- 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
re: USWNT files federal discrimination suit against US Soccer, demand equal pay
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:15 pm to different arse
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:15 pm to different arse
Excellent contribution.
2
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:17 pm to LNCHBOX
You're welcome.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:18 pm to LNCHBOX
They should get equal per diem, but that's all they should get out of this suit.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:19 pm to WarSlamEagle
Sick burn
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:20 pm to Stewie Griffin
Thanks for the screenshot.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how this can even be considered as to why the women should be paid more.
The men have to be extremely conservative with their friendlies during WCQ, while the women will have nothing but time on their hands after the Olympics. Of course they will generate more revenue for US Soccer during FY2017. That doesn't, however, mean the playing fields are equal. The men have a higher risk on the side of soccer that nets astronomically higher global interest. The women will also benefit from sending the senior team to the Olympics.
Even if the US had qualified for the Olympics, the typical American doesn't realize that it's actually the U23 team, and not the likes of Dempsey, Bradley, and Howard. I believe this would hurt the men once the tournament started. Just wanted to bring that point up even though its moot.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how this can even be considered as to why the women should be paid more.
The men have to be extremely conservative with their friendlies during WCQ, while the women will have nothing but time on their hands after the Olympics. Of course they will generate more revenue for US Soccer during FY2017. That doesn't, however, mean the playing fields are equal. The men have a higher risk on the side of soccer that nets astronomically higher global interest. The women will also benefit from sending the senior team to the Olympics.
Even if the US had qualified for the Olympics, the typical American doesn't realize that it's actually the U23 team, and not the likes of Dempsey, Bradley, and Howard. I believe this would hurt the men once the tournament started. Just wanted to bring that point up even though its moot.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:24 pm to McCaigBro69
quote:
I mean if you have two office buildings and one is literally the nicest one on the block, while the other is shitty and needs repairs to keep up with the surrounding real estate, which would you continue funding to upgrade?
If the tenants working in the nice building are generating a larger profit while getting paid less than the tenants in the shitty building, it's not unreasonable for them to ask for a raise.
To poke a hole in my own argument I'd need a larger sample size than a projected budget for FY'17 to make any definitive statements.
But the women have a point.
*waits for LNCHBOX's next ad hominem
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:25 pm to Bluefin
quote:
The men have a higher risk on the side of soccer that nets astronomically higher global interest
Completely agree.
quote:
The women will also benefit from sending the senior team to the Olympics
Not their fault the men couldn't make it.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:35 pm to Stewie Griffin
Seriously, thats purely event/arena revenue.
That does not count ANY TV, marketing, merchandise, etc. revenue.
You cherry picked a year, and it was bad data that doesn't even tell good information.
We would need a full 4 year cycle breakdown of total revenue and expenditure which includes all revenue and expense streams.
I have no idea if the women deserve more money or not - but a lawsuit should have nothing to do with it. If they want more, they should threaten to boycot. And the USSF will either pay what they want or go with a B squad willing to play.
I am all in favor of the women's team making wages proprorational to revenue, the same amount proportionall to revenue as the men's team. But until someone provides that data, we don't know what that is. And I have a feeling they are already being paid that.
ETA - if what you attached is from the lawsuit and is what they are trying to use as proof, they obviously have nothing to stand on thats relevant and are praying that people who don't know how to read or look into things jump on misleading and bad data and put public pressure on the USSF.
That does not count ANY TV, marketing, merchandise, etc. revenue.
You cherry picked a year, and it was bad data that doesn't even tell good information.
We would need a full 4 year cycle breakdown of total revenue and expenditure which includes all revenue and expense streams.
I have no idea if the women deserve more money or not - but a lawsuit should have nothing to do with it. If they want more, they should threaten to boycot. And the USSF will either pay what they want or go with a B squad willing to play.
I am all in favor of the women's team making wages proprorational to revenue, the same amount proportionall to revenue as the men's team. But until someone provides that data, we don't know what that is. And I have a feeling they are already being paid that.
