House Oversight Democrat Demands Answers on StubHub CEO’s Ticket Resale Fund

Ranking Member Robert Garcia is seeking documents on Andro Capital, seller financing and whether businesses affiliated with Eric Baker received preferential treatment on StubHub.

StubHub CEO Eric Baker’s financial ties to a professional ticket-resale operation have drawn congressional scrutiny, with the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee demanding information about whether Baker and affiliated businesses received preferential treatment on the marketplace.

Rep. Robert Garcia, the committee’s ranking member, sent Baker a letter Friday (embedded below) requesting written responses and supporting records by Aug. 6. Garcia said Oversight Democrats are investigating StubHub’s relationships with Andro Capital, where Baker holds management and ownership interests, and Colloquy Capital, an Andro affiliate involved in financing professional ticket sellers.

The relationships were disclosed in SEC filings, drew broader attention following a CBC investigation earlier this month and also underpin allegations in a proposed class action lawsuit filed in July.

The request comes from the committee’s Democratic minority rather than the Republican-led committee as a whole. It is not a subpoena, and the letter does not announce that the committee has reached any conclusions about whether StubHub, Baker, Andro or Colloquy violated the law. Garcia is currently the committee’s ranking member, while Rep. James Comer serves as chairman.

Garcia’s letter alleges that Baker may have unfairly benefited from the relationship between Andro and StubHub, asking whether those relationships allowed Baker-affiliated businesses to gain advantages over ordinary consumers or smaller ticket brokers.

StubHub told TicketNews that Baker’s investment in Andro has been publicly disclosed and characterized Andro as a separate company and one of numerous vendors used to provide services while StubHub focuses on its core business. The company said the relationship accounts for “only a small fraction of StubHub’s total revenue.”

Garcia Seeks Records on Pricing, Fees and Seller Financing

Garcia submitted nine sets of questions covering StubHub’s dealings with Andro and Colloquy.

Among other requests, the congressman wants StubHub to explain how it has listed, priced and fulfilled Andro’s tickets and whether those services differ from what is available to other professional sellers. He also asked the company to identify costs it agreed to cover for Andro under an April 2024 arrangement.

Other questions focus on how StubHub selects sellers to refer to Colloquy for financing, what services StubHub provided for tickets owned by Colloquy and what fees it earned from those sales.

Garcia is additionally seeking information about specialized application programming interfaces, data feeds, memberships or fee structures offered to professional resellers. He asked whether any such benefits were made available to Andro or Colloquy and requested StubHub’s policies governing executives and employees who operate as ticket brokers on the platform.

The letter seeks emails and other correspondence involving Baker, StubHub employees, Andro and Colloquy, along with StubHub’s policies for handling related-party transactions.

Relationships Detailed in StubHub’s SEC Filings

The underlying business relationships were disclosed to investors in StubHub’s Securities and Exchange Commission filings, although Garcia and private plaintiffs have questioned whether consumers were adequately informed about them.

StubHub’s filings identify Andro as a seller that has used the platform since 2008. The company says it provides Andro with ticket-management services and lists, prices and fulfills tickets on its behalf. Baker is identified as Andro’s managing partner and as having an ownership interest in both StubHub and Andro.

StubHub reported that it earned approximately $100,000 in fees from Andro’s ticket sales during both 2022 and 2023. It reported no seller-fee revenue from Andro during 2024, the first quarter of 2025 or the first quarter of 2026.

The company also disclosed that it paid an Andro-managed fund $1.6 million under a servicing agreement and side letter in 2023. StubHub subsequently entered an April 2024 agreement to cover certain costs incurred by Andro in connection with ticket-management services, although its filings do not specify which costs were covered.

StubHub entered a separate agreement with Colloquy in July 2024. Under that program, StubHub refers selected sellers to Colloquy for potential short-term financing based on current or anticipated proceeds from ticket sales.

StubHub then directs an agreed percentage of those sellers’ proceeds to Colloquy as repayment. Colloquy held a security interest in $9.2 million of seller proceeds as of March 31, up from $7.9 million at the end of 2025.

A separate services agreement allowed StubHub to facilitate sales and servicing for tickets owned by Colloquy in return for a percentage-based fee. StubHub’s latest quarterly filing said that agreement ended Nov. 1, 2025, and that $2.4 million was due to Colloquy under the two arrangements as of March 31.

Those disclosures establish that related-party transactions existed. They do not, by themselves, establish that StubHub manipulated ticket prices, that Andro received improper preferential treatment or that the arrangements caused consumers to pay more. Those are among the questions Garcia is asking StubHub to address.

The Andro controversy has surfaced during an already difficult summer for StubHub. The marketplace has faced lawsuits, government inquiries and complaints from World Cup ticket buyers whose orders were canceled or failed to transfer before matches.

StubHub has denied allowing speculative listings and has attributed a significant portion of the World Cup fulfillment problems to FIFA’s restrictive transfer procedures and newly introduced ticketing app. It has also emphasized that affected orders are covered by its FanProtect Guarantee, which provides replacement tickets or a refund when an order cannot be completed.

Garcia’s request widens that scrutiny from whether individual ticket orders were fulfilled to how StubHub’s marketplace operates behind the scenes — including who finances professional sellers, which sellers receive specialized services and whether the company’s CEO benefits from businesses participating on the platform he runs.

StubHub has until Aug. 6 to respond. The letter does not announce a hearing or formal enforcement action, but it places the company’s related-party arrangements before Congress as StubHub continues defending its business practices in court and before consumer-protection authorities.

Read Garcia’s letter to StubHub CEO Eric Baker