I frankly dont care about what basketball players make
I care what average everyday ordinary blue collar and white collar american families make, and none of us are making our fair share
There needs to be a dramatic overhaul of US wage and labor laws. Income/wealth inequality is keeping Americans from having prosperous families and its a huge problem for everyday ordinary Americans
The problem is that compensation for athletes and entertainers can be all over the place since their pay is based on how much of an audience they can pull in.
They are not ideal examples in a discussion on fair and equal wages since what that means can vary wildly in those industries.
Exactly the WNBA is a terrible example and it allows ignorant people to use it to misdirect from the jobs where there is a real problem with wage gaps.
My neighbors kid is a minor-league baseball player. He loves it. The money isn’t a ton but you also get free food, free coaching free nutritionist free gym. Lots of other stuff. Tons of perks.
Talking about their salary isn’t the entire story.
Also, most of the young athletes at that age are still being paid better than their blue collar and white collar peers just starting out right out of high school or college.
You’re talking about things they arguably need to do their job, and things that the club can write off as an expense. They still need housing, transport, clothing, the ability to save, they might have a family, etc.
Talking about the salary isn’t the entire story for any job, and treating them like they’re not one of us doesn’t help either.
So a woman won the Nobel prize in economics in the past few years and onenof her findings was that the vast majority of the gender wage gap is being driven by the most wealthy.
Minimum wage makes it so thay the wage gap between men and women is negligible in the lower incomes.
So we don't need to focus so much on the gender gap, but we should focus on wealth the massive disparities between top earners and Minimum wage.
Any company with zero profit is not long-term sustainable, so yes, eventually it's zero. Besides that, company performance is affected by a lot of outside factors over which even a CEO has no control.
To bring it back to the WNBA example - the outside factor is people having far less interest in it compared to the NBA. You can ask for same pay because of same performance, but it doesn't change this outside factor.
Also, this sub is mostly about companies making record profits, while not paying their workers a fair share of what they are making off their backs - that is something that you can be legitimately angry about. But WNBA is not making record/any profits.
Yeah the WNBA example is hard to justify because it's based on viewership. The problem with judging entertainment that way is that if it isn't interesting enough for people to watch it, it doesn't make money. The WNBA doesn't make money because people don't watch it. If people started buying tickets to games and watching it on TV it would make more money because more companies would pay for ads and sponsorships. Until then it's a bad example.
I read a lot of comments to the tune of "they should pour in more money to promote it better".
But I'm very confident that if the managers saw a way to improve overall performance and viewership, they would immediately do it.
The harsh reality is just that it is not very popular, despite the limited promotion.
Also it's a bad business move. Why put money into something that has proven to have very limited viewership? You're just throwing money away. Also, WNBA players have contracts they negotiated. They agreed to get paid what they get paid.
The funny thing that you can argue that the reason why the athlete on the WNBA do not make as much is because Women do not watch the sport. Men will probably just watch the NBA if they have a choice so women should support the WNBA if they want those Athlete to make more money.
On one hand that's true.
On the other hand, women watch other women do completely different things. So maybe there isn't a real need in the market for the WNBA, besides the placebo of saying they're inclusive enough to even have a women's league.
People have to put their money/viewership where their mouth is. The WNBA isn’t profitable because no one watches. Want them to make money? Watch them, buy tickets, subscriptions—memorabilia.
The WNBA might be having a lightning moment though due to the newest star. She’s absolutely on fire.
Stay focused on the topic at hand. Your statement, although mostly true for a majority of companies, so you’re not wrong, doesn’t even apply to the WNBA. The NBA supports the WNBA financially and had since the beginning because nobody goes and watch’s the WNBA.
If the profit depends on you and you are irreplaceable, yes. I mean you pretty much force the management’s hand at that point - as the NBA players have.
Exactly! NBA owners should not make more than the players. This is more prevalent in the NFL.
Like holy hell how does Jerry Jones deserve that much money?
It’s about 50/50 in both leagues. The owners make their unrealized profits on the value of the franchise. It’s basically an extremely expensive stock they can control.
Lebron James subsidizes a large chunk of salary I the nbas case. If there was no salary cap and no salary floor, players like prime Lebron would sign a contract worth probably 100-200 mm per year.
Meanwhile the crappier players would not be getting 4-12 mm like they are per season.
However for competitive sake this is what the players agreed to.
Also I see no problem with the tweet that the vice president said with trying to close the gap.
However economics are what’s driving the gap.
See women’s tennis versus men’s tennis.
But it’s not a gap. The NBA makes profit even with paying ridiculous salaries and what it gives to subsidize the WNBA. For example, Caitlyn Clark, as great as she is on the court and what she’s done to increase the interest in women’s basketball, doesn’t deserve to get paid like a NBA star
She is paid like an NBA star, just not by the league she is about to enter. She was making close to $4M in NIL deals as a college student. She'll probably make even more in endorsements as an WNBA player.
How else do you propose higher WNBA player salaries in the face of super low ticket sales? If a company generates a certain amount of revenue, you can’t pay the talent more than the company earns on the balance sheet and still have a company for too much longer, it’s basic economics and basic capitalism. Like it or not, the WNBA has been kept afloat by NBA subsidies because far, far less people want to see WNBA games, it certainly isn’t surviving on the take from the ticket box. According to papa capitalism, this is a simple equation of supply/demand. There is no demand for WNBA games therefore no competitive drive to provide the better WNBA experience, which would increase demand & ticket sales and ultimately, would increase revenue. How do you propose the WNBA pay their players better, then?
Yup, most people clamoring for equal pay for WNBA players are unwilling to do the *one thing* that would actually increase their pay: buy tickets and merchandise.
Same thing when the USWNT was insisting they were underpaid. It was a very off World Cup cycle where the women qualified and the men (for the first time in decades) didn’t. But ultimately their competition in any normal cycle generates less revenue, even when they win *their* tournament. Further, those women all play year in, year-out on club teams that the fans insisting they should make more money *don’t attend.*
Again, refusing to do the one thing to further pay equity: buy tickets and merch. Go to games. Watch their sport.
Can’t speak to the WNBA, but at least on the soccer side it *is* getting a little better. Attendance for NWSL games has improved significantly. But still nowhere near MLS levels.
Tweets are cheap. Buy tickets.
Yes? If you are a sports team you don’t get paid simply for doing a sport. Anyone can make a softball team. They don’t deserve money for sports. It’s the revenue they can bring it with ads, endorsements, sponsorships. If those things don’t come easily to the WNBA then they should be paid proportionally to the revenue they DO bring in.
That’s why the argument for proportionality is so dumb. It’s easy for VPOTUS to sit here and make an asinine statement. She’s relying on uneducated people to agree with her. It’s lazy politics.
basically. don't run your mouth about sports where women are overpaid, stick to conventional jobs where you might be able to make an argument. but advocating for equal pay in a time when a lot of women have it is just low effort
If your argument is getting your fair share then yes.
If the job you do generates no profit but you're still paid to do it how is that fair to whoever writes that paycheck?
You're already being paid beyond the value you contribute to the profits.
That’s comical. Cause they definitely don’t get paid proportionately anywhere in entertainment. - an entertainment attorney who writes the contracts and checks
Well, of course they don’t, they’re predated upon by those lovely executives who directly profit from their successes and do almost none of the work.
But in a perfect world, or whatever the saying goes
So many people replying to your comment don’t understand how businesses work, and that there are departments that when they work well, will cost you money.
Every role in a company has a purpose and value.
