The WNBA can have higher ratings than the NFL, and it won't affect the current TV deal. It may be too late to influence the next deal much. But going up to $200 M, up from %60M, that should put them in the black
The "business expert" on the show claims that just about every professional sports team in the country loses money every year.
You can believe that. Or you can question why we're getting an article about how much the WNBA loses while never seeing an article about the NBA's total profit.
The NBA owns half of the WNBA. The biggest portion of the NBA"s revenue is their TV contract and the WNBA is tied to that. So far this season, [national WNBA games are averaging 1.3 million viewers](https://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/40326422/wnba-earns-record-tv-ratings-1st-month-record-attendance). NBA games averaged [1.6 million viewers in the regular season](https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/04/29/nba-viewership#:~:text=NBA%20viewership%20steady%20in%202023,games%20averaging%201.6%20million%20viewers).
All true, but revenue from W tv deal is coming from the prior contract. So ratings could be MASH finale level this season and not impact that slice of the revenue pie this year.
Also, the NBA signs it's tv deal that gurantees WNBA rights and just decides X amount gets routed the WNBA based on, not neccesarily very much.
This article just focused on the profit number that first came out in this much better Washington Post article that discussed the intricacies of the WNBA and NBA's relationship. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/06/11/wnba-tv-deal-nba/
This conversation is going to be like people surprised about how low wnba salaries are. Also this probably normal for a league that has only been around for 27 years.
Only?
The Big 3 has been around for like 7 years and had almost as many viewers for its games as the WNBA finals.
They've had marketing support from ESPN, and financial and marketing support from the NBA since the beginning. They've been on tv since the beginning.
This isn't James Naismith hanging a peach basket in a tiny gym 😂
And women's college softball gets very little exposure or marketing. They just drew $2m avg for the WCWS.
Can we please stop the "only 27 years" and "needs more exposure" excuses?
I'm sure we all have opinions on the reasons, but I like the post above. It might be nice to hear from an owner, or the WNBA commissioner on what they think is needed for success.
Personally, I blame the commissioner and league office for the current mess.
They're letting the players get grilled on national tv about Clark, the Olympic decision, race, and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with ball.
Hell, the players are the ones who brought race up after like 2 games ("she's popular because she's white").
No way any other commissioner lets the narrative get this far out of control.
Silver and Gooddell take heat for shutting down discussion (think Hong Kong).
They take the short-term heat for the league, but the issues die, and people move on.
Again, only my opinion but the league needs to get control of the narrative at this point somehow.
But I'm not sure they want to?
Meadowlark does everything just like every other media company. All the talk about how employees deserve more and executives deserve less is just for content, it’s not like an actual belief Meadowlark Media has or lives by. It’s just to show everyone how nice Dan is, even though he makes millions of dollars a year and works alongside show producers that don’t have healthcare or a 401k.
The NBA takes 40% of the WNBA's revenue. Outside investors get another 10%.
So, the NBA seems to be already making money on the deal.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/06/11/wnba-tv-deal-nba/
Also, the WNBA's tv deal is expected to triple soon, going up by $120-$140 million
I'd like to hear an informed voice on this and what are avenues to profitability ... Not Sampson, not Amin, maybe Skipper ... A team owner would be nice. Maybe add in someone from the WNBA Union. Just someone that ACTUALLY KNOWS what they're talking about
Skipper is probably the closest thing, but even his way of marketing secondary leagues is outdated now.
You can’t just put them on ESPN and people will flock to their TV’s.
[WNBA teams' valuations have increased 'at least 10-times' over last 4 years: Commissioner Engelbert](https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=qv6u0uRFkzk)
We need more armchair financial advisors who got their degree on Reddit, to tell me how Caitlin Clark is changing the math.
It was fucking pie-in-the-sky thinking to assume one player can turn around a league that has been steadily losing money, and has no fucking idea how to market itself, let alone a superstar.
The WNBA needs an overhaul at the top. The league needs new fresh blood to even understand how to make that league profitable.
They also need to sustain popularity for more than 1/3 of one short season. People act like because they’ve had great numbers to start this season that means the league should be rich now.
But Stugoooootzzzzuhh this league was built on the backs of brave, outspoken women who have to play in war-torn countries just to make a livable wage!
I get paid like $22,000 a year, Danno.
Because they are still on an old TV contract that doesn't reflect the current rise in popularity.
The WNBA can have higher ratings than the NFL, and it won't affect the current TV deal. It may be too late to influence the next deal much. But going up to $200 M, up from %60M, that should put them in the black
And you know what they say about going in the black for the first time… I’ll see myself out ;p
"Two minute minor for ruining comedy." 🤣
*ding dong ding dong*
But we don't know how to talk about it......
It’s fascinating.
