Business
$11,000 to see Taylor Swift? How concert tickets got so expensive
Today is the day. You called in sick to work. You’ve been looking forward to the chance to buy seats since the show was announced. The webpage loads on your laptop, and you’re met with triple-digit prices for a ticket to see your favorite musician. In the seconds you spend hesitating, the entire concert is sold out. You quickly pull up a reseller site, and the prices are now four digits and climbing.
Taylor Swift fans saw a similar scene this year, as have masses of other aspiring concertgoers. For Swift’s sold-out shows at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood next month, face-value tickets sold for $49 to $449 if you could get them. Now, first-night tickets will set you back around $800 to $11,000 each on StubHub.
How did we end up spending more than your average mortgage payment for a seat at a concert? The answer is … complicated.
Why are concert tickets so expensive?
There are five major players influencing ticket prices for that concert you’ve been waiting to see: the artists, the promoters who put on the shows, the venues that host them, the ticketing companies that make the initial ticket sales, and the resellers that sell seats no longer available from the box office.
Each link in the chain is responsible for some portion of the cost of your concert-night experience, because each link is a business trying to make a profit.
Promoters are the connection between the act and the venue. They officially set the ticket prices, and they take on the loss if the concert doesn’t generate enough ticket sales to cover what the artist has been guaranteed. They organize and publicize the shows, and those costs go into the price of the ticket.
Artists like Swift at the top of the industry can tell the promoter where to set ticket prices and also pick the venues. Smaller acts have those decisions made for them. According to Bob Lefsetz, a music-industry analyst and former label executive, said the acts also have power over ticketing fees and resale policies if the primary ticket seller has its own resale platform, although they pay the ticket seller to take the heat for those decisions.
Venues are paid by promoters to put the shows on and the promoters get that money through ticket sales. Venues also may charge a facility fee, which adds to the slew of fees that show up at the end of your purchase. In addition, the buildings hold back tickets that they give priority to their suite owners or their loyalty programs.
Some venues are owned by or have exclusive deals with promoters such as Live Nation Entertainment (which also owns Ticketmaster). Others are called “open buildings” that any promoter can book. Every building has a ticketing contract, however, which typically requires the ticketing company to pay in advance for the right to sell the seats. And in Lefsetz’s view, Ticketmaster is the only company that has the technology to sell tickets for high-demand events because it has cornered the market and has the money.
Ticketing companies add the fees that can turn a $20 seat into a $35 seat (Ticketmaster‘s will make your head spin). Here’s the breakdown of the most common ones:
- The service fee, also known as a convenience fee, is the amount tacked on for the privilege of buying a ticket online instead of at the box office. Ticketmaster says it sets the fees with the artists’ input and typically shares the proceeds with them.
- The processing fee is the charge added to each order (not each ticket) to cover miscellaneous expenses associated with online ticketing. The Ticketmaster website says that the processing fee “offsets the costs of ticket handling, shipping and support.” If costs are lower than the processing fee, that money goes to Ticketmaster and is typically shared with the artists.
- The delivery fee is the charge for getting you the tickets you order, and it varies based on which option you select. The DIY options, such as tickets you print yourself or store in your phone, tend to be free or low-cost; not so much for having physical tickets shipped to your home. Ticketmaster acknowledges that sometimes a portion of this fee goes directly to the company.
- The facility charge is what helps the venue run the show. Ticketmaster’s website says it does not profit from this fee and does not decide how high it is. Artists decide if there is a fee and how much it is.
A 2018 report by the Government Accountability Office found that fees on initial ticket sales added 27% to the cost, on average. The lower the price of the ticket, however, the more burdensome the fees can seem.
Ticketmaster is this industry’s Goliath, but there are other ticketing agencies handling smaller venues and acts. Their common goal is to get rid of software “bots” that quickly buy tickets in bulk, raising prices for hot shows by shifting tickets to the resale market.
Resellers and ticket brokers such as StubHub and SeatGeek create a secondary market for tickets that buyers can’t — or never intended to — use themselves. Brokers compete with fans for seats in the initial sales, using teams of employees or software bots that snap up tickets faster than individuals can. In addition, the GAO’s report found that event promoters will sometimes distribute tickets through brokers “to capture a share of higher secondary market prices without the reputation risk of raising an event’s ticket prices directly.”
The GAO also said that, according to the four resellers interviewed for its report, “professional brokers represent either the majority or overwhelming majority of ticket sales on their sites.”
