Do Team-Specific Revenues Matter in Baseball’s Arbitration System?
According to baseball’s collective bargaining agreement, arbitrators may not consider team finances when rendering a decision. The author develops two theories to examine the setting of final offers. In the first theory, final offers are simply functions of the arbitral criteria and are, therefore, not a function of the revenue-generating capability of the team. In the second theory, the author argues that teams may trade some talented and, thus, high-priced arbitrationeligible players, resulting in an implicit premium embedded in the final offers. The empirical analysis suggests that there are no such premiums embedded in the final offers.
Volume (Year): 1 (2006)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.fitinfotech.com/|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.fitinfotech.com/IJSF/IJSFbackissueWVU.tpl|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jsf:intjsf:v:1:y:2006:i:3:p:162-173. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Victor Matheson)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.