OT Caitlin Clark's WNBA rookie contract breakdown released

[LeBronSpaghetti]

I’m not sure what people expect for a business that generates absolutely no money. Many of them have complained that they want revenue sharing - well if there’s no revenue how does that work? Do they have to pay to play like I do in my men’s league?

I think it would be great if the WNBA started generating some money from Clark’s popularity. But I cannot stand the entitlement of “I do nothing to generate any money but I deserve a massive salary”. Clark will be very wealthy due to endorsements and sponsorships regardless of her salary, which she of course deserves because she generates a lot of money.

you've never worked for a tech company have you? didnt both besos and musk become the world's richest men before their company made any money

That’s funny because I do in fact work in tech. I’m not sure if you understand the “growth at any cost” model if you’re trying to compare companies like Amazon, Tesla, or Salesforce to the WNBA.

Companies like Amazon, Salesforce, and Tesla have attained high extremely high valuations despite not turning a profit initially due to investors belief in their long term potential. Instead of prioritizing short term profitability, they chose to focus on rapid expansion, market penetration, and product development. They then reinvested their revenue back into the business to fuel growth, acquire customers, develop new products, and expand into new markets. This is what’s often known of as "growth at any cost."

These companies achieved massive valuations without immediate profitability by focusing on growth, building investor confidence in their long-term potential, and executing ambitious strategies to dominate their respective markets. This is what made their founders extremely wealthy as the value of their equity stakes soared alongside their companies valuations.

The WNBA is nothing like this. They are not generating insane revenue and reinvesting it into their product and experiencing massive growth. There also isn’t an overwhelming market appetite for the WNBA, unlike the three companies I mentioned above.

[Ambrose]

Livable wage? In what state is 75k livable?

47 states. The three that require more are California, Massachusetts, Hawaii. $60k or less for 36 states.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/poverty/4179830-this-is-how-much-singles-need-to-live-comfortably-in-every-state/

im sure different data sets say different things, but the notion of needing less than 100k to live in nyc is a joke. Anecdotally this seems right, based on me living in nyc
https://smartasset.com/data-studies/salary-needed-live-comfortably-2024

Most people, Clark included, don't live in places with insanely high cost of living. $75k, which is mandated as a rookie deal, is plenty to live comfortably for the vast majority of the country for a single person.

Plus, her Nike deal is at least 8 figures, and it's probably not low 8 figures either.

[LeBronSpaghetti]

I’m not sure what people expect for a business that generates absolutely no money. Many of them have complained that they want revenue sharing - well if there’s no revenue how does that work? Do they have to pay to play like I do in my men’s league?

I think it would be great if the WNBA started generating some money from Clark’s popularity. But I cannot stand the entitlement of “I do nothing to generate any money but I deserve a massive salary”. Clark will be very wealthy due to endorsements and sponsorships regardless of her salary, which she of course deserves because she generates a lot of money.

If you’re a failing business and there’s a star salesman on the market that is going to immediately increase your revenue by a factor of 100 you don’t go to them with an offer of $15 an hour because “well heck sorry bro we’re a failing business why would you expect more? Just get a side hustle!”

Unfortunately society will basically force her to go along with this exploitation under the guise of “lifting up women’s basketball for the future! Collective bargaining!” While the suits sit in the boardroom laughing their asses off. But don’t expect everyone to just be like “yeah this is okay because this is how it’s always been done”, not everyone is going to go along with that in your life


In an ideal world she would come out and say hey, this isn’t the 70s anymore, things are moving at much faster pace than your antiquated systems are capable of handling and it’s taking advantage of me. I’d rather negotiate my compensation outside the framework of collective bargaining of which I had no part in, meet me at the table if you’d like or I’ll go do something else with my time

You have absolutely no proof that Clark being in the WNBA will do anything positive for its revenue let alone a 100x increase like you claim. Regardless, Clark will be extremely rich from sponsorships and she completely deserves that.

And as for your salesman analogy: it’s more like if I have a small business of 5 people selling pencils, and the best salesman in the world comes to me and says he wants to work for me. Just because he’s the best in the world doesn’t mean I have the funds to offer him what he’s worth. The WNBA is small potatoes and can only offer small potatoes. Clark can make an outstanding living elsewhere, but the WNBA can only offer her so much at the moment. Perhaps she changes everything for the WNBA and it becomes nearly as popular as the NBA and salaries increase to match that. I highly doubt that, but some seem to think it’s a given.

[Doctor MJ]

I’m not sure what people expect for a business that generates absolutely no money. Many of them have complained that they want revenue sharing - well if there’s no revenue how does that work? Do they have to pay to play like I do in my men’s league?

