- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:35 am to NIH
If investors keep dumping money in it doesnt really matter what they lost in the past.
The investors do take a cut of revenue though and thats why the players only get 20% unlike the ~50% the NBA and NFL players get
The investors do take a cut of revenue though and thats why the players only get 20% unlike the ~50% the NBA and NFL players get
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:44 am to tigerbait2010
quote:
Remarkable how untalented and annoying an entire professional league can be
A boys varsity basketball team would run these twats out of the gym.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:46 am to holdmuh keystonelite
quote:
Well she got me. I make less than 150k a year.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:49 am to sgallo3
Did your new Griner jersey come in yet?
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:52 am to tiggerthetooth
I'm much more triggered by the fact that someone with that level of grammar is making that much money moreso than just the fact that she's making that money.
Good for you making that much; but this is the sort of thing AI should be used for.
Good for you making that much; but this is the sort of thing AI should be used for.
This post was edited on 4/16/26 at 10:53 am
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:54 am to tiggerthetooth
A league full of progressive women that are now making fun of people that earn less than 150K/year. That’s definitely going to draw in the spectators.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:56 am to TheOcean
quote:
WNBA will go bankrupt soon enough.
The WNBA will never go bankrupt.
Ever.
Daddy NBA will continue to subsidize their garbage product.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:56 am to tiggerthetooth
She works for a non-profit charity organization.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 10:57 am to sgallo3
Can you walk us through who these investors are?
Is the leagues revenue going to be more than their liabilities?
Are the women being paid with profits from the league?
Is the leagues revenue going to be more than their liabilities?
Are the women being paid with profits from the league?
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:15 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
Is the leagues revenue going to be more than their liabilities?
No.
The CBA was set at the level the WNBA owners admitted they would still be making money during negotiations.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:17 am to sgallo3
I’m sorry, so the millions the women will be making is not coming from dollars generated? And instead given to them while the league loses money?
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:20 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
I’m sorry, so the millions the women will be making is not coming from dollars generated?
What do you think revenue is?
They are getting 20% of revenue. NFL, NBA, NHL get ~50%.
The owners argued they would lose $700 million over 7 years if players got 31% of revenue.
Then they argued they would lose $420 million if the players got 27.5% of revenue.
That means 3.5% of revenue is worth $280 million over 7 years.
$280 million divided by 3.5 = $80m per 1%.
That means the break even point would be 22.25%.
This post was edited on 4/16/26 at 11:26 am
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:26 am to sgallo3
The NFL’s revenues cover their costs. So they get to dispurss it.
The WNBA’s revenue does not cover its costs, historically.
So what money is there to pay the players?
I know the WNBA has finally turned a profit 1 time. But is that excluding the fact that their costs are subsidized?
The WNBA’s revenue does not cover its costs, historically.
So what money is there to pay the players?
I know the WNBA has finally turned a profit 1 time. But is that excluding the fact that their costs are subsidized?
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:32 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
So what money is there to pay the players?
An extra $200 million per year in tv money coming in next year. The league salary cap total went up 82.5 million
If they lost 40 million last year and spend 82.5 million more this year while making $200 million more on tv rights alone they'll still be at a surplus assuming expenses dont go up $80 million.
They also are seeing increased revenue in merch and ticket sales.
The 2 expansion teams supposedly cost $250 million a piece as well so that's another $500 million the league recieved.
This post was edited on 4/16/26 at 11:36 am
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:41 am to sgallo3
Networks see a fantastic return on their NFL tv deals. I believe the Big 10 and SEC do as well.
Do these networks see a positive return on WNBA tv deals?
If not, I’m not sure how you can claim these women aren’t being subsidized.
We just have the NBA floating the league and networks donating to them. That’s not the same as the NFL, is it?
This assumes people keep tuning in more and more as well, no? I have a sneaking suspicion viewership saw a limited spike due to racism and Clark.
ETA: I’m trying to figure out if the business is making money or if it’s just leftists donating to WNBA players.
It seems like you’re saying “eh, can’t whine now bc the women have a functioning league that makes money.
But the NBA owns 42% of the league. NBA teams absorb WNBA losses. It markets the WNBA. It lets them use facilities. Networks give give the league money to air their games and don’t see positive returns on the investment.
How does any of this equal the women deserving these pay raise?
Do these networks see a positive return on WNBA tv deals?
If not, I’m not sure how you can claim these women aren’t being subsidized.
We just have the NBA floating the league and networks donating to them. That’s not the same as the NFL, is it?
This assumes people keep tuning in more and more as well, no? I have a sneaking suspicion viewership saw a limited spike due to racism and Clark.
ETA: I’m trying to figure out if the business is making money or if it’s just leftists donating to WNBA players.
It seems like you’re saying “eh, can’t whine now bc the women have a functioning league that makes money.
But the NBA owns 42% of the league. NBA teams absorb WNBA losses. It markets the WNBA. It lets them use facilities. Networks give give the league money to air their games and don’t see positive returns on the investment.
How does any of this equal the women deserving these pay raise?
This post was edited on 4/16/26 at 11:48 am
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:49 am to ReauxlTide222
The WNBA gets more viewers than the NHL in the US. NHL gets a lot of money from their canadian tv deal though.
Comparing NHL's US deal they got 7 years, 4.5 billion
WNBA got 11 years, 2.2 billion
In 2025, WNBA regular-season games averaged approximately 960,000–970,000 viewers, more than double the 440,000–450,000 average for the 2024-25 NHL season
there are a LOT more NHL games per year though.
If you wanna compare salary caps, NHL is $95.5 million per team, WNBA is $7 million per team
Comparing NHL's US deal they got 7 years, 4.5 billion
WNBA got 11 years, 2.2 billion
In 2025, WNBA regular-season games averaged approximately 960,000–970,000 viewers, more than double the 440,000–450,000 average for the 2024-25 NHL season
there are a LOT more NHL games per year though.
If you wanna compare salary caps, NHL is $95.5 million per team, WNBA is $7 million per team
This post was edited on 4/16/26 at 11:50 am
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:54 am to sgallo3
What’s this mean? It reads as if it’s all a function of NBA popularity and a completed subsidization for the WNBA.
It doesn’t seem fair to only count US viewers for the NHL given how popular it is in other countries.
The NHL has more than 1300 nationally televised games per season while the WMBA has 50-60.
And Canada sees 2-4 more million viewers per NHL game.
I’m not sure you’re making any legitimate points here.
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:58 am to CarolinaGamecock99
Hey, looks like dawn..
Posted on 4/16/26 at 11:59 am to ReauxlTide222
quote:
The NHL has more than 1300 nationally televised games per season while the WMBA has 50-60.
WNBA will have 125+ under the new TV deal, viewership has hit record highs as well. Of course the deal is gonna be way more money than the old deal.
quote:
It doesn’t seem fair to only count US viewers for the NHL given how popular it is in other countries.
And Canada sees 2-4 more million viewers per NHL game.
The NHL has separate tv rights for Canada, a 12-year, $11 billion CAD extension with Rogers Communications in Canada (through 2038).
I compared their US TV deal to the WNBA deal because the numbers were US viewers.
I really find it funny that people try to convince themselves that the WNBA is the only sports league in the world where the owners are getting screwed. The owners just collected $500 million in franchise fees for one season. This isn't a charity to them. They are making money on tickets, concessions, franchise fees, and all sorts of shite.
I don't understand why anyone would go to a WNBA game but I'm not naive enough to think the owners are losing their asses off and still agreed to give the players an almost 4x pay increase.
This post was edited on 4/16/26 at 12:05 pm
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News