StubHub takes issue with the GAO’s number; of the people who sold tickets through the site last year, it classifies less than 1% as brokers.
Resale prices for tickets are set by the seller, although some resale sites will suggest prices for them. And this is where ticket prices can skyrocket, because the sites don’t limit how much a seller can charge.
“This is a truly market-driven platform,” StubHub spokesperson Jessica Finn said. “So this is really about what sellers think that the price, the value of the ticket is, and what buyers think the value of the ticket is, and they effectively agree on it with a purchase…. It’s very much a dynamic marketplace, prices go up and down and we don’t meddle with that.”
Lefsetz said the secondary market sells tickets for the prices they do because that is what the tickets are worth. They wouldn’t be on sale for those prices if people didn’t buy them for that price. If they set the price too high the tickets won’t sell — for example, tickets for Adele’s Las Vegas shows sold for an average price of $1,900, compared with the average listed price of $4,800, according to StubHub.
Resellers charge a similar array of fees to ticket buyers, but they add more on average to the cost of seats than the original ticket seller’s fees do. University of Chicago professor Eric Budish, an economist who studies ticketing in the United States, found that resellers charged buyers and sellers fees amounting to 30% to 40% of the ticket resale value. “So if a Taylor Swift ticket resells for say $2,000, the secondary market site … might be making 30% of that amount. 30% of $2,000 is $600. Taylor Swift sold the ticket for say $300. So the secondary marketplace is making more than Taylor Swift is, and then the broker is making more than either of them.”
Lefsetz says people want to sit in great seats without having to pay an exorbitant price for them; instead, they think they’re entitled to sit there because of how much they love the artist. “Everyone thinks that it is only the ultra-rich who are buying four-figure concert tickets. No, there are people who are saving up. This is their favorite band!”
What are the options for the future of ticketing?
The way Budish sees it, the industry has three economically logical options moving forward.
We could continue as we are with unrestricted reselling. Tickets go on sale at the price set by the promoter and, despite repeated efforts to confine sales to actual human fans, many get bought up by bots in seconds to be sold on the secondary market. Currently, it’s hard for fans to tell how many of the venue’s seats are even being made available in the primary sale, rather than being reserved for VIPs or other special interests.
The next option is that the promoters set what is called a “market-clearing price,” that is, a price high enough to prevent the tickets from being resold for more money, but low enough to attract a full house of fans.
The market-clearing price could be thousands of dollars for prime seats to see a top act, and an artist may balk at the image that projects. But this price depends on the supply of tickets available. If artists add shows in a city where their music is popular, they can lower the price and accommodate the demand.
Ticketmaster has started trying to set market-clearing prices through a program it calls “platinum tickets,” where it sells the most in-demand seats separately from the primary ticket offering. According to the website, platinum ticket prices are determined by the demand, with the price for hot tickets rising as the supply goes down, “similar to how airline tickets and hotel rooms are sold.”
The company says that the goal of platinum tickets is to allow artists and promoters to set ticket prices that they think reflect their true market value. But the program can generate fierce backlash from fans, as Bruce Springsteen discovered last year when platinum ticket prices skyrocketed above $4,000.
The final option is to restrict or end resale. Options for this route would be to make tickets nontransferable, allow resale only at face value and only on the primary seller’s resale platform and use technology to attempt to identify real fans by looking for irregular behavior on their accounts. The Cure used all of these measures on their most recent tour. Lead singer Robert Smith advocated for his fans to the point that he convinced Ticketmaster to refund some of the excessively high fees on the tickets.
What would it mean to restrict ticket resale?
A ticketing company called Dice has attempted to block the secondary market by issuing tickets only a few hours before an event and enabling customers to return unwanted tickets for resale at face value. This generates a refund only if the tickets are resold by Dice. Fans looking for tickets to a sold-out show can get on a waiting list, forming a virtual line for the next ticket made available for resale on Dice. This allows the price to stay the same and for the revenue to go to the artist and the venue.
The waiting list also shows artists what the demand is for their concerts. If there are more fans on the waiting list than the number of tickets sold, then they can add another tour date in that city.
Dice allows some tickets to be transferred from the buyer to another user of the Dice app, which opens the door to tickets being exchanged for more than face value — potentially through another platform. The company tries to prevent that, however, by using machine learning and other tools to monitor its system for “suspicious behavior,” spokesperson Joomi Park said. “If we suspect anyone is trying to cheat the system, they’re banned from Dice, it’s that simple,” Park added.
