OT: How Airplanes Became the WNBA’s Biggest Scandal

[BRS24]

Over the last few seasons, there have been some insane travel stories from the WNBA - teams taking different flights to avoid middle seats, players upgrading themselves for more room, etc, etc, and the NY Liberty got caught providing charter flights.

SI Article here

"The Napa trip, over Labor Day weekend, violated the WNBA’s collective bargaining agreement, a benefit that vastly exceeded the allowable compensation to players. So, too, did the charter flights Liberty owners Joe and Clara Wu Tsai bought and provided to their team repeatedly throughout the second half of the WNBA season, a competitive advantage for New York that led to a league-record $500,000 fine of the team—originally floated by the league at $1 million, reduced on an appeal, itself an irregular process—and the removal of Liberty executive Oliver Weisberg from the league’s executive committee, sources told Sports Illustrated. The league confirmed these details, as well."

 

[MSGRET]

This is BS, most major college teams fly charter, and the W fines the owners because they flew their team via charter planes. This is an insult to these basketball players and they call the W the premier basketball league for women's basketball. UConn players have it better then the teams in the W. With the onset of NIL I see very few early graduations of the top players, because they are probably making more money and get better treatment in college then in the W.

 

[topogigio]

Hate to say it, but it is simply a matter of economics. The W loses 10 million dollars a year and has consistently lost the same amount every year since its inception. If it weren't for NBA cash infusion, the league would not exist. Certainly not fair to the women who play the game, but someone has to pay the bill.

 

[BobbyJ]

It's a real shocker that a billionaire decided that rules don't apply to him.

 

[Zinethar]

So a WNBA owner wanted to do more for the players than what was expected and gets slapped by the league? It is not a matter of economics as the owners added to their experience not tone it down. What the WNBA needs is more owners like these!

 

[BobbyJ]

So a WNBA owner wanted to do more for the players than what was expected and gets slapped by the league? It is not a matter of economics as the owners added to their experience not tone it down. What the WNBA needs is more owners like these!

No, that’s not the point. It’s against the rules.

 

[Cuango]

This is BS, most major college teams fly charter, and the W fines the owners because they flew their team via charter planes. This is an insult to these basketball players and they call the W the premier basketball league for women's basketball. UConn players have it better then the teams in the W. With the onset of NIL I see very few early graduations of the top players, because they are probably making more money and get better treatment in college then in the W.

What’s BS is the fact that what they (The Liberty) did was expressly forbidden in the CBA and was adjudged to be a competitive advantage. You can certainly argue that having to fly coach is uncomfortable for the players (self-evidently true) but not that one team with deep pockets should be allowed to gain an advantage due to their owner’s willingness to spend his money in violation of the agreement that all the other teams (presumably) are following.

The WNBA is already hanging on by a thread! Even (especially) if you got rid of the CBA and allowed owners to spend as much as they wished on their own team, it would simply make things worse. Soon you would have three or four “super teams” while the others would gradually fade away and the league would fold.

I’m not sure what the answer is but it’s certainly not creating a more tilted playing field that allows certain teams to do things others cannot afford. I mean, it is a business after all. Perhaps the players shouldn’t vote for a CBA that does not address something that is supposedly such a high priority. Or perhaps, perhaps the travel thing is mostly being pushed by a vocal minority and it is simply not as important to a large group of WNBA players as it is being portrayed. That would explain the CBA vote, at least.

 

[Blakeon18]

New York Liberty threatened, fined by WNBA over illicit charter flights

The New York Liberty got thrown in the WNBA’s penalty box for having the audacity to provide their players with better flight accommodations.

nypost.com

This article in today's NY Post is on the same topic of charter flights.
It seems like further penalties might include loss of draft picks...suspending ownership...even termination
of the franchise....yikes!
It is interesting...one owner with huge bucks spends his own dimes for a charter flight [clearly an advantage]...others are following the league rule and not providing those flights [can't? won't?]. It's great for the Liberty players...but does that team get to break the rules without penalties? For example: we know there are caps on player salaries. Those caps apply to all teams...correct? Should the Liberty owner...[Joe Tsai...net worth near 9 billion]...be allowed to pay whatever he wishes...without penalties?

Probably not a great comparison but anyway: there are some basic rules in NCAA sports. Some minor/some major.
In general they are followed but we sure have seen multiple violations by colleges. If the misbehaving college says
'yes...we did promise to follow those rules but we have decided to break them in order to help our recruiting and our own teams...BUT do not penalize us for doing so'

Is that OK with the other schools? Is what Tsai doing OK with the other teams and owners...rule-breaking for the Liberty but we have to follow those rules as we ALL agreed to do?

 

[Beemer]

I can't imagine that this sits well with his fellow owners. I'm sure they'd love to be able to charter flights for their teams if they could afford to and if the CBA permitted it. But they can't and it doesn't, so that's that.

Props to the WNBA for attempting to maintain a level economic platform for their franchises and for not letting the Liberty get away with breaking the CBA.

 

[meyers7]

Granted, they broke the rules. I think the main point is though, that it's a stupid rule.

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Hate to say it, but it is simply a matter of economics. The W loses 10 million dollars a year and has consistently lost the same amount every year since its inception. If it weren't for NBA cash infusion, the league would not exist. Certainly not fair to the women who play the game, but someone has to pay the bill.

And yet, the European leagues pay top dollar to all of their players, and not only survive, but thrive. What's wrong with the WNBA? It's not "simply a matter of economics." Indeed, were it simple economics, the league would not have negotiated substantially higher (yet still too meager) salaries and benefits for its players not long ago.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

I get the team broke the rule and even if the rule is silly, it still happened.

That being said I would love to know what the WNBA spends on marketing and has for the last 25 years. Marketing a niche product won't necessarily increase viewership or attendance. I've heard for years marketing is the problem. It isn't that the product isn't being promoted, just that a small number of people care about it. The WNBA seemingly spends a large amount of money marketing their product but it hasn't caught on with the public and isn't likely to based on a TV spot.

The league is probably in a better spot than it was 10 years ago and the big names are household ones but that hasn't translated to bodies in seats or viewership. Those would need to increase for the league to offer better opportunities to their players.

 

[Beemer]

And yet, the European leagues pay top dollar to all of their players, and not only survive, but thrive. What's wrong with the WNBA? It's not "simply a matter of economics." Indeed, were it simple economics, the league would not have negotiated substantially higher (yet still too meager) salaries and benefits for its players not long ago.

I think it is a couple of things: 1. Women's basketball seems to be much more popular in Europe than here, so the leagues have bigger fanbases which means more revenue to pay player salaries & benefits 2. Many European governments subsidize sports in their countries although I don't know if women's pro basketball is one of them. If they do, there's another source of revenue with