After a thorough discussion of the qualifications and methodologies of the various experts proffered by plaintiffs and defendants, the Court concluded that “an antitrust violation, antitrust impact, and damages are common questions capable of being established through a common body of evidence.”

With respect to Antitrust Violations: “The agreements in the record offer direct, class-wide evidence of an antitrust violation. Indeed, in this case, the Ninth Circuit has already held that Plaintiffs’ allegations regarding the interlocking agreements plausibly allege an antitrust violation. The agreements will thus be sufficient to determine on a class-wide basis whether there exists an antitrust violation. That is, if the contracts match-up to the allegations, then there will be a violation applicable to the whole class.”

With respect to Antitrust Impact and Damages: “Dr. Zona has produced two admissible models that are designed to show class wide impact and damages stemming from Defendants’ restraints on NFL football telecasts. The Transaction and Viewership Model measures the amount that Sunday Ticket’s prices to class members would have fallen after the entry of additional providers of out-of-market telecasts. Specifically, Dr. Zona uses data of Sunday Ticket subscribers to model consumer preferences for various alternative packages of NFL games. He then uses his modeling of those preferences to estimate prices that would be charged under various competitive scenarios. His model shows significant price discounts of 44.6% to 53.4%. The Conjoint Model, using Butler’s survey data, also estimates prices in a competitive environment and shows a price reduction of 18.9%. The Court is satisfied that the models, especially the Transaction and Viewership Model, offers sufficient class-wide proof of antitrust impact. It can be relied on by each member of the class, and as previously discussed, because the Court does not accept Defendants’ challenges to the models, they are thus capable of sustaining a reasonable jury finding on the merits. Similarly, Dr. Rascher offers three admissible but-for worlds to show that impact and damages are capable of being proven on a class-wide basis: the College Football But-For World, the Non-Exclusivity But-For World, and the No-Pooling But-For World. What the Court finds most significant to the inquiry here is Dr. Rascher’s College Football But-For World and his use of the college football market as a yardstick. That simulated world shows that the twelve or so Sunday afternoon out-of-market NFL games currently available only through Sunday Ticket would likely be carried on the same available traditional television networks and basic cable networks that carry college football. And because there are relatively few NFL games compared to the number of college football games shown on Saturdays, all NFL telecasts would be expected to be available for consumers on those networks. As a result, Dr. Rascher calculates the supracompetitive overcharge to be, with market-wide adjustments, the amount each class member paid for Sunday Ticket.”


In re NFL’s Sunday Ticket Antitrust Lit., No.15-2668, 2023 WL 1813530, 2023 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 21752 (C.D.Cal. Feb. 7, 2023).