Hey there,

If you read Monday’s All-Access edition, you’ll remember we were walking you through four potential business models for college sports. We talked about the “true free market” approach and the “competitive conference” approach in that edition, which you can read here if you missed out.

Today, we’re looking at two other potential college sports business models: the “labor union” approach, and the “player equity” approach. Both approaches are theoretically legal, but have some big holes too. Let’s get into it now.

…But you can’t unless you’re an All-Access subscriber! Don’t worry – we’ve got you covered. It’s really easy to sign up for NIL Wire All-Access, which gives you two additional stories a week, with deep-dive analysis like this. Just click here – you won’t regret it!

— Cole, Justin and Collin

Four (theoretically) legal business models for the future of college sports: Part Two

Alright, let’s recap: Last edition we went through the first two legal business models proposed in this academic paper. They were the “true free market approach” and the “competitive conference approach, respectively.

Both of those models were focused on maintaining market competition. The first considered that free market economics fundamentally produce what’s best for everyone – market rate is established naturally, through competition, and unnecessary oversight can be eliminated.

The second model tried to create competition within the conferences themselves. If conferences are able to offer various incentives to certain players, other conferences will have to offer better packages in order to recruit talent effectively. Hence, more free market competition. 

For the full breakdown of both models, you’ll need to click here. But that’s old news – let’s get into the other two legal models: the “Labor Union” model and the “Player Equity” model.

Become a paying subscriber of NIL Wire All-Access to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.

Already a paying subscriber? Sign In.