Notice THE OFFICIAL WNBA CBA Lockout/Strike Thread……… (5 Viewers)

[THE HCP]

At 75 Im still alive, know how to thrive and survive. Min of 3 times a week add's years to one's life.

GOD DAMN. 3 times a WEEK!!!!???? Can you send me some pointers please.

 

[Hoopguru]

GOD DAMN. 3 times a WEEK!!!!???? Can you send me some pointers please.

You’re a road warrior you shouldn’t need pointers!

 

[kjironman1]

GOD DAMN. 3 times a WEEK!!!!???? Can you send me some pointers please.

This is low hanging fruit here. ^^^^^

 

[SharpesTriumph]

asking for an immediate shift to a rev share based of GROSS revenue in a league that has been subsidized since inception and incurred losses basically every season is pretty wild to me. With the media rights deal coming in, there will definitely be changes, but after nearly 30yrs of running at consistent losses, its crazy for the players to die on the hill of '% of gross' knowing how they got to where they are. I saw the suggested contract wage level increases and that seemed like a good move forward, that combined with a player share of 'profits' could be something if it ever got to that point.

the sad irony is that the interest in CC helped drive things forward, many of the league and its commentators were incredibly dismissive of her impact and wanted to spotlight shift the success metrics onto other players and past players and it got a little tired and ugly. Then CC got injured and the majority of the viewer support stopped. It was there for that, and most of it left when it wasnt there anymore.... imagine that.

Im not sure the players are winning the PR battle of the 'casual' who helped get this rights deal qualified and signed.

it has a very 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' feel about it to me in regards to how this is playing out.

You can flip all these arguments back to blame the owners too. After years of losses they finally have a league with large profits projected and they're franchises have exploded in net worth but their trying to get players to give them back even more profits.

If players were only payed based off net revenue they'd get $0 when the league losses money, or they'd have negative paychecks and have to pay the league back?

If the owners want players to take compensation% lower than other pro sports maybe they could give players small portion of equity instead of cash? Just how publicly trades companies let employees buy stock or people in tech / startups get stock options.

But none of the owners want that, they want players to take less pay like a startup that compensates with stock options while they keep 100% of the equity so they can sell for hundreds of millions and share zero profit.

Most businesses have to choose if they want to let key staff be partners or employees and compensate accordingly. One type saves the company cash now but costs equity later, the other pays more cash now but keeps all the equity later. WNBA should be no different.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Peoples feelings about CC don’t register with me. She is the sole reason for viewership and attendance being up. Her haters can deny it all they want but it’s true. They are on damn charter planes and have moved up in the quality of hotels simply because of her. The new tv contract is her as well.
I simply don’t understand why people hate on the sole reason people are spending money and tuning in. It feels like the same vibe the league and players had towards MJ when he first arrived. It’s ok to acknowledge it. They have had to move games to NBA arenas and not community college gyms for her…… NOBODY else.
All of this coincides with her arrival.

…..”No there are other players people watch and others have been crushing it for 30 years…….”
Sure.

I agree don't see why people need to hate on Clark. Yes she's just like MJ in terms of impact to their sport - hell she might be higher. But when she retires I expect the WNBA will continue much better than if she'd never played just as with MJ.

 

[BlayZa]

that part about the nba/wnba continuing much better if Jordan and Clark never played is masterclass in irony.

without the thing that made them huge, they would be even bigger.

wtf?

 

[THE HCP]

This is low hanging fruit here. ^^^^^

 

[Phatguysrule]

Peoples feelings about CC don’t register with me. She is the sole reason for viewership and attendance being up. Her haters can deny it all they want but it’s true. They are on damn charter planes and have moved up in the quality of hotels simply because of her. The new tv contract is her as well.
I simply don’t understand why people hate on the sole reason people are spending money and tuning in. It feels like the same vibe the league and players had towards MJ when he first arrived. It’s ok to acknowledge it. They have had to move games to NBA arenas and not community college gyms for her…… NOBODY else.
All of this coincides with her arrival.

…..”No there are other players people watch and others have been crushing it for 30 years…….”
Sure.

Lol. I don't understand why people get so upset when anybody suggests WNBA is fine without Caitlin Clark. Sure, she's a draw. Biggest draw in the league. She brings in more revenue. Absolutely.

Attendance and viewership ship was trending up before she was ever drafted. thanks to increased marketing spending by the wnba. COVID sucked, sure.

Did people also already have their channels picked before CC was injured? Are her fans too busy on the farm to figure out how to change the channel? TV viewership was up, even without the streaming deals.

