Well, I don’t know anything about the profitability of the NBA or individual franchises.
I wonder how much NBA team owners like seeing their profits eroded, because they have to subsidize women’s basketball.
If women’s basketball cannot survive financially without a subsidy, maybe there’s just not a big market for it.
Or does the NBA just want to make a political statement, with endless ongoing subsidies of the WNBA.
Free hand of the marketplace and all... could the WNBA be re-imagined in a different format of play that WOULD be profitable? Even if it doesn’t resemble pro basketball anymore? I’ve seen advertisements in my area for women offering to come clran your house while fully naked and you are welcome to closely supervise to verify that the work is being done. $100/hour or some such rate. Just an extreme ecample.
The WNBA is very much like the U.S. Postal System,, it LOSES 5 BILLION Dollars a year... "But we NEED It".
“If women’s basketball cannot survive financially without a subsidy, maybe there’s just not a big market for it.”
At least six professional women’s basketball leagues have failed in the United States since 1978. The only major circuit to achieve long-term survival is the WNBA, which was founded in 1996.The defunct leagues folded due to financial struggles, low attendance, or labor disputes.
Without appeasing the fans, there is no money in it for either league. The comparison of women’s playing capacity to men has been a major factor in the failures. Women are not as strong, fast, jump as high, or, the big need for the fans over the last 15 years, hit as hard. And the rules for men’s leagues have displayed an aptitude to enter rules that stretch this dynamic every year. And that’s what sells. So if comparing the league for marketing, guess what is going to be considered high priority? The only problem with the recognition of violence in the league is that in the NBA the play generally dictates the violence as part of the play. They have enforcers, but they can use brunt force to accomplish the goal. The women aren’t big enough and without an open right cross, they don’t hit hard enough to use the game as a immunity. They look like they do, but they get up like weebles. So the violence has to be something beyond fallout from the game.
“Sources told SBJ Engelbert is in a difficult position trying to not show favoritism to Clark and trying to appease the players that feel overshadowed by her.”
And this is the result of trying to stretch enough violence into the leagues to sell their product without ruining the game for the purity enthusiast. Where is the line drawn before it gets out of hand even if it was based on the game and not on the jealousy or ego of the players? And as for the comparison of each league against the other, I can’t remember any time of playing, officiating, running tournaments, and controlling leagues in my 65 year history of the game where a game had to be stopped because a player lost a hairpiece. Won’t be long till there will be a tech called on over-makeup. Right now, there is no rule covering makeup for WNBA players. But give it time as when it becomes profitable, it’s get in the book, at least, the case book.
wy69
The NBA owners can structure their team and/or personal finances by factoring in a huge tax write off from subsidizing the failing WNBA.