• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Since the passage of the Interstate Commerce Act (1897) and the Sherman Act (1890), regulation and antitrust have operated as competing mechanisms to control competition. Regulation produced cross-subsidies and favors to special interests, but specified prices and rules of mandatory dealing. Antitrust promoted competition without favoring special interests, but couldn`t formulate rules for particular industries. The deregulation movement reflected the relative competencies of antitrust and regulation. Antitrust and regulation can also be viewed as complements in which regulation and antitrust assign control of competition to courts and regulatory agencies based on their relative strengths. Antitrust also can act as a constraint on what regulators can do. This paper uses the game-theoretic framework of political bargaining and the historical record of antitrust and regulation to establish and illustrate these points.

Abstract:
More than a century ago, the federal government started controlling competition, first railroads through the Interstate Commerce Act and then the general economy under the Sherman Act. The Commerce Act assigned primary responsibility to the first great federal agency, the Interstate Commerce Commission, while the Sherman Act relied for its implementation on federal courts of general jurisdiction. Since that time, there has been an ongoing struggle to formulate the appropriate policy for controlling competition and to determine the right balance between antitrust and regulation for implementing that policy.

Regulation and antitrust are two competing mechanisms to control competition. The early history in which special courts were established and then abolished, and in which the FTC was created illustrate this point. The relative advantages and disadvantages of each mechanism became clearer over time. Regulation produced cross-subsidies and favors to special interests, but was able to specify prices and specific rules of how firms should deal with each other. Antitrust, especially when it became economically coherent within the past 30 years or so, showed itself to be reasonably good at promoting competition, avoiding the favoring of special interests, but not good at formulating specific rules for particular industries. The partial and full deregulation movement was a response to the recognition of the relative advantages of regulation and antitrust. This does not mean that no sector will be regulated, but rather that competition, constrained only by antitrust, will be used over more activities, even in regulated industries.

Aside from being viewed as substitutes, antitrust and regulation can also be viewed as complements in which the activities of an industry can be subject to both regulatory and antitrust scrutiny. In this way, the complementary use of regulation and antitrust can assign control of competition to courts and regulatory agencies based on their relative strengths, and in some settings, antitrust can act as a constraint on what regulators can do. The trends in network industries indicate that regulators, not antitrust courts, will bear the responsibility for formulating interconnection policies in partially deregulated industries, but antitrust will remain in the background as a club that firms can use if regulators allow incumbents to acquire market power either through merger or predatory acts. The history shows that at least for the United States, the increased use of the Sherman Act instead of regulation to control competition, and when necessary, the complementary use of the two, has brought benefits to consumers.

Interstate Commerce Act, Sherman Act, federal regulation, restraint of trade, monopoly

Abstract:
In 2002, Congress established the Antitrust Modernization Commission to address whether the antitrust laws needed to be changed in light of globalization and rapid technological change. This paper addresses that question. Although the basic framework of the antitrust laws is suitable to deal with current economic conditions, the paper identifies several areas where antitrust can be improved. The paper first examines whether the proper criterion for antitrust should be total or consumer surplus. Then it identifies some key issues that need to be clarified and explains how they should be clarified. Those issues include market definition, merger policy and the treatment of efficiencies, the interaction of antitrust and intellectual property, exclusionary conduct, the right of indirect purchasers to sue, and the proper allocation of responsibility between regulation and antitrust.

Abstract:
Market definition is a crude though sometimes useful tool for identifying market power. The ambiguity in what analysts mean by market power (price above marginal cost, or excess profits) cannot be resolved by market share. When used to analyze a merger or U.S. Sherman Act Section 2 case, it is not just the level of market shares, but also the changes in market shares that are relevant to calculate whether any increase in market power occurs. Despite this, in Section 2 cases courts often use market definition to figure out whether market power exists, a question that can be especially problematic to answer by using market definition. In Section 2 cases, the full antitrust analysis is difficult because any increase in market power typically has to be weighed against any benefits of the alleged bad act. The procedure for defining a market in a merger case or Section 2 case can be rigorously described, but the information required to implement the procedure is typically unavailable. Few analysts (or courts) follow the rigorous procedure in either merger or Section 2 cases. Instead, most markets are defined with some guidance from theory and some qualitative knowledge. Econometric studies using market definition may be helpful both in testing various definitions and in understanding the economic consequences of either the merger or the bad act.

