ABSTRACT
In the last chapter it was argued that conventional wisdom holds that sports leagues are a cartel. In this chapter we attempt to provide a fuller justification for this argument. It is important to note, however, that this does not imply that Neale’s (1964) natural monopoly thesis is redundant. We argue that one of the main reasons why Neale’s predictions are consistent with the development of sporting leagues is that likely cartel behaviour will echo that of a monopoly. However, we argue that by adopting the cartel definition of sporting leagues the rationale for, and description of, the mechanisms by which leagues operate and develop is enhanced. To illustrate these arguments some broad empirical developments in sporting leagues are sketched. These are discussed in more detail in subsequent chapters.
