Oakland lacked standing to bring a price-fixing antitrust claim against Oakland Raiders and other NFL teams arising out of the Raiders’ move to Las Vegas. A finding of antitrust standing requires a balancing of the nature of the plaintiff’s alleged injury, the directness of the injury, the speculative measure of the harm, the risk of duplicative recovery, and the complexity in apportioning damages. Here, Oakland was priced out of the market and therefore was a non-purchaser. In addition, Oakland’s damages were highly speculative and would be exceedingly difficult to calculate. Oakland also failed to allege a group boycott since only the Raiders refused to deal with it.