I think it would be great if the WNBA started generating some money from Clark’s popularity. But I cannot stand the entitlement of “I do nothing to generate any money but I deserve a massive salary”. Clark will be very wealthy due to endorsements and sponsorships regardless of her salary, which she of course deserves because she generates a lot of money.

How would it make any sense for a league that sells thousands of tickets for each team for each game would generate no revenue? For the record, the WNBA generated $200 million in revenue in 2023 - which sounds like it's roughly $200 million more than what people pay to watch you - and it's been growing increasingly rapidly in recent years.

Also, I think you may be confusing revenue with profit, and there the thing is that your profit is dependent on how costs are defined. For a start-up league, paying for everything that's required to use an NBA arena is a stupid thing if your goal is to make immediate profit, but that's what the NBA chose to do with the WNBA because this wasn't their goal.

I think frankly the NBA's done a reasonably good job with all of this stuff. The rub is that when costs are so murky as they are in the case of the WNBA, you really can't use a profit-sharing model, so you need to use revenue-sharing...but it's understandable wouldn't want to use the same slit for the WNBA as the NBA due to the fact that they see themselves as paying for things to sustain the WNBA that are either irrelevant or negligible for the NBA.

If they consulted me though, I'd advise them to use the same revenue sharing model they do for the NBA. If NBA players are getting X% of the NBA's revenue, pay WNBA players X% of the WNBA's revenue. I just think it's simpler that way to keep labor harmony and I don't think it would cost owners that much more money. I don't think they are being sexist if they don't do this, but I think of it as something where you're paying a little bit extra for good will, which is something that all companies who think in the long-term do as a matte of course.

[Ambrose]

I’m not sure what people expect for a business that generates absolutely no money. Many of them have complained that they want revenue sharing - well if there’s no revenue how does that work? Do they have to pay to play like I do in my men’s league?

I think it would be great if the WNBA started generating some money from Clark’s popularity. But I cannot stand the entitlement of “I do nothing to generate any money but I deserve a massive salary”. Clark will be very wealthy due to endorsements and sponsorships regardless of her salary, which she of course deserves because she generates a lot of money.

If you’re a failing business and there’s a star salesman on the market that is going to immediately increase your revenue by a factor of 100 you don’t go to them with an offer of $15 an hour because “well heck sorry bro we’re a failing business why would you expect more? Just get a side hustle!”

Unfortunately society will basically force her to go along with this exploitation under the guise of “lifting up women’s basketball for the future! Collective bargaining!” While the suits sit in the boardroom laughing their asses off. But don’t expect everyone to just be like “yeah this is okay because this is how it’s always been done”, not everyone is going to go along with that in your life


In an ideal world she would come out and say hey, this isn’t the 70s anymore, things are moving at much faster pace than your antiquated systems are capable of handling and it’s taking advantage of me. I’d rather negotiate my compensation outside the framework of collective bargaining of which I had no part in, meet me at the table if you’d like or I’ll go do something else with my time

You have absolutely no proof that Clark being in the WNBA will do anything positive for its revenue let alone a 100x increase like you claim. Regardless, Clark will be extremely rich from sponsorships and she completely deserves that.

And as for your salesman analogy: it’s more like if I have a small business of 5 people selling pencils, and the best salesman in the world comes to me and says he wants to work for me. Just because he’s the best in the world doesn’t mean I have the funds to offer him what he’s worth. The WNBA is small potatoes and can only offer small potatoes. Clark can make an outstanding living elsewhere, but the WNBA can only offer her so much at the moment. Perhaps she changes everything for the WNBA and it becomes nearly as popular as the NBA and salaries increase to match that. I highly doubt that, but some seem to think it’s a given.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91106543/caitlin-clark-ticket-prices-wnba-games-draft-indiana-fever

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/04/17/caitlin-clark-drives-indiana-fever-tickets-to-wnba-high/?sh=643223a93d87

https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/wnba/caitlin-clark-dc-fever-mystics-tickets/65-8610ce58-7392-4c45-a33d-2816ecfe25b8

https://www.si.com/wnba/2024/04/16/caitlin-clark-indiana-fever-jersey-sells-out-so-quickly-after-wnba-draft

[LeBronSpaghetti]

If you’re a failing business and there’s a star salesman on the market that is going to immediately increase your revenue by a factor of 100 you don’t go to them with an offer of $15 an hour because “well heck sorry bro we’re a failing business why would you expect more? Just get a side hustle!”