You can’t get your Taylor Swift or NBA tickets on Dice, but what would happen if this idea was implemented on a larger scale?
The Fédération Internationale de Football Association uses a similar resale process for the World Cup, offering a platform where people can sell the tickets they bought but they cannot set the price lower than 15% or exceed 110% of the original face value of the ticket. (FIFA also charges a 10% administration fee.)
So, what deters World Cup fans from going elsewhere to sell their tickets? At the 2023 men’s World Cup, it was the host country’s government: Qatar passed a law granting FIFA exclusive rights to sell World Cup tickets. According to Reuters, “hawkers caught face fines of up to 10 times the face value of the tickets being sold illegally.”
Still, fans with money have shown time and again that they’ll pay far more than the face value of a ticket to see their favorite artists, so it’s unrealistic to think that the secondary market can be eliminated. People will still resell seats under the table; the more this happens in unauthorized channels, the less protection fans will have against scams.
And there are many reasons why people want the freedom to resell tickets as they see fit. StubHub’s Finn offered this example: Say you had a ticket to an Inter Miami season-opening game to see Lionel Messi play. “You’re going with your son and suddenly realize like, ‘Hey, I can actually pay for my entire set of tickets next season if I don’t go to this one starter game.’ Can you really discredit the person from trying to think that way? That’s the way the market turns. That’s not an unfair thing for them.”
The resale market is attractive to artists, too. Major artists have been known to dip their toes in the secondary market by withholding tickets during the primary sale and then “reselling” them to make more money off the broken system.
In 2011, the Smoking Gun website posted a copy of Katy Perry’s rider for her world tour that year, laying out the amenities that had to be provided at each stop. One demand was that promoters hold back tickets for her team to offer through resellers.
Budish says this practice isn’t uncommon; many artists have been caught doing it. For example, in 2019, Live Nation admitted to an agreement with Metallica to hold back 88,000 tickets for the band to sell on the secondary market.
What are bots and can anything be done about them?
According to Queue-it, a company that helps manage high-volume website traffic, there are multiple parts in the ticket-buying process where scalpers employ bots. During ticket presales, bots can create fake accounts to circumvent buying limits, or they can even hack existing, real accounts. To get into legitimate accounts a bot may be designed to guess passwords, which is called credential cracking. They also can use stolen passwords and apply them in bulk to ticketing websites, something called credential stuffing.
During the primary sale, people can use scraping bots to scan the internet for available tickets so they are the first to arrive at the sale. Then, they use expediting bots to buy many tickets at once.
There is even a bot that can hold tickets in its cart so it appears to fans that the tickets are sold out, inducing them to go to the secondary market. These are called denial of inventory bots.
According to a 2018 study by Distil Networks, a company that detects and mitigates bots, about 40% of the bots observed across all 180 ticketing domains were what they call “bad bots,” which are computer programs designed to cause harm.
The National Independent Venue Association, which represents independent venues and promoters, has created a coalition called “Fix the Tix” that lobbies for measures to restrict bots. The coalition wants Congress to update the 2016 Better Online Ticket Sales Act to ban speculative ticket sales and expand the protections against bots used by “predatory resellers.”
A tricky aspect of making sure tickets land in the hands of fans is that artists can’t identify who their fans are. They have created fan clubs to give registered members early access to tickets, but brokers created multiple bogus registrations and bought up tickets that way. This fan club idea is what Ticketmaster tried to do with its “Verified Fan” initiative, but the company got bombarded with bots anyway.
Ticketing companies have also tried to deter bot sales by attaching an ID to a ticket that must be checked at the door. But that raises venues’ costs by requiring them to have people checking IDs, Budish said.
I need a ticket, what do I do?
If you are buying on the secondary market, use a trusted service that can verify your ticket and reimburse you if you encounter a problem.
Waiting until the last minute is a high-risk, high-reward strategy. If people price their tickets too high on the resale market, they won’t sell. (The same is true for the initial sale prices). So inevitably, buyers (and promoters) will eventually cut their prices to avoid being stuck with unsold seats — but only if there’s too much supply.
StubHub noted that interest in tickets peaks when the tickets first go on sale and sometimes right before the show. It advises fans to buy some time in between.