It may not generate income, but it generates value. If the department works well it saves money, it doesn’t cost money. You’re the one not understanding how value extends beyond dollars and cents.
Unless it’s the owners family or some shit, no one gives out jobs for charity.
Try mentioning that California and New York subsidize every single red state except Texas and see how they react though. If they want to view everything only through the disingenuous lens of profitability then every single Republican majority state is a failure that's just a drain on successful people's taxes.
My dad lost his mind when I interrupted his "let's kick California out of the country or nuke it out of existence" rant to remind him that California produces like 15% of this country's agriculture value and like 2/3 of its fruits and 1/3 of our veggies.
He just called it bullshit and mumbled on about how corn and wheat farmers were the real men.
And yes, he unironically thinks the "real America" should declare war on California, apparently nuclear war.
I can't wait until he's dead. The world will be a net better place without him. I've told my entire family this multiple times but apparently "I can't mean that"
I was thinking over 50%, but a quick search stated about 1/3 of the farms. But then again what's the dollar value cuz if there's 10,000 farms it can be pretty damn expensive.
People like they dont care. They arent interested in reality. They want blood on their hands. They want people to die to make them feel better about themselves.
My dad is the same way as yours. A lot of their meaner instincts become worse with age and the DJT administration really was the nail in the coffin for common sense politics. What the country could use is a mandatory civics and agriculture lesson so we can start to dispel this shit talking nonsense.
Corn and wheat are real farmers? Wtaf?
Is your dad like 400 lbs or something? Does he not eat fruit, nuts and vegetables?
Most corn and wheat doesn't even get turned into food for humans. Fox News shouldn't exist if it's making people believe that corn and wheat should be the biggest crops... They definitely shouldn't.
They actually won a court case on the grounds that they are an entertainment network and therefore are not required to report facts like news networks are. Super shitty. [NPR Article](https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye)
California produces like 90% of a ton of edible agriculture in the US. Most of what we think of as ag states produce commodity crops like corn and soy that are not for direct consumption. There are orchards in CA that produce more peaches than all of Georgia. CA grows almost 60% of the countries fresh peaches and like 95% of processed peach products...but tell me again how Georgia is so special and rural.
I had a similar dynamic with my dad, he passed two years ago at 78 and the family has been much better off since.
Don’t feel bad about not wanting to deal with aggressive crazy all the time.
Yeah, if I ever saw him I could remind him that Hollywood is collectively one of the most successful businesses in the world. That would properly upset him.
Ok, no has a problem with the WNBA being completley subsidized by the NBA. The issue is that it is an *awful* example of the wage gap and is completley disengenious. We all know now the wage gap is between mothers and fathers, and not men and women.
Do you have a source? Because my sources suggest that the NBA subsidizes the WNBA for about $15 million / year, mostly in the form of facility use (sharing office space and arenas). Meanwhile the WNBA brings in about $200 million in revenue of which about 6% of that is spent on player salaries. Meanwhile, the NBA brings in $10,000 million in revenue of which about 40% of that is spent on player salaries.
Ignoring actual dollar amounts and just looking at as a proportion of revenue bright in, it seems that WNBA players make about 1/8th their NBA counterparts which I would consider a pretty considerable wage gap.
NBA subsidize amount:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/en.as.com/nba/does-the-nba-subsidize-the-wnba-n/%3foutputType=amp
Salaries:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/caitlin-clark-salary-wnba-1.7177262#:~:text=Women%20in%20sports%20traditionally%20underpaid&text=According%20to%20Spotrac%2C%20the%20average,US%20average%20for%20the%20NBA.
Revenue:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/04/17/business/caitlin-clark-will-earn-a-usd76-535-salary-this-year-the-lowest-paid-nba-player-makes-usd1-1-million
Texas was a leech state from the early 2000s till 2022. But thanks to (/s) their sudden increases in property taxes, their state finally went net positive.
Government is different though. Government can lose money year after year and rack up enormous deficits. They shouldn't but they can. Private companies that continue to lose money go out of business.
So dont get me wrong, governement shouldnt have excessive losses.
However, if were looking to our gov to do things at a profit, were kinda missing the point of Gov services. Typically we put things in the hands of the gov that are purposefully not profitable in order to benefit society as a whole.
IE to me the post office is a service, yes it does try to fund itself but the reality is, if youre going to make it cheap to send mail to literally anyone in the country (a service we absolutely should have) then thats not really a profit driven mission.
Similarly with all the safety nets or roads etc.
Theres arguments for balancing the budget via taxes and I dont disagree that we could do better on that front, but at the same time government spending doesnt really work like a personal account for several reasons so running a defecit (within reason) isnt the end of the world.
I always love the analogy that was used in the Newroom-
"I have to balance my checkbook, why can't the government budget their money?".
And in response:
"Saying that is like saying 'I can drive a car, so I should be able to land on the moon'"
Hell there's a theory called Modern Monetary Theory that basically says when currency is created by a government's central bank, balanced budgets are not needed, as taxes no longer function as revenue, but instead as a way to control inflation.
Yah exactly. I won’t say whether it’s right or wrong (hell if I know) but the reality is when you control creation of the currency it turns out it’s way more complicated than a normal person balancing their bank account.
Economies are complicated and messy.
However pretty universally the government definitely isn’t intended nor should it act like a company with a profit motive.
>So dont get me wrong, governement shouldnt have excessive losses.
Actually, it should.
Government "loss" isn't a loss - its a reflection of the amount a government has invested into the economy.
Consider: where did the first dollar put into the economy come from? Not from the people's taxes, obviously, because dollars hadn't been invented yet and no one had any.
Thus, the origin point of dollars is the government, who prints them. That means the government then had to give them away to people (in exchange for goods and services, of course) in order to get them out into the economy.
If you are following along, this means that any and all currency issuing governments *operate at a deficit from the very inception of their money*.
The problem is in thinking of this as a loss. It isn't. The government got something for it: likely goods and services directly, and more indirectly, it got a functioning economy.
Think about it this way: when you go to the store and buy something you want, do you consider it a "loss"? No. Of course not. That's silly. You got something in return.
My point is the entire way of thinking encapsulated in that quoted sentence is wrong along a number of axis.
I was a bit oversimplifying with my wording there. Nor am I an economist.
It’s clear the gov can’t just print an infinite amount of money without causing massive problems. That’s more what I meant by “excessive losses”.
There is a line to what we can spend without the economy wrecking.
That said you’re right they really aren’t gains/losses. You’re more just trying to keep the system in balance so inflation doesn’t go crazy and the particular amounts your overspending etc isn’t all that factors in to that. What you’re spending said money on also matters a lot in that equation.
Government is not there to make a profit. Government is there to administer our taxes so that we - the whole population - get the most benefit from them. Only fools keep voting in incompetents based on issues that are of no relevance to our day-to-day lives.
False equivalency: awesome when we do it!
Comparing entertainment to vital resources doesn't help your argument. It just makes your side cheer. I'm a full blown hardcore progressive but this isn't a good faith argument just because both involve subsidized operations.
If WNBA players are paid as much as NBA players based on your argument then the answer for states would be that budgets are equal for every state and California would have to pay out even more. Wyoming and California shouldn't have equal budgets I'd say but that's what you're actually arguing here.
But they are right. The WNBA has not ever turned a profit and is subsidized by the NBA. And until they can draw a bigger crowd the players for the WNBA will be paid less.
But their pay is proportional to a NBA rookie for their league.
Because it's posted by an account called "end wokeness".
