|
Baseball has an historic anti-trust exemption that is not based in reason but which has nevertheless been recognized as the status quo. Before collective bargaining succeeded in earning free agency, teams could sell the contracts of players for several times the players' salaries. The players' services had a particular market value that the teams retained by combining with the other teams to restrict the movement of players. With the advent of free agency, teams have to negotiate with players and pay a price that the market will bear. I don't see why any capitalists should have a problem with that.
Professional Hockey, Basketball and Football do not enjoy traditional antitrust exemption. There is a collective bargaining exemption to the antitrust laws when in the context of collective bargaining, the players and teams agree to particular restraints of player movement as part of an overall collective bargaining package. To the extent that the players' unions negotiate some sort of free agency, the players earn what competitive bidding for their services will pay - what the market will bear. Despite the high salaries earned by many players, the value of the franchises have continued to increase. Apparently, the business model has been successful.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|