Compare the popularity of the act and the venue. If it is a high-demand show in a small space, prices are likely to be more expensive. Check if they are playing at any bigger venues.
Check prices on different websites to compare. If you see a price that looks too good to be true, it probably is.
Your favorite artist’s tour may be sponsored by a credit card company, which will have tickets reserved for cardholders. Leftsetz said that his credit card company reached out to him months after the Taylor Swift tickets sold out and asked if he wanted tickets. They sometimes do presales as well.
Join the fan club. If there is a fan club for an artist, it typically gets an allotment of tickets. According to the GAO, 10% to 30% of the tickets for major artists’ shows are typically reserved for presales, whether for fan clubs or other groups, although the percentage can be much higher for the biggest events.
Think about going alone. It is harder to sell single tickets, so they are likely to resell at a lower price than groups of tickets.
Know someone. Meet someone who works for the building, the act or the promoter.
Just show up at the venue on the day of the show. If the tickets that were held back during the primary sale didn’t sell, then promoters may give them to the box office to sell. Nonprofessional ticket scalpers also show up at the event and try to sell tickets there, but beware — scalping is generally illegal in California, and you may be scammed with counterfeit tickets.
About The Times Utility Journalism Team
This article is from The Times’ Utility Journalism Team. Our mission is to be essential to the lives of Southern Californians by publishing information that solves problems, answers questions and helps with decision making. We serve audiences in and around Los Angeles — including current Times subscribers and diverse communities that haven’t historically had their needs met by our coverage.
How can we be useful to you and your community? Email utility (at) latimes.com or one of our journalists: Matt Ballinger, Jon Healey, Ada Tseng, Jessica Roy and Karen Garcia.
Business
Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos to Attend Trump’s Inauguration
Bezos, Zuckerberg and Coke at the inauguration
Corporate America had already raced to donate big sums to Donald Trump’s record-breaking inaugural fund. Now some of its leaders appear eager to jockey for prominent positions at the inauguration next week.
It’s a new reminder that for some of the nation’s biggest businesses, forging close ties to a president-elect who is promising hard-hitting policies like tariffs is a priority this time around.
Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg are expected to be on the inauguration dais, according to NBC News, alongside Elon Musk and several cabinet picks.
The presence of Musk isn’t a surprise, given the Tesla chief’s significant support of and huge influence over Trump. But the other tech moguls have only more recently been seen as supporters of the administration. (Indeed, Bezos frequently sparred with Trump during his first presidential term.)
It’s the latest effort by Bezos and Zuckerberg to burnish their Trump credentials. At the DealBook Summit in December, Bezos — whose Amazon has faced scrutiny under the Biden administration and whose Blue Origin is hoping to win government rocket contracts — said that he was “very hopeful” about Trump’s efforts to reduce regulation.
And Zuckerberg recently announced significant changes to Meta’s content moderation policy, including relaxing restrictions on speech seen as protecting groups including L.G.B.T.Q. people that won praise from Trump and other conservatives. On the inauguration front, Zuckerberg is also co-hosting a reception alongside the longtime Trump backers Miriam Adelson, Tilman Fertitta and Todd Ricketts.
Both tech moguls have visited Mar-a-Lago since the election, with Zuckerberg having done so more than once.
Coca-Cola took a different tack. The drinks giant’s C.E.O., James Quincey, gave Trump what an aide called the “first ever Presidential Commemorative Inaugural Diet Coke bottle.”
More broadly, business leaders want a piece of the inauguration action. The Times previously reported that the Trump inaugural fund had surpassed $170 million, a record, and that even major donors have been wait-listed for events.
Others are throwing unofficial events around Washington, including an “Inaugural Crypto Ball” that will feature Snoop Dogg, with tickets starting at $5,000, The Wall Street Journal reports.
It’s a reminder that C.E.O.s are reading the room, and preparing their companies for a president who has proposed creating an “External Revenue Service” to oversee what he has promised will be wide-ranging tariffs.
David Urban, a longtime Trump adviser who’s hosting a pre-inauguration event, told The Journal, “This is the world order, and if we’re going to succeed, we need to get with the world order.”
-
In other Trump news: The president-elect is expected to appear via videoconference at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, which starts on Inauguration Day, according to Semafor.