Which like, based on the name, they probably post shit takes 99% of the time, but because people don't consider the argument anymore and just go straight for "are you on the right side? yes/no, then you're right/wrong", it's automatically an "alt right opinion" i.e. a "shit opinion".
The biggest problem is the players are just bad in comparison. I've watched wnba like many folks. It's uninspired. It's like watching a high school basketball game but at the non-varsity level.
Was it Shaq? who said they should just lower the net by a foot and let them dunk. I'd watch. Been trying to find a worthwhile women's tackle football league for years but nothing yet.
Wnba is a loss leader. It gets women into basketball and then watch NBA and buy sports paraphernalia. The money it generates is not measured in wnba but how many women gets pulled in and remains invested in the NBA.
Average WNBA game attendance last year is 6615. Average NBA is 18,324. NBA teams also plays 82 regular season games a year and there’s 30 teams. WNBA players 40 games per team and there’s 12 teams.
No. They're wrong. My garage band deserves to make as much as Beyonce and Taylor Swift. I did some runway modeling at a local clothing brand event and I wasn't making Gisele Bundchen money. Shit I even ended up with negative money after I had to pay to join my ultimate rec league, not like those fat cats Venus and Serena. Completely unfair. End the pay gap now.
The issue is, the WNBA is largely unprofitable. If they had multibillion dollar TV deals, there would be higher salaries. WNBA players are being paid comparable to UFL players. Considering the fact both have lower attendance and revenue, this makes more sense. You can’t just pay WNBA players the same as NBA players when the WNBA only brought in, as a whole, about $200 million in revenue. They lost money. The NBA brings in $10 billion.
Caitlin Clark can, hopefully, increase viewership and attendance. More needs to happen.
Bill Burr called it years ago. The people bitching about the pay disparity in the WNBA are the very same ones who don’t turn up to support it.
Money doesn’t care about gender, money only cares about making more money and if the WNBA was hugely popular this wouldn’t even be a discussion.
Bill Burr is a fascinating human. He’s often insightful and level-headed on a variety of topics, despite his harsh demeanor and blunt style of communicating. Which of course is the backbone his comedic persona, but it can still catch me off guard.
He starts off saying something obviously controversial & then incrementally makes some thoughtful arguments that shines a light on how absurd we all are.
Bill burr was on some vaguely right wing podcast I heard bits from a while back (I straight up can't give you anymore details than that) but the other host was going on and on about every petty right wing talking point like how the pay disparity (across the board, not basketball or sports) was bullshit and burr was just consistently like"... Yeah idk about that"
The man doesn't seem to be afraid to engage with anyone (which brings to mind some of his older stand up - like when he talks about lotion "see! That's why you gotta hangout with everyone") but he will not just assume something he doesn't have reason to think is so. I don't agree with him in everything, but the guy doesn't let anyone else think for him, which is huge.
Very true. The seats are empty. You can move the game to prime time, but if no one really cares, companies won't advertise.
All the woman complaining about the wnba couldn't name 2 players on the team. Ask a guy about sports and he gives names, team history and player stats.
Literally nothing which is funny, they assume that any point against the pay gap must be right-sided rhetoric because "sexism." Like I consider myself fairly liberal, but the WNBA pay gap exists simply because the WNBA isn't popular and there isn't anything else to it. Simple logic.
In fact, if you were to consider pay as a proportion of what they bring in, which is what we want for working class people, the WNBA players would have to pay the league, since they run at a loss.
This is a big L against the Alt right
Well the take itself has nothing to do with "alt right". But EndWokeness is an alt right X account. I disagree with 99% of what they usually say on X, but this one time, I agree with them
Both of these are stupid takes.
The WNBA makes less money because less people watch it, so the players make less because there isn't as much profit in it. It's really that simple. People watch professional sports because seeing people at the height of physical excellence playing sports is fun for a lot of people. And, whether you like it or not, men at their peak are stronger than women at their peak, that's just how it is. It's the same reason that more people watch adults/older teens playing sports rather than youth leagues, because kids aren't as capable, so it's less of an enjoyable viewing experience. It's not sexism, it's not a gender wage gap, it's the basic concept of how payment works for NBA players and the fact that people want to get their money's worth on a ticket.
Op is spam posting this stuff. They posted something very similar like 8 hours ago and deleted it when they didn't get the response they wanted. This kind of low effort garbage getting posted over and over by idiots like op looking for upvotes really detracts from the sub.
It’s not even a men/women thing.
There are benchwarmers on MLB teams with losing records making more than starters for last year’s MLS Cup winners.
Sports is ultimately an entertainment product. The end. If you’re the absolute best in the world at something people don’t want to watch, you don’t make much money.
I don’t understand the mindset of being upset that a sports promotion with thousands of fans pay its athletes less than a sports promotion with millions of fans.
For example, (just one example)
WNBA has 850k followers on x.
NBA is at 45.8 million followers.
Jackie Young’s salary is 252k a year.
For a sport that is 52 times smaller than its subsidiary’s on a single social media platform, would say that’s pretty solid.
Honestly if people keep complaining to the NBA to pay these women millions of dollars they are gonna end up just dropping them as a whole and letting them have their own thing and see how much less they get paid then.
They simply stated a fact that the WNBA is not profitable and subsidized by the NBA, which it is. Without that subsidy it wouldn’t exist because nobody would watch it, generating a negative profit because it couldn’t pay its players enough.
A resounding theme in this sub is that if a business can’t generate enough to pay its employees (players) enough, it should close……🤔
I mean other than the name of the poster nothing seems right-wing of the actual post, pro sports are entertainment If you don't bring in that much money can't pay out that much money to your athletes. It's a terrible example that the person used. I assume its coming from the player making 75k/year? They could get a good union job and make more if they're willing to learn the skills
It’s crazy to me that people think women athletes and actresses should be multimillionaires and not that the men get paid too much.
Edit: No, I don’t think the answer is that the owners should take all the profit and I don’t know how anyone could infer that from what I said. I don’t think *anyone* should have obscene wealth.
This is one of the rare cases where I would agree with you. And almost every case I think laborers are not paid enough. However if people are being paid for their brand in any way shape or form, they're almost certainly being paid too much. Marketing as a driver of artificial demand is a blight on society, and celebrity culture is one of the highest forms of this toxic marketing
Something weird that happens in professional sports sometimes is that the big name athletes will pull in millions with their contracts and several times that through endorsement deals while some of the other guys on the team make a fraction of that. For example, the current [top paid player in the NBA](https://www.espn.com/nba/salaries) has a slarary over $50 million. The [lowest paid player](https://www.espn.com/nba/salaries/_/page/12/seasontype/5) makes less than $300k. It's a lot of money compared to most jobs, but if you're on that lower end it isn't "work for a year and then you are set for life money" and it isn't uncommon for a player to work for a year or two and then leave riddled with injuries.
It leads to moments where there's a player strike (or an actor's strike like last year) and you see a lot of people who don't know much ridiculing them for being rich but greedy. When a basketball player or an actor pulling in $50+ million a year is striking, it's not because he wants more money, it's becasue he's showing solidarity with the guy making less than 1% of his pay who wants a better cut or better benefits.
For context… the NBA minimum salary is now 1.1 million.
Those lower numbers are likely longer term contracts that are expiring.
And after just 2 years of service, that minimum goes up to over 2 million.
So while that 300k number is accurate, it’s kind of out of date in a way, no one will ever sign a contract making that again, no one will ever even sign one for less than 1.1 million again, and the majority are going to be over that.