Unfortunately society will basically force her to go along with this exploitation under the guise of “lifting up women’s basketball for the future! Collective bargaining!” While the suits sit in the boardroom laughing their asses off. But don’t expect everyone to just be like “yeah this is okay because this is how it’s always been done”, not everyone is going to go along with that in your life


In an ideal world she would come out and say hey, this isn’t the 70s anymore, things are moving at much faster pace than your antiquated systems are capable of handling and it’s taking advantage of me. I’d rather negotiate my compensation outside the framework of collective bargaining of which I had no part in, meet me at the table if you’d like or I’ll go do something else with my time

You have absolutely no proof that Clark being in the WNBA will do anything positive for its revenue let alone a 100x increase like you claim. Regardless, Clark will be extremely rich from sponsorships and she completely deserves that.

And as for your salesman analogy: it’s more like if I have a small business of 5 people selling pencils, and the best salesman in the world comes to me and says he wants to work for me. Just because he’s the best in the world doesn’t mean I have the funds to offer him what he’s worth. The WNBA is small potatoes and can only offer small potatoes. Clark can make an outstanding living elsewhere, but the WNBA can only offer her so much at the moment. Perhaps she changes everything for the WNBA and it becomes nearly as popular as the NBA and salaries increase to match that. I highly doubt that, but some seem to think it’s a given.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91106543/caitlin-clark-ticket-prices-wnba-games-draft-indiana-fever

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/04/17/caitlin-clark-drives-indiana-fever-tickets-to-wnba-high/?sh=643223a93d87

https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/wnba/caitlin-clark-dc-fever-mystics-tickets/65-8610ce58-7392-4c45-a33d-2816ecfe25b8

https://www.si.com/wnba/2024/04/16/caitlin-clark-indiana-fever-jersey-sells-out-so-quickly-after-wnba-draft

That’s great news, I hope that continues and it’s not just a flash in the pan. Ideally it leads to a sustainable league that isn’t based on one individual’s marketability.

[DOT]

But I cannot stand the entitlement of “I do nothing to generate any money but I deserve a massive salary”.

Hell yeah comrade

Down with the bourgeoise

Eat the rich!

[azcatz11]

You have absolutely no proof that Clark being in the WNBA will do anything positive for its revenue let alone a 100x increase like you claim. Regardless, Clark will be extremely rich from sponsorships and she completely deserves that.

And as for your salesman analogy: it’s more like if I have a small business of 5 people selling pencils, and the best salesman in the world comes to me and says he wants to work for me. Just because he’s the best in the world doesn’t mean I have the funds to offer him what he’s worth. The WNBA is small potatoes and can only offer small potatoes. Clark can make an outstanding living elsewhere, but the WNBA can only offer her so much at the moment. Perhaps she changes everything for the WNBA and it becomes nearly as popular as the NBA and salaries increase to match that. I highly doubt that, but some seem to think it’s a given.

https://www.fastcompany.com/91106543/caitlin-clark-ticket-prices-wnba-games-draft-indiana-fever

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/04/17/caitlin-clark-drives-indiana-fever-tickets-to-wnba-high/?sh=643223a93d87

https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/wnba/caitlin-clark-dc-fever-mystics-tickets/65-8610ce58-7392-4c45-a33d-2816ecfe25b8

https://www.si.com/wnba/2024/04/16/caitlin-clark-indiana-fever-jersey-sells-out-so-quickly-after-wnba-draft

That’s great news, I hope that continues and it’s not just a flash in the pan. Ideally it leads to a sustainable league that isn’t based on one individual’s marketability.

I'm not trying to be a hater but I'll believe it when I see it. The one flaw I see with her is she's not charismatic and doesn't seem to like attention. I personally don't see her being a transcendent star or moving the WNBA needle in a hugely significant way like some people think. If she had an unbelievable personality - I may have a different opinion.

[dockingsched]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=AtPRYYXAIqrFGO95b7YfIA

[dockingsched]

I’m not sure what people expect for a business that generates absolutely no money. Many of them have complained that they want revenue sharing - well if there’s no revenue how does that work? Do they have to pay to play like I do in my men’s league?

I think it would be great if the WNBA started generating some money from Clark’s popularity. But I cannot stand the entitlement of “I do nothing to generate any money but I deserve a massive salary”. Clark will be very wealthy due to endorsements and sponsorships regardless of her salary, which she of course deserves because she generates a lot of money.

Wait what? You think the wnba doesn’t generate revenue? In that post you said it a few times so I can’t imagine it’s a typo. WNBA generates hundreds of millions in revenue.