ETA - if what you attached is from the lawsuit and is what they are trying to use as proof, they obviously have nothing to stand on thats relevant and are praying that people who don't know how to read or look into things jump on misleading and bad data and put public pressure on the USSF.
This post was edited on 3/31/16 at 12:56 pm
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:47 pm to Stewie Griffin
quote:
And WarSlamEagle convinced me to engage. Blame him.
COME AT ME, BRO
ETA: I mostly got into this because I was surprised that the USWNTers were using the federation's own projections. I have no idea how the federation came to those numbers, or if the pay is anywhere near proportional. I do know the turf nonsense was messed up, and something seems off with the way they were treated in that whole ordeal. Then again, I enjoy watching the USWNT a good bit, even when it's not the Olympics or the World Cup. #bias
This post was edited on 3/31/16 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 3/31/16 at 12:50 pm to Stewie Griffin
quote:
the fault of the USWNT that they can do a Victory Tour, while the men can't even qualify for the Olympics.
The lack of success in the men is a reason to spend more money, not less.
The succes of the women is an indication that the investment is sufficient.
These national teams are not jobs programs.
Should the women be paid more than they are? Maybe but it has nothing to do with what the men are paid.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:01 pm to uway
quote:
The succes of the women is an indication that the investment is sufficient.
Their unhappiness is an indication to the contrary.
quote:
Should the women be paid more than they are? Maybe but it has nothing to do with what the men are paid.
That's fair.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:03 pm to Tigerstark
quote:
If they want more, they should threaten to boycot
They have. The lawsuit, I would imagine, is another tactic to get what they want.
quote:
I am all in favor of the women's team making wages proprorational to revenue, the same amount proportionall to revenue as the men's team. But until someone provides that data, we don't know what that is.
I agree.
quote:
ETA - if what you attached is from the lawsuit and is what they are trying to use as proof, they obviously have nothing to stand on thats relevant and are praying that people who don't know how to read or look into things jump on misleading and bad data and put public pressure on the USSF.
What I attached is from US Soccer's 2016 Annual General Meeting. I think they might be using those figures in the lawsuit, but those figures come from US Soccer, not the USWNT's suit.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:06 pm to Stewie Griffin
How about responding to the point though? Its not meant as total revenue or even direct revenue - purely arena revenue. TV revenue and tournament revenue (which is based upon TV revenue) will be a HUGE difference.
Therefore, its laughable that anyone would think its relevant to the story.
Therefore, its laughable that anyone would think its relevant to the story.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:11 pm to Tigerstark
quote:
That does not count ANY TV, marketing, merchandise, etc. revenue.
I'm not 100 percent sure, but I think most of this money isn't differentiated between men's and women's. The TV deals are linked.
quote:
David Nathanson, head of business operations for Fox Sports, who helped win the English-language portion of the estimated $1.2 billion U.S. broadcast rights that included both the men’s and women’s World Cups from 2015 to 2022, had no trouble assessing the worth of the women’s tournament in determining the network’s bid. “I can tell you that when we were bidding on the rights, we valued the Women’s World Cup almost as high as the men’s World Cup,” he says. “We recognized at an early stage that the U.S. had the number-one ranked team in the world and there was a big opportunity to capture the interest of this country with that event. In fact, the Women’s World Cup final (in 1999) was the (second)-highest-rated soccer event. We knew there was tremendous value in it from an early stage, and we certainly considered that when we were bidding on the rights.”
Maybe that's politically correct speech. Maybe not.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:15 pm to Stewie Griffin
US Soccer's financials don't disclose how much the women's team on its own generates in sponsorships and endorsement deals, which I think is part of the lawsuit. And the TV deals are linked. So it's hard to measure the split there.
