|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jul 8, 2019 16:27:18 GMT -8
FIFA just announced that they plan to double the Women's price money for the 2023 Women's World Cup from $30 million to $60 million. The men's pot is currently $400 million. Yes, more than 10 times what the women get. They're going to increase the men's pot to $440 million for their next Cup in Qatar in 2022. FIFA president Gianni Infantino apparently thought the grand gesture to "double" the women's prize money would satisfy critics... not sure who flunked basic algebra but the disparity is actually increasing by $10 million. Yeah, but come on... increased the women's pot by 100%, and the men's by only 10%! Totally fair! </sarcasm> In 2006 26 billion viewers watched the men’s World Cup. 715 million people watched the final game. Of the last 8 years Forbes list of most valuable sports franchises has been topped by an “association football” aka soccer men’s team for seven of them. Three times reach for Manchester United and Real Madrid, Dallas Cowboys topped 2018. So I’m expecting participants in World Cup get a proportional cut of the revenues: and those billions of eyeballs bring in a lot more money. Otoh? The women’s USWNT base salary of $100k per player exceeds the men’s USMNT base salary by, wait for it, $100k. So the entire current discrepancy is generated by the FIFA bonuses paid to the federations: bonuses paid for by the two World Cup revenue streams. One far larger than the other....
|
|
balzaccom
Trail Wise!
Waiting for spring...
Posts: 4,496
|
Post by balzaccom on Jul 8, 2019 17:38:10 GMT -8
Otoh...
The real money in sports is it in the endorsement deals. And while FIFA and the USSF continue to show they are clueless, I am delighted to see that companies like Nike are not. While Nike does market research, FIFA and the rest talk between their good old boys and fail to see what this World Cup did: superb soccer watched by hundreds of millions of fans. And a whole generation of females growing up with aspirations to the stars.
Gotta love it.
|
|
jazzmom
Trail Wise!
a.k.a. TigerFan
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by jazzmom on Jul 8, 2019 18:50:48 GMT -8
Otoh? The women’s USWNT base salary of $100k per player exceeds the men’s USMNT base salary by, wait for it, $100k. I've never heard/read about these USWNT/USMNT "base salaries". The current lawsuit is based on NWSL and MSL min/max salaries, which exist for both men and women. In terms of revenue, in recent years (2017, 2018), the USWNT has brought in higher revenues than USMNT. Oh, and more people watched this year's Women's World Cup final than last year's Men's World Cup final. So, even if you could "explain" the $30 vs $400 million discrepancy, I totally reject the suggestion that it also explains why the discrepancy will INCREASE in the 2022/2023 World Cups.
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jul 8, 2019 19:15:07 GMT -8
First of all the lawsuit is against USSF that’s the soccer federation that owns the men’s and women’s national teams. “All 28 female players sued the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) — their employer — in U.S. District Court in March, ” major league soccer isn’t part of the suit Relative revenue streams? Increased worldwide broadcast coverage? That’s the usual basis for team members prize money and bonuses . The bonus payments, the source of the huge discrepancy are from FIFA so whatever local sources of revenue the U. S. national federation has that’s reflected in the women’s national revenues being larger doesn’t have relevance to World Cup bonuses. Perhaps that’s why the women enjoy a guarranteed $100k and the men do not. jazzmom given you’d “never heard” of the base salary you might find this Washington Post Factchecker overview informative. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/?utm_term=.6a4183a86928As you mentioned the 30 million v the 400? That’s FIFA. “World Cup earnings Then there’s the World Cup — which has a different bonus structure entirely. Before we dive in, it’s important to understand how World Cup prize money works. FIFA sets the amount and awards any prize money to the winning country’s federation. The federation — in this case USSF — then distributes it to the players based on each team’s collective-bargaining agreement. Total prize money for the Women’s World Cup in 2019 is $30 million — the champions will walk away with about $4 million. For contrast, in the 2018 Men’s World Cup, the champions won $38 million from a total pool of about $400 million. In other words, the champions from the men’s world cup were awarded more than the total prize money in the women’s tournament. So there’s no question that there’s a huge gap in earning potential here. “ I suppose that could be addressed by suing FIFA. Just out of curiosity? Where on Forbes listing of valuable sports franchises are the NWSL franchises? Certainly they must be up there giving Manchester United & Real Madrid a run for that four billion dollar valuation. Or not. The international association football economics that FIFA operates within.