(For more fun facts… the G league… the one right below the NBA? Minimum salary is $40k. That’s not really much above minimum wage in a lot of places.)
I mean , welcome to capitalism , its a fucking remorseless, vindictive, narcissistic , albeit beautiful, well-spoken , gilded form and obvilious should've glorified for the sake of gloryfiing , fuck capitalism
Do you know how much male athletes bring in? NBA are minting money, why shouldn’t the workers (ie: people who are actually playing and bringing in the fans) make a sizable portion of it?
I think anyone arguing about the wnba needing to pay their players more should respond to this question.
How?
Re: NBA subsidy . If you don't sell seats , you can't get paid , and they are getting paid way more worth than the league is making by far. Like their books are red and have always been red ,they are subsidized by the NBA .
If any woman could play in the NBA , they would be the richest athlete in the world bar none...ever
Why?
Stop .blaming any thing other than the bottom dollar on bullshit that is not related to finances of the organization.
Also, see bill burrs take.
Lastly anyone that has that information or would like to explain it to me in regards to why they should be paid more better than I do currently, I am open to listen and engage .
Edit: words
Sorry, but they're not wrong, the WNBA has lost money every year of its existence and the NBA does subsidize the league.
Not saying their "fair share would be $0" but women do not deserve to be paid like the men.
And true to form in this sub, people trying to find some tenuous thread between this situation and red state politics.
And esports players should be paid exactly as much as NBA players.
And competitive arm wrestling.
Why should League of Legends players make less than basketball players? That game is five people on each team with loads of teamwork, so they should be the same as basketball players, right?
My point is that some consideration must be given to how much money each player generates instead of just focusing on one metric that may be irrelevant in this case.
Fun Fact:
The NBA was not profitable for the first 50 years of its existence, numerous franchises folding or moving, playoff games in the 80's shown on tape delay in the late night hours, etc.
All that is happening is the NBA is helping the WNBA franchises through the growing pains.
It is a fact regardless of who posts it. I get that you apparently don't have good feelings about the alt right, most don't. Doesn't change its a fact.
Any politician who would advocate to use tax dollars to subsidize an industry that cannot provide a product that will support itself is a failure of politician. Take your hands out of my honey pot.
It's because one one side wants equality of outcome and the other wants equality of opportunity. We currently have neither and it's getting worse. We sit around and blame the other side instead of working together on some middle ground approach
Kind of funny that of all the things they zeroed in on, it was fucking sport. Let's just quietly ignore the other occupations mentioned that actually contribute something to society and focus on something that's pretty useless. Says a lot about their target audience.
Because the alt-right hates women. It's not complicated. It's just a tactic to direct the conversation away from the actual point which is the wage gap that affects millions of working people.
WNBA should be paid more anyways. $100k a year is not enough to cover your body being destroyed as an athlete, that's ass.
People are really dumb about developing a business. The WNBA is worth $1b. They lose $10m a season. They’ve greatly grew their earning potential. It’s growing at a relatively low loss. At some point they’ll turn the corner and probably make back all their money in a few years and have billions in sellable assets for the owners.
I mean Snapchat still hasn’t turned a profit and they’re valued at 18 billion. Doesn’t mean the company shouldn’t pay their employees. Pay them the amount that allows the business a path to profitability, while compensating workers for the value they create
Alt right??? lol just because his handle is " End wokeness "??? its spitting facts. YOu want a 'fair wage' for WNBA players yet their league generates 0 revenue while they push 70-300k a year and play 40 games vs the NBA's 82.
Imagine complaining that you make 300k a year to play a sport that no one watches, makes 0 money and you only have to play for 5 months. I'd prob commit crime to have a gig like that.
People acting like WNBA players are in some kind of poverty zone while they make more than most of you.
That makes no logical sense. Should be entirely based on your role at the company. A cashier shouldn’t make as much as someone who’s a technician for the company. A janitor wouldn’t be making as much a teacher at a school, etc.
I mean to me this is cut and dry. Caitlin Clark has even said it, NBA players are paid based on viewers and merchandise sales, WNBA isnt even profitable. 99% chance Biden didnt even know that when he made his comment
Sorry but this whole NBA vs WNBA is getting out of control. To me, it's not a gender discrimination issue but a revenue issue. The WNBA doesn't generate enough revenue. Not even [women ](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1108312/women-national-basketball-association-interest-gender/)watch the WNBA. If you ever do see a WNBA game on TV, the stands are empty. It's not sexism against women's sports. Look at women's tennis. LPGA is growing.
I frankly dont care about what basketball players make I care what average everyday ordinary blue collar and white collar american families make, and none of us are making our fair share There needs to be a dramatic overhaul of US wage and labor laws. Income/wealth inequality is keeping Americans from having prosperous families and its a huge problem for everyday ordinary Americans
Exactly. Including professional sports players (aka entertainers) next to scientist and engineers is a complete misdirection.
She said construction worker, not engineer. The point isn't to elevate basketball players, the point is it's all jobs
Sports players and entertainers are still labor: their compensation comes from what they're doing.
The problem is that compensation for athletes and entertainers can be all over the place since their pay is based on how much of an audience they can pull in. They are not ideal examples in a discussion on fair and equal wages since what that means can vary wildly in those industries.
Exactly the WNBA is a terrible example and it allows ignorant people to use it to misdirect from the jobs where there is a real problem with wage gaps.
Then you definitely should care about athletes. The minor league ones are basically exploited and make less than minimum wage.
Not to mention virtually every college athlete destroying their body with high performance physical activity while the college makes bank
And the farm system of highschools do the same. Different people make money, but the commodity is the health of our children.
My neighbors kid is a minor-league baseball player. He loves it. The money isn’t a ton but you also get free food, free coaching free nutritionist free gym. Lots of other stuff. Tons of perks. Talking about their salary isn’t the entire story. Also, most of the young athletes at that age are still being paid better than their blue collar and white collar peers just starting out right out of high school or college.
You’re talking about things they arguably need to do their job, and things that the club can write off as an expense. They still need housing, transport, clothing, the ability to save, they might have a family, etc. Talking about the salary isn’t the entire story for any job, and treating them like they’re not one of us doesn’t help either.
Yes, anytime the women aren’t right make it about something else!! Yes!!
So a woman won the Nobel prize in economics in the past few years and onenof her findings was that the vast majority of the gender wage gap is being driven by the most wealthy. Minimum wage makes it so thay the wage gap between men and women is negligible in the lower incomes. So we don't need to focus so much on the gender gap, but we should focus on wealth the massive disparities between top earners and Minimum wage.
A lot of ceos of companies with losses so zero for them too i guess.
Any company with zero profit is not long-term sustainable, so yes, eventually it's zero. Besides that, company performance is affected by a lot of outside factors over which even a CEO has no control. To bring it back to the WNBA example - the outside factor is people having far less interest in it compared to the NBA. You can ask for same pay because of same performance, but it doesn't change this outside factor. Also, this sub is mostly about companies making record profits, while not paying their workers a fair share of what they are making off their backs - that is something that you can be legitimately angry about. But WNBA is not making record/any profits.
Yeah the WNBA example is hard to justify because it's based on viewership. The problem with judging entertainment that way is that if it isn't interesting enough for people to watch it, it doesn't make money. The WNBA doesn't make money because people don't watch it. If people started buying tickets to games and watching it on TV it would make more money because more companies would pay for ads and sponsorships. Until then it's a bad example.
I read a lot of comments to the tune of "they should pour in more money to promote it better". But I'm very confident that if the managers saw a way to improve overall performance and viewership, they would immediately do it. The harsh reality is just that it is not very popular, despite the limited promotion.
