Search results

Since the appearance of Simon Rottenberg's seminal paper on the baseball players' labour market in the Journal of Political Economy (1956), the literature on the economics of professional team sports has increased rapidly, fuelled by major changes in the restrictive rules which had pervaded these sports, themselves a consequence of battles in the courts and the collective bargaining arena. These changes have not been limited to North America, to which most of the literature relates, but also apply to Western Europe and Australia in particular. This monograph surveys this literature covering those various parts of the world in order to draw out both theoretical and empirical aspects. However, to argue that the existence of what is now an extensive literature “justifies” such a survey on professional team sports clearly begs a number of questions. Justification can be found in at least two major aspects.

The Chinese Professional Baseball League (CPBL) experienced a rapid decline in attendance after the mid 1990s. In this study, market demand analysis is used to discover the causes of variation in CPBL attendance from 1990 to 2008. The ordinary least squares (OLS) is employed for model estimation. From this model, empirical evidence reveals that a homogenous sport substitute, Taiwan Major League (TML), the Major League Baseball (MLB) effect and game-fixing scandals in CPBL negatively influence CPBL attendance. Additionally, real income is found to negatively affect CPBL attendance, making CPBL games an inferior product. The proposed model accounts for approximately 91% of variation in CPBL attendance between 1990 and 2008.

This study aims to examine the “external effect” of a migrated star player on their domestic sport industries. By exploring the new aspect of star power, this study provides important insight and critical implication to many relevant stakeholders in the professional sports league. Particularly, this is critical under the recent circumstance where the globalization of sports products becomes the central strategic issue of the world-class leagues.

In this paper, the external effect of star players migrated from three Asian leagues (Japan, Korea and Taiwan) to Major League Baseball in the USA, the world-class baseball league, on their domestic league attendance demand was empirically investigated. For the analysis, comprehensive historical data from various reliable sources from each league were collected.

The findings of the paper strongly support the external effect of migrated stars significantly existing in all the three leagues. The effect is consistent across various measurements of migrated star players. More interestingly, the effect was found to be mixed across different leagues; for example, migrated star players increases in domestic league attendance in Japan, while it decreases in Korea and Taiwan. This indicates that the external effect of migrated star players depends on the characteristics of the domestic leagues. In addition, it was found that the external effect was substantial enough to compare to the effect of major demand drivers such as team winning, competitive balance and star power. For managerial implications, this study also provides revenue projections induced by the impact of migrated star players.

This study opens a new chapter related to star power topic and immediately calls for future studies regarding this external effect, particularly, theoretical and behavioral approaches.

In this study we examine how resource-constrained organizations can maneuver for competitive advantage in highly institutionalized fields. Unlike studies of institutional entrepreneurship, we investigate competitive maneuvering by an organization that is unable to alter either the regulative or normative institutions that characterize its field. Using the “Moneyball” phenomenon and recent changes in Major League Baseball as the basis for an intensive case study of entrepreneurial actions taken by the Oakland A’s, we found that the A’s were able to maneuver for advantage by using bricolage and refusing to enact baseball’s cognitive institutions, and that they continued succeeding despite ongoing resource constraints and rapid copying of their actions by other teams. These results contribute to our understanding of competitive maneuvering and change in institutionalized fields. Our findings expand the positioning of bricolage beyond its prior characterization as a tool used primarily by peripheral organizations in less institutionalized fields; our study suggests that bricolage may aid resource constrained participants (including the majority of entrepreneurial firms) to survive in a wider range of circumstances than previously believed.

When and how did modern rankings emerge? This paper aims to answer that question by taking a closer look at the history of American baseball. In the 1870s, baseball was the first team sport to introduce a competitive system, the league, that determined the champion based on teams’ overall number of wins and losses. The in-depth analysis of the baseball discourse from the 1850s to the 1870s shows that leagues were introduced as a solution to a specific problem: how to identify deserving champions that had proved their ability again and again over the course of a season. The rising awareness of this problem was due to a shift in the baseball discourse of the 1860s, which established a new, statistical understanding of athletic achievement that demanded consistency of performance together with an acceptance that even champions lose a game once in a while. Rankings and other statistics, based on constant scoring of individual plays and increasingly sophisticated methods, helped institutionalize this new understanding of achievement and, in so doing, made the introduction of the league system possible. Moreover, the league system proved to be dependent on rankings – in the form of league tables – that made it possible to observe and experience the championship race, making rankings an essential element of modern competitive sports. Given that today’s rankings apply similar ideas of achievement to other fields (e.g., the “excellence” of universities), the story draws attention to the history of a specific imaginary of achievement that transcends the field of sports and should be studied more widely to understand the institutionalization of rankings in other fields.

The purpose of this paper is to understand why some sports show a positive economic impact and other sports do not, and to identify a common set of explanatory factors explaining the differences.

This explanatory research reviews the economic impact literature to identify the underlying conditions that would theoretically allow any sport, large or small, to generate positive economic effects.

Nine conditions are identified that, when present, could allow a community to experience a positive economic impact from a team or stadium. These are then used to explain the discrepancy in known empirical outcomes in major and minor league baseball (MiLB). It appears as if major league teams are more likely to violate the conditions than minor league teams. This research finds theoretical support for previous suggestions that smaller teams and events may be beneficial to local economies. In doing so, it also explains previous empirical results that found some MiLB classifications are associated with positive gains in per capita income.

Stakeholders can use the nine conditions to understand expected economic impact of their relevant sports. This research provides a comprehensive guide to understanding when economic impact can be positive.

This research helps explain some of the existing controversy regarding economic impact analysis.

It is the first research to help provide a pre-set of conditions that can help predict whether positive economic impact will occur for specific sports teams or stadium projects.

The 1922 Supreme Court anti-trust exemption awarded to organized baseball was quick to grasp the prerogatives of the emerging U.S. popular culture industries, and displays the anomalies of performance in the law. The trade and commerce in cultural performances yield contradictory opinions about the distinctions between the functions of work and play, as well as the properties of work and the performing arts. The interconnecting functions of a sport like organized baseball, as an industry, an art, and a popular cultural entertainment makes baseball a rich object for analysis in the perplexing historical puzzle of decentralized U.S. cultural policy.

The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the effect of controllability on compensation of Major League Baseball.

The sample consists of Major League Baseball players who have publicly published compensations figures and who have actively played in the Major Leagues. All data used in the study are publicly available. Multiple regression is employed to test the relationship between player's performance and starting salary of the next season.

The paper proposes that strikeouts, bases on balls, and home runs are relatively controllable for both hitters and pitchers because these performance measures are essentially independent of other teammates' performance.

The distinctness of professional baseball players by nature may constrain the generalization of this paper. It is recommended that further interpretation of the effects of controllability on compensation for other high‐interdependency organizations should be made with caution.

It is suggested that managers in low‐interdependency organizations should make a stronger linkage between subordinates' controllable performance and their compensation. If the compensation plan is designed to maximize the subordinates' reward for performing a controllable task, they will be motivated to expend greater effort on it.