WNBA viewership hits high largely without Clark, but with caveats

WNBA viewership hit a new high in 2025, with Nielsen's change to "Big Data" helping to overcome an injury-wracked season for Caitlin Clark.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

 

[Phatguysrule]

they could divest from the nba subsidization

what is false about the league not turning a profit since inception?
nobody is even arguing with "pay the ladies" ....
the new rights deal was going to 3-4x their pay, but then they want wages out of % GROSS REVENUE all of a sudden.
everyone saying the wnba success recent interest, viewership, tv rights rev boost ISNT mostly due to CC, is crazy. just bball 'purists' on a forum claiming the high road. For the avg fan out there, most cannot name their local team or 5 WNBA players total. The can do CC and then possibly Angel Reese, who is mostly well known for mebounds, misses and hating CC.

fans invested into the WNBA with the CC aura, bought season tickets, TV packages etc
when she wasnt in games and on TV, the league basically crashed. yes, its up YOY, but holy low base batman, and vs projections with CC aura in full effect all year, it limped over the success line.

Fever games were the only nationally televised games that drew normie attention. when she got injured 50%+ viewership drop.
viewership overall was up 6% on '24, but with CC's rookies season hype n going into her 2hd year but only playing 13 games, id think that was accurate as those 13 would have been the top audience games televised too.

i found that non-Fever games viewership was up 36% which is good % movement, but a very low numbers base.

the actual real test is if they can maintain any momentum with all this being dragged thru the media, the 'pay us what you owe us' t-shirts, and continual lockout threats on a league that the avg person struggles to recognise or have interest in.... Also, that 'what you owe us' part annoyed a LOT of casuals and generated a fair amount of surfacing of WNBA history and reality to many more casuals who struggled to understand the rationale based on the numbers.

i honestly dont see what the actual 'win' here is for the WNBA PA, in having $1, being offered $4, but asking for $20.

Legitimate leagues pay the players 50% of sport related revenue.

Asking for a path to 50% is not out of line now that the league is making money.

Why wouldn't WNBA players also get 50% of basketball related revenue? The owners are going to make their money. It will just take a few more years for the profits to catch up to their losses on THEIR INVESTMENT.

The players aren't invested. They don't get to take advantage of the rewards of growing franchises or growing league. They shouldn't have to worry about the losses, either.

That's for the owners.

But they make money on the franchises. They are going to make that money regardless. The NBA will make money on the value of the league. They are going to make that money regardless.

I don't understand how people can be upset the players want a similar share as The NBA, NHL, NFL, etc and instead side with the billionaire owners...

 

[Phatguysrule]

I agree don't see why people need to hate on Clark. Yes she's just like MJ in terms of impact to their sport - hell she might be higher. But when she retires I expect the WNBA will continue much better than if she'd never played just as with MJ.

I don't think anyone in here has been hating on CC. I'm not sure why this keeps coming up.

 

[crandc]

Somehow an inability to name Seattle WNBA players is taken as, I don't know, proof of irrelevancy?
And I realized how damn few Seattle Seahawks I can name after watching NFL playoffs and Super Bowl...

 

[kjironman1]

Lol. I don't understand why people get so upset when anybody suggests WNBA is fine without Caitlin Clark. Sure, she's a draw. Biggest draw in the league. She brings in more revenue. Absolutely.

Attendance and viewership ship was trending up before she was ever drafted. thanks to increased marketing spending by the wnba. COVID sucked, sure.

Did people also already have their channels picked before CC was injured? Are her fans too busy on the farm to figure out how to change the channel? TV viewership was up, even without the streaming deals.

WNBA viewership hits high largely without Clark, but with caveats

WNBA viewership hit a new high in 2025, with Nielsen's change to "Big Data" helping to overcome an injury-wracked season for Caitlin Clark.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Well beings she's probably the only player that can actually say she had a huge impact on attendance it isn't clear where they would be without her. Saying they would be where they are without her though seems a bit ridiculous.

 

[THE HCP]

Sure, she's a draw.

Bro?!?

 

[Phatguysrule]

Well beings she's probably the only player that can actually say she had a huge impact on attendance it isn't clear where they would be without her. Saying they would be where they are without her though seems a bit ridiculous.

I don't think anybody said they'd be where they are without her. But the league would almost certainly be growing thanks to the huge funding round the wnba did a few years ago and invested in the new marketing strategy.

