View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Oldfandepot2
Joined: 05 Jul 2013 Posts: 996 Location: Northeast
Back to top |
|
Durantula
Joined: 30 Mar 2013 Posts: 5223
Back to top |
Posted: 04/13/15 7:58 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
It is a huge disparity but every couple of years you hear about the WNBA potentially folding and that is with these low salaries. Could you increase everyone's salaries and keep the league viable without major increases in attendance?
The biggest issue to me is two fold: fewer girls are playing basketball and you would be surprised how many women do not follow college basketball once their career is over. They might follow the team they played for but if they move to a different town they aren't going to adopt the local team as theirs and buy season tickets and I don't think they become big WBB fans down the line. Someone here mentioned in a post how they knew about a team in the NCAA tournament and they were playing a high seed with prominent players and they knew nothing about them. I think for girls they just like to play the sport but in terms of interest in the overall game at a national level the interest isn't there. You see a lot of men in the crowd at women's games but there should be so many more women especially the former players.
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004 Posts: 11050 Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
Posted: 04/13/15 9:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The WNBA's TV contract is something like $12 million a year, so call it $1 million per team. The NBA's new contract is $2.66 billion a year, or around $83 million per team. That kind of explains it.
The good news is that the WNBA's finances have improved meaningfully, with the NBA admitting that 6 teams made money each of the last two years. (Most sports franchises officially lose money, thanks to accounting tricks.) Still, I wouldn't expect salaries to ramp up particularly fast.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 66926 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 04/13/15 10:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
beknighted wrote: |
The WNBA's TV contract is something like $12 million a year, so call it $1 million per team. The NBA's new contract is $2.66 billion a year, or around $83 million per team. That kind of explains it.
The good news is that the WNBA's finances have improved meaningfully, with the NBA admitting that 6 teams made money each of the last two years. (Most sports franchises officially lose money, thanks to accounting tricks.) Still, I wouldn't expect salaries to ramp up particularly fast. |
The CBA was completed shortly after the new media deal and the players got essentially nothing in the way of pay increases.
Of course they also fired the head of the union shortly thereafter...
_________________ I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010 Posts: 9628
Back to top |
Posted: 04/13/15 11:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Even after the new ESPN deal, the Sparks owners had to get rid of their team due to unsustainable losses.
|
|
dtrain34
Joined: 17 Aug 2010 Posts: 409 Location: Lacey, Washington
Back to top |
Posted: 04/14/15 10:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The lack of popularity of the WNBA is almost analogous to pro soccer for either gender (although here in the Northwest the Timbers, Sounders and Caps ARE a pretty big deal):
Kids play soccer and GBB but they don't turn into fans when they grow up.
One of those aforementioned D1 players who was unfamiliar with her team's highly-rated NCAA tourney foe prior to the scouting report was, along with her fourth grade AAU team mates, beside herself with joy when the Seattle Storm won its first championship. The next time the Storm won she was in high school.... "hey, you might want to come in here and watch this, the Storm are about to clinch the championship...." "Huh, that's good, I'm going over to Ashley's house, OK?"
This is kind of a non sequitir as I'm not sure how it could help make fans out of players, but:
How about the WNBA plays during basketball season?
It may avoid conflict with the men's NBA and WCBB by playing during the summer but it's going up against baseball and early season football now and those are sports people expect to see that time of year. Of course with the current salaries that would dilute the product as few top pros would abandon their foreign teams and in some cases, adopted homelands, for the W's lowly wages.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11151
Back to top |
Posted: 04/15/15 9:26 am ::: |
Reply |
|
That's a huge gender difference, for whatever reason: High school male basketball players are almost invariably basketball fans, watch games on TV, can talk about teams and players, and will make time to watch the NCAAs and NBA playoffs.
High school female basketball players are very seldom fans, and very seldom watch games on TV. (The elite players, who are looking to basketball as a career, are in a different category, but there aren't many of them.) And those who are fans, are fans of men's teams and male players, as evidenced by the fact that girls don't buy basketball shoes branded by female players, but rather get the LeBron or Curry or whatever male model is the hottest at a given time.
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 66926 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
Posted: 04/15/15 9:30 am ::: |
Reply |
|
ClayK wrote: |
evidenced by the fact that girls don't buy basketball shoes branded by female players, but rather get the LeBron or Curry or whatever male model is the hottest at a given time. |
Or they realize that the female branded shoes are crap designed to be pretty rather than functional.
_________________ I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 11151
Back to top |
Posted: 04/15/15 9:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
pilight wrote: |
ClayK wrote: |
evidenced by the fact that girls don't buy basketball shoes branded by female players, but rather get the LeBron or Curry or whatever male model is the hottest at a given time. |
Or they realize that the female branded shoes are crap designed to be pretty rather than functional. |
I don't know whether that's true or not ... could be.
But a lot of men's shoes are more about the design than the function. Check out any issue of Slam. (And they may be functional too ...)
_________________ Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013 Posts: 14550
Back to top |
Posted: 04/15/15 10:36 am ::: |
Reply |
|
The women's NCAA final had 3.2 million viewers.
The men's NCAA final had over 28 million viewers and was by far the most highly watched show on TV for the week. (12 million more than the second place show, NCIS).
The men's semifinals drew 22.6 million and 15.3 million viewers; the women's semis drew 2.4 and 2.0 million.
Why does the financial disparity surprise anyone?
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005 Posts: 8229 Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
Posted: 04/15/15 10:56 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Some in the media and elsewhere want to ascribe the salary differential to discrimination or sexism. That is uninformed or tendentious.
Basic free market economics explains the differential: supply vs. demand, revenue vs. costs, profits vs. losses. If anything, the WNBA has been economically free-riding on financial support from the NBA throughout its history. |
|
dtrain34
Joined: 17 Aug 2010 Posts: 409 Location: Lacey, Washington
Back to top |
Posted: 04/15/15 12:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Yep, if sexism were the problem, we wouldn't hear much about tennis or golf, which have been huge for years, or Ronda Rousey, who pretty much made up her sport and pushed for UFC to sanction female fights with no tradition whatever compared to the UConn-UT-Stanford history in WBB.
|
|
terpsforever
Joined: 17 Jul 2011 Posts: 1233
Back to top |
Posted: 04/18/15 1:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ArtBest23 wrote: |
The women's NCAA final had 3.2 million viewers.
The men's NCAA final had over 28 million viewers and was by far the most highly watched show on TV for the week. (12 million more than the second place show, NCIS).
The men's semifinals drew 22.6 million and 15.3 million viewers; the women's semis drew 2.4 and 2.0 million.
Why does the financial disparity surprise anyone? |
exactly.
|
|
|
|