The Combines Act :: essays research papers

The Combines ActJ.C.H. Joness article "The Economics of the National Hockey conference" (1969)purpose is to unionizeulate through simple micro economics that the apex motive ofprofessional hockey group owners is receipts maximization. The owners argue thattheir of import interest is "for the love of the game," not the financial benefits ofowning a professional sports privilege and to avoid government regulations suchas the Combines Act (note 1).An article scripted in 1982 by J.A. Schofield entitled "The Development of FirstClass play in England," states the behavior of sport cartels. Three openinges are used to explain the behavior described by Schofield, number twobeing real by J.C.H. Jones (1969). (1) The profit maximization hypothesis.(2)The joint profit maximization hypothesis that the entire cartel ( unify)strives for. This hypothesis does not incorporate non profit objectives that set group behavior. (3) The utility maximization baffle that a llow for manypossibilities unwashedly compromising arguments such as the success of the team ata given year and paid attendance for the teams venue.By explaining the frame move of a professional sports league Jones introduces usto factors that make an organized league function, which seems quite familiar toany other monopolistic markets. Since no team can create any revenue bythemselves they must form a coalition with another club to produce a profitgenerating output, namely a hockey game. Other clubs enter this coalition and accordinglycreating a formal league which we call the National Hockey League. Jones thenstates how revenue is generated in the N.H.L and how it is affected by certainfactors.A hypothetic model of the N.H.L is created by Jones with all things being equal,creating an equilibrium amongst all clubs. The model is then adjusted to reallife variables that turns his theoretical model into what we issue as the N.H.L.Jones variables includes the incentive for team s to win (this being the StanelyCup), different quality of doers, the nonprofessional draft (a draft at the end of theseason which amateur players a selected, last place team gets first pick and soforth), and player redistribution(trades).By applying microtheory Jones clearly presents his argument which I was able tounderstand with my current knowledge of microeconomics. Jones examines therevenue side of an individual team using the usual variables tastes, prices,incomes, quality and substitutes. On the supply side Jones stresses that themajor element is the benevolent inputs namely the hockey players. The data that Jonesused was team statistics such as their final rank at the end of the season andthe paid attendance as a percentage of maximum seating capacity.