Most articles on sports economics presume the well-known Nash equilibrium concept. In this article, however, we apply evolutionary game theory in a sports-contest model. If clubs follow evolutionarily stable strategies (ESS), then ESS generate greater investments and smaller profits than predicted by Nash’s strategies, independent of whether a club is win-maximizing or profit-maximizing. Overdissipation of the rent is possible for Nash strategies and for ESS.
AtkinsonS.StanleyL.TschirhartJ. (1988). Revenue sharing as an incentive in an agency problem: An example from the national football league. Rand Journal of Economics, 19, 27–43.
Deloitte (2009). Annual review of football finance. Sports Business Group at Deloitte, Manchester, UK.
4.
DietlH.FranckE. (2000). Effizienzprobleme in Sportligen mit Gewinnmaximierenden Kapitalgesellschaften - eine Modelltheoretische Untersuchung. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 70, 1157–1175.
5.
DietlH.FranckE.LangM. (2008). Overinvestment in team sports leagues: A contest theory model. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 55, 353–368.
6.
DietlH.GrossmannM.LangM. (2011). Competitive balance and revenue sharing in sports leagues with utility-maximizing teams. Journal of Sports Economics, 12, 284–308.
7.
Garcia-del BarrioP.SzymanskiS. (2009). Goal! profit maximization and win maximization in football leagues. Review of Industrial Organization, 34, 45–68.
8.
GrossmannM.DietlH. (2009). Investment behaviour in a two period contest model. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 165, 401–417.
9.
GrossmannM.DietlH.TrinknerU. (2008). The effect of marginal cost elasticity on competitive balance. Journal of Sports Economics, 9, 339–350.
10.
HehenkampB.LeiningerW.PossajennikovA. (2004). Evolutionary equilibrium in Tullock contests: Spite and overdissipation. European Journal of Political Economy, 20, 1045–1057.
11.
KésenneS. (1996). League management in professional team sports with win maximizing clubs. European Journal for Sports Management, 2, 14–22.
12.
KésenneS. (2000). Revenue sharing and competitive balance in professional team sports. Journal of Sports Economics, 1, 56–65.
13.
KésenneS. (2006). The win maximization model reconsidered. Journal of Sports Economics, 7, 416–427.
14.
LangM.GrossmannM.TheilerP. (2011). The sugar daddy’s game: How wealthy investors change competition in professional team sports. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 167, 557–577.
15.
LeiningerW. (2003). On evolutionarily stable behavior in contests. Economics of Governance, 4, 177–186.
16.
NealeW. (1964). The peculiar economics of professional sports: A contribution to the theory of the firm in sporting competition and in market competition. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 78, 1–14.
17.
RottenbergS. (1956). The baseball players’ labor market. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 242–258.
18.
SchafferM. (1988). Evolutionarily stable strategies for a finite population and a variable contest size. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 132, 469–478.
19.
SchafferM. (1989). Are profit-maximisers the best survivors? A Darwinian model of economic natural selection. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 12, 29–45.
SmithJ. (1974). The theory of games and the evolution of animal conflicts. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 47, 209–221.
22.
SmithJ. (1982). Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
23.
SmithJ.PriceG. (1973). The logic of animal conflict. Nature, 246, 15–18.
24.
SzymanskiS. (2003). The economic design of sporting contests. Journal of Economic Literature, 41, 1137–1187.
25.
SzymanskiS.KésenneS. (2004). Competitive balance and gate revenue sharing in team sports. Journal of Industrial Economics, 52, 165–177.
26.
TullockG. (1980). Effcient rent-seeking. In BuchananJ.TollisonR.TullockG. (eds.), Toward a theory of rent seeking society (pp. 97–112). Austin, TX: University Press.
27.
WhitneyJ. (1993). Bidding till bankrupt: Destructive competition in professional team sports. Economic Inquiry, 31, 100–115.