My view is that the definition of a market and the use of market shares and changes in market shares are at best crude first steps to begin an analysis. I would use them to eliminate frivolous antitrust cases when shares are low, but would use them cautiously for anything else. Their usefulness in Section 2 cases is especially weak. Despite their limitations, when they can be used to eliminate frivolous antitrust cases, that use can contribute enormous value to society.

market definition, antitrust, competition, market power, sherman act

Abstract:
This paper discusses the benefits and limitations of several recent trends in the use of economics to analyze antitrust questions. It explains the connection between HHI analysis and merger simulation, and also critically discusses structural estimation and critical loss analysis.

Antitrust and Industrial Organization

Abstract:
This paper first reviews economic theories for why firms tie their products and then discusses our views concerning what this review implies concerning optimal antitrust policy for tying cases. The review considers efficiency rationales for tying, price discrimination rationales, and various exclusionary rationales that have recently been put forth. We specifically discuss the Chicago School view that tying should raise no antitrust concern and explain when that logic breaks down. In our discussion of optimal antitrust policy concerning tying our main point is that, because of the prevalence of efficiency driven tying in real-world markets and the difficulty that courts have in reliably identifying all the welfare consequences of a tie, in general there should be a high hurdle required for intervention in tying cases.

Tie in sales

Abstract:
This paper discusses some of the recent theoretical and empirical advances in industrial organization over the last decade or two and explains their relevance, if any, to the analysis of antitrust problems. After discussing the very broad area of game theory, I move on to discuss some specific areas where theory has improved our understanding of certain industry practices, such as strategic behavior, raising rivals' costs and tie-ins. I also discuss some provocative work by Sutton that links high concentration to fierce competition. On the empirical side, I discuss some breakthroughs in structural demand estimation, merger simulation, and in the modeling of entry and exit. In the discussions of these new theoretical and empirical results, I highlight their likely relevance for antitrust practitioners.

Antitrust and Industrial Organization

Abstract:
Given the focus on tie-in sales in several recent antitrust cases, economists have turned their attention to the motivations and consequences of tying, significantly improving our understanding. Tirole has written an excellent primer focused on what we know about tying and what he believes is desirable antitrust policy concerning the practice. Although we agree with most of Tirole's arguments, there are two topics for which our perspective is somewhat different. First, we would add one situation to the ones identified by Tirole in which tying can harm competition and reduce welfare. Second, in his policy discussion Tirole stops short in some places of using theory to provide concrete guidance and restraint to antitrust enforcers. In other places his suggestions could lead to less rather than more clarity. We explain our reasons for preferring a more limited role for antitrust intervention than Tirole appears to recommend.

Tying, Exclusion, Predation

Abstract:
In this article we distinguish between two types of single-firm conduct. The first, which we call "extraction," is conduct engaged in by the firm to capture surplus from what the firm has itself created independent of the conduct's effect on rivals. The second, which we call "extension," is single firm conduct that increases the firm's profit by weakening or eliminating the competitive constraints provided by products of rivals. We propose as a fundamental antitrust policy towards single-firm conduct the following: Conduct merely to extract surplus the firm has created independent of the conduct's effect on rivals should be permitted. Conversely, conduct that extends the firm's market power by impairing the competitive constraints imposed by rivals presents a legitimate cause for concern.

We subscribe strongly to the view that an essential element of appropriate antitrust policy is to allow a firm to capture as much of the surplus that, by its own investment, innovation, industry or foresight, the firm has itself brought into existence. We believe that alternative approaches to single-firm conduct, including in particular ones aiming to enhance static efficiency at the possible cost of dynamic efficiency and ones seeking to maximize overall welfare through more targeted intervention on a case-by-case basis (not to mention the use of competition policy to protect competitors rather than consumers) threaten seriously to impede economic growth and welfare over time.

A policy that goes further, and which permits all unilateral conduct regardless of competitive effects (perhaps on grounds that "even more profit will generate even more innovation") is considered below and rejected as overly lenient, inconsistent with widely accepted presumptions in favor of inter-firm competition, and unwise, at least under the current state of economic knowledge. But we note that this conclusion is one based on our current economic knowledge and should remain a topic of ongoing research. It requires an empirical assessment of the gains from motivating more competition ex ante versus the subsequent loss of competition ex post.

