In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there a
He can't help it. He sees the world in black and white and has this extreme tendency to lump those he disagrees with together so if one person he disagrees with says something then everyone he disagrees with thinks that thing.
While I do enjoy being inflamatory, based on this forums body of work, and the culmination of many different conversations on the topics of womyn, I strongly believe that Crossnerd is closer to right about this whole thing than say a Lozen or an Elrazor
Many men have an innate need to feel superior to women. This manifests in many different ways, but normally through smug condescension
I thought this was bs but ai said average WNBA viewership 1.2 mil per game, NBA 1.5-2 mil per game.Wow, that's damn good. Of course there are more teams in the NBA so much more total viewers per season but still seems pretty successful. Even with way lower ticket prices, less merch sales, you would think there is still enough to pay even the bench warmers enough to not have to
There was a recent Caitlin Clark/angel Reese boost, but I don’t think anyone knows if it will sustain. Personal anecdote, I watched quite a bit of women’s basketball her last year at Iowa and first year in wnba (including games she wasn’t involved in) and didn’t watch one second of women’s basketball last year. Bloom off the rose I guess.
Anyways, NBA is a worldwide league and does a lot of business besides domestic TV deals. And most people in the industry seem to agree broadcasters pay WAY too much for nba rights for what they get out of it. And they don’t overpay nearly as much for WNBA. Which seems to be the crux of the issue. Even if their per game rating are similar, what espn/fox are willing to pay for the ratings is very different.
What do you want to do. Force ESPN to pay 10X as much for Tv rights, so you can increase salaries accordingly? Of so, that is fine. But I don’t see anybody saying this. It seems they want the league to make up the difference themselves, despite not having the revenue because the broadcasting deals are magnitudes smaller.
While I do enjoy being inflamatory, based on this forums body of work, and the culmination of many different conversations on the topics of womyn, I strongly believe that Crossnerd is closer to right about this whole thing than say a Lozen or an ElrazorMany men have an innate need to feel superior to women. This manifests in many different ways, but normally through smug conde
I personally believe if all the warriors going to bat for women truly cared about empowering women they would have been furious about repealing Roe V Wade. Most these guys supported that decision as states rights or some nonsense. Maybe talk to a girl or something? They legitimately despised that decision and see it as a direct attack on womens rights and autonomy. This is because it was. This is part of why Right Wingers can't get a date
..] Sorry for derail as this post is mostly out of pettiness and a bit of disgust, but since rickroll was gracious enough to guide me to the posts just wanted to highlight the extent this guy would go through to 'stretch the truth', not only when shitposting but when there is something material on the line as he not only declined my bet but requested an apology and a donation o
sweet mother of mercy that's such a dishonest cherry picking of the situation - there's good reason why you didn't post the full conversation
It was very long being the reason. Done with derail and treating you like a half serious person. Stand by the post. You’d pick it apart or go to great lengths to prove otherwise if it was incorrect. Good luck with that. I’m done.
Loooool
I personally believe if all the warriors going to bat for women truly cared about empowering women they would have been furious about repealing Roe V Wade. Most these guys supported that decision as states rights or some nonsense. Maybe talk to a girl or something? They legitimately despised that decision and see it as a direct attack on womens rights and autonomy. This is
Now ask yourself why neither Carter, nor Clinton, nor Obama, nor Biden ever bothered to put Roe into statute to protect it. Biden, who always opposed it on religious grounds, only said through gritted teeth that he might (given an amenable Congress) use statute to reinstate Roe rights in spring '24, when his polls were flagging against convicted felon Trump's and his people decided that was the best wedge issue. He still didn't like it and he ceased to be the candidate shortly after.
It’s funny that lozen still thinks some high schooler is going through the arduous process of transitioning solely to excel in women’s sports.
Announcing a change of name and pronouns, in the sure and certain knowledge that your school will support you and oppose any woman who objects, is hardly arduous.
Now ask yourself why neither Carter, nor Clinton, nor Obama, nor Biden ever bothered to put Roe into statute to protect it. Biden, who always opposed it on religious grounds, only said through gritted teeth that he might (given an amenable Congress) use statute to reinstate Roe rights in spring '24, when his polls were flagging against convicted felon Trump's and his people dec
Much of the US government was (apparently) built on "we don't expect regressive anti-american ******s to come in with a wrecking ball"
The obvious expectation was that we wouldn't get a regressive Supreme Court 50 years later that despises progress (and womin)
It was very long being the reason. Done with derail and treating you like a half serious person. Stand by the post. You'd pick it apart or go to great lengths to prove otherwise if it was incorrect. Good luck with that. I'm done.
you are such a coward hiding behind word salad - there's very good reason why you didn't post the entirety of it because it's nothing like how you portrayed it with those snippets
here is where it begins if anyone cares to see for themselves
the thread https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/29/ne...
starts at post 93
For any business, profit comes marginal revenue of each unit sold after meeting fixed costs. The last 20% makes the difference.
For this situation specifically - The value of ratings is not linear - the last rating point is worth more than the first one. WNBA plays only about half the regular season games and way fewer playoff games, so the total catalog is smaller, resulting in it being less valuable. And, as I said, the real money in broadcast rights is in the playoffs. Check out the difference there.
If they can't turn a profit with 80% of the viewership of the NBA, there's an obvious management issue that has little to do with the popularity of the sport.
This is too facile imo. There are a lot of factors besides viewership, and even with viewership, you should be looking at worldwide, not domestic. And not all viewership generates the same amount of revenue. But more importantly, there are some structural issues that currently limit the profitability of the WNBA that are not necessarily easy for management to solve. I'm sure they could do better, but it isn't just blithering incompetence.
On the flip side, thinking that short term profitability is some sort of impenetrable argument for meager WNBA salaries is also dumb. You also have to consider how much the teams have increased in value. In 2023, if you had $1 billion to spend on ownership interests in sports franchises, you would have been far better off putting that money into random WNBA teams than random NBA teams.
Yeah, the WNBA numbers are way higher than I would have expected, like 80+% of the viewership of the NBA "We can't pay the women because no one wants to watch women's sports" sure doesn't hold a lot of water.
I know those are the numbers they report, but there is no way in hell they are accurate and I don't believe them. Although I agree they should either pay the players more or stop lying about the numbers.