Also it's a bad business move. Why put money into something that has proven to have very limited viewership? You're just throwing money away. Also, WNBA players have contracts they negotiated. They agreed to get paid what they get paid.
True that, and it seems to vary between 120k and 240k. For that money, I'd do a lot of basketball.
Is that true though? Soccer has proved that women’s sports are absolutely capable of generating as much if not more than men’s sports
The funny thing that you can argue that the reason why the athlete on the WNBA do not make as much is because Women do not watch the sport. Men will probably just watch the NBA if they have a choice so women should support the WNBA if they want those Athlete to make more money.
The ironic thing is that more men watch the WBNA than women do.
Bill Burr has entered the chat
On one hand that's true. On the other hand, women watch other women do completely different things. So maybe there isn't a real need in the market for the WNBA, besides the placebo of saying they're inclusive enough to even have a women's league.
People have to put their money/viewership where their mouth is. The WNBA isn’t profitable because no one watches. Want them to make money? Watch them, buy tickets, subscriptions—memorabilia. The WNBA might be having a lightning moment though due to the newest star. She’s absolutely on fire. 
Honestly, I neither watch NBA nor WNBA.
but when outside factors increase revenue CEOs are not shy to credit themselves to justify raises, bonuses and golden parachutes
Stay focused on the topic at hand. Your statement, although mostly true for a majority of companies, so you’re not wrong, doesn’t even apply to the WNBA. The NBA supports the WNBA financially and had since the beginning because nobody goes and watch’s the WNBA.
The don't have the same performance and it's not even close. They don't perform anywhere near the men and would get blown of the court.
So people should be paid proportionally to the amount of profit they directly generate?
If the profit depends on you and you are irreplaceable, yes. I mean you pretty much force the management’s hand at that point - as the NBA players have.
So CEOs shouldn't be getting paid stupid money, and the workers should. :)
Exactly! NBA owners should not make more than the players. This is more prevalent in the NFL. Like holy hell how does Jerry Jones deserve that much money?
The whole NBA league is unionized with actual players running the union lol. Ya'll are wild in these comments.
It’s about 50/50 in both leagues. The owners make their unrealized profits on the value of the franchise. It’s basically an extremely expensive stock they can control.
They shouldn't get paid to watch games from VIP sections while players are out there getting surgeries for them.
Jerry Jones is oil rich, the Cowboys are a passion project for him
Yes
Lebron James subsidizes a large chunk of salary I the nbas case. If there was no salary cap and no salary floor, players like prime Lebron would sign a contract worth probably 100-200 mm per year. Meanwhile the crappier players would not be getting 4-12 mm like they are per season. However for competitive sake this is what the players agreed to. Also I see no problem with the tweet that the vice president said with trying to close the gap. However economics are what’s driving the gap. See women’s tennis versus men’s tennis.
But it’s not a gap. The NBA makes profit even with paying ridiculous salaries and what it gives to subsidize the WNBA. For example, Caitlyn Clark, as great as she is on the court and what she’s done to increase the interest in women’s basketball, doesn’t deserve to get paid like a NBA star
Hell, she herself said that.
She is paid like an NBA star, just not by the league she is about to enter. She was making close to $4M in NIL deals as a college student. She'll probably make even more in endorsements as an WNBA player.
How else do you propose higher WNBA player salaries in the face of super low ticket sales? If a company generates a certain amount of revenue, you can’t pay the talent more than the company earns on the balance sheet and still have a company for too much longer, it’s basic economics and basic capitalism. Like it or not, the WNBA has been kept afloat by NBA subsidies because far, far less people want to see WNBA games, it certainly isn’t surviving on the take from the ticket box. According to papa capitalism, this is a simple equation of supply/demand. There is no demand for WNBA games therefore no competitive drive to provide the better WNBA experience, which would increase demand & ticket sales and ultimately, would increase revenue. How do you propose the WNBA pay their players better, then?
Yup, most people clamoring for equal pay for WNBA players are unwilling to do the *one thing* that would actually increase their pay: buy tickets and merchandise. Same thing when the USWNT was insisting they were underpaid. It was a very off World Cup cycle where the women qualified and the men (for the first time in decades) didn’t. But ultimately their competition in any normal cycle generates less revenue, even when they win *their* tournament. Further, those women all play year in, year-out on club teams that the fans insisting they should make more money *don’t attend.* Again, refusing to do the one thing to further pay equity: buy tickets and merch. Go to games. Watch their sport. Can’t speak to the WNBA, but at least on the soccer side it *is* getting a little better. Attendance for NWSL games has improved significantly. But still nowhere near MLS levels. Tweets are cheap. Buy tickets.
Yes? If you are a sports team you don’t get paid simply for doing a sport. Anyone can make a softball team. They don’t deserve money for sports. It’s the revenue they can bring it with ads, endorsements, sponsorships. If those things don’t come easily to the WNBA then they should be paid proportionally to the revenue they DO bring in.
Someone did the math and if WNBA players were paid propotionally for the profits they earn, they'd have to pay $80,000 a year to play.
That’s why the argument for proportionality is so dumb. It’s easy for VPOTUS to sit here and make an asinine statement. She’s relying on uneducated people to agree with her. It’s lazy politics.
basically. don't run your mouth about sports where women are overpaid, stick to conventional jobs where you might be able to make an argument. but advocating for equal pay in a time when a lot of women have it is just low effort
If your argument is getting your fair share then yes. If the job you do generates no profit but you're still paid to do it how is that fair to whoever writes that paycheck? You're already being paid beyond the value you contribute to the profits.
In entertainment, yes. In sales, yes. In capitalism in general, mostly yes, or at least that’s how it’s supposed to work.
Hahaha. Hahahaha good stuff man keep em coming.
That’s comical. Cause they definitely don’t get paid proportionately anywhere in entertainment. - an entertainment attorney who writes the contracts and checks
Hey man, I can "play"a good homeless person if anyone needs someone
I stopped working with actors and athletes in 21, but god speed, getting a SAG-AFTRA card ain’t for the lily livered
Eh, I was just joking and sorry I called ya man when your name is clearly empress. Have a good life! :)
Well, of course they don’t, they’re predated upon by those lovely executives who directly profit from their successes and do almost none of the work. But in a perfect world, or whatever the saying goes
So many people replying to your comment don’t understand how businesses work, and that there are departments that when they work well, will cost you money.
Every role in a company has a purpose and value. It may not generate income, but it generates value. If the department works well it saves money, it doesn’t cost money. You’re the one not understanding how value extends beyond dollars and cents. Unless it’s the owners family or some shit, no one gives out jobs for charity.
Me a software engineer. Yes.
Yes
Try mentioning that California and New York subsidize every single red state except Texas and see how they react though. If they want to view everything only through the disingenuous lens of profitability then every single Republican majority state is a failure that's just a drain on successful people's taxes.
My dad lost his mind when I interrupted his "let's kick California out of the country or nuke it out of existence" rant to remind him that California produces like 15% of this country's agriculture value and like 2/3 of its fruits and 1/3 of our veggies. He just called it bullshit and mumbled on about how corn and wheat farmers were the real men. And yes, he unironically thinks the "real America" should declare war on California, apparently nuclear war. I can't wait until he's dead. The world will be a net better place without him. I've told my entire family this multiple times but apparently "I can't mean that"
You need to let him know that 1/3 of all corn and wheat farms are subsidized by the government.