It was successful before CC and helped her become as popular as she is. She had to be a great and marketable player and personality to get to these heights, but the WNBA has done well to squeeze everything they can out if it.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Somehow an inability to name Seattle WNBA players is taken as, I don't know, proof of irrelevancy?
And I realized how damn few Seattle Seahawks I can name after watching NFL playoffs and Super Bowl...

Exactly. Most people can't name more than one or two NFL players or NBA players. Or NHL players.

All of those leagues lost money when they started.

All of those leagues pay players 50% of sport related revenue.

There is no argument for denying the WNBA players the same. Except possibly, that you don't think women should make as much as men.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Bro?!?

I can't believe you're trying to turn this into some kind of insult.

Here is what you cut off

Sure, she's a draw. Biggest draw in the league. She brings in more revenue. Absolutely.

 

[BlayZa]

Legitimate leagues pay the players 50% of sport related revenue.

Asking for a path to 50% is not out of line now that the league is making money.

Why wouldn't WNBA players also get 50% of basketball related revenue? The owners are going to make their money. It will just take a few more years for the profits to catch up to their losses on THEIR INVESTMENT.

The players aren't invested. They don't get to take advantage of the rewards of growing franchises or growing league. They shouldn't have to worry about the losses, either.

That's for the owners.

But they make money on the franchises. They are going to make that money regardless. The NBA will make money on the value of the league. They are going to make that money regardless.

I don't understand how people can be upset the players want a similar share as The NBA, NHL, NFL, etc and instead side with the billionaire owners...

depends what you mean by legitimate. its a massively subsidized league, by the NBA and the team owners.
i never said a 'path' to gross rev isnt a thing, what im saying is that its their current ask after consistently not turning a profit since inception and hard talking about what they are "owed". i see they have dropped from 40-50% to 25% of gross, yet they also seem hell bent on destroying the one player who actually enabled them to reach a lot of new mainstream interest, which boggles my mind at least.

it seems we are right on deadline, so will be interesting to see if a deal can get done or its a lockout.

 

[Phatguysrule]

depends what you mean by legitimate. its a massively subsidized league, by the NBA and the team owners.
i never said a 'path' to gross rev isnt a thing, what im saying is that its their current ask after consistently not turning a profit since inception and hard talking about what they are "owed". i see they have dropped from 40-50% to 25% of gross, yet they also seem hell bent on destroying the one player who actually enabled them to reach a lot of new mainstream interest, which boggles my mind at least.

it seems we are right on deadline, so will be interesting to see if a deal can get done or its a lockout.

The players' job isn't to draw a profit. They aren't invested that way.

Making a profit is the job of the owners. The players don't get to share in the benefits of team and League values exploding.

The losses aren't on the players. The losses are on the owners for what has been a poorly run league.

Every league is heavily subsidized when it starts.

Where does this "destroying one player" bullshit come from?

Nobody is trying to destroy any player.

And just so you know, a lockout is the owners locking the players out. That's not on the players.

I hope the players have a plan in place to begin setting up a competing league if there is a lockout.

 

[BlayZa]

'when it starts' ?
you mean 30yrs ago?
also, re the poorly run league, it has had an incredibly poor product for a long time too - which generated extremely limited interest. until CC......

a lockout isnt purely one sided unless there is an outright negotiation refusal by one side. that isnt this. this is an example of vastly different financial outcome expectations on each side, hence the negotiation stallings

tbh id love the players to start their own thing and lets see how that one goes..... perspective n reality is a hell of a drug.

and you really honestly saying you dont think wnba players hate on CC cause she is in the spotlight? again, mind boggling.

i do admire your support of the players in this, tbh ive never met an actual wnba fan online, or seen any jerseys irl. maybe the tide is changing.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

'when it starts' ?
you mean 30yrs ago?
also, re the poorly run league, it has had an incredibly poor product for a long time too - which generated extremely limited interest. until CC......

a lockout isnt purely one sided unless there is an outright negotiation refusal by one side. that isnt this. this is an example of vastly different financial outcome expectations on each side, hence the negotiation stallings

tbh id love the players to start their own thing and lets see how that one goes..... perspective n reality is a hell of a drug.

and you really honestly saying you dont think wnba players hate on CC cause she is in the spotlight? again, mind boggling.

i do admire your support of the players in this, tbh ive never met an actual wnba fan online, or seen any jerseys irl. maybe the tide is changing.

