OPINION Should WNBA Players Be Paid More?

Goldie

Goldie

Sounds like one of them good problems
Site Owner
520484912_1259761015595980_6890283913571639762_n.jpg



 
Rob Parker sounds stupid. That wouldn't make any sense at all and would do far more harm than good. The women should get more than 9%. Especially as the values of these teams and revenue has increased. Teams worth hundreds of millions now. They can get more than 9%
 
Yes.

Folks do zero research on this topic and think WNBA players are demanding the same pay as NBA players. That's not the case. They are demanding similar percentages.

For example, the NBA got almost 80 billion dollars in media deals for 11 years. NBA players get 50% of that, which is 40 billion. The numbers are more depending on all the other revenue, but you get the idea.

The WNBA just signed a 2.1 billion dollar media deal for close to a decade. Right now they only get 9% of that. They want that to be closer to 50%.

That doesn't mean they get the same number as NBA players. Theyre not asking for half of 80 billion. They're asking for half of 2.1 billion.

And before folks say the WNBA is losing money. That's bullshit. The NBA claims teams are losing money any time the new CBA talks come around. Same with MLB, NFL, etc. if the WNBA was really losing money, billionaires wouldn't be fighting to buy teams. There have been 6 expansion teams added to the WNBA since 2020. Expansion fees are like $250 million this year. You telling me billionaires keep buying teams for millions knowing they're losing money? Nah they just cooking books.

Long ass post to say, yes. Get these ladies as close to 50% revenue sharing as possible.
 
The WNBA is about to get a big contract and they are expected to be profitable. Yes, the players should get more than a 9% share of the revenue. I don't know if it should be 50% though. They should eventually get to that point, but right now the league might be better off with investing more of the revenue into growing the game. It's not like the players in the NBA started out with a 50% revenue split. They had to work towards that even after the league became profitable.
 
Yeah, you have to be an idiot to think the owners and executives aren't making hand over fist

It's women dominated and already outwardly presented as having low profitability... since when do companies care about fair pay, and if the company does starts with fair payment it always errs on the side of corporate profits after all things said and done

I wouldn't bet anything significant that they're getting paid equal ratios as NBA players are... Notice I said ratios ... And ratios of owner and executive to players... Not actual pay
 
AZTG said:
Yes.

Folks do zero research on this topic and think WNBA players are demanding the same pay as NBA players. That's not the case. They are demanding similar percentages.

For example, the NBA got almost 80 billion dollars in media deals for 11 years. NBA players get 50% of that, which is 40 billion. The numbers are more depending on all the other revenue, but you get the idea.

The WNBA just signed a 2.1 billion dollar media deal for close to a decade. Right now they only get 9% of that. They want that to be closer to 50%.

That doesn't mean they get the same number as NBA players. Theyre not asking for half of 80 billion. They're asking for half of 2.1 billion.

And before folks say the WNBA is losing money. That's bullshit. The NBA claims teams are losing money any time the new CBA talks come around. Same with MLB, NFL, etc. if the WNBA was really losing money, billionaires wouldn't be fighting to buy teams. There have been 6 expansion teams added to the WNBA since 2020. Expansion fees are like $250 million this year. You telling me billionaires keep buying teams for millions knowing they're losing money? Nah they just cooking books.

Long ass post to say, yes. Get these ladies as close to 50% revenue sharing as possible.
Click to expand...

Mod_Ro said:
“oPerATinG at A loSS”


So tired of hearing that
Click to expand...
This is what AI says
Despite the immense popularity and revenue growth fueled by Caitlin Clark and the 2024 rookie class, the WNBA is reportedly still operating at a loss.

Here's a closer look at the situation:
  • Growing Revenue, Increased Losses: While the WNBA's revenue has increased significantly, with some reports stating it doubled to around $200 million in 2023, the league is still expected to lose money in 2024. Sources have projected a loss of around $50 million for the year. This is a substantial increase from the average annual losses of about $10 million that the league had reported in previous years.

  • Strategic Investments: The increased losses can be attributed in part to the league's strategic investments in growth. A major new expense is the full-time charter flight program for players, a move that addressed a long-standing request from athletes but also added significant costs. These investments are seen as a way to improve the product and infrastructure of the league for long-term growth and profitability.

  • Long-Term Outlook: The financial narrative is a complex one. On one hand, the league is losing money on a year-to-year basis. On the other hand, the long-term value of the league is skyrocketing. Caitlin Clark's impact is estimated to have contributed a staggering amount of economic activity to the WNBA, with some projections for her economic impact in 2025 reaching nearly $1 billion. The league is also on the verge of a new media rights deal that is expected to be worth significantly more than its current one, and the valuation of franchises is at an all-time high. Investors are buying into the league at record prices, suggesting they believe the current losses are a temporary phase on the path to significant future profits.
 
