Marine ecosystem-based management (EBM) is globally acknowledged as the best practice to manage resources and mitigate multi-sector conflict in the multiple uses of ocean resources, yet EBM is not being implemented or executed at a level that is necessary to effect significant and positive changes in marine ecosystems. Furthermore, continuation of business-as-usual (BAU) approaches to dealing with ocean-uses and marine ecosystem impacts, instead of EBM, may mean missing out on significant ecological, social, and economic benefits. One way to advance beyond BAU approaches to managing marine ecosystems and their uses is establishing a solid business case for EBM. Here we present a business case for EBM with the goal of showing that EBM is not only ecologically preferable but also economically advantageous compared to BAU. We present four case studies with estimates of the value proposition for conducting BAU and EBM in these instances. Categorically EBM has a stronger business case than BAU. In all the cases, even given the caveats of the methodology and precision of the estimates, EBM was cheaper, more efficient, was better able to handle tradeoffs across ocean-use sectors, better accommodated non-economic and non-human commerce considerations, and provided more benefits. Conversely, BAU was costlier than EBM options. We trust that these reality-based, hypothetical examples at least broaden the discussion of moving towards EBM and assert that they provide evidence to further support the broader consideration and adoption of EBM, or at least should spark discussion as to why not.