For someone who talks about how poor the WNBA product is you sure seem to have a bizarre obsession to post about it. Like I can't imagine spending 1 minute of my time to go find a NASCAR group and tell their fans how stupid their league is.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

'when it starts' ?
you mean 30yrs ago?
also, re the poorly run league, it has had an incredibly poor product for a long time too - which generated extremely limited interest. until CC......

a lockout isnt purely one sided unless there is an outright negotiation refusal by one side. that isnt this. this is an example of vastly different financial outcome expectations on each side, hence the negotiation stallings

tbh id love the players to start their own thing and lets see how that one goes..... perspective n reality is a hell of a drug.

and you really honestly saying you dont think wnba players hate on CC cause she is in the spotlight? again, mind boggling.

i do admire your support of the players in this, tbh ive never met an actual wnba fan online, or seen any jerseys irl. maybe the tide is changing.

Phat has a good point, perhaps you need to lookup the definition of "lockout" and "strike"

 

[BlayZa]

For someone who talks about how poor the WNBA product is you sure seem to have a bizarre obsession to post about it. Like I can't imagine spending 1 minute of my time to go find a NASCAR group and tell their fans how stupid their league is.

a few posts is a fairly low bar for obsession status qualification.
i think you are vastly over-estimating my interest in the wnba, and under-estimating my interest in business negotiation.
also, i too could care less about nascar too, i do love Formula 1 tho.

 

[BlayZa]

Phat has a good point, perhaps you need to lookup the definition of "lockout" and "strike"

a lockout is the outcome when the CBA expires without agreement. if there is no deal reached, what else is meant to happen?

 

[kjironman1]

But the league would almost certainly be growing thanks to the huge funding round the wnba did a few years ago and invested in the new marketing strategy.

And then you said it again.
There is no way the league grows without a face to build it around.
By the way. It wasn’t the WNBA that funded the league or market strategy. It was the NBA.
The WNBA was, has been, and still is broke.

 

[BlayZa]

the commissioner seems to think a deal will be done, and it will be 'historic'.
they are running out of time to get something sorted before the season is impacted, which would hurt both sides in a multitude of ways.

going to be interesting to see exactly how the wnba cookie crumbles.

 

[Phatguysrule]

'when it starts' ?
you mean 30yrs ago?
also, re the poorly run league, it has had an incredibly poor product for a long time too - which generated extremely limited interest. until CC......

That is false. Increased interest happened as soon as the league did the 70 million funding round and actually invested in a marketing campaign.

Caitlin Clark also benefited from that marketing campaign. Dick's sporting goods had a whole section of Sabrinas before Caitlin Clark was ever drafted.

a lockout isnt purely one sided unless there is an outright negotiation refusal by one side. that isnt this. this is an example of vastly different financial outcome expectations on each side, hence the negotiation stallings.
tbh id love the players to start their own thing and lets see how that one goes..... perspective n reality is a hell of a drug.

The players are the product. It's already a proven product. It can make money. A lot of money.

If they can get some activist investors on board competing networks would love to get a hold of that market.

Just a few of the wealthiest women could make this happen. Even some who aren't on the list.

Jobs has been rumored to be interested in investing in sports.

Richest Women in the USA (2025 - Top 10)

Alice Walton: ~$106B–$117B (Walmart)
Julia Koch & family: ~$81.2B (Koch Industries)
Jacqueline Mars: ~$41.5B–$42.2B (Mars, Inc.)
Miriam Adelson & family: ~$37.9B (Casinos)
Abigail Johnson: ~$35B (Fidelity)
MacKenzie Scott: ~$33.9B (Amazon)
Marilyn Simons & family: ~$32.5B (Hedge funds)
Elaine Marshall & family: ~$30.9B (Koch Inc.)
Melinda French Gates: ~$29B (Investments)
Lyndal Stephens Greth & family: ~$27.4B (Oil & Gas)

and you really honestly saying you dont think wnba players hate on CC cause she is in the spotlight? again, mind boggling.

No, that's not what I'm saying. What I said is directly above.

Nobody's trying to destroy her any more than she is trying to destroy them.

Welcome to competitive sports.

i do admire your support of the players in this, tbh ive never met an actual wnba fan online, or seen any jerseys irl. maybe the tide is changing.

Thanks. I virtually always support real people over corporate billionaires.

Heck, If you could get even one of those wealthy women above on board you could probably get unrivaled to replace the WNBA and pay the players more than the current owners are offering.

Just expanded to five on five. With no WNBA to compete against the media rights deal would be huge.

 

[Phatguysrule]

And then you said it again.
There is no way the league grows without a face to build it around.