HERE’S WHAT’S HAPPENING
Investors brace for the latest inflation data. The Consumer Price Index report, due out at 8:30 a.m. Eastern, is expected to show that inflation ticked up last month, most likely because of climbing food and fuel costs. Global bond markets have been rattled as slow progress on slowing inflation has prompted the Fed to slash its forecast for interest rate cuts.
More Trump cabinet picks will appear before the Senate on Wednesday. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, the choice for secretary of state, is expected to field questions about his views on the Middle East, Ukraine and China, but is expected to be confirmed. Russell Vought, the pick to run the Office of Management and Budget, will most likely be asked about his advocacy for drastically shrinking the federal government, a key Trump objective. And Sean Duffy, the Fox Business host chosen to lead the Transportation Department, will probably face questions on how he would oversee matters including aviation safety and autonomous vehicles, the latter of which is a priority for Elon Musk.
Meta plans to lay off another 5 percent of its employees. Mark Zuckerberg, the tech giant’s C.E.O., told staff members to prepare for “extensive performance-based cuts” as the company braces for “an intense year.” The social media giant faces intense competition in the race to commercialize artificial intelligence.
A new bill would give TikTok a reprieve from a ban in the United States. Senator Ed Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, said he planned to introduce the Extend the TikTok Deadline Act, which would give the video platform 270 additional days to be divested from its Chinese parent, ByteDance before being blacklisted. It’s the latest effort to buy TikTok time, as the app faces a Jan. 19 deadline set by a law; President-elect Donald Trump has opposed the potential ban as well.
A question of succession
JPMorgan Chase and BlackRock, the giant money manager, just reported earnings. (In short: Both handily beat analyst expectations.)
But the Wall Street giants are likely to face questioning on a particular issue on Wednesday: Which top lieutenants are in line to replace their larger-than-life C.E.O.s, Jamie Dimon and Larry Fink.
Who’s out:
-
Daniel Pinto, who had long been Dimon’s right-hand man, said he would officially drop his responsibilities as JPMorgan’s C.O.O. in June and retire at the end of 2026. Jenn Piepszak, the co-C.E.O. of the company’s core commercial and investment bank, has become C.O.O.
-
And Mark Wiedman, the head of BlackRock’s global client business and a top contender to succeed Fink, is planning to leave, according to news reports.
What Wall Street is gossiping about JPMorgan: Even in taking the C.O.O. role, JPMorgan said that Piepszak wasn’t interested in succeeding Dimon “at this time.” DealBook hears that while she genuinely appears not to want to pursue the top job, the phrasing covers her in case she changes her mind.
For now, that means the most likely candidates for the top spot are Marianne Lake, the company’s head of consumer and community banking; Troy Rohrbaugh, the other co-head of the commercial and investment bank; and Doug Petno, a co-head of global banking.
The buzz around BlackRock: Wiedman reportedly didn’t want to keep waiting to succeed Fink and is expected to seek a C.E.O. position elsewhere. (So sudden was his departure that he’s forfeiting about $8 million worth of stock options and, according to The Wall Street Journal, he doesn’t have another job lined up yet.)
Fink said on CNBC on Wednesday that Wiedman’s departure had been in the works for some time, with the executive having expressed a desire to leave about six months ago.
Other candidates to take over for Fink include Martin Small, BlackRock’s C.F.O.; Rob Goldstein, the firm’s C.O.O.; and Rachel Lord, the head of international.
But Dimon and Fink aren’t going anywhere just yet. Dimon, 68, said only last year that he might not be in the role in five years. And Fink, 72, said in July that he was working on succession planning: “When I do believe the next generation is ready, I’m out.”
The S.E.C. gets in a final shot at Musk
Another battle between Elon Musk and the S.E.C. erupted on Tuesday, with the agency suing the tech mogul over his 2022 purchase of Twitter.
It’s unclear what happens to the lawsuit once President-elect Donald Trump, who counts Musk as a close ally, takes office. But the agency’s reputation as an independent watchdog may be at stake.
A recap: The S.E.C. accused Musk of violating securities laws in his $44 billion acquisition of the social media company.
The agency said that Musk had failed to disclose his Twitter ownership stake for a pivotal 11-day stretch before revealing his intentions to purchase the company. That breach allowed him to buy up at least $150 million worth of Twitter shares at a lower price — to the detriment of existing shareholders, the agency argues.
The S.E.C. isn’t just seeking to fine Musk. It wants him to pay back the windfall. “That’s unusual,” Ann Lipton, a professor at Tulane Law School, told DealBook.
