The Institutional Framework for Doing Sports Business: Principles of EU Competition Policy in Sports Markets

The competition rules and policy framework of the European Union represents an important institutional restriction for doing sports business. Driven by the courts, the 2007 overhaul of the approach and methodology has increased the scope of competition policy towards sports associations and clubs. Nowadays, virtually all activities of sports associations that govern and organize a sports discipline with business elements are subject to antitrust rules. This includes genuine sporting rules that are essential for a league, championship or tournament to come into existence. Of course, „real? business or commercial activities like ticket selling, marketing of broadcasting rights, etc. also have to comply with competition rules. Regulatory activities of sports associations comply with European competition rules if they pursuit a legitimate objective, its restrictive effects are inherent to that objective and proportionate to it. This new approach offers important orientation for the strategy choice of sports associations, clubs and related enterprises. Since this assessment is done following a case-by-case approach, however, neither a blacklist of anticompetitive nor a whitelist of procompetitive sporting rules can be derived. Instead, conclusions can be drawn only from the existing case decisions – but, unfortunately, this leaves many aspects open. With respect to business activities, the focus of European competition policy is on centralized marketing arrangements bundling media rights. These constitute cartels and are viewed to be anticompetitive in nature. However, they may be exempted from the cartel prohibition on efficiency and consumer benefits considerations. Here, a detailed list of conditions exists that centralized marketing arrangements must comply with in order to be legal. Although this policy seems to be well-developed at first sight, a closer look at the decision practice reveals several open problems. Other areas of the buying and selling behavior of sports associations and related enterprises are considerably less well-developed and do not provide much orientation for business.sports business, competition policy, sporting rules, centralized marketing, sports economics

Solidifying the Defensive Line: The NFL Network\u27s Current Position Under Antitrust Law and How it Can Be Improved

In the United States, the broadcasting of professional sporting events is a multi-billion dollar industry, and the National Football League (NFL) alone earned more than $3 billion from television contracts during its 2008 season. Considering the massive revenues that broadcast rights can generate, it is no surprise that some major professional sports leagues have recently developed their own television networks. While it was not the first league-owned television network, the NFL Network has certainly generated the most attention. Since it started broadcasting a select number of NFL regular season games in 2006, the NFL Network has been subject to media criticism, extensive litigation, and even Congressional committee hearings. There are potential antitrust concerns surrounding the Network that are highlighted by an ongoing dispute between the NFL and cable provider Comcast Corporation. Comcast offers the NFL Network on a separate sports programming tier instead of on its basic cable package. As a result, subscribers must pay extra for access to the Network, and it reaches far fewer viewers than basic cable. The antitrust scrutiny stems from uncertainty about whether the NFL Network (1) is exempt from antitrust liability under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961, and (2) constitutes an agreement in restraint of trade in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. This Note first examines the analysis that a court is likely to use in determining whether the NFL Network violates antitrust law. For sports-related cases that involve potential antitrust liability under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, courts have applied the rule of reason analysis and have looked to what effects the challenged conduct will have on competition or consumer welfare. The NFL Network\u27s impact on competition and consumer welfare can be evaluated by considering its role in the League\u27s television policy, and how broadcasting games on the Network actually affects consumers\u27 access to NFL programming. Ultimately, the NFL Network may avoid antitrust liability as long as it remains a supplement to the NFL\u27s primary focus: regional broadcasts of every NFL game on free, over-the-air networks. In that way, games shown on the Network only increase consumer access by giving viewers a way to pay for NFL programming that would not otherwise be available in their market. Finally, this Note proposes a flexible-scheduling policy that would address some of the NFL Network\u27s antitrust issues and ensure that consumer access to NFL programming is enhanced

The Institutional Framework for Doing Sports Business: Principles of EU Competition Policy in Sports Markets

The competition rules and policy framework of the European Union represents an important institutional restriction for doing sports business. Driven by the courts, the 2007 overhaul of the approach and methodology has increased the scope of competition policy towards sports associations and clubs. Nowadays, virtually all activities of sports associations that govern and organize a sports discipline with business elements are subject to antitrust rules. This includes genuine sporting rules that are essential for a league, championship or tourna-ment to come into existence. Of course, ‘real’ business or commercial activities like ticket selling, marketing of broadcasting rights, etc. also have to comply with competition rules. Regulatory activities of sports associations comply with European competition rules if they pursuit a legitimate objective, its restrictive effects are inherent to that objective and proportionate to it. This new approach offers important orientation for the strategy choice of sports associations, clubs and related enterprises. Since this assessment is done following a case-by-case approach, however, neither a blacklist of anticompetitive nor a whitelist of procompetitive sporting rules can be derived. Instead, conclusions can be drawn only from the existing case decisions – but, unfortunately, this leaves many aspects open. With respect to business activities, the focus of European competition policy is on centralized marketing arrangements bundling media rights. These constitute cartels and are viewed to be anticompetitive in nature. However, they may be exempted from the cartel prohibition on efficiency and consumer benefits considerations. Here, a detailed list of conditions exists that centralized marketing arrangements must comply with in order to be legal. Although this policy seems to be well-developed at first sight, a closer look at the decision practice reveals several open problems. Other areas of the buying and selling behavior of sports associations and related enterprises are considerably less well-developed and do not provide much orientation for business. The author would like to thank Arne Feddersen and the participants of the 2nd European Conference on Sports Economics (German Sports University Co-logne, 2010) for valuable comments on earlier versions of this paper.Sports business, competition policy, sporting rules, centralized marketing, sports economics