|
|
|
Post by bluefish on Jul 9, 2019 2:12:13 GMT -8
Not a huge soccer fan. Huge fan of this particular team. I think they generated interest, proved themselves as phenomenal athletes individually and as a team, and gave the USA a whole new batch of fans like me. I'm much more likely to watch women's soccer going forward. My entire life I've been appalled by women's inequality. Gender equality is centuries overdue. Not to imply I'm centuries old, just that it seems change is glacially slow. Hmmmmm, bad analogy, now.
|
|
jazzmom
Trail Wise!
a.k.a. TigerFan
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by jazzmom on Jul 9, 2019 2:34:46 GMT -8
Total prize money for the Women’s World Cup in 2019 is $30 million — the champions will walk away with about $4 million. For contrast, in the 2018 Men’s World Cup, the champions won $38 million from a total pool of about $400 million. In other words, the champions from the men’s world cup were awarded more than the total prize money in the women’s tournament. So there’s no question that there’s a huge gap in earning potential here. Pretty sure this was the point I made. The fact of the discrepancy isn't the worst of it; it's that the discrepancy is growing.
|
|
FamilySherpa
Trail Wise!
Tangled up in Rhododendron
Posts: 1,791
|
Post by FamilySherpa on Jul 9, 2019 4:54:00 GMT -8
As great as the US team is, Europe is miles ahead of us in supporting women's soccer. We need to fix the pro system.
|
|
jazzmom
Trail Wise!
a.k.a. TigerFan
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by jazzmom on Jul 9, 2019 6:09:56 GMT -8
As great as the US team is, Europe is miles ahead of us in supporting women's soccer. Well, FIFA is based in Switzerland and they're setting the prize money for the World Cups...
|
|
FamilySherpa
Trail Wise!
Tangled up in Rhododendron
Posts: 1,791
|
Post by FamilySherpa on Jul 9, 2019 6:20:12 GMT -8
As great as the US team is, Europe is miles ahead of us in supporting women's soccer. Well, FIFA is based in Switzerland and they're setting the prize money for the World Cups... I'm talking about support for the women's professional leagues.
|
|
jazzmom
Trail Wise!
a.k.a. TigerFan
Posts: 3,059
|
Post by jazzmom on Jul 9, 2019 7:21:51 GMT -8
Well, FIFA is based in Switzerland and they're setting the prize money for the World Cups... I'm talking about support for the women's professional leagues. Maybe, but then men's salaries are proportionately higher as well. The most successful women's team is Lyon (France), which is in the Division 1 Feminine league, and its top players are reported to earn up to €180K ($202K). Top WSL women players are reported to be earning between £35K - £65K (US$81K) a year. There are maybe half-dozen outliers worldwide among women, who are earning around $300K per year. At the same time, the top Premier League players are earning over $20 Million -- 100 times what the top women earn. I believe the US men and women's salary disparity is actually smaller. We just don't have the superstar players that the Premier League has. I'm willing to accept that the world, in general, prefers male super heroes. Top women athletes are certainly admired but they're rarely worshiped in the way top male athletes are. And I get it that teams/leagues operate as a business and, as such, top male athletes are worth more to the business. BUT I think there's a difference when it comes to prize money for a tournament like the World Cup, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Olympics, etc. In these events, I think the prize money should be equal. Other international sports organizations have come to recognize this; Wimbledon for instance awards equal prize money for men and women. They give out the same medals at the Olympics for every event, regardless of how "popular"/competitive/lucrative. US Open prize money is the same for men and women. The discrepancy in the World Cup prize money is medieval, IMO.
|
|
Hungry Jack
Trail Wise!
Living and dying in 3/4 time...
