|
1
|
- Raymond Sauer
- Clemson University
|
|
2
|
- How Did We Get Here?
- Economic factors shaping the growth in sport
- Play for Pay
- What drives the salaries of coaches & players?
- Unions, Salary Caps, & the Draft
- Union-monopoly negotiations: good for the game?
- The Franchise Monopoly Game
- Why billionaire owners “need” stadium subsidies
|
|
3
|
- Item Price 1960 Price 2004
- Loaf of (Basic) Bread $0.50 $1
- Lakeside lot in Clemson $ 5,000 $250,000
- 1 acre Menlo Park, CA $10,000 $3m+
- Bottle of Top Bordeaux $20 $500+
- Avg Wage in MLB $65,000 $2.5m
- Washington Redskins $1.4m $800m (’98)
- NCAA Tournament TV rights $0 $545m/yr
|
|
4
|
- Growth in wealth & income
- Sustained increase in income
- Grandkids are several times richer
- Decline in real price of necessities
- Can eat cheaply, clothing at thrift store
- Spend income on luxuries
- Increase in leisure time
- Work week fallen from 60 to 35 hours
|
|
5
|
- Economics of superstars
- Applies to artists, musicians, athletes
- Sports are collectively enjoyed
- Individual value increases market size
- Water cooler talk: common values
- Did you see Pavarotti at the Met?
- Individual attention spans are limited
- Competition for nation’s attention
- The economic contest:
- Which sports will attract nation’s attention?
|
|
6
|
- Americans’ response?
- Watch TV!
- Go to a ballgame
- Sustained increases in attendance for MLB, NFL, NBA from 1950-200
- Demand for tickets, viewing on TV
- Decades long increases in prices
- Irony of the typical fan:
- “Obscene! I can’t afford these
prices”
|
|
7
|
- Athleticism: grace & power
- On display in figure skating & track
- Why aren’t these more prominent?
- Economics of superstars implies limits
- Today’s big three
- baseball, basketball, & football
- Why did they win the race to the top?
|
|
8
|
- Big 3 in 1900:
- Baseball, boxing, horse racing
- Performance-based in boxing & horse racing
- Today’s ball sports were in their infancy
- Baseball got a head start
- National League (1876)
- Oldest professional league in world
- Replaced Players League & barnstorming clubs
- Managed by profit-driven owners
- Found ballgames a good place to sell beer
- Structured competition helped game survive
|
|
9
|
- 1. Appreciation of athleticism
- Sports are luxury goods in rich societies
- Add skyboxes, better sightlines, better seats
- Form is secondary
- 2. Centralization of control
essential
- Structure increases market share
- Modern: media adds to advantage
of numbers
- Performance-based competition loses
- 3. Lesson learned?
- This year NASCAR & ATP added cohesion to their series
- Churchill Downs’ long run plan is to integrate racing
|
|
10
|
- Baltimore Sun, 4/28/04
- “Williams, Friedgen pay on record”
- Williams: $1.3 million
guaranteed
- Friedgen: $1.1 million
- w/ incentives of several $100k each
- Economist Andrew Zimbalist:
“It's unjustified economically and inappropriate educationally
and morally for [the coaches] to receive the kind of salaries they
do."
|
|
11
|
- Three theories
- Support from "off campus boosters" (ą alumni)
- M. Sperber on the NCAA "a trade association for coaches” and
administrators“
- Are schools more valuable as vehicles for sports than education, or
just mismanaged?
- Visibility in national marketplace
- athletic competition as advertising of competence
- Student demand
- Why would schools like Presbyterian College persist when sports budgets
can amount to 5% of tuition?
|
|
12
|
- National prominence
- More applications, more selective
- Graduates benefit from recognition
- Winning gets attention
- Applications sensitive to athletic success
- NC St’s NCAA bb championships in 70s & 80s
- S. Carolina’s unbeaten run w/ G. Rogers in 1985
- Doug Flutie & Boston College
|
|
13
|
- Good players & good coaching
- NCAA rules: can’t pay players
- Impact of Doug Flutie is unchanged
- Competition on other margins
- Must offer something else
- Reputation of school & coach
- Coaches ability to recruit talent
- NCAA rules raise the value of top coaches
|
|
14
|
- What sets pay of Williams, Friedgen?
