阿尔斯通诉 NCAA 反垄断案后 NCAA 体育运动的工资、人才和需求情况

IF 1.8 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Sports Economics Pub Date : 2023-12-18 DOI:10.1177/15270025231217970
Shane D. Sanders
{"title":"阿尔斯通诉 NCAA 反垄断案后 NCAA 体育运动的工资、人才和需求情况","authors":"Shane D. Sanders","doi":"10.1177/15270025231217970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From the “landmark” Alston v. NCAA antitrust decision, we examine whether the legally hypothesized fan wage-repugnance effect implies procompetitive benefits in NCAA sports output markets via increased output demand from student-athlete wage restriction. In Alston v. NCAA, the Courts took this benefit as given but failed to recognize the empirically-verified relationship between league talent and fan demand. We assume a legally-hypothesized wage-repugnance line exists and present a theoretical output-demand model functionally dependent upon allocations in a wage-constrained labor-input market. Even given fan repugnance, wage restrictions do not necessarily generate procompetitive benefits. For families of model parameterizations, wage restrictions impose anticompetitive harm.","PeriodicalId":51522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sports Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wages, Talent, and Demand for NCAA Sport After the Alston v. NCAA Antitrust Case\",\"authors\":\"Shane D. Sanders\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15270025231217970\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"From the “landmark” Alston v. NCAA antitrust decision, we examine whether the legally hypothesized fan wage-repugnance effect implies procompetitive benefits in NCAA sports output markets via increased output demand from student-athlete wage restriction. In Alston v. NCAA, the Courts took this benefit as given but failed to recognize the empirically-verified relationship between league talent and fan demand. We assume a legally-hypothesized wage-repugnance line exists and present a theoretical output-demand model functionally dependent upon allocations in a wage-constrained labor-input market. Even given fan repugnance, wage restrictions do not necessarily generate procompetitive benefits. For families of model parameterizations, wage restrictions impose anticompetitive harm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sports Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sports Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15270025231217970\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sports Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15270025231217970","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从 "里程碑式 "的 "Alston 诉 NCAA "反托拉斯判决中,我们研究了法律上假设的球迷工资排斥效应是否意味着 NCAA 体育产出市场通过限制学生运动员工资增加产出需求而获得有利于竞争的利益。在 Alston 诉 NCAA 案中,法院将这一利益视为既定事实,但却没有认识到联盟人才与球迷需求之间的经验验证关系。我们假定存在一条法律上假定的工资-反感线,并提出了一个理论上的产出-需求模型,其功能取决于工资受限的劳动投入市场的分配。即使存在粉丝反感,工资限制也不一定会产生有利于竞争的好处。对于一系列模型参数化而言,工资限制会造成反竞争损害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Wages, Talent, and Demand for NCAA Sport After the Alston v. NCAA Antitrust Case
From the “landmark” Alston v. NCAA antitrust decision, we examine whether the legally hypothesized fan wage-repugnance effect implies procompetitive benefits in NCAA sports output markets via increased output demand from student-athlete wage restriction. In Alston v. NCAA, the Courts took this benefit as given but failed to recognize the empirically-verified relationship between league talent and fan demand. We assume a legally-hypothesized wage-repugnance line exists and present a theoretical output-demand model functionally dependent upon allocations in a wage-constrained labor-input market. Even given fan repugnance, wage restrictions do not necessarily generate procompetitive benefits. For families of model parameterizations, wage restrictions impose anticompetitive harm.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
17.60%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Journal of Sports Economics publishes scholarly research in the field of sports economics. The aim of the journal is to further research in the area of sports economics by bringing together theoretical and empirical research in a single intellectual venue. Relevant topics include: labor market research; labor-management relations; collective bargaining; wage determination; local public finance; and other fields related to the economics of sports. Published quarterly, the Journal of Sports Economics is unique in that it is the only journal devoted specifically to this rapidly growing field.
期刊最新文献
Nontransitive Patterns in Long-Term Football Rivalries The Well-Being and Social Value of Playing Soccer for Women and Men Migrants Networks and Survival in the Job: Evidence from Foreign Newcomers on the PGA Tour Updating Beliefs Based on Observed Performance: Evidence From NFL Head Coaches Should I Stay or Should I Go Pro? Early NFL Draft Entry by NCAA FBS Underclassmen
×
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