Alex Spiro, Musk’s lawyer, called the latest action a “sham” and accused the agency of waging a “multiyear campaign of harassment” against him.
The showdown sets up a tough question for the S.E.C. Will Paul Atkins, the president-elect’s widely respected pick to lead the agency, drop the case? Such a move could call the bedrock principle of S.E.C. independence into question.
Jay Clayton, who led the agency during Trump’s first term, earned the respect of the business community for running it in a largely drama-free manner. It was under Clayton that the S.E.C. sued Musk over his statements about taking Tesla private.
Musk, who is set to become Trump’s cost-cutting czar and is expected to have office space in the White House complex, has called for the “comprehensive overhaul” of agencies like the S.E.C. The billionaire said he would also like to see “punitive action against those individuals who have abused their regulatory power for personal and political gain.”
-
In related news: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau sued Capital One, accusing it of cheating its depositors out of $2 billion in interest payments.
THE SPEED READ
Deals
-
DAZN, the streaming network backed by the billionaire businessman Len Blavatnik, is closing in on funding from Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund as the kingdom continues to expand its sports footprint. (NYT)
-
The Justice Department sued KKR, accusing the investment giant of withholding information during government reviews for several of its deals. KKR filed a countersuit. (Bloomberg)
-
OpenAI added Adebayo Ogunlesi, the billionaire co-founder of the infrastructure investment firm Global Infrastructure Partners, to its board. (FT)
Politics and policy
Best of the rest
We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com.
Business
For uninsured fire victims, the Small Business Administration offers a rare lifeline
As wildfires continue to burn around Southern California, thousands of business owners, homeowners and renters are confronting the daunting challenge of rebuilding from the ashes. For some number of them, the road ahead will be all the more difficult because they didn’t have any or enough insurance to cover their losses. For them, the U.S. Small Business Administration is a possible lifeline.
The SBA, which offers emergency loans to businesses, homeowners, renters and nonprofits, is among the few relief options for those who don’t have insurance or are underinsured. Uninsured Angelenos can also apply for disaster assistance through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA.
The current wildfires are ravaging a state that was already in the midst of a home insurance crisis. Thousands of homeowners have lost their insurance in recent years as providers pull out of fire-prone areas and jack up their prices in the face of rising risk.
“For those who are not going to get that insurance payout, this is available,” Small Business Administration head Isabella Casillas Guzman said in an interview during a recent trip to the fire areas. “The loans are intended to fill gaps, and that is very broad.”
About one-third of businesses don’t have insurance and three-quarters are underinsured, Guzman said.
“There will be residual effects around the whole community,” she said. “Insurance will not cover this disaster.”
Businesses, nonprofits and small agricultural cooperatives can apply for an economic injury loan or a physical damage loan through SBA. Homeowners are eligible for physical damage loans. Economic injury loans are intended to help businesses meet ordinary financial demands, while physical damage loans provide funds for repairs and restoration. People can apply online and loans must be repaid within 30 years.
Renters can receive up to $100,000 in assistance, homeowners up to $500,000 and businesses up to $2 million, according to Guzman. Homeowners and renters who cannot get access to credit elsewhere can qualify for loans with a interest rate of 2.5%. The SBA determines an applicant has no credit available elsewhere if they do not have other funds to pay for disaster recovery and cannot borrow from nongovernment sources.
Interest rates for homeowners and renters who do have access to credit elsewhere are just over 5%. Loans for businesses could come with interest rates of 4% or 8% depending on whether the business has other credit options.
An applicant must show they are able to repay their loan and have a credit history acceptable to the SBA in order to be approved. The loans became available following President Biden’s declaration of a major disaster in California.
“We’ve already received hundreds of applications from individuals and businesses interested in exploring additional support,” Guzman said. “We know the economic disruption may not be contained to the footprint of any evacuation zones or power outages.”
People who don’t have insurance or whose insurance doesn’t cover the entirety of their losses are eligible for loans, Guzman said. While many will use the funds to start from scratch after losing their property to the fires, businesses that are still standing can also apply for support to cover lost revenue.
Guzman was not able to estimate the total value of loans they expect to offer in California but said the organization is on solid financial footing after temporarily running out of funds in October.
“Funding has been replenished by Congress, and we expect to be able to coordinate closely with Congress,” Guzman said. “We’re fully funded and in a good position to provide support.”