- Competence established
- Other schools value Williams’ services
- Unrestricted competitive bidding
- Salary = value of coaches’ contribution
- Is the football coach truly worth more than the school president?
- Is the school president on TV each Saturday?
- Media values have shaped sports, and schools
|
|
15
|
|
|
16
|
- 1. The advent of free agency
- 2. Demand-driven growth in the
value of players
- George Steinbrenner:
- "You measure the value of a ballplayer by how many fannies he puts
in the seats.“
- These days, the seats include the couch in the den.
|
|
17
|
- Several versions (since 1889) w/ common features:
- “If, prior to March 1, … the player and club have not agreed upon the
terms of such contract [for the next playing season], then on or before
ten days after said March 1, the club shall have the right to renew
this contract for the period of one year on the same terms except that
the amount payable to the player shall be such as the club shall fix in
said notice”
- J. M. Ward: “the reserve rule
gave the managers unlimited power, and they have not hesitated to use
this in the most arbitrary and mercenary way”
|
|
18
|
- Senator Kefauver: Let me ask you,
first, do you think there should be some limit on the length of time of
a reserve contract?
- Jackie Robinson: Yes; I do sir.
- Hearings before the Subcommittee on Antitrust & Monopoly, Senate
Judiciary Committee, July 1958
|
|
19
|
- Miller elected head of MLBPA in 1966
- Former head of Steelworkers Union
- Better, he was both shrewd and smart
- Brookings Conference: “the most intense person in the room, and
unquestionably the brightest too”
- Key move: agreement on arbitration
- neutral member selected by players & owners
- replaced appeals to commissioner
|
|
20
|
- A’s renege on Jim “Catfish” Hunter’s contract
- Top pitcher in baseball in early 70s
- In 1974 signed 2-year contract (rare) @ $100k
- Called for A’s to send 1/2 of contract to tax-deferred annuity
- Owner writes check for $100k instead
- gave owner tax write-off instead of Hunter
- Hunter claims contract invalidated
|
|
21
|
- Issue goes to 3-member arbitration panel in Fall '74
- 2 votes predictable (Miller & owners rep)
- The arbitrator, Peter Seitz, is only vote that matters
- Seitz declares Hunter free agent
- Hunter signs 5 year deal w/ Yanks for $3.5 million!
|
|
22
|
- McNally & Messersmith refuse to sign contracts
- Messersmith plays for Dodgers at renewed terms
- McNally injured but willing to stand for principle
- Prior cases: owners dragged out
negotiations
- Ex: in 1972 Ted Simmons held out for MLB average
- Cards renewed him at $18,000
- Gave raise to $24,000 when he made the all-star team in 1972
- here, McNally was offered $100k to sign in late summer even though it
was known he was unable to pitch!
|
|
23
|
- Signing would re-instate the reserve clause
- Not signing -> neutral arbitrator is forced to determine how far the
reserve clause extends
- 1 year, or (through renewals) indefinitely?
- Peter Seitz' decision: 1 year
renewal
- players that don't re-sign now "play out their option"
- can re-sign
- Opens Pandora's box
- majority of players are on 1 year contracts
- They will be free agents in one year!!!