Abstract:
The courts and analysts continue to struggle to articulate safe harbors for a wide variety of common business pricing practices in which either a single product is sold at a discount if purchased in bulk or in which multiple products are bundled together at prices different from the ones that would emerge if the products were purchased separately. The phenomenon of tying in which the sale of one product is conditioned on the purchase of another is closely related to bundling. Its analysis relies on the same economics as that used to analyze bundling (see, e.g., Carlton and Waldman (2008)), though the law seems to make a distinction between the two. The need for safe harbors for common business pricing practices arises from the recognition that these practices often are motivated by efficiency and that a broad antitrust attack on them could cause more harm than good. In this essay, we analyze and propose safe harbors for quantity discounts and bundled products. In analyzing the latter case, we discuss the deficiencies of the particular safe harbor proposed in the report of the Antitrust Modernization Commission (2007) (AMC) of which Carlton was a member.

Abstract:
Consider a durable goods producer that potentially has market power in the aftermarkets associated with its own products. An important question is to what extent, if any, should the antitrust laws restrict the firm's behavior in these aftermarkets? In this paper we explore three models that illustrate how various behaviors that hurt competition in aftermarkets can, in fact, be efficient responses to potential inefficiencies that can arise in aftermarkets. Our results should give courts pause before intervening in aftermarkets.

Abstract:
This paper summarizes what lessons other countries should draw from U.S. antitrust policy. I pay special attention to small economies. I also discuss how antitrust fits in as one of many government policies that affect competition and what policies likely work best together given the level of a country's development.

Antitrust, Industrial Organization

Abstract:
Mergers in any industry can raise complicated questions about the elimination of competition and the achievement of efficiencies. Mergers in regulated industries such as electricity raise even more complicated issues as the analyst needs to grapple with the constraining effects of regulation, multiple levels of regulation, the ability to evade regulation, and the desire for efficiency. This paper discusses the electricity industry in general and one particular electricity merger that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recently analyzed, in order to draw several lessons about the promotion of competition through electricity mergers in the United States. The purpose is to stimulate discussion with European counterparts to see what, if anything, Europe can learn from the U.S. experience with electricity mergers and regulations.

Abstract:
In this article, I explain the inadequacy of our current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of antitrust policy towards mergers. I then discuss the types of data that one must collect in order to be able to perform an analysis of the effectiveness of antitrust policy. There are two types of data one requires in order to perform such an analysis. One is data on the relevant market pre and post merger. The second is data on the specific predictions of the government agencies about the market post-merger. A key point of this article is to stress how weak an analysis of only the first type of data is. The frequent call for retrospective studies typically envisions relying on just this type of data, but the limitations on the analysis are not well understood. As I explain below, retrospective studies that ask whether prices went up post merger are surprisingly poor guides for analyzing merger policy. It is only when the second type of data is combined with the first type that a reliable analysis of antitrust policy can be carried out. There is a need both to collect the necessary data and to analyze it correctly.

Industrial Organization, Regulation, Antitrust Policy

Abstract:
This paper analyzes the question: When should a single firm have a duty to deal with another? The paper uses a series of economic models to answer the question, assuming the goal is to prevent harm to competition, and applies the economic analysis to the leading cases to show when antitrust enforcement is appropriate and when it is not. The analysis shows that, to prevent harm to competition, the role for antitrust should be quite limited and that two leading cases, Aspen and Kodak, represent a dangerous direction for antitrust policy.

Abstract:
With the clamor rising over airport delays and with both the Congress and the Administration considering remedies, this paper advocates the use of market mechanisms, specifically slot auctions, to promote efficient usage of airport capacity, reduce airport delays, and, more generally, promote competition.

Abstract:
This article investigates how the tying of complementary products can be used to preserve and create monopoly positions. We first show how a monopolist of a product in the current period can use tying to preserve its monopoly in the future. We then show how a monopolist in one market can employ tying to extend its monopoly into a newly emerging market. Our analysis explains how a dominant firm can use tying to remain dominant in an industry undergoing rapid technological change. The analysis focuses on entry costs and network externalities. We also relate our analysis to the Microsoft case.

