Southern California’s engineering talent, especially from companies such as SpaceX, Tesla and other advanced manufacturing and energy players, is difficult to find elsewhere.

“For a company building and deploying real infrastructure, proximity to the problem set, partners and talent needed to solve it matters more” than any drawbacks of working in California, Ramamurthy said. “L.A. delivers on all fronts.”

NEW YORK — Beverly Hills-based Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary faced a bruising courtroom loss Wednesday after a federal jury found that the company operated a monopoly over concert venues.

The verdict by a Manhattan, N.Y., jury came after a five-week trial and caps a closely watched case that could have far reaching effects across the music industry, potentially leading to the breakup of the companies.

Ticketmaster is the world’s largest ticket seller for live events, while Live Nation is a dominant force in the concert business.

The civil case began when the federal government alleged that Live Nation used its clout to engage in a variety of anticompetitive practices, including preventing venues from using multiple ticket sellers.

“It is time to hold them accountable,” Jeffrey Kessler, an attorney for the states, said in a closing argument. He called Live Nation a “monopolistic bully” that drove up prices for ticket buyers.

Jurors agreed. They found that Ticketmaster had overcharged consumers by $1.72 for each ticket. The judge will assess damages later.

Live Nation, which owns and operates hundreds of venues, countered that it did not violate U.S. antitrust laws, arguing that artists, sports teams and venues decide prices and ticketing practices.

“Success is not against the antitrust laws in the United States,” Live Nation attorney David Marriott said in his summation.

Live Nation said in a statement that the “jury’s verdict is not the last word on this matter,” noting the court had yet to rule on a motion it had filed to challenge its liability in the case.

The trial revealed some embarrassing internal communications, including emails from a Live Nation executive who called customers “so stupid” and said the company was “robbing them blind, baby.” The executive, Benjamin Baker, testified that the messages were “very immature and unacceptable.”

The original lawsuit, led by a cadre of interested parties including the federal government, 39 states and the District of Columbia, dates to 2024. It alleged that Live Nation and Ticketmaster monopolized various aspects of the live music industry, such as concert promotion, venue operations, artist management and ticketing services.

Live Nation manages more than 400 artists and controls more than 265 venues in North America, while Ticketmaster simultaneously controls around 80% of the primary ticket marketplace and also is increasing its involvement in the resale market, according to the lawsuit.

Last month, Live Nation secured an unexpected tentative settlement with the Department of Justice in which the company agreed to several structural changes to its business, including adjustments to ticketing deals with venues, capping service fees and paying a $280-million fine.

However, more than 30 states, including California, decided to proceed with the trial. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta praised these state-led efforts to protect consumers, even amid dwindling antitrust enforcement from the Trump administration, he said in a statement.

“This is a historic and resounding victory for artists, fans, and the venues that support them,” Bonta said. “We are incredibly proud of today’s outcome … this verdict shows just how far states can go to protect our residents from big corporations that are using their power to illegally raise prices and rip-off Americans.”

Though a verdict has been reached, remedies for how Live Nation will be held accountable for its actions are still being decided by the judge.

One possibility is that the companies could be split up, an outcome favored by critics.

National Independent Venue Assn. Executive Director Stephen Parker said Ticketmaster and Live Nation need to be separate for the industry to see change.

“Live Nation and Ticketmaster must be broken up now. Ticketmaster should not be permitted to participate in the ticket resale market. Live Nation should not be able to promote more than 50% of artists’ tours,” Parker said in a statement. “And the damages paid to the states should be remitted to the independent venues, promoters, festivals, and fans that have suffered under Live Nation’s monopolistic reign over the last 15 years.”

Serona Elton, attorney and interim vice dean at the University of Miami’s Frost School of Music, said that the separation of Live Nation and Ticket master seems to be “on the table,” but she said it’s too early to assess the verdict’s fallout on the music industry.

Elton said fans might notice small changes in pricing, but there are factors other than Live Nation that are contributing to high ticket prices, such as the secondary ticket market as well as supply and demand challenges.

The verdict, Elton said, “sends a message of support to music companies and professionals working in the live space who have felt like they have suffered financial consequences because of Live Nation’s behavior.”

The ruling is a small but necessary step toward achieving a balanced and competitive ticketing industry, said Hal Singer, a managing director of economic consulting firm Econ One, who specializes in antitrust and consumer protection issues.

Forcing a Ticketmaster sale probably is the only remedy that will bring real change, Singer said.

“We’re not out of the woods quite yet,” Singer said. “We’ve kind of tilted the probability.… It could change the competitive balance. But that requires that a meaningful remedy follows the liability. You need both.”

Fans and some artists have long groused about Ticketmaster, which was founded in 1976 and merged with Live Nation in 2010.

Dustin Brighton, director of government relations for the Coalition for Ticket Fairness, agreed that although the verdict is a landmark moment for fans, “it’s not the end of the road.”

“As the court considers remedies, the focus must be on restoring competition, increasing transparency, and ensuring fans have real choice,” Brighton said in a statement.

Times staff writer August Brown and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

President Trump has signed a bill restoring federal funding to tech startups in California and elsewhere, money that had been held up for more than six months.

The Small Business Administration money, a key source of capital for new aerospace and defense firms in the Los Angeles region, ran out in October after a congressional impasse.

The Small Business Innovation and Economic Security Act signed by Trump on Monday funds the Small Business Innovation Research, or SBIR, the Small Business Technology Transfer, or STTR, and related programs.

They provide more than $4 billion in seed funding to commercial startups that provide valuable services to the government and public, stimulate the economy and help maintain the country’s competitive edge.

The money is awarded by multiple agencies, including the Health and Human Services and Energy departments and NASA, with the military distributing the largest portion.

The funding has helped launch defense and aerospace startups across Southern California, including Costa Mesa autonomous weapons maker Anduril Industries, now valued at more than $30 billion.

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, held up reauthorization over concerns some startups had become reliant on the money instead of developing commercial businesses. She proposed a bill with a $75-million lifetime funding cap for individual companies.

Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, the committee’s ranking Democrat, contended the bill would crimp innovation and hurt companies.

The reauthorization includes no lifetime caps but requires departments to set limits on how many times companies can apply each year for the Small Business Administration funding, prioritizing startups.

The bill also establishes a Strategic Breakthrough Allocation program that awards up to $30 million in Small Business Administration funding to a single company provided it can bring in matching funding.

The new program is intended to assist startups to become commercially viable after they run through their SBIR or STTR funding, which are intended to fund feasibility studies and prototypes. STTR requires a partnership with a research institution.

Other provisions in the bill include new due diligence standards to prevent any tech developed by the startups from falling into the hands of adversaries such as China.

“With a bipartisan, five-year reauthorization signed into law, small businesses are once again empowered to create these innovative technologies and tackle our nation’s most pressing challenges head-on,” Markey said in a statement.