Re: monopoly definition

[DonKelley@aol.com]

The Braves move did indeed involve litigation.  Bill Veeck, after a successful turnaround as owner of the Cleveland Indians, bought the St. Louis Browns in the early 50's.  The Browns were heavily in the red, so Veeck decided to sell Sportsman's Park in St. Louis to the Cardinals and move the Browns to Baltimore. Baltimore had been without a major league team since 1902, when the original Orioles moved to New York.  

Veeck never consulted with the owner of Baltimore's AAA team, or the owners of nearby AL teams in Washington and Philadelphia.  Amid threats of litigation, the AL blocked the move.

The next year Veeck had another idea: move to Milwaukee. He chose Milwaukee for two reasons: The Browns had been the Milwaukee Brewers in the first year of the American League - 1901. In addition, Veeck had owner a AAA team there prior to buying the Indians in the 1940's.

Boston Braves owner Lou Perini, who at this point also owned the AAA team in Milwaukee, sued the NL to block Veeck from moving.  His reasoning: Milwaukee was his market.  The NL appeared to be on the verge of agreeing, but Perini made sure by moving the Braves to Milwaukee on short notice.

Perini already had a contract to play at County Stadium.  He had to cut a last-minute deal to move his AAA team to Toledo.  I'm  not sure what happened with broadcast rights, but as noted in earlier posts, only a handful of games were televised.  Radio coverage was mostly home games, with Jim Britt handling play-by-play for both the Sox and Braves.

By contrast, there was plenty of warning about the Braves move to Atlanta.  The mayor of Atlanta leaked the rumor in March 1964 and the move was announced in October 1964.  Milwaukee officials filed suit to keep the Braves.  The NL ruling, in November 1964, stated that the Braves had to play in Milwaukee in 1965 but could go to Atlanta starting in 1966. 

We we as litigious in the 50's amd 60's as we are now?  Probably not, but we were leaning in that direction.