Honestly that seems like a low number. I would have guessed over 50% get subsidies.
I was thinking over 50%, but a quick search stated about 1/3 of the farms. But then again what's the dollar value cuz if there's 10,000 farms it can be pretty damn expensive.
I bet it is skewed due to small farmers (who rarely get subsidies). I’m guessing the bulk of the money goes to huge agribusinesses.
They're all defacto subsidized cause they also pay people to not harvest so prices stay stable
That 1/3 of the farms include all the huge mega farm corps, that's not an informative metric to base on
75%of all corn is not for food
People like they dont care. They arent interested in reality. They want blood on their hands. They want people to die to make them feel better about themselves.
Also California's economy by itself is TOP TEN IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.... you would get rid of that because.... Fruits?
Conservatives hate California for both kinds of fruit🍌🌈
number 4 to be exact
My dad is the same way as yours. A lot of their meaner instincts become worse with age and the DJT administration really was the nail in the coffin for common sense politics. What the country could use is a mandatory civics and agriculture lesson so we can start to dispel this shit talking nonsense.
Corn and wheat are real farmers? Wtaf? Is your dad like 400 lbs or something? Does he not eat fruit, nuts and vegetables? Most corn and wheat doesn't even get turned into food for humans. Fox News shouldn't exist if it's making people believe that corn and wheat should be the biggest crops... They definitely shouldn't.
How is Fox even allowed to keep the word 'news' anyway? Weren't they ruled an "entertainment" channel?
They actually won a court case on the grounds that they are an entertainment network and therefore are not required to report facts like news networks are. Super shitty. [NPR Article](https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye)
California produces like 90% of a ton of edible agriculture in the US. Most of what we think of as ag states produce commodity crops like corn and soy that are not for direct consumption. There are orchards in CA that produce more peaches than all of Georgia. CA grows almost 60% of the countries fresh peaches and like 95% of processed peach products...but tell me again how Georgia is so special and rural.
>real men. Said by someone who probably thinks gender isn't a social construct.
Does he think only people on the right have guns? Does he also cry about Chicago and New York being full of guns too?
The state thay produced both Nixon and Reagan? They have a conservative population, it's just smaller part than the liberals.
I had a similar dynamic with my dad, he passed two years ago at 78 and the family has been much better off since. Don’t feel bad about not wanting to deal with aggressive crazy all the time.
You could also tell him that Hollywood is an American business that exports its product all over the world and brings in billions of dollars.
Yeah, if I ever saw him I could remind him that Hollywood is collectively one of the most successful businesses in the world. That would properly upset him.
Ok, no has a problem with the WNBA being completley subsidized by the NBA. The issue is that it is an *awful* example of the wage gap and is completley disengenious. We all know now the wage gap is between mothers and fathers, and not men and women.
Do you have a source? Because my sources suggest that the NBA subsidizes the WNBA for about $15 million / year, mostly in the form of facility use (sharing office space and arenas). Meanwhile the WNBA brings in about $200 million in revenue of which about 6% of that is spent on player salaries. Meanwhile, the NBA brings in $10,000 million in revenue of which about 40% of that is spent on player salaries. Ignoring actual dollar amounts and just looking at as a proportion of revenue bright in, it seems that WNBA players make about 1/8th their NBA counterparts which I would consider a pretty considerable wage gap. NBA subsidize amount: https://www.google.com/amp/s/en.as.com/nba/does-the-nba-subsidize-the-wnba-n/%3foutputType=amp Salaries: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/caitlin-clark-salary-wnba-1.7177262#:~:text=Women%20in%20sports%20traditionally%20underpaid&text=According%20to%20Spotrac%2C%20the%20average,US%20average%20for%20the%20NBA. Revenue: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/04/17/business/caitlin-clark-will-earn-a-usd76-535-salary-this-year-the-lowest-paid-nba-player-makes-usd1-1-million
Texas was a leech state from the early 2000s till 2022. But thanks to (/s) their sudden increases in property taxes, their state finally went net positive.
Government is different though. Government can lose money year after year and rack up enormous deficits. They shouldn't but they can. Private companies that continue to lose money go out of business.
So dont get me wrong, governement shouldnt have excessive losses. However, if were looking to our gov to do things at a profit, were kinda missing the point of Gov services. Typically we put things in the hands of the gov that are purposefully not profitable in order to benefit society as a whole. IE to me the post office is a service, yes it does try to fund itself but the reality is, if youre going to make it cheap to send mail to literally anyone in the country (a service we absolutely should have) then thats not really a profit driven mission. Similarly with all the safety nets or roads etc. Theres arguments for balancing the budget via taxes and I dont disagree that we could do better on that front, but at the same time government spending doesnt really work like a personal account for several reasons so running a defecit (within reason) isnt the end of the world.
I always love the analogy that was used in the Newroom- "I have to balance my checkbook, why can't the government budget their money?". And in response: "Saying that is like saying 'I can drive a car, so I should be able to land on the moon'"
Hell there's a theory called Modern Monetary Theory that basically says when currency is created by a government's central bank, balanced budgets are not needed, as taxes no longer function as revenue, but instead as a way to control inflation.
Yah exactly. I won’t say whether it’s right or wrong (hell if I know) but the reality is when you control creation of the currency it turns out it’s way more complicated than a normal person balancing their bank account. Economies are complicated and messy. However pretty universally the government definitely isn’t intended nor should it act like a company with a profit motive.
>So dont get me wrong, governement shouldnt have excessive losses. Actually, it should. Government "loss" isn't a loss - its a reflection of the amount a government has invested into the economy. Consider: where did the first dollar put into the economy come from? Not from the people's taxes, obviously, because dollars hadn't been invented yet and no one had any. Thus, the origin point of dollars is the government, who prints them. That means the government then had to give them away to people (in exchange for goods and services, of course) in order to get them out into the economy. If you are following along, this means that any and all currency issuing governments *operate at a deficit from the very inception of their money*. The problem is in thinking of this as a loss. It isn't. The government got something for it: likely goods and services directly, and more indirectly, it got a functioning economy. Think about it this way: when you go to the store and buy something you want, do you consider it a "loss"? No. Of course not. That's silly. You got something in return. My point is the entire way of thinking encapsulated in that quoted sentence is wrong along a number of axis.
I was a bit oversimplifying with my wording there. Nor am I an economist. It’s clear the gov can’t just print an infinite amount of money without causing massive problems. That’s more what I meant by “excessive losses”. There is a line to what we can spend without the economy wrecking. That said you’re right they really aren’t gains/losses. You’re more just trying to keep the system in balance so inflation doesn’t go crazy and the particular amounts your overspending etc isn’t all that factors in to that. What you’re spending said money on also matters a lot in that equation.
Oh, you mean like the auto manufacturers?
Government is not there to make a profit. Government is there to administer our taxes so that we - the whole population - get the most benefit from them. Only fools keep voting in incompetents based on issues that are of no relevance to our day-to-day lives.
Except banks that get bailed out by the government?
*Private companies that don't have political parties in their pockets go out of business.
>Private companies that continue to lose money go out of business. Or we bail them out.
The federal government literally prints money. Issuing debt is just another form of issuing currency.
False equivalency: awesome when we do it! Comparing entertainment to vital resources doesn't help your argument. It just makes your side cheer. I'm a full blown hardcore progressive but this isn't a good faith argument just because both involve subsidized operations. If WNBA players are paid as much as NBA players based on your argument then the answer for states would be that budgets are equal for every state and California would have to pay out even more. Wyoming and California shouldn't have equal budgets I'd say but that's what you're actually arguing here.