Business
Cookies, Cocktails and Mushrooms on the Menu as Justices Hear Bank Fraud Case
In a lively Supreme Court argument on Tuesday that included references to cookies, cocktails and toxic mushrooms, the justices tried to find the line between misleading statements and outright lies in the case of a Chicago politician convicted of making false statements to bank regulators.
The case concerned Patrick Daley Thompson, a former Chicago alderman who is the grandson of one former mayor, Richard J. Daley, and the nephew of another, Richard M. Daley. He conceded that he had misled the regulators but said his statements fell short of the outright falsehoods he said were required to make them criminal.
The justices peppered the lawyers with colorful questions that tried to tease out the difference between false and misleading statements.
Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. asked whether a motorist pulled over on suspicion of driving while impaired said something false by stating that he had had one cocktail while omitting that he had also drunk four glasses of wine.
Caroline A. Flynn, a lawyer for the federal government, said that a jury could find the statement to be false because “the officer was asking for a complete account of how much the person had had to drink.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson asked about a child who admitted to eating three cookies when she had consumed 10.
Ms. Flynn said context mattered.
“If the mom had said, ‘Did you eat all the cookies,’ or ‘how many cookies did you eat,’ and the child says, ‘I ate three cookies’ when she ate 10, that’s a false statement,” Ms. Flynn said. “But, if the mom says, ‘Did you eat any cookies,’ and the child says three, that’s not an understatement in response to a specific numerical inquiry.”
Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked whether it was false to label toxic mushrooms as “a hundred percent natural.” Ms. Flynn did not give a direct response.
The case before the court, Thompson v. United States, No. 23-1095, started when Mr. Thompson took out three loans from Washington Federal Bank for Savings between 2011 and 2014. He used the first, for $110,000, to finance a law firm. He used the next loan, for $20,000, to pay a tax bill. He used the third, for $89,000, to repay a debt to another bank.
He made a single payment on the loans, for $390 in 2012. The bank, which did not press him for further payments, went under in 2017.
When the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and a loan servicer it had hired sought repayment of the loans plus interest, amounting to about $270,000, Mr. Thompson told them he had borrowed $110,000, which was true in a narrow sense but incomplete.
After negotiations, Mr. Thompson in 2018 paid back the principal but not the interest. More than two years later, federal prosecutors charged him with violating a law making it a crime to give “any false statement or report” to influence the F.D.I.C.
He was convicted and ordered to repay the interest, amounting to about $50,000. He served four months in prison.
Chris C. Gair, a lawyer for Mr. Thompson, said his client’s statements were accurate in context, an assertion that met with skepticism. Justice Elena Kagan noted that the jury had found the statements were false and that a ruling in Mr. Thompson’s favor would require a court to rule that no reasonable juror could have come to that conclusion.
Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Brett M. Kavanaugh said that issue was not before the court, which had agreed to decide the legal question of whether the federal law, as a general matter, covered misleading statements. Lower courts, they said, could decide whether Mr. Thompson had been properly convicted.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked for an example of a misleading statement that was not false. Mr. Gair, who was presenting his first Supreme Court argument, responded by talking about himself.
“If I go back and change my website and say ‘40 years of litigation experience’ and then in bold caps say ‘Supreme Court advocate,’” he said, “that would be, after today, a true statement. It would be misleading to anybody who was thinking about whether to hire me.”
Justice Alito said such a statement was, at most, mildly misleading. But Justice Kagan was impressed.
“Well, it is, though, the humblest answer I’ve ever heard from the Supreme Court podium,” she said, to laughter. “So good show on that one.”
-
Health1 week ago
Ozempic ‘microdosing’ is the new weight-loss trend: Should you try it?
-
Technology6 days ago
Meta is highlighting a splintering global approach to online speech
-
Science4 days ago
Metro will offer free rides in L.A. through Sunday due to fires
-
Technology1 week ago
Las Vegas police release ChatGPT logs from the suspect in the Cybertruck explosion
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago
‘How to Make Millions Before Grandma Dies’ Review: Thai Oscar Entry Is a Disarmingly Sentimental Tear-Jerker
-
Health1 week ago
Michael J. Fox honored with Presidential Medal of Freedom for Parkinson’s research efforts
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago
Movie Review: Millennials try to buy-in or opt-out of the “American Meltdown”
-
News1 week ago
Photos: Pacific Palisades Wildfire Engulfs Homes in an L.A. Neighborhood