WNBA investigating $100,000 Las Vegas Aces player sponsorships that star called 'life-changing'

#1
W

woodpusher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
521
Likes
332
#1

I suppose the difference is that
WNBA has a players' union, and
The union agreed to a salary cap.

Although any player who belongs to such a union with such a salary cap who also receives an endorsement deal is cause for suspicion.
 
#2
#2
Yeah, IDK why this can't be counted as an endorsement deal. Literally no difference in any meaningful way. The city likes the way they represent their city. Las Vegas spends as much money on branding as any city in the US, probably. There is nothing nefarious or wrong with this. It's not fair to the rest of the WNBA? It's the same as choosing LA because of the market size.
 
#6
#6
C-south said:
Solution is simple. Have the players buyout the investors and what the nba subsidizes. That way revenue can be split 2 ways instead of 4. Of course we all know that won’t work out like they want it to.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the $19.5M payroll cannot buy out half of a single $250M franchise let alone the league. Simple solution lacks reality.
 
#9
#9
95 Vol Alum said:
Disingenuous question. They are seeking higher wages in the next CBA. But you know that.
Click to expand...

From what? They’ve lost money every year they’ve been in existence. At some point those that have thrown money away to keep them afloat might consider a little roi. There’s not many companies that start a business to lose money just to give someone a job so those that were given employment can demand more money.
 
#10
#10
C-south said:
From what? They’ve lost money every year they’ve been in existence. At some point those that have thrown money away to keep them afloat might consider a little roi. There’s not many companies that start a business to lose money just to give someone a job so those that were given employment can demand more money.
Click to expand...
They don't need to leave the players only 9% for purposes of "ROI" and "losing money every year" was mostly an accounting lie too.

Lots of entities increased wages before being "profitable" anyway. It's always weird to me when there is a labor dispute and fans side with the billionaire owners over the players who make the leagues what they are
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomUTfan
#11
#11
NashVol11 said:
They don't need to leave the players only 9% for purposes of "ROI" and "losing money every year" was mostly an accounting lie too.

Lots of entities increased wages before being "profitable" anyway. It's always weird to me when there is a labor dispute and fans side with the billionaire owners over the players who make the leagues what they are
Click to expand...

Lol. 9% is better than 0%. I guess after 30 years of losing hundreds of millions they feel like they deserve something. There’s always someone willing to play for less.
 
#12
#12
C-south said:
Lol. 9% is better than 0%. I guess after 30 years of losing hundreds of millions they feel like they deserve something. There’s always someone willing to play for less.
Click to expand...
No, they are just arguing for something close to the status quo because they always do. Every time leagues do what you're suggesting and try "replacement players" everyone hates them, and again why side with the owners over the players?
 
#13
#13
NashVol11 said:
No, they are just arguing for something close to the status quo because they always do. Every time leagues do what you're suggesting and try "replacement players" everyone hates them, and again why side with the owners over the players?
Click to expand...

It’s the wnba. If anyone cared that much the money wouldn’t be an issue.
 
#14
#14
NashVol11 said:
They don't need to leave the players only 9% for purposes of "ROI" and "losing money every year" was mostly an accounting lie too.

Lots of entities increased wages before being "profitable" anyway. It's always weird to me when there is a labor dispute and fans side with the billionaire owners over the players who make the leagues what they are
Click to expand...
There was a good article on Yahoo Sports today quoting a couple of economists who argued that the WNBA players are being vastly underpaid based on their value. I'll link it. ‘They’re absolutely underpaid’: Economists weigh in on WNBA labor showdown
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#17
#17
C-south said:
And? The pie is split 4 ways instead of 2. They may get more money but it won’t be anything close to nba player money and will continue to operate at a loss.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about NBA player money? They certainly won't be operating at a loss though

www.espn.com

More record growth for women's sports revenue

Women's sports are projected to earn $2.35 billion globally in 2025, a 25% increase from 2024, according to a new report by consulting giant Deloitte.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

(And like I said, even the claim that they are "operating at a loss" now is just creative accounting)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomUTfan
#18
#18
NashVol11 said:
Who said anything about NBA player money? They certainly won't be operating at a loss though

www.espn.com

More record growth for women's sports revenue

Women's sports are projected to earn $2.35 billion globally in 2025, a 25% increase from 2024, according to a new report by consulting giant Deloitte.
www.espn.com www.espn.com

(And like I said, even the claim that they are "operating at a loss" now is just creative accounting)
Click to expand...

People who know better than to trust the owners of sports franchises really want to believe them this time.

We must have dozens and dozens of instances where the leagues told us one thing about something they weren't showing us, and the truth came out and refuted their narrative. Here are a few that come to mind:

- NFL and the NFLPA recently caught in a scandal to hide information.
- NFL 2011 lockout got caught with hidden revenue (lockout insurance)
- 2011 NBA lockout, Forbes analysts examined team valuations and found they were greatly undervaluing through complex accounting.
- MLB refused to open their books after declaring massive losses for Covid and the MLBPA said they were exaggerating. (I guess this one is still up for dispute)
- Remember when the Pirates got caught lying saying they were operating at a loss? (upon Googling this, it appears history has repeated itself?)
- It took a lawsuit to reveal that UFC fighters were only getting 20% of revenue with Dana telling us the whole time it's fair pay.

But yeah, this time the league is telling us the truth about revenue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zjcvols and NashVol11
#22
#22
Also, I get when people roll their eyes about NBA/MLB players crying unfair pay when those guys have guaranteed contracts and minimum from 840K to (I think the NBA is) $2.2M but a WNBA player max is like 80K. You can barely afford to live on that in California and places that have the jock tax. I don't think WNBA players getting like $250K is outrageous.
 
#24
#24
zjcvols said:
If the WNBA is such a massive, massive money loss how come they were able to get $250M a piece for three new franchises? I don't know many people dropping $250M for guaranteed losses.
Click to expand...

Maybe because that’s coming from current nba owners. Since almost half (42%) of all wnba revenue goes to the nba owners they aren’t set to lose as much when it fails. The investment groups also don’t lose any foothold on their share of 16%. That means any pay increases will come from the 42% left which means wnba owners will have to give up something if the players want to get a higher percentage. None of this means they will turn a profit, something they have NEVER done.
 
#25
#25
C-south said:
Maybe because that’s coming from current nba owners. Since almost half (42%) of all wnba revenue goes to the nba owners they aren’t set to lose as much when it fails. The investment groups also don’t lose any foothold on their share of 16%. That means any pay increases will come from the 42% left which means wnba owners will have to give up something if the players want to get a higher percentage. None of this means they will turn a profit, something they have NEVER done.
Click to expand...
Bunch of word salad to say absolutely nothing. The new Portland team's owner, for example, is not an NBA owner and paid a $125M expansion fee.

But I'm glad you figured out the groundbreaking idea that for the players to get a higher percentage, the owners will get a lesser percentage.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top