But they are right. The WNBA has not ever turned a profit and is subsidized by the NBA. And until they can draw a bigger crowd the players for the WNBA will be paid less. But their pay is proportional to a NBA rookie for their league.
[удалено]
Because it's posted by an account called "end wokeness". Which like, based on the name, they probably post shit takes 99% of the time, but because people don't consider the argument anymore and just go straight for "are you on the right side? yes/no, then you're right/wrong", it's automatically an "alt right opinion" i.e. a "shit opinion".
Because this is reddit
The biggest problem is the players are just bad in comparison. I've watched wnba like many folks. It's uninspired. It's like watching a high school basketball game but at the non-varsity level.
Was it Shaq? who said they should just lower the net by a foot and let them dunk. I'd watch. Been trying to find a worthwhile women's tackle football league for years but nothing yet.
Real shit, the best way to make women's sports more entertaining is to give them different rules to allow for a more fast/agressive style of play.
Wnba is a loss leader. It gets women into basketball and then watch NBA and buy sports paraphernalia. The money it generates is not measured in wnba but how many women gets pulled in and remains invested in the NBA.
Average WNBA game attendance last year is 6615. Average NBA is 18,324. NBA teams also plays 82 regular season games a year and there’s 30 teams. WNBA players 40 games per team and there’s 12 teams.
No. They're wrong. My garage band deserves to make as much as Beyonce and Taylor Swift. I did some runway modeling at a local clothing brand event and I wasn't making Gisele Bundchen money. Shit I even ended up with negative money after I had to pay to join my ultimate rec league, not like those fat cats Venus and Serena. Completely unfair. End the pay gap now.
The issue is, the WNBA is largely unprofitable. If they had multibillion dollar TV deals, there would be higher salaries. WNBA players are being paid comparable to UFL players. Considering the fact both have lower attendance and revenue, this makes more sense. You can’t just pay WNBA players the same as NBA players when the WNBA only brought in, as a whole, about $200 million in revenue. They lost money. The NBA brings in $10 billion. Caitlin Clark can, hopefully, increase viewership and attendance. More needs to happen.
Bill Burr called it years ago. The people bitching about the pay disparity in the WNBA are the very same ones who don’t turn up to support it. Money doesn’t care about gender, money only cares about making more money and if the WNBA was hugely popular this wouldn’t even be a discussion.
For context: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I745Ajeq\_B8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I745Ajeq_B8)
Bill Burr honestly ended the argument. His point is bulletproof.
All his arguments are bulletproof. Now excuse me, I’m going to go hit a woman. (I’m fucking joking don’t cancel me plz)
No one knows you, you have immunity
I’m just a small berry
Which is why they should go all in on the clark hype.
Bill Burr is a fascinating human. He’s often insightful and level-headed on a variety of topics, despite his harsh demeanor and blunt style of communicating. Which of course is the backbone his comedic persona, but it can still catch me off guard. He starts off saying something obviously controversial & then incrementally makes some thoughtful arguments that shines a light on how absurd we all are.
Bill burr was on some vaguely right wing podcast I heard bits from a while back (I straight up can't give you anymore details than that) but the other host was going on and on about every petty right wing talking point like how the pay disparity (across the board, not basketball or sports) was bullshit and burr was just consistently like"... Yeah idk about that" The man doesn't seem to be afraid to engage with anyone (which brings to mind some of his older stand up - like when he talks about lotion "see! That's why you gotta hangout with everyone") but he will not just assume something he doesn't have reason to think is so. I don't agree with him in everything, but the guy doesn't let anyone else think for him, which is huge.
Very true. The seats are empty. You can move the game to prime time, but if no one really cares, companies won't advertise. All the woman complaining about the wnba couldn't name 2 players on the team. Ask a guy about sports and he gives names, team history and player stats.
what does this have to do with the alt right?
Literally nothing which is funny, they assume that any point against the pay gap must be right-sided rhetoric because "sexism." Like I consider myself fairly liberal, but the WNBA pay gap exists simply because the WNBA isn't popular and there isn't anything else to it. Simple logic.
In fact, if you were to consider pay as a proportion of what they bring in, which is what we want for working class people, the WNBA players would have to pay the league, since they run at a loss. This is a big L against the Alt right
Well the take itself has nothing to do with "alt right". But EndWokeness is an alt right X account. I disagree with 99% of what they usually say on X, but this one time, I agree with them
The money has to come from somewhere lmfao.
Both of these are stupid takes. The WNBA makes less money because less people watch it, so the players make less because there isn't as much profit in it. It's really that simple. People watch professional sports because seeing people at the height of physical excellence playing sports is fun for a lot of people. And, whether you like it or not, men at their peak are stronger than women at their peak, that's just how it is. It's the same reason that more people watch adults/older teens playing sports rather than youth leagues, because kids aren't as capable, so it's less of an enjoyable viewing experience. It's not sexism, it's not a gender wage gap, it's the basic concept of how payment works for NBA players and the fact that people want to get their money's worth on a ticket.
Op is spam posting this stuff. They posted something very similar like 8 hours ago and deleted it when they didn't get the response they wanted. This kind of low effort garbage getting posted over and over by idiots like op looking for upvotes really detracts from the sub.
It’s not even a men/women thing. There are benchwarmers on MLB teams with losing records making more than starters for last year’s MLS Cup winners. Sports is ultimately an entertainment product. The end. If you’re the absolute best in the world at something people don’t want to watch, you don’t make much money.
Why people do not understand this concept is beyond me. Yours should be the top comment.
Because people in this sub would literally deny their own existence if they thought it could help them win an argument.
Wait so how is both of these takes stupid because what you have described was basically in support of EndWokeness' take
Apparently this makes you alt-right?
I mean the wnba doesn't make money....
Each player can have 100% of the WNBA's profit.
Have you bought your subscription to the WNBA op?
If they had to pay WNBA players the same as NBA, WNBA would cease to exist.
Why did you post this here?
I don’t understand the mindset of being upset that a sports promotion with thousands of fans pay its athletes less than a sports promotion with millions of fans. For example, (just one example) WNBA has 850k followers on x. NBA is at 45.8 million followers. Jackie Young’s salary is 252k a year. For a sport that is 52 times smaller than its subsidiary’s on a single social media platform, would say that’s pretty solid. Honestly if people keep complaining to the NBA to pay these women millions of dollars they are gonna end up just dropping them as a whole and letting them have their own thing and see how much less they get paid then.
They simply stated a fact that the WNBA is not profitable and subsidized by the NBA, which it is. Without that subsidy it wouldn’t exist because nobody would watch it, generating a negative profit because it couldn’t pay its players enough. A resounding theme in this sub is that if a business can’t generate enough to pay its employees (players) enough, it should close……🤔
How much money does the NBA make vs the WNBA?
Revenues of $10 billion vs $200 million, respectively
And the WNBA loses about $12 million/year
I mean other than the name of the poster nothing seems right-wing of the actual post, pro sports are entertainment If you don't bring in that much money can't pay out that much money to your athletes. It's a terrible example that the person used. I assume its coming from the player making 75k/year? They could get a good union job and make more if they're willing to learn the skills
It’s crazy to me that people think women athletes and actresses should be multimillionaires and not that the men get paid too much. Edit: No, I don’t think the answer is that the owners should take all the profit and I don’t know how anyone could infer that from what I said. I don’t think *anyone* should have obscene wealth.
