The Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is a disaster of major proportions. The commercial and natural resources damages that will arise from the spill may ultimately be similarly significant. The Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 is often compared as the closest, if imperfect, historical example of how the Gulf spill will be treated. After the Exxon Valdez spill, fishermen claimed pure economic damages related to alleged depression of seafood prices in addition to losses from forgone catch in closed fisheries. These types of pure economic losses are allowed under the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 and are likely to be among those at issue in the Deepwater Horizon spill. To quantify such claims, it will be necessary to estimate the seafood prices that would have prevailed if the spill had not occurred. A study prepared for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Liability Fund after the Exxon Valdez spill undertook a comprehensive, multi-model estimation of price effects for 12 species of seafood in several fisheries at different levels of production. It based the estimation of price effects on the fundamental supply and demand forces that determine prices of Alaska seafood. This modeling approach could serve as a template for the pure economic losses arising from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.