By: Hannah Gracedel

For decades, Varsity Spirit (“Varsity”) has been the undisputed champion of competitive cheerleading. They outfit teams, run camps, and, most importantly, control the biggest competitions in the industry. But while cheerleaders are trained to execute flawless routines, Varsity’s business decisions have drawn the attention of those who argue that its grip on the cheerleading world might be less about fair cheerleading competitions and more about unfairly dominating the competitive cheerleading market. Two recent class action suits, one in 2023 and another in 2024, claim that Varsity gained and maintained significant control of every aspect of the competitive genre, “All Star Cheer” through its anticompetitive practices. Both suits resulted in major settlements amounting to $126 million total.

What is All Star Cheerleading

Cheerleading has grown significantly since its inception in 1882, with an estimated 3.5 million athletes competing globally. While many Americans might be familiar with cheerleading, some might be surprised to learn about a subdivision called All Star Cheer. All Star Cheer focuses primarily on competition, whereas traditional school cheerleading involves crowd engagement, school spirit activities, as well as the option to compete. All Star teams are most often organized by private gyms, which form the teams based on skill and age level. At competitions, All Star Cheer teams perform a two and half minute routine composed of tumbling, stunting, pyramids, dance, and cheer segments. All Star Cheer is a notoriously expensive sport, where a full season can cost athletes around $8,000-$10,000 due to gym fees, uniform costs, travel expenses, competition fees, etc.

Who is Varsity Spirit

Varsity Spirit was founded in 1974 by Jeff Webb and started as a cheerleading camp company. The company later began manufacturing apparel for cheerleading teams, organizing competitions, and operating summer training camps. Today, Varsity runs the biggest and most prestigious cheerleading competitions and almost every single All Star Cheer competition as well. Varsity gained its dominant 90% share of the cheer competition market primarily by acquiring smaller competitors, including Jam Brands in 2015, Spirit Celebrations in 2016–2017, and Epic Brands in 2018. Essentially, if you are a competitive cheerleader, almost every competition you compete in is controlled by Varsity.

Antitrust Law

Varsity’s dominance in the competitive cheerleading industry has raised antitrust concerns. Antitrust law is about keeping the playing field fair by preventing businesses from using their power to stifle competition. Regulations like the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Act prohibit companies from monopolizing markets or using unfair practices, such as price-fixing, bid-rigging, or exclusive contracts, to restrict competition. The purpose of these laws is to safeguard consumers and other businesses from being coerced into bad agreements due to the excessive market power of a single company. However, not all monopolies are illegal. A company can gain dominance or a monopoly fairly by offering the best products or services at the best price, and that’s just healthy competition. But when a company reaches the top by stifling competition rather than fostering it, antitrust law will step in.

The Class Action Settlements

In March 2023, Varsity Brands agreed to pay $43.5 million to resolve allegations that it abused its market dominance to artificially inflate prices for private gyms and spectators. This action was brought by direct purchasers, which are those who paid registration and associated fees directly to Varsity to participate in Varsity competitions. Two markets were identified where Varsity exercised its monopoly power: the “competition” market and the “cheer apparel” market. The plaintiffs alleged that Varsity dominated 80% of the All Star cheerleading competition market and 90% of the All Star apparel market through a series of “exclusionary schemes.”

The alleged “exclusionary schemes” were the exclusionary contracts offered to All Star Gyms that were incentivized by the promise of rebates. A rebate is a partial refund given to a buyer after a purchase, which is different from a discount where the price reduction is applied at the time of purchase. The process to receive a rebate typically involves customers paying full price for an item and later submitting proof of purchase to the retailer, who then sends the customer the refund in the form of cash or future discounts on products. 

Varsity offered two rebate programs, the Network Agreement and the Family Plan. The Network Agreement, offered to large prestigious gyms widely known at their competitions, required a commitment to attending at least 5 of Varsity’s All Star Competitions and spending at least $30,000 per year on registration fees. Once gyms met this threshold, they earned increasing rebates for every dollar spent beyond it, creating a strong financial incentive to stay within the Varsity system. For smaller gyms that could not meet the spending threshold, Varsity offered a modified version called the Family Plan, which required attendance at 6 Varsity competitions in order to start receiving rebates. The rebates here were in the form of “Varsity Fashion Dollars,” which could only be used on varsity apparel purchases.

Because gyms and their teams can only attend a limited number of competitions each season, these agreements strongly incentivized All Star gyms to participate in Varsity events and purchase Varsity apparel exclusively. Attending a non-Varsity competition meant forfeiting the chance to earn higher rebates, which teams could not afford to do, when that money could then be used on Varsity competition uniforms. Once gyms were locked into Varsity’s exploitative ecosystem, Varsity was able to inflate its prices, thus possibly furthering demand for their rebate programs.

In May 2024, Varsity Spirit agreed to an $82.5 million settlement to resolve another class-action lawsuit. Unlike the 2023 case, this lawsuit was brought on behalf of indirect purchasers – those who paid competition registration fees, camp fees, or bought apparel through a gym or school. The lawsuit covered all the same issues as the previous, such as unlawful acquisitions of rivals, anticompetitive exclusive dealing agreements, and Varsity overcharging consumers.

In addition to the monetary settlements, Varsity agreed to end any rebate or discount program related to their cheer competitions.

Conclusion

What makes Varsity’s antitrust issues particularly interesting is how long these practices went unnoticed. Unlike tech monopolies or pharmaceutical price-fixing, competitive cheerleading is a relatively niche industry that does not draw much regulatory attention. But the consequence of Varsity’s practices going unchecked for so long has driven many working-class participants out of the sport simply because it is no longer affordable. Although both recent cases settled before reaching trial, they highlight how antitrust law can play a crucial role in curbing corporate abuses in power, ultimately safeguarding consumers and promoting fair competition for businesses.