Abstract:
This paper investigates how the tying of complementary products can be used to preserve and extend monopoly positions. We first show how a firm that is a monopolist of a product in the current period can use tying to preserve its monopoly position in future periods. We then show using related arguments how a monopolist in one market can employ tying to extend its monopoly position into a newly emerging market. The analysis focuses on the importance of entry costs and network externalities. The paper includes a discussion of antitrust implications.

Abstract:
Economic growth depends in large part on technological change. Laws governing intellectual property rights protect inventors from competition in order to create incentives for them to innovate. Antitrust laws constrain how a monopolist can act in order to maintain its monopoly in an attempt to foster competition. There is a fundamental tension between these two different types of laws. Attempts to adapt static antitrust analysis to a setting of dynamic R&D competition through the use of 'innovation markets' are likely to lead to error. Applying standard antitrust doctrines such as tying and exclusivity to R&D settings is likely to be complicated. Only detailed study of the industry of concern has the possibility of uncovering reliable relationships between innovation and industry behavior. One important form of competition, especially in certain network industries, is between open and closed systems. We have presented an example to illustrate how there is a tendency for systems to close even though an open system is socially more desirable. Rather than trying to use the antitrust laws to attack the maintenance of closed systems, an alternative approach would be to use intellectual property laws and regulations to promote open systems and the standard setting organizations that they require. Recognition that optimal policy toward R&D requires coordination between the antitrust and intellectual property laws is needed.

Abstract:
In this paper, we investigate empirically the effect of two recent domestic airline alliances. We find that both alliances benefited consumers - average fares fell and total traffic increased after the creation of the alliances on those city pairs affected by the alliances. We also find that these effects are found both on city pairs where the alliance created one or two new online carriers, and on city pairs where the alliance increased the service offered by one or both alliance partners. Finally, we find that the size of the fare effect of the alliance depends on the pre-alliance level of competition on a city pair with the effect being larger on those city pairs where the level of competition was relatively low.

Abstract:
We examine manufacturers' decisions of whether and how to offer their products for sale over the internet. Manufacturers that rely on promotion of their products by brick and mortar retailers must consider the possibility that internet retailers can free ride off of that promotional effort. This creates an incentive for manufacturers to limit the availability of their products over the internet and to control the pricing of their products over the internet. We examine three categories of products: fragrances, DVD players, and side by side refrigerators. Our evidence suggests that manufacturers that limit distribution in the physical world also use various mechanisms to limit distribution online. In particular, we find evidence that these manufacturers attempt to prevent the sale of their products by online retailers who sell goods at deep discounts. Furthermore, we show that manufacturers who distribute their goods directly through manufacturer websites tend to charge very high prices for the products, consistent with the hypothesis that manufacturers internalize free rider issues. While our main focus is on free riding, our evidence on pricing practices is germane to the growing literature on price dispersion on the internet.

Abstract:
This paper analyzes the concept of barriers to entry. It explains that the concept is a static one and explores the inadequacy of the concept in a world with sunk costs, adjustment costs and uncertainty. The static concept addresses the question of whether profits are excessive. The more interesting and relevant question is how fast entry or exit will erode profits or losses and how do the bounds that entry and exit place on price vary with uncertainty and sunk cost. Intuition based on the static concept of barrier to entry can be misleading in many industries.

Abstract:
This paper uses a new data source to analyze the choice of organizational form of retail gasoline stations. In recent years, gasoline stations have tended to be less likely to be owned and operated by a lessee dealer and more likely to be owned and operated by the refiner. Critics have alleged that company-operated stations are used to drive lessee dealer stations out of business in order to restrict competition. We examine the determinants of organizational form and find them to be based on efficiency not predatory concerns. We estimate the costs of recent laws prohibiting company ownership of gasoline stations.

Abstract:
This paper investigates the role of product upgrades and consumer switching costs in the tying of complementary products. Previous analyses of tying have found that a monopolist of one product cannot increase its profits and reduce social welfare by tying and monopolizing a complementary product if the initial monopolized product is essential, where essential means that all uses of the complementary good require the initial monopolized product. We show that this is not true in durable-goods settings characterized by product upgrades, where we show tying is especially important when consumer switching costs are present. In addition to our results concerning tying our analysis also provides a new rationale for leasing in durable-goods markets. We also discuss various extensions including the role of the reversibility of tying as well as the antitrust implications of our analysis.

