Pro Sports League Antitrust 'Beliefs': Applied Theory and the Rule of Reason. (15th June 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fort, Rodney
• Other Names: Blair Roger D. guestEditor.
• Is Part Of: Managerial and decision economics. Volume 38:Number 5(2017)
• Page Start: 655
• Page End: 663
• Publication Date: 2016-06-15
• Subjects: Managerial economics -- Periodicals; Decision making -- Periodicals; Management -- Periodicals; 658.15
• DOI: 10.1002/mde.2791
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0143-6570

Abstract

Abstract : In antitrust rule of reason cases, courts weigh anticompetitive harm against consumer welfare offsets. In sports cases, the courts appear to accept claims that fans prefer more competitive balance to less, so that a potential welfare offset is any added enhanced competitive balance attributable to the anticompetitive activity. In addition, courts often decide that less intrusive alternatives may be available to accomplish the same competitive balance gain. From the applied theory perspective, this is troublesome. Theoretically, whether fans prefer more balance is a hypothesis about preferences that needs to be examined in detail for any particular case. Applied theory also is of aid in assessing whether a particular device under scrutiny, including so‐called less intrusive alternatives, should even be predicted to enhance balance. Wading through the foregoing produces food for thought for the courts. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.