BlackRain said:
The NBA operated at a loss for decades and player wages still rose. That and the "they lose 50 million a year" with no proof gotta be the most overused and least understood arguments
Click to expand...

I think you're oversimplifying too. The NBA has had ups and downs. There were periods where it operated at a loss but even in those periods they were making moves to make turn the course (e.g., acquiring the ABA). The WNBA has always been a charity case. The NBA and WNBA owners have tried to invest and make moves to make it more profitable, but after 25 years of it not producing, I think they were resigned to just support it and cut the losses. Under those circumstances it wasn't unreasonable for them not to be paying the women players a ton of money, and the revenue split discussion didn't even make sense when the teams were not making any profit.

Now things are different and the players should benefit, but let's not start pushing an overcorrected narrative and act like the players were always correct in their demands. They didn't just start requesting revenue sharing equal to the men. They've been saying they deserved that even before the league got the big contract.
 
RandomOne said:
This is what AI says
Despite the immense popularity and revenue growth fueled by Caitlin Clark and the 2024 rookie class, the WNBA is reportedly still operating at a loss.

Here's a closer look at the situation:
  • Growing Revenue, Increased Losses: While the WNBA's revenue has increased significantly, with some reports stating it doubled to around $200 million in 2023, the league is still expected to lose money in 2024. Sources have projected a loss of around $50 million for the year. This is a substantial increase from the average annual losses of about $10 million that the league had reported in previous years.

  • Strategic Investments: The increased losses can be attributed in part to the league's strategic investments in growth. A major new expense is the full-time charter flight program for players, a move that addressed a long-standing request from athletes but also added significant costs. These investments are seen as a way to improve the product and infrastructure of the league for long-term growth and profitability.

  • Long-Term Outlook: The financial narrative is a complex one. On one hand, the league is losing money on a year-to-year basis. On the other hand, the long-term value of the league is skyrocketing. Caitlin Clark's impact is estimated to have contributed a staggering amount of economic activity to the WNBA, with some projections for her economic impact in 2025 reaching nearly $1 billion. The league is also on the verge of a new media rights deal that is expected to be worth significantly more than its current one, and the valuation of franchises is at an all-time high. Investors are buying into the league at record prices, suggesting they believe the current losses are a temporary phase on the path to significant future profits.
Click to expand...

That's what I mean by cooking the books. AI is just regurgitating what the data from the league that doesn't want to pay the women a fair share is saying.

Go back to AI and ask what if an owner has other businesses and has to pay $70 million dollars in taxes. What does the $50 million dollar loss on their WNBA team impact that?

If your "loss" here means you're not paying taxes for the same amount on your year end, then it's not a real loss. This means you can keep taking the money and investing in "growth" and lose money but not really lose a $1 out your pockets.

Rememebr last year Balmer barely paid taxes cause the Clippers lost millions upon millions. The same clippers he's just build a billion dollar stadium for. And that he could sell for a 3 billion dollar profit.

Also ask AI what happens if your team loses 50 mil a year but it's worth goes up $60 mil a year. You make up all your yearly losses when you sell and make a $10 per year profit.

That's what it means to cook the books.

Pay the ladies.
 
Last edited:
The Lonious Monk said:
I think you're oversimplifying too. The NBA has had ups and downs. There were periods where it operated at a loss but even in those periods they were making moves to make turn the course (e.g., acquiring the ABA). The WNBA has always been a charity case. The NBA and WNBA owners have tried to invest and make moves to make it more profitable, but after 25 years of it not producing, I think they were resigned to just support it and cut the losses. Under those circumstances it wasn't unreasonable for them not to be paying the women players a ton of money, and the revenue split discussion didn't even make sense when the teams were not making any profit.

Now things are different and the players should benefit, but let's not start pushing an overcorrected narrative and act like the players were always correct in their demands. They didn't just start requesting revenue sharing equal to the men. They've been saying they deserved that even before the league got the big contract.
Click to expand...

There's no overcorrected narrative in anything I said. It's a fact that before the 80s and Magic and Bird came along the NBA was not bringing in huge profits. The games were on tape delay, it was known as a league for coke addicts. The NBA was in serious trouble yet the percentage of what players made still rose. That's the comparison being made. That if the argument is "it's not making money to justify an increase then how did the NBA manage to pay players more white still operating at a loss for years" isn't an unfair question in response.

People have been using the same figures with no proof everytime this topic comes up. Thats what I was commenting on. People using figures with no actual proof behind them. Just a random number that became part of the lore of the WNBA not being worth anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top