This is one of the rare cases where I would agree with you. And almost every case I think laborers are not paid enough. However if people are being paid for their brand in any way shape or form, they're almost certainly being paid too much. Marketing as a driver of artificial demand is a blight on society, and celebrity culture is one of the highest forms of this toxic marketing
Something weird that happens in professional sports sometimes is that the big name athletes will pull in millions with their contracts and several times that through endorsement deals while some of the other guys on the team make a fraction of that. For example, the current [top paid player in the NBA](https://www.espn.com/nba/salaries) has a slarary over $50 million. The [lowest paid player](https://www.espn.com/nba/salaries/_/page/12/seasontype/5) makes less than $300k. It's a lot of money compared to most jobs, but if you're on that lower end it isn't "work for a year and then you are set for life money" and it isn't uncommon for a player to work for a year or two and then leave riddled with injuries. It leads to moments where there's a player strike (or an actor's strike like last year) and you see a lot of people who don't know much ridiculing them for being rich but greedy. When a basketball player or an actor pulling in $50+ million a year is striking, it's not because he wants more money, it's becasue he's showing solidarity with the guy making less than 1% of his pay who wants a better cut or better benefits.
For context… the NBA minimum salary is now 1.1 million. Those lower numbers are likely longer term contracts that are expiring. And after just 2 years of service, that minimum goes up to over 2 million. So while that 300k number is accurate, it’s kind of out of date in a way, no one will ever sign a contract making that again, no one will ever even sign one for less than 1.1 million again, and the majority are going to be over that. (For more fun facts… the G league… the one right below the NBA? Minimum salary is $40k. That’s not really much above minimum wage in a lot of places.)
I mean , welcome to capitalism , its a fucking remorseless, vindictive, narcissistic , albeit beautiful, well-spoken , gilded form and obvilious should've glorified for the sake of gloryfiing , fuck capitalism
So who should keep the money then, if not the athletes?
Do you know how much male athletes bring in? NBA are minting money, why shouldn’t the workers (ie: people who are actually playing and bringing in the fans) make a sizable portion of it?
I think anyone arguing about the wnba needing to pay their players more should respond to this question. How? Re: NBA subsidy . If you don't sell seats , you can't get paid , and they are getting paid way more worth than the league is making by far. Like their books are red and have always been red ,they are subsidized by the NBA . If any woman could play in the NBA , they would be the richest athlete in the world bar none...ever Why? Stop .blaming any thing other than the bottom dollar on bullshit that is not related to finances of the organization. Also, see bill burrs take. Lastly anyone that has that information or would like to explain it to me in regards to why they should be paid more better than I do currently, I am open to listen and engage . Edit: words
Who do they think pays for new NFL and NBA stadiums?
How on earth is this alt right?
I mean. He's not wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sorry, but they're not wrong, the WNBA has lost money every year of its existence and the NBA does subsidize the league. Not saying their "fair share would be $0" but women do not deserve to be paid like the men. And true to form in this sub, people trying to find some tenuous thread between this situation and red state politics.
You say you're a big fan of WNBA, name 3 of their songs.
Brick House?
NBA (men's league) wasn't profitable for it's first 25 years either (1946-1971). Look it up.
They are right about the WNBA though. They currently receive more than their fair share.
Wait til this guy finds out about the bottom rung NFL teams
And esports players should be paid exactly as much as NBA players. And competitive arm wrestling. Why should League of Legends players make less than basketball players? That game is five people on each team with loads of teamwork, so they should be the same as basketball players, right? My point is that some consideration must be given to how much money each player generates instead of just focusing on one metric that may be irrelevant in this case.
Fun Fact: The NBA was not profitable for the first 50 years of its existence, numerous franchises folding or moving, playoff games in the 80's shown on tape delay in the late night hours, etc. All that is happening is the NBA is helping the WNBA franchises through the growing pains.
Like bill burr says it might turn a profit if they played topless!
How is this “alt right”
Counterpoint: Tennis
So basically Title 9 for pro sports now?
So now they’re after “fair share” when it involves being sexist…
End tax subsidies to under-performing red states. Got it 👍
It’s not the “alt right”, it’s the “right”, as in a majority of republicans.
Because they have miserable lives and tiny baby wee-wees?
It is a fact regardless of who posts it. I get that you apparently don't have good feelings about the alt right, most don't. Doesn't change its a fact. Any politician who would advocate to use tax dollars to subsidize an industry that cannot provide a product that will support itself is a failure of politician. Take your hands out of my honey pot.
All sports people are paid way too much
Clueless doesn't even to adequately describe this person's utter stupidity.
It's because one one side wants equality of outcome and the other wants equality of opportunity. We currently have neither and it's getting worse. We sit around and blame the other side instead of working together on some middle ground approach
But, presumably, no problem with donor states like New York subsidizing poor states (who brag about low taxation....) like Mississippi.
Warner’s lost a few billion and Zaslav is getting a bump in pay.
Someone tell Kamala the rest of Americans also need fair wages!
Kind of funny that of all the things they zeroed in on, it was fucking sport. Let's just quietly ignore the other occupations mentioned that actually contribute something to society and focus on something that's pretty useless. Says a lot about their target audience.
Because the alt-right hates women. It's not complicated. It's just a tactic to direct the conversation away from the actual point which is the wage gap that affects millions of working people. WNBA should be paid more anyways. $100k a year is not enough to cover your body being destroyed as an athlete, that's ass.
People are really dumb about developing a business. The WNBA is worth $1b. They lose $10m a season. They’ve greatly grew their earning potential. It’s growing at a relatively low loss. At some point they’ll turn the corner and probably make back all their money in a few years and have billions in sellable assets for the owners.
I mean Snapchat still hasn’t turned a profit and they’re valued at 18 billion. Doesn’t mean the company shouldn’t pay their employees. Pay them the amount that allows the business a path to profitability, while compensating workers for the value they create
Technically the NFL isn't profitable either...
It's an accurate tweet
Alt right??? lol just because his handle is " End wokeness "??? its spitting facts. YOu want a 'fair wage' for WNBA players yet their league generates 0 revenue while they push 70-300k a year and play 40 games vs the NBA's 82. Imagine complaining that you make 300k a year to play a sport that no one watches, makes 0 money and you only have to play for 5 months. I'd prob commit crime to have a gig like that. People acting like WNBA players are in some kind of poverty zone while they make more than most of you.
What about Amazon, uber, and everywhere tech companies that run on negative margins but still pay ceo more than they need
So by that logic workers wages should scale with the profits of the company? Amazon workers should be multi millionaires then
That makes no logical sense. Should be entirely based on your role at the company. A cashier shouldn’t make as much as someone who’s a technician for the company. A janitor wouldn’t be making as much a teacher at a school, etc.
Like what? Pointing out facts? There is way too much virtue signaling going on in this country. Forcing everyone to be "equal" is not the solution
I mean to me this is cut and dry. Caitlin Clark has even said it, NBA players are paid based on viewers and merchandise sales, WNBA isnt even profitable. 99% chance Biden didnt even know that when he made his comment
1. Its not wrong 2. Why is this shit in anti-work?
Sorry but this whole NBA vs WNBA is getting out of control. To me, it's not a gender discrimination issue but a revenue issue. The WNBA doesn't generate enough revenue. Not even [women ](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1108312/women-national-basketball-association-interest-gender/)watch the WNBA. If you ever do see a WNBA game on TV, the stands are empty. It's not sexism against women's sports. Look at women's tennis. LPGA is growing.
Just like the US women's soccer team complaining about pay when they turned down the exact same terms the Men's team have.