Gift article, no paywall.
The only thing embarrassing is his pretzel logic. He used some amazing mental gymnastics to make his point. There are fewer people watching the game because the game is shorter? Please. There are fewer people watching it because it’s an unwatchable product. He proves Mark Twain when he said “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics”.
The facts are the WNBA’s revenue is about $200 million and the NBA generates about $10.5 billion. If the WNBA wants their salaries to be the same percentage of revenue as the NBA, they would get a pay cut, not a pay raise. The WNBA also on average loses $10 Million/year and $40 million last year.
You want to pay the women more? Fine. Don’t be surprised if the league folds if they do. Personally, I won’t miss it.
14 Likes
I hate to say it, because I know how hard those ladies play, and how good they are, but it’s hard to justify higher salaries when the league isn’t even making a profit.
Why add to an already multi-million dollar deficit?
That doesn’t seem to make a lot of good economic sense.
7 Likes
I think they’ve mistaken the gratuitous ESPN coverage for actual popularity and income-generation.
If they want to get paid more, they’re free to go find some organization to pay them.
What’s actually embarrassing is acting like they’re somehow entitled to more just because.
10 Likes
I get the move with Caitlin Clark finally got them some ratings and attendance numbers so they have to strike while the iron is hot. It’s a bit embarrassing how they’re doing it for sure.
2 Likes
Who?
1 Like
The majority of the increased revenue should go to the NBA/ownership and not the players to offset for the years and years of losses. This is basic common sense and basic business…
The main leverage WNBA players have is to withhold services and delay NBA/ownership realizing the forthcoming increased revenue which is not insignificant leverage. WNBA players are also pushing the ‘big guy/little guy’ narrative to attempt to gain public support and additional leverage, although regarding this, their approach is quite abrasive and unpolished - yeah the sports media complex might back them but your common sports fan is not going to get behind them. I see mixed results on the leverage gain there. In the end the ownership/NBA will give in enough to get the players on the court so they can realize the increased revenue coming.
Total player salaries are currently in the range of $20M for the WNBA. The tv contract is going from $60M/year to $200M/year so there will be an extra $140M/year from tv revenue plus increased tickets and merch, etc… let’s round to $200M extra money in the WNBA world floating around. It has been well reported that the WBNA has operated at around a $40M/year loss so now they will operate at about ~$150M/year surplus.
Okay so the negotiation is about how that $150M surplus gets split. My guess is that something like 2/3 goes to ownership and 1/3 to players which takes them from $20M collective salary to $70M collective salary - look for about a 250% increase in players salaries. Current minimum salary is $60K and will jump to close to $200K. Top players currently make around $250K and will be flirting close to $1M after the CBA. In total players will be at $70M of about $250-350M in total revenue or something like 20-30% of total basketball related revenue which is somewhere between where they are now and most men’s leagues.
It will be a huge pay raise for them but they will still be unhappy because that is how they are wired collectively. I mean look how they are treating their cash cow Caitlin Clark. Let’s make no mistake here. The main reason they are going to get this massive bump is because of the Caitlin Clark effect and her coming into the WNBA right around CBA bargaining time.
A wild card in this is that I expect the ownership will want a longer season to further increase the total revenue coming their way. The player pay jump I described above is likely going to be the biggest percentage salary jump WNBA players ever see and thus will be the best time for ownership to push for and for WNBA players to accept a longer season psychologically. Do not be surprised if part of the agreement is that the season goes from 44 games to somewhere between 50 and 60 games. If players accept a longer season then that $70M player pool might go to say $80M which would be a 300% increase in player salaries. You’d would think that would shut their traps for a few years at least.
2 Likes
I hate to say this, but if Caitlin Clark wasn’t a white girl, I think she would have far more support amongst the league
Race adds some friction to all of this unfortunately
1 Like
She would also have more support if she’d drop the acting down a few notches. She must have grown up watching soccer or something.
1 Like
WNBA (and NCAA women’s bball) is being shoved down everyone’s throat by ESPN. Page landing articles and ticker scores ahead of more popular leagues. Mostly a media generated popularity. I have never watched a minute of play and can only name one player.
4 Likes
You can definitely tell when ESPN paid for something
4 Likes
I get your perspective, but this is really the only way women’s sports has any chance to get a fair shot at representation. It takes a boost even if artificial.
Otherwise, yes, men given they are naturally more athletic on average will always be the more entertaining product. Thus, women will never get a chance at showing that their product is worthwhile.
And women’s sports can be a valuable product, see women’s college basketball which gets great ratings. The difference is that the college fanbase has the alumnus connection to their universities, while WNBA hasn’t had a chance to scale like the NBA.
Women’s college sports has scale. WNBA does not.
Social progress always come at a cost, unfortunately. But once you get over the initial hump (cost), then the progress can hopefully turn into an actual market free of artificial intervention
ESPN broadcasts Cornhole. Literally.
Anyone whining about them ‘shoving the WNBA down our throats’…is an unadulterated idiot.
4 Likes
I don’t recall the cornhole celebrities whining that they don’t get paid enough, though. 
3 Likes
Why are college women basketball players making more from NIL than WMBA players
Are all of them doing that? Nope. And there are certainly men who make more in college NIL than they will professionally. So what?
That has nothing to do with whether they’re paid appropriately as professionals - different markets, different dynamics, different funding sources.
Best thing the WNBA players could do is sit back and let Clark make all of them more money. She is a potential crossover and breakout star, so try to extract maximum value from that. Even if it means a few folks get their feelings hurt.
1 Like
The WNBA needs to market Caitlin Clark like how the NBA did Larry Bird in the 1980s.
They just need to find a villain for her or another Magic Johnson to spice up a rivalry.
1 Like
That was supposed to be Reese, problem is she’s not good enough
2 Likes
I can’t sit through an entire NBA game. For me it’s like fishing shows and Laverne and Shirley reruns. Good for about five minutes.
3 Likes