How do leagues defend franchise relocation rules that restrain movement of teams?

• A. They argue the rules protect the overall league product and protect individual owners from revenue losses when a competing team moves into their geographic area.
• B. They argue relocation rules are unnecessary.
• C. They argue the rules maximize competition among cities.
• D. They argue the rules have no legitimate rationale.

Answer: (A)

Leagues defend relocation rules by emphasizing that the league’s value rests on a stable, well-managed market structure. Limiting where teams can move helps protect the overall product the league sells—the quality and appeal of competition across all clubs—and preserves revenue streams for every owner. If a new or relocating team enters a market, it can siphon fans, sponsors, and media attention away from existing teams, reducing attendance, local sponsorship deals, and the value of national TV contracts. By requiring approval and restraining movement, the league aims to prevent such revenue disruptions and maintain balance and predictability for all franchises. That protective rationale is why this justification is the strongest.