Local TV Advertising

Local TV Advertising Antitrust Litigation alleges that local television station owners exchanged competitively sensitive pricing and pacing data — information about upcoming ad sales and inventory — enabling coordinated pricing for local television advertising rather than independent competition among station groups. Centralized in the Northern District of Illinois in 2018, the docket carries 15 pending actions after roughly seven years of litigation, a claim population made up of local, regional, and national advertisers who purchased local TV ad time.

For a funder, this is an information-exchange antitrust theory — plaintiffs must show the shared pacing and pricing data plausibly enabled coordination among station owners, a fact pattern similar to information-exchange theories tested in other industries. At this stage of the docket's life, that theory has had years to develop through discovery and motion practice, which reduces novel-theory risk relative to when the docket was newly centralized, even though this specific docket's own record still needs to be evaluated on its own facts.

Advertisers and advertising agencies with documented local TV ad-spend during the relevant period are the relevant claimant pool for commercial claim funding under Criterica Capital's commercial litigation finance line — not a medical-lien matter. A firm representing a group of advertiser clients is a reasonable portfolio finance candidate once purchase records and the docket's current certification posture are confirmed. A structure and litigation brief on the information-exchange theory and current posture is also available.

Pre-settlement funding is a non-recourse purchase of a portion of the proceeds of a pending legal claim — not a loan. If the case does not result in a recovery, nothing is owed. Rates, fees, and repayment terms are disclosed in full in the funding agreement, which the applicant’s attorney reviews before signing. Availability and terms vary by state.