You must be thinking of profit, but saying profit wouldn’t make sense in your attempt at witty one liners trying to make fun of players for supposedly not generating money

[Doctor MJ]

https://www.fastcompany.com/91106543/caitlin-clark-ticket-prices-wnba-games-draft-indiana-fever

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/04/17/caitlin-clark-drives-indiana-fever-tickets-to-wnba-high/?sh=643223a93d87

https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/wnba/caitlin-clark-dc-fever-mystics-tickets/65-8610ce58-7392-4c45-a33d-2816ecfe25b8

https://www.si.com/wnba/2024/04/16/caitlin-clark-indiana-fever-jersey-sells-out-so-quickly-after-wnba-draft

That’s great news, I hope that continues and it’s not just a flash in the pan. Ideally it leads to a sustainable league that isn’t based on one individual’s marketability.

I'm not trying to be a hater but I'll believe it when I see it. The one flaw I see with her is she's not charismatic and doesn't seem to like attention. I personally don't see her being a transcendent star or moving the WNBA needle in a hugely significant way like some people think. If she had an unbelievable personality - I may have a different opinion.

I mean, if there was a question of whether Clark could generate the buzz to be a mainstream star, it's already been answered.

I feel like people are operating as if the University of Iowa normally generates buzz we all talk about in women's basketball that translates to huge ratings and ticket prices, when that's obviously not the case.

[D.Brasco]

That’s great news, I hope that continues and it’s not just a flash in the pan. Ideally it leads to a sustainable league that isn’t based on one individual’s marketability.

I'm not trying to be a hater but I'll believe it when I see it. The one flaw I see with her is she's not charismatic and doesn't seem to like attention. I personally don't see her being a transcendent star or moving the WNBA needle in a hugely significant way like some people think. If she had an unbelievable personality - I may have a different opinion.

I mean, if there was a question of whether Clark could generate the buzz to be a mainstream star, it's already been answered.

I feel like people are operating as if the University of Iowa normally generates buzz we all talk about in women's basketball that translates to huge ratings and ticket prices, when that's obviously not the case.

Personality for star athletes is often overrated. Most sports stars are kinda dull personality wise. It's usually the fringe stars or the role players who tend to have to be more outgoing and try to go out of their way to show personality.

As long as a star athlete is not off-putting to people, the marketers will handle the personality aspect.

[erdamon]

How would it make any sense for a league that sells thousands of tickets for each team for each game would generate no revenue? For the record, the WNBA generated $200 million in revenue in 2023 - which sounds like it's roughly $200 million more than what people pay to watch you - and it's been growing increasingly rapidly in recent years.
.

Not sure where the 200m in revenue number comes from. The number I am seeing is 60m which matches up to the released salaries for picks 1-4.

Currently the WNBA has lots of financial problems. Most teams are only using 11 of their 12 slots due to lack of budget. This is partially due to the last contract where they gave the top players a major pay increase but only increased the total budget by a minor amount. So the top stars basically ate a roster spot.

And in reality only a handful of the girls that were drafted will make it because you have 33 new players trying to grab only of about 111 slots each year.

You are also dealing with a much smaller total amount of money so all the overhead (staff, venues, travel) eats a decent chunk of the total.

[WestGOAT]

This can all be easily explained. For one, thats a pretty great paycheck for 4-5 months of work. But also, sports are an entertainment business. In entertainment, you make what you bring in.

If one musician plays for 20 people at a bar and another musician plays for 75,000 at an arena, should the one playing for 20 people at a bar be paid the 10 million per show Taylor Swift makes? They are doing the same job...

I think people just want to be outraged about stuff these days.

(This isn't directed at anyone here, just seen countless posts on Twitter with people outraged over this.)

OP simply posted a pic depicting her salary, not sure there is any outrage in the post?

What stands out to me is that she was probably earning way more in college with NIL money or whatever. It's just ironic that her pay dramatically decreases going from "amateur"-level to pro.

Also your example doesn't really hold up here. For her to join the WNBA she has to comply with the collective bargaining agreement, which grossly underpays prolific rookies. She's not in charge of the revenue she is bringing in and will basically be subsidizing other WNBA players and the league itself. If she entered the league as a free-agent she'd get the max contract allowed.

[Ambrose]

https://www.fastcompany.com/91106543/caitlin-clark-ticket-prices-wnba-games-draft-indiana-fever

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/04/17/caitlin-clark-drives-indiana-fever-tickets-to-wnba-high/?sh=643223a93d87

https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/wnba/caitlin-clark-dc-fever-mystics-tickets/65-8610ce58-7392-4c45-a33d-2816ecfe25b8

https://www.si.com/wnba/2024/04/16/caitlin-clark-indiana-fever-jersey-sells-out-so-quickly-after-wnba-draft

That’s great news, I hope that continues and it’s not just a flash in the pan. Ideally it leads to a sustainable league that isn’t based on one individual’s marketability.