He may or may not end up liking the answers to the questions if they're answered.
quote:
So what then is the value of the Women’s National Team in monetary terms? Rich Nichols, the executive director of the WNT players’ association, has asked US Soccer many times to receive a breakdown of the numbers, but says he has been stonewalled.
“The players are not asking to be overpaid,” Wambach says. “They are asking to be paid their market value. Let’s open the books. What is the market value of the women’s team? How much advertising space are you selling for those specific women’s games? And is that consistent with what you are paying those players? Those are questions that I would like to get answered.”
He may or may not end up liking the answers to the questions if they're answered.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:26 pm to Stewie Griffin
Thats still not relevant information - thats what the US rights were bought for from FIFA NOT WHAT THE USSF RECEIVED AS REVENUE FROM FIFA for those tournaments. We're one of pretty much every country in the world that buys the rights and most aren't paying for the women's what they pay for the mens.
Just a quick breakdown is that the USWNT received $2m from FIFA for the last WC - that was the total amount for the winner.
USMNT received $9m payout from FIFA for the 2015 WC.
So just the WC payout is 4.5 times more. Not counging anything else in revenue. The women, per their own lawsuit, claim the men are getting paid, sometimes, up to 4 times as much. Actually seems pretty fair to me.
Just a quick breakdown is that the USWNT received $2m from FIFA for the last WC - that was the total amount for the winner.
USMNT received $9m payout from FIFA for the 2015 WC.
So just the WC payout is 4.5 times more. Not counging anything else in revenue. The women, per their own lawsuit, claim the men are getting paid, sometimes, up to 4 times as much. Actually seems pretty fair to me.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:30 pm to Tigerstark
One thing I do support - Abby is saying that they want to know the breakdown of the revenue for ads, etc.
If USSF has not provided that, then a lawsuit is maybe the only way to make them provide it. I'm all for them having an open fair way to determine their proporation revenue.
If USSF has not provided that, then a lawsuit is maybe the only way to make them provide it. I'm all for them having an open fair way to determine their proporation revenue.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:45 pm to Tigerstark
The money is one thing, and like everyone is saying the "revenue" could be manipulated so many different ways that it's currently very hard to tell which team makes more money. It wouldn't hurt to pay them a couple of thousand more a year.
However, it's annoying the crap out of me how they keep talking about being the best in the world compared to the men and everything. Congrats on being the best women's soccer team, it's like being the skinniest kid at fat camp. Play a really good u-17 boys select team in front of the public and then tell us how great you are. We're the best at womens soccer bc no one else cares about it. I hate all our dumb bandwagon fans who only watch the WNT and their daughter's play, they're equally culpable in this idocy.
To clarify, I'm not really talking about the money, more the overall attitude of the Women's Team that they're equal to if not more important than the men.
However, it's annoying the crap out of me how they keep talking about being the best in the world compared to the men and everything. Congrats on being the best women's soccer team, it's like being the skinniest kid at fat camp. Play a really good u-17 boys select team in front of the public and then tell us how great you are. We're the best at womens soccer bc no one else cares about it. I hate all our dumb bandwagon fans who only watch the WNT and their daughter's play, they're equally culpable in this idocy.
To clarify, I'm not really talking about the money, more the overall attitude of the Women's Team that they're equal to if not more important than the men.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:46 pm to Tigerstark
quote:
One thing I do support - Abby is saying that they want to know the breakdown of the revenue for ads, etc.
Is this ad revenue you speak of going to include ALL events that both teams are in?
Because the USMNT just being in the World Cup probably would still be 4-5x greater the amount of the women's WC and Olympic run.
I don't really see how it couldn't include that.
Posted on 3/31/16 at 1:51 pm to McCaigBro69
I just read this comment on an article and laughed.
quote:
I'm a 300 pound male bikini model and I have recently discovered that I am not being financially compensated nearly as well as Kate Upton.
How is this possible? We're doing THE EXACT SAME JOB! It's discriminatory and I won't stand for it.
Whom do I sue?
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News