Abstract:
Consider a durable goods producer that potentially has market power in the aftermarkets associated with its products. An important question is to what extent, if any, should the antitrust laws restrict the firm's behavior in these aftermarkets? In this paper we explore a number of models characterized by either competition or monopoly in the new-unit market, and show that a variety of behaviors that hurt competition in aftermarkets can, in fact, be efficient responses to potential inefficiencies that can arise in aftermarkets. Our results should give courts pause before intervening in aftermarkets.

Abstract:
We show that demand uncertainty leads to vertical product differentiation even when consumers are homogeneous. When a firm anticipates that its inventory or capacity may not be fully utilized, product variety can reduce its expected costs of excess capacity. When the firm offers a continuum of product varieties, the highest quality product has the highest profit margins but the lowest percentage margin, while the lowest quality product has the highest percentage margin but the lowest absolute margin. We derive these results in both a monopoly model and a variety of different competitive models. We conclude with a discussion of empirical predictions together with a brief discussion of supporting evidence available from marketing studies.

Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.

Abstract:
In this article, I explain the inadequacy of our current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of antitrust policy towards mergers. I then discuss the types of data that one must collect in order to be able to perform an analysis of the effectiveness of antitrust policy. There are two types of data one requires in order to perform such an analysis. One is data on the relevant market pre and post merger. The second is data on the specific predictions of the government agencies about the market post-merger. A key point of this article is to stress how weak an analysis of only the first type of data is. The frequent call for retrospective studies typically envisions relying on just this type of data, but the limitations on the analysis are not well understood. As I explain below, retrospective studies that ask whether prices went up post merger are surprisingly poor guides for analyzing merger policy. It is only when the second type of data is combined with the first type that a reliable analysis of antitrust policy can be carried out. There is a need both to collect the necessary data and to analyze it correctly.

Abstract:
This paper examines the attitude of Jewish law to competition in light of the economist's understanding of the benefits of competition and of the beneficiaries from intervention in the competitive process. The punchline of this paper is simple. Although Judaism has used a whole host of restrictions on competition and has had its share of legislation to promote private interests, there has been one area that has generally been a consistent exception to impediments to competition - the teaching of Torah. This exception is all the more remarkable because those who were in a position to influence the legislation often stood to benefit from such restrictions. From this stress on teaching, we show that the foundation was laid for the survival and perpetuation of Judaism.

Abstract:
This paper provides a new explanation for tying that is not based on any of the standard explanations - efficiency, price discrimination, and exclusion. Our analysis shows how a monopolist sometimes has an incentive to tie a complementary good to its monopolized good in order to transfer profits from a rival producer of the complementary product to the monopolist. This occurs even when consumers - who have the option to use the monopolist's complementary good - do not use it. The tie is profitable because it alters the subsequent pricing game between the monopolist and the rival in a manner favorable to the monopolist. We show that this form of tying is socially inefficient, but interestingly can arise only when the tie is socially efficient in the absence of the rival producer. We relate this inefficient form of tying to several actual examples and explore its antitrust implications.

Abstract:
No abstract is available for this paper.

Abstract:
In 1991, the Antitrust Division sued MIT and the eight schools in the Ivy League under Section 1 of the Sherman Act for engaging in a conspiracy to fix the prices that students pay. The Antitrust Division claimed that the schools conspired on financial aid policies in an effort to reduce aid and raise their revenues. The schools justified their cooperative behavior by explaining that it enabled them to concentrate aid on only those in need and thereby helped the schools to achieve their goals of need-blind admission coupled with financial aid to all needy admittees. This paper analyzes the empirical determinants of tuition and finds that the schools' agreement had no effect on average tuition paid. The paper also analyzes the appropriate application of the antitrust laws to not-for-profit institutions. The Court of Appeals found that it is appropriate for the courts to consider non-profit institutions' justifications for collective action (in this case, to enable the poor to attend school) under a Rule of Reason. The Court of Appeals overturned the District Court's opinion against MIT, citing the failure of the District Court to properly apply the Rule of Reason.