It was growing before Caitlin Clark was in the picture. There are very popular college players drafted every year.

Of course it would have continued growing.

Would it have grown as much? Who knows? Maybe somebody else would have been the star.

By the way. It wasn’t the WNBA that funded the league or market strategy. It was the NBA.
The WNBA was, has been, and still is broke.

Yes, The NBA and WNBA owners, as well as some NBA players, finally went out and decided to spend on marketing. It returned huge gains and led to almost immediate increased exposure, popularity and revenue.

Which shows what a shitty job the owners (including the NBA) had done with the league up to that point.

It was the owner's fault the league wasn't making money. It wasn't the players fault. That was the business model.

The players thought they should be making money. So they started talking about starting Unrivaled. This kicked the WNBA and NBA in the ass and got them going on the funding round to grow the league.

The reality is the NBA had been in the way. Doing just enough to keep the WNBA afloat, but not enough to allow it to thrive.

 

[kjironman1]

It was growing before Caitlin Clark was in the picture. There are very popular college players drafted every year.

Of course it would have continued growing.

Would it have grown as much? Who knows? Maybe somebody else would have been the star.


Yes, The NBA and WNBA owners, as well as some NBA players, finally went out and decided to spend on marketing. It returned huge gains and led to almost immediate increased exposure, popularity and revenue.

Which shows what a shitty job the owners (including the NBA) had done with the league up to that point.

It was the owner's fault the league wasn't making money. It wasn't the players fault. That was the business model.

The players thought they should be making money. So they started talking about starting Unrivaled. This kicked the WNBA and NBA in the ass and got them going on the funding round to grow the league.

The reality is the NBA had been in the way. Doing just enough to keep the WNBA afloat, but not enough to allow it to thrive.

The product in any business adventure has to be sufficient to satisfy a customer base.
Not saying your information and direction is wrong. Just saying they really didn’t have quite the draw due to talent on the court and possibly the product itself doesn’t quite fulfill those expectations. Clark has helped that issue.
Absolutely the talent has gotten better I’m sure but there still is a few things missing that the NBA provides.
Your average 24 hour gym player simply cannot do what is being done on an NBA court every night.
They can do what is happening on a WNBA court and more.
That might sound callous but it’s fact. Everyone says “For Women they are really good”.

 

[Phatguysrule]

The product in any business adventure has to be sufficient to satisfy a customer base.
Not saying your information and direction is wrong. Just saying they really didn’t have quite the draw due to talent on the court and possibly the product itself doesn’t quite fulfill those expectations. Clark has helped that issue.
Absolutely the talent has gotten better I’m sure but there still is a few things missing that the NBA provides.
Your average 24 hour gym player simply cannot do what is being done on an NBA court every night.
They can do what is happening on a WNBA court and more.
That might sound callous but it’s fact. Everyone says “For Women they are really good”.

That doesn't really matter. Steph Curry is so popular partially because he's the same size as a normal guy. He just put in a ton of work.

It doesn't have to compete with the NBA.

None of these points dispute anything I've said.

The league started growing as soon as the marketing changed. It didn't start growing because of Caitlin Clark. It started growing before Caitlin Clark was on the scene.

It started growing because of the marketing spend. The WNBA has always had the most talented women basketball players in the world. Talent was never the problem.

The league was being run poorly by the NBA and WNBA. That's it. That has been the only problem.

Frankly, I find this argument that the league is only doing well because of Caitlin Clark to be chauvinistic.

Caitlin Clark is an added draw. Absolutely. She's a superstar. The league's new marketing has helped her become that (and no, that isn't a diss on Caitlin Clark).

 

[kjironman1]

That doesn't really matter. Steph Curry is so popular partially because he's the same size as a normal guy. He just put in a ton of work.

It doesn't have to compete with the NBA.

None of these points dispute anything I've said.

The league started growing as soon as the marketing changed. It didn't start growing because of Caitlin Clark. It started growing before Caitlin Clark was on the scene.

It started growing because of the marketing spend. The WNBA has always had the most talented women basketball players in the world. Talent was never the problem.

The league was being run poorly by the NBA and WNBA. That's it. That has been the only problem.

Frankly, I find this argument that the league is only doing well because of Caitlin Clark to be chauvinistic.

Caitlin Clark is an added draw. Absolutely. She's a superstar. The league's new marketing has helped her become that (and no, that isn't a diss on Caitlin Clark).

I’m going to have to give it a shot if Portland actually plays this year and it looks good. I guess I’ll know better after I actually watch a few games.