I'm not trying to be a hater but I'll believe it when I see it. The one flaw I see with her is she's not charismatic and doesn't seem to like attention. I personally don't see her being a transcendent star or moving the WNBA needle in a hugely significant way like some people think. If she had an unbelievable personality - I may have a different opinion.

What more proof do you need?

The three highest rated games in NCAA history, all in a row. Quadrupled the ratings of the previous record for highest rated WNBA draft (5x from last year). Jersey sold out in a day. Fever tickets have doubled in price, probably sold more than ever already, and opposing opponents are having to change venues to fit people in to see the Fever play.

Now, sure, this could be a one-year thing, but the fact is she's already made the WNBA a **** ton of money before even playing a game. She was the biggest ratings draw in NCAA history by a mile, no one comes remotely close. So what else do you need to see?

[azcatz11]

That’s great news, I hope that continues and it’s not just a flash in the pan. Ideally it leads to a sustainable league that isn’t based on one individual’s marketability.

I'm not trying to be a hater but I'll believe it when I see it. The one flaw I see with her is she's not charismatic and doesn't seem to like attention. I personally don't see her being a transcendent star or moving the WNBA needle in a hugely significant way like some people think. If she had an unbelievable personality - I may have a different opinion.

What more proof do you need?

The three highest rated games in NCAA history, all in a row. Quadrupled the ratings of the previous record for highest rated WNBA draft (5x from last year). Jersey sold out in a day. Fever tickets have doubled in price, probably sold more than ever already, and opposing opponents are having to change venues to fit people in to see the Fever play.

Now, sure, this could be a one-year thing, but the fact is she's already made the WNBA a **** ton of money before even playing a game. She was the biggest ratings draw in NCAA history by a mile, no one comes remotely close. So what else do you need to see?

We have never had a crossover WNBA star ever. She would be the first. Griner had an unbelievable amount of hype also and she fizzled out pretty quick.

[D.Brasco]

Read on Twitter

She definitely felt the I'm not getting paid enough to be doing this, at this particular moment. Eesh.

[dc]

We have never had a crossover WNBA star ever. She would be the first. Griner had an unbelievable amount of hype also and she fizzled out pretty quick.

Griner had hype because she could dunk during a game, but let's face it: nobody was really that impressed because 1) it was mostly of the graze the rim type variety and 2) she was doing it against women who mostly couldn't dunk.

I was more impressed by the Stanford girl who dunked on a break she generated from a steal because she's only 6'1". It was impressive.

[Ambrose]

I'm not trying to be a hater but I'll believe it when I see it. The one flaw I see with her is she's not charismatic and doesn't seem to like attention. I personally don't see her being a transcendent star or moving the WNBA needle in a hugely significant way like some people think. If she had an unbelievable personality - I may have a different opinion.

What more proof do you need?

The three highest rated games in NCAA history, all in a row. Quadrupled the ratings of the previous record for highest rated WNBA draft (5x from last year). Jersey sold out in a day. Fever tickets have doubled in price, probably sold more than ever already, and opposing opponents are having to change venues to fit people in to see the Fever play.

Now, sure, this could be a one-year thing, but the fact is she's already made the WNBA a **** ton of money before even playing a game. She was the biggest ratings draw in NCAA history by a mile, no one comes remotely close. So what else do you need to see?

We have never had a crossover WNBA star ever. She would be the first. Griner had an unbelievable amount of hype also and she fizzled out pretty quick.

Yeah, but no one has done the things Caitlin has. Griner had hype, but she wasn't shattering viewership records, ticket sales and jersey sales. You can't compare CC to anyone before her, because she's done things no one else has, and no one else has come close.

[dc]

Yeah, but no one has done the things Caitlin has. Griner had hype, but she wasn't shattering viewership records, ticket sales and jersey sales. You can't compare CC to anyone before her, because she's done things no one else has, and no one else has come close.

Yeah what people need to understand is CC's on court performance in college is indeed unprecedented. Dragged a non-top tier program into the Final 2 years in a row at insane levels of efficiency, especially given her usage rate.

There have been other great performances in womens college ball, but there's never been a carry job that resulted in this much team success at her level of efficiency. It was a better, women's version of Steph's carry job with Davidson in 2008.

Jackie Stiles awhile ago also had insane numbers playing for a small school, but her team just made it to the Elite 8 once.