Abstract:
New Keynesian models and some models of growth rely on market power for their results. This sole focus on market power as the source for certain macroeconomic phenomena is misguided both theoretically and empirically. New Keynesian multipliers are closely related to standard measures of deadweight loss used in the public finance literature. The theoretical analysis shows that a standard competitive model with taxes exactly reproduces the multipliers in the new Keynesian models, and the empirical evidence strongly suggests that taxes, not market power, will be the far more important influence on explaining short-run fluctuations in GNP. Theory and the empirical evidence suggest that the existence of intellectual property rights is likely to be a more important determinant of innovation than market power. Finally, the paper shows how models that incorporate the cost of market making, durability and dynamic policies, and timing based on the option value of resolving uncertainty can yield more valuable insights into macroeconomic phenomena than can models with market power.

Abstract:
No abstract is available for this paper.

Abstract:
Airport delays are increasingly significantly. These delays are largely attributable to increased congestion on runways and at gates as airlines increasingly use smaller but more frequently-departing passenger jets. This paper proposes reducing congestion by auctioning off takeoff and landing 'slots' at airports. These auctions would have several benefits: they would redistribute airport facilities toward higher-valued uses, incentivize airlines to make more efficient use of airport capacity, and generate revenue to fund airport improvements and capacity expansion.

airport delays, congestion, proposed solutions, auctions, incentives, efficiency, FAA, market based system

Abstract:
No abstract is available for this paper.

Abstract:
This paper examines a model in which demand is uncertain and production must occur before demand is known for sure. By investing resources in information gathering activity, demand can be forecast. The paper investigates the relationship between the incentive to plan and market structure and conduct. Competition leads to too little planning, while monopoly leads to too high a price relative to the social optimum. A dominant firm with a competitive fringe turns out to be better than either pure competition or monopoly. One interesting result is that the optimal production strategy of the dominant firm is to produce even when the price is below marginal cost. Although such a production policy resembles that associated with "predatory pricing" (a practice which is thought to be socially undesirable), society would be harmed by a prohibition of such a policy.

Abstract:
To say that the price of some good is inflexible over time has little meaning if the "good" is changing over time. In this paper we concentrate on delivery lags as being the only dimension other than price that varies. We show how one can predict the relative importance of price and delivery lag fluctuations as equilibrating mechanisms. The complications of the theory as well as the surprising results underscore the complexity of predicting price behavior when the characteristics of the good are endogenous. The empirical results provide strong support for the theory that delivery lags are an important influence on market behavior and therefore that an understanding of their influence is crucial in predicting how markets will respond to supply and demand shocks.

Abstract:
In response to the standardless approach used in LePage's v. 3M, the Antitrust Modernization Commission (AMC) and others advocate using a discount allocation approach to assess whether bundled loyalty discounts violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act. This approach treats loyalty discounts like predatory pricing. The analogy to predatory pricing is flawed. We propose an alternative approach that focuses on the presence of significant scale economies. We use our approach to analyze LePage's, as well as the recent PeaceHealth decision.

Abstract:
We demonstrate that demand uncertainty can explain equilibrium product variety in the presence of sunk costs. Product variety is an efficient response to uncertainty because it reduces the expected costs associated with excess capacity. We find that within the firm's product line, the highest quality product has the highest profit margin but the lowest percentage margin, while the lowest quality product has the highest percentage margin but the lowest absolute margin. Both of these relationships are consistent with evidence available from marketing studies.

Abstract:
Should a price squeeze constitute anticompetitive conduct requiring investigation under the antitrust laws? A price squeeze occurs when a vertically integrated firm supplies an input to its downstream competitors at a price that generates a profit margin so low that the competitors exit the downstream market. I ask whether it is sensible to try to use antitrust laws to prevent such conduct or whether such an attempt would create more harm than benefit. The current case, linkLine Communications, Inc. v. SBC California, Inc., raises this exact question.

K21, L4, L42

Abstract:
This paper provides one of the few successful demonstrations of the efficiency of certain types of restrictions in the context of a joint venture. The joint venture we examine is the National Hockey League (NHL) in the 1980s, which was then composed of 21 separately owned teams. (It now has 30 teams.) The restriction we analyze is the NHL rule on franchise relocation. Before one can fully understand the effect of the restriction, one must understand the theory of how sports leagues operate and whether sports leagues have any market power that can be enhanced by such a restriction. After providing such a theory, we empirically test the effect of the NHL restriction on franchise relocation. Aside from data availability, the advantage of our time period is that television was then an unimportant source of revenue for the NHL. Thus we are able to isolate a particular externality arising from how the NHL finances teams.