Media-Revenue Allocation in Formula One – A Case for Competition Policy?

Oliver Budzinski
{"title":"Media-Revenue Allocation in Formula One – A Case for Competition Policy?","authors":"Oliver Budzinski","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2671301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two midfield teams competing in the FIA Formula One World Championship (motor racing), have reportedly lodged a formal complaint to the European Commission. They raise two concerns about violations of competition law. First, the system of allocating media revenues (predominantly from the sale of broadcasting rights) between the participating teams is allegedly unlawful and unfair because of non-performance related extra payments to some teams and a heavily front-biased performance-related distribution scheme. Second, the system of rule-making in F1 is unlawful and unfair because some teams have more influence on rules and rule-changes than others. According to the complainants, the commercial rights holder (CRH) abuses its power to benefit certain teams over others and forms a cartel with the favored teams as well as the governing sports authority in order to set the rules in an anticompetitive way for the complaining teams. This comment argues that an investigation into Formula One’s revenue and governance structure is justified since there is ample indication of anticompetitive arrangements.","PeriodicalId":306463,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Other Law & Society: Public Law - Antitrust (Topic)","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Other Law & Society: Public Law - Antitrust (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2671301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Two midfield teams competing in the FIA Formula One World Championship (motor racing), have reportedly lodged a formal complaint to the European Commission. They raise two concerns about violations of competition law. First, the system of allocating media revenues (predominantly from the sale of broadcasting rights) between the participating teams is allegedly unlawful and unfair because of non-performance related extra payments to some teams and a heavily front-biased performance-related distribution scheme. Second, the system of rule-making in F1 is unlawful and unfair because some teams have more influence on rules and rule-changes than others. According to the complainants, the commercial rights holder (CRH) abuses its power to benefit certain teams over others and forms a cartel with the favored teams as well as the governing sports authority in order to set the rules in an anticompetitive way for the complaining teams. This comment argues that an investigation into Formula One’s revenue and governance structure is justified since there is ample indication of anticompetitive arrangements.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
f1的媒体收入分配——竞争政策的案例?
据报道,参加国际汽联一级方程式世界锦标赛(赛车)的两支中场车队已向欧盟委员会提出正式投诉。他们提出了两个关于违反竞争法的担忧。首先,在参赛球队之间分配媒体收入(主要来自出售转播权)的制度据称是非法和不公平的,因为一些球队获得了与表现无关的额外报酬,而且与表现相关的分配方案严重偏向于前端。其次,F1的规则制定系统是不合法和不公平的,因为一些车队对规则和规则变更的影响比其他车队更大。根据原告的说法,商业权利持有人(CRH)滥用其权力,使某些球队比其他球队受益,并与受青睐的球队以及管理体育当局形成卡特尔,以便以反竞争的方式为投诉球队制定规则。这个评论认为,调查一级方程式的收入和治理结构是合理的,因为有充分的迹象表明反竞争的安排。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
'Competition Overdose': Curing Markets from Themselves? Ten Points for Discussion Exploitative Abuses: Recent Trends and Comparative Perspectives Setting the Edge: How the NCAA Can Defend Amateurism by Allowing Third Party Compensation Competition in Digital Markets: A Review of Expert Reports The Israeli Statute on National Book Price Maintenance - A Critical Evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1