- 300 announce they will play out their option in 1976
|
|
24
|
- Aftermath of Messersmith-McNally:
- Owners fire arbitrator Seitz
- Owners lock out players in Spring 1976
- Contracts change over next decade
- Majority of contracts become multi-year
- Average salary increases over 700%
- Players’ share of revenues increased from 21% to 56%
|
|
25
|
- CBA of 1977 established a pattern
- Owners want restrictions codified in CBA
- Players accept some guaranteed goodies in exchange
- In absence of CBA, de facto free agency
- Recent pattern in NBA & NFL:
- Veterans vote for rookie pay scales in draft
- No more Kevin Garnett contracts
- Accept cap at % of revenues, more for them
- Federal law exempts CBA restrictions from Antitrust
- Is this limited? See Clarett
vs. NFL
|
|
26
|
- All of MLB’s labor trouble since then stems from owners’ desire to take
back the gains players realized in 1976*
- 1981 strike: free agent compensation scheme for owners
- 1990 lockout: salary cap +
reduction in pension contributions
- 1994 strike: salary cap + more
revenue sharing
- 2002 lockout: revenue sharing
& “luxury tax” on high payrolls
|
|
27
|
- Long History of Franchise Relocation
- 3 periods in MLB
- to 1903: frequent, to avoid
bankruptcy
- Buffalo Bisons - > Boston Red Sox (AL)
- Balt. Orioles #3 -> NY Highlanders -> NY Yankees)
- 1903-1953: no relocations, no
new teams
- 1953-2004: profit driven relocation & threats
- Credible due to league control of entry
- Auction among cities for biggest stadium subsidy
|
|
28
|
- From Keith Olberman's Constitutional Amendment Prohibiting Corporate
Welfare:
- any official of any government "who pays, suggests his government
should pay, or promises a sports franchise, or ... money towards
building a stadium or refurbishing an existing one, that official will
be sentenced to a life of hard labor in a federal penitentiary."
- In Mike Lupica's Mad as Hell, 1996, pp. 40-41.
- Source: Raymond J. Keating,
"Sports Pork," Policy Analysis No. 339, Cato Institute.
|
|
29
|
- 3 distinct periods
- 1) private finance in early 20th Century
- 2) public finance (multipurpose monsters)
- 3) public finance plus corporate naming rights
|
|
30
|
- New Stadiums Very Profitable -- For Teams
- Extensive public construction/lease subsidies
- non-shared revenue streams (luxury boxes)
- New venues: revenue increments of
$30-$40m
- ticket prices increase 50%-100%
- attendance increases as well
- How? Why?
- "throwback" vs. multi-purpose stadiums
- "mistake by the lake"
- increase in proportion of "premium" seats
|
|
31
|
- The Franchise Monopoly Game, that is
- managed (artificial) scarcity.....
- keep # franchises below free entry level
- ensures significant # of wannabe cities
- w/ demand growth, "auction" off new franchises
- plus relocation threats
- Auction among competing cities for best deal
- multi-hundred million $ franchise fees and stadium deals bordering on
extortion are feasible only if a sufficient number of demanders exist
for teams
|
|
32
|
- Infrastructure (ancient)
- roads, public transportation
- land (often land no-one wants)
- Flushing Meadows (Shea Stadium)
- The Meadowlands (Giants Stadium)
- Operating Costs w/ Public Stadiums
- sweetheart leases
- parking & luxury box revenue, etc
- property tax breaks (avoidance)
- tax-free municipal financing
|
|
33
|
- Jobs & economic development
- investment will "pay off"
- creates jobs -- direct & indirect
- ML city needs ML team(s)
- A credible case?
- Among dozens of reputable studies, none have found any significant
economic impact
- Commissioned studies = “billboard economics”
|
|
34
|
- Teams/stadiums create positive externalities
- profit-max owner not be compensated for external benefits provided by
stadium
- many follow team but don't buy tickets
- newspapers sell w/ sports section but don't pay owners
- Surveys indicate significant “willingness to pay”
- Problem: incentive to overstate
value of team
- Remedy: reverse the bias - how
much in extra taxes?
- Use both methods to put upper & lower bounds
- Bottom line: compare value of
sports investment with alternatives:
education, roads & bridges, fire protection
- Direct economic impact is not sufficient to warrant millions in stadium
subsidies
|
|
35
|
- The franchise monopoly game is feasible since US Pro Sports are a Closed
Systems of Competition
- Entry controlled entirely by league owners.
- Artificial scarcity of ML franchises sets up subsidy wars
- Does this violate anti-trust law?
Perhaps.
- Is the league the entity and all sports the market?
- If so, they are off the hook.
- Open systems of competition alter the margins of competition between
cities
- Won’t see open systems in US w/o anti-trust action:
- Teams are worth much less in an open system
|