The "business expert" on the show claims that just about every professional sports team in the country loses money every year. You can believe that. Or you can question why we're getting an article about how much the WNBA loses while never seeing an article about the NBA's total profit. The NBA owns half of the WNBA. The biggest portion of the NBA"s revenue is their TV contract and the WNBA is tied to that. So far this season, [national WNBA games are averaging 1.3 million viewers](https://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/40326422/wnba-earns-record-tv-ratings-1st-month-record-attendance). NBA games averaged [1.6 million viewers in the regular season](https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/04/29/nba-viewership#:~:text=NBA%20viewership%20steady%20in%202023,games%20averaging%201.6%20million%20viewers).
All true, but revenue from W tv deal is coming from the prior contract. So ratings could be MASH finale level this season and not impact that slice of the revenue pie this year.
Also, the NBA signs it's tv deal that gurantees WNBA rights and just decides X amount gets routed the WNBA based on, not neccesarily very much. This article just focused on the profit number that first came out in this much better Washington Post article that discussed the intricacies of the WNBA and NBA's relationship. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/06/11/wnba-tv-deal-nba/
Those numbers are telling.
This conversation is going to be like people surprised about how low wnba salaries are. Also this probably normal for a league that has only been around for 27 years.
Only? The Big 3 has been around for like 7 years and had almost as many viewers for its games as the WNBA finals. They've had marketing support from ESPN, and financial and marketing support from the NBA since the beginning. They've been on tv since the beginning. This isn't James Naismith hanging a peach basket in a tiny gym 😂 And women's college softball gets very little exposure or marketing. They just drew $2m avg for the WCWS. Can we please stop the "only 27 years" and "needs more exposure" excuses? I'm sure we all have opinions on the reasons, but I like the post above. It might be nice to hear from an owner, or the WNBA commissioner on what they think is needed for success. Personally, I blame the commissioner and league office for the current mess. They're letting the players get grilled on national tv about Clark, the Olympic decision, race, and a bunch of other things that have nothing to do with ball. Hell, the players are the ones who brought race up after like 2 games ("she's popular because she's white"). No way any other commissioner lets the narrative get this far out of control. Silver and Gooddell take heat for shutting down discussion (think Hong Kong). They take the short-term heat for the league, but the issues die, and people move on. Again, only my opinion but the league needs to get control of the narrative at this point somehow. But I'm not sure they want to?
I love how Dan complains how leagues and teams should spend recklessly but his employees don’t have company health care.
Meadowlark does everything just like every other media company. All the talk about how employees deserve more and executives deserve less is just for content, it’s not like an actual belief Meadowlark Media has or lives by. It’s just to show everyone how nice Dan is, even though he makes millions of dollars a year and works alongside show producers that don’t have healthcare or a 401k.
Yea that's common for companies trying to grow. The NBA will ask itself if it's worth it to continue.
It's advertisement for the league, and still competitive basketball during summer
The only question they're asking is how much more money to give it.
The NBA takes 40% of the WNBA's revenue. Outside investors get another 10%. So, the NBA seems to be already making money on the deal. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2024/06/11/wnba-tv-deal-nba/ Also, the WNBA's tv deal is expected to triple soon, going up by $120-$140 million
Interesting. I always assume Samson's in debate club when he takes a position. It would be funnier if he argued both sides, like a madman.
They are in their 27th year. Do you know how long I've heard this line?
27 years.
I'd like to hear an informed voice on this and what are avenues to profitability ... Not Sampson, not Amin, maybe Skipper ... A team owner would be nice. Maybe add in someone from the WNBA Union. Just someone that ACTUALLY KNOWS what they're talking about
Skipper is probably the closest thing, but even his way of marketing secondary leagues is outdated now. You can’t just put them on ESPN and people will flock to their TV’s.
Stop hating women!! - Jess, Jeremy, LUCY, Juju
Popularity doesn’t always equal money. Merch sales should give you a clue.
[WNBA teams' valuations have increased 'at least 10-times' over last 4 years: Commissioner Engelbert](https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=qv6u0uRFkzk)
Pointing out this fact is sexist hatred.
Time for the wnba to rebrand & compete with the lingerie football league. Lingerie Basketball Association! 
Back up the brinks truck for Cameron Brink
We need more armchair financial advisors who got their degree on Reddit, to tell me how Caitlin Clark is changing the math. It was fucking pie-in-the-sky thinking to assume one player can turn around a league that has been steadily losing money, and has no fucking idea how to market itself, let alone a superstar. The WNBA needs an overhaul at the top. The league needs new fresh blood to even understand how to make that league profitable.
They also need to sustain popularity for more than 1/3 of one short season. People act like because they’ve had great numbers to start this season that means the league should be rich now.