An Exploration of Ticket Pricing in Intercollegiate Athletics

Ticket sales represent a significant revenue stream for FBS athletic departments, yet little is known about how administrators determine prices for those tickets. This three-paper format dissertation is an attempt to begin filling this gap in the literature so that we may better understand ticket pricing from a managerial perspective. Paper one is conceptual in nature, and includes a review of extant ticket pricing literature and presents a research agenda for studying pricing in the unique environment of intercollegiate sport using the theoretical frameworks of stakeholder theory and institutional theory. The second and third papers are empirical examinations of ticket-pricing from the viewpoints of athletic administrators with various departmental responsibilities so that we may better understand the role of ticket pricing in intercollegiate sport from different points of departure. Using a phenomenological approach, twenty athletic administrators, representing two Power 5 and two Group of 5 institutions, were interviewed about their experiences with ticket pricing. Paper two represents an attempt to better understand the pricing process utilized in college sport, including the organizational objectives and influencing factors identified by administrators, while also suggesting a cyclical model for spectator sport ticket pricing. Paper three is an exploration of the perceived roles of athletic administrative stakeholders, as well as departmental isomorphic behavior, as they relate to ticket pricing decisions in intercollegiate athletics

A Qualitative Exploration of Ticket-Pricing Decisions in Intercollegiate Athletics

Ticket sales represent a significant revenue stream for NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision athletic departments, yet little is known about how administrators determine prices for those tickets. Utilizing strategic planning as the primary framework and supplemented by stakeholder theory, this study examines ticket-pricing decisions from the viewpoint of athletic administrators with various departmental responsibilities to better understand the role of ticket pricing in intercollegiate sport. Twenty athletic administrators, representing two Power 5 and two Group of 5 institutions, were interviewed about their experiences with ticket pricing. In addition to common pricing objectives related to revenue, patronage, and operations, administrators also suggested attendance-oriented pricing objectives unique to college sport pricing theory. However, findings suggest no well-defined organizational objective for ticket pricing exists within the departments sampled. The factors athletic administrators consider when contemplating pricing decisions can be categorized into seven areas: (a) scheduling, (b) research, (c) team performance, (d) stakeholders, (e) discrimination, (f) fan experience, and (g) competitive comparisons

Are You Ready for Some Football?: How Antitrust Laws Can Be Used to Break Up DirecTV\u27s Exclusive Right to Telecast NFL\u27s Sunday Ticket Package

There is almost no question that football has become modem America\u27s pastime. Football has never been more popular, and every Sunday people are clamoring to watch as many games as possible. The Sunday Ticket package allows viewers to watch any National Football League ( NFL ) game being played at any given time. However, the NFL has only granted DirecTV the right to air the Sunday Ticket package, denying this excellent service to a majority of television viewers. By limiting the reach of the Sunday Ticket package, the NFL may be in violation of antitrust laws. This Note begins by explaining antitrust laws, and then moves on to discussing the history of professional football and its complicated relationship with television. Finally, the Note argues that several aspects of NFL\u27s agreement with DirecTV violate antitrust laws, and that making the Sunday Ticket package more widely available would benefit consumers

Are You Ready for Some Football?: How Antitrust Laws Can Be Used to Break Up DirecTV\u27s Exclusive Right to Telecast NFL\u27s Sunday Ticket Package

There is almost no question that football has become modem America\u27s pastime. Football has never been more popular, and every Sunday people are clamoring to watch as many games as possible. The Sunday Ticket package allows viewers to watch any National Football League ( NFL ) game being played at any given time. However, the NFL has only granted DirecTV the right to air the Sunday Ticket package, denying this excellent service to a majority of television viewers. By limiting the reach of the Sunday Ticket package, the NFL may be in violation of antitrust laws. This Note begins by explaining antitrust laws, and then moves on to discussing the history of professional football and its complicated relationship with television. Finally, the Note argues that several aspects of NFL\u27s agreement with DirecTV violate antitrust laws, and that making the Sunday Ticket package more widely available would benefit consumers