The AFL has come a long way from its heyday of being a mere “team” in the 1950s.
Since then, the league has evolved into an organization with a world-class fan base, an elite team, a team with a strong financial future and a team that has become one of the league’s most recognizable brands.
It is now one of its biggest and most profitable corporations.
And its business model, which includes a complex structure of contracts and revenue sharing, has been the subject of intense debate for decades.
So why are we paying attention now?
The answer is simple: Monopoly economics.
The concept of the “monopoly” is an old one.
It comes from the Latin word for “ownership,” and it describes a situation in which one person owns something and another uses it for his own advantage.
If you’re an owner of a piece of land, the first thing you want to do is get rid of it.
If someone else owns it, you want him to take it.
The “monopolists” in sports are the “owners,” or the people who have control over the game.
The term itself has been around for hundreds of years, and it has many different definitions.
But one definition is that a monopoly is a “monoculture.”
In sports, a monopoly in which a single person has control over a certain amount of money.
For example, if an owner has the rights to sell a football and you have the rights, the owners can only sell a limited number of tickets to a game, while the other people who bought tickets can only buy the same number.
It can also be a “competitor” who is the primary supplier of goods or services.
So, a monopolist is a person who has a monopoly over something.
The problem with a monopoly, as we saw earlier, is that it gives the owner too much power over his products or services, which means he can get rid off competitors and use the money to improve his business.
In fact, if you can’t use the monopolist’s money to make better products or serve customers, you can usually take away the monopoly.
The most common examples of monopoly economics are in sports, with the NFL being the most prominent example.
But there are other examples.
In baseball, the players union controls the salary of players, and the players can’t be traded or traded for money.
In basketball, the ownership of the franchise is split among the players, but the team is not allowed to compete with any other team in the league.
In hockey, the NHL is owned by the league, but there are many teams in the NHL.
In football, the owner owns the players and they are not allowed, for example, to play for free.
In soccer, there is the ownership and the fans, and they cannot be traded for the money.
There is also the problem of whether or not the league can survive without the “rights” of the owners.
So how can we fight the monopoly?
Well, the NFL and the NFL Players Association are not the only players’ union to have fought monopoly economics.
Many others are fighting the problem.
The AFL, for instance, has had several attempts to negotiate a deal with the owners of the Oakland Raiders that would have required them to sell their share of the team, but they failed because the owners wanted to keep the team and use it to keep players happy.
The NFL is a different story.
The league has always been a business in a market economy.
And while the owners may not be able to get rid out of their monopoly with the threat of legal action, they can force their way in with their own money.
So when the NFL came to the bargaining table with the Raiders in 2006, it brought with it an array of tactics.
It tried to get the Raiders to agree to buy out its share of their team, to make it appear that the Raiders would be a better financial success than the league was, to use the leverage of the Raiders’ public relations team to make their owners seem less financially successful, and to try to keep their owners happy by forcing them to spend more money to try and win more games.
Those tactics have not worked.
The Raiders have continued to win games, and in fact, they have won more games than any other NFL team.
But the owners have made it clear that they don’t want to pay a price to win.
The owners have also tried to convince the league that the owners want the Raiders out of Oakland, and have tried to pressure the owners to move the team from Oakland.
The players and the owners are united in their opposition to the owners’ monopoly.
So now, in a bid to win the battle over the Raiders, the two sides are going to have to come to an agreement.
The way that that deal is going to work, though, is not all that obvious.
The first thing that is going be discussed is whether or the owners agree