Posts: 3,809
|
Post by Hungry Jack on Jul 9, 2019 8:54:40 GMT -8
Yeah, but come on... increased the women's pot by 100%, and the men's by only 10%! Totally fair! </sarcasm> In 2006 26 billion viewers watched the men’s World Cup. 715 million people watched the final game. Of the last 8 years Forbes list of most valuable sports franchises has been topped by an “association football” aka soccer men’s team for seven of them. Three times reach for Manchester United and Real Madrid, Dallas Cowboys topped 2018. So I’m expecting participants in World Cup get a proportional cut of the revenues: and those billions of eyeballs bring in a lot more money. Otoh? The women’s USWNT base salary of $100k per player exceeds the men’s USMNT base salary by, wait for it, $100k. So the entire current discrepancy is generated by the FIFA bonuses paid to the federations: bonuses paid for by the two World Cup revenue streams. One far larger than the other.... There is somewhat of a parallel in NCAA sports, where Title 9 (a very worthy law) mandates that athletic budgets are apportioned equally to men's and women's sports. Many collegiate sports programs rely a great deal on broadcast revenues from football and men's basketball to fund operations. Americans have an insatiable appetite for these sports. Obviously, pretty much all of higher education is subsidized some way by state and federal government, either via tax dollars going to support public university budgets, federal loans for student tuition and aid, and federal research. So I think Title 9 makes perfect sense.
|
|
Hungry Jack
Trail Wise!
Living and dying in 3/4 time...
Posts: 3,809
|
Post by Hungry Jack on Jul 9, 2019 8:59:47 GMT -8
I think tennis might be the sport where compensation parity is getting very close. Roger Federer is probably the most popular tennis player of all time, but a quick (unscientific) survey shows that while a Google search using Federer yields 93M hits, Serena Williams (my favorite) gets 193M hits--or twice as many.
|
|
FamilySherpa
Trail Wise!
Tangled up in Rhododendron
Posts: 1,791
|
Post by FamilySherpa on Jul 9, 2019 9:53:52 GMT -8
I'm talking about support for the women's professional leagues. Maybe, but then men's salaries are proportionately higher as well. The most successful women's team is Lyon (France), which is in the Division 1 Feminine league, and its top players are reported to earn up to €180K ($202K). Top WSL women players are reported to be earning between £35K - £65K (US$81K) a year. There are maybe half-dozen outliers worldwide among women, who are earning around $300K per year. At the same time, the top Premier League players are earning over $20 Million -- 100 times what the top women earn. I believe the US men and women's salary disparity is actually smaller. We just don't have the superstar players that the Premier League has. I'm willing to accept that the world, in general, prefers male super heroes. Top women athletes are certainly admired but they're rarely worshiped in the way top male athletes are. And I get it that teams/leagues operate as a business and, as such, top male athletes are worth more to the business. BUT I think there's a difference when it comes to prize money for a tournament like the World Cup, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Olympics, etc. In these events, I think the prize money should be equal. Other international sports organizations have come to recognize this; Wimbledon for instance awards equal prize money for men and women. They give out the same medals at the Olympics for every event, regardless of how "popular"/competitive/lucrative. US Open prize money is the same for men and women. The discrepancy in the World Cup prize money is medieval, IMO. I'm not sure if you think i'm arguing against you or what. I'm all for equal pay for International tournaments. It seems silly not to. My concern is the women's professional league (Here in the US). Its a complete mess. It needs funding, real stadiums, partner clubs, a longer season, more teams, everything.
|
|
balzaccom
Trail Wise!
Waiting for spring...
Posts: 4,496
|
Post by balzaccom on Jul 9, 2019 10:24:20 GMT -8
I have a feeling some of these women are going to worshipped very very much like male stars...but by girls. That's cool.
|
|
gabby
Trail Wise!
Posts: 4,537
|
Post by gabby on Jul 9, 2019 10:40:57 GMT -8
I have a feeling some of these women are going to worshipped very very much like male stars...but by girls. That's cool. And me too. Eventually, you've gotta believe that the "men first" attitude that seems to drive all of this will go the way of the dodo. Men might even start voting for women presidential candidates! First, we need to get rid of the very strange and archaic, apparently deep-seated attitudes that make some people believe all the pure crap that makes these things happen. Let's start with me (us).
|
|