f/k/a archives . . . real opinions & real haiku

An email from SportsEconomist Skip Sauer made me speculate on the purpose of the

NCAA in seeking to eliminate the NIT as a tournament rival.  Although a “not-for-profit”

entity, NCAA has a $6.2 billion, 11-year contract with CBS for television and marketing

rights to its tournament. (see our prior post)

 

  The folks who run nominally “non-profit” institutions (can you say “bar & guild“?) 

have the incentive to create rules and relationships among their members that will maximize

the income of all those members — especially when they convince themselves that they are

acting for a very good cause, such as education. [Adam Smith’s axiom certainly doesn’t have

an exception for non-profits.]  Using market power against potential or actual rival groups, or

eliminating them throughacquisition or entry barriers, is a very good way to maximize income. 

Of course, the NCAA’s leaders also have the normal human desire to increase their domain.

 

Also, responding to my post yesterday, Steve Bainbridge wrote:  

“I sort of vaguely recall such a time [when NIT was a vigorous competitor with the

NCAA], but if David’s point is that there ought to be some competition to be stifled

before one concludes that a merger is anit-competitive, I have to agree. Stick a fork

in the NIT; it’s done.” 

That’s a little cavalier, even from the perspective of a West Coaster with little empathy for fans in  “bballguysNF”

New York City.  The fact that the National Invitational Tournament has been reduced over the years —

thanks in great part to the actions and policies of the NCAA — to a mere David competing with tiny

stones against the NCAA Goliath makes a merger investigation even more important.  (See the

market concentration section of the DOJ/FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines; yes, Steve, I know

there were product and geographic market definitions questions in the case.)   Clearly, there is still

“some competition” between the two post-season tournaments (as the $40.6 million offer to buy

the NIT suggests), and removing NIT completely will not only extinguish the only current rival, it will

make the likelihood of a new entrant into the pre- or post-season basketball tournament arena

virtually zero.  

 

Of course, ending the litigation also keeps the court from assessing the legality of the NCAA’s

restrictive post-season rules for member schools.

 

“bBallGuysN” One thing we can all agree on:  There’s been too much prose

and not enough poetry at this website lately;  Overnight, Ed Markowski

supplied us all with more good haiku and senryu about his beloved game

of basketball and the humans who play it:

 

 

Manhattan

the shadow of a skyscraper falls across

the basketball court

 

 

 

 

Highway One

ten feet up the Sequoia

an orange hoop

 

 

 

 

long rebound

crossing mid-court

she crosses my mind

 

 

 

Indiana farm

one tractor

three hoops

 

calligraphy class

the point guard

pens a nike swoosh

 

 

ed markowski  – for more, see his Comments to

yesterday’s post.

 

 

on a related note:

 

 

game over

men turn to leave

the tv department

 

                                                        John Stevenson 

                                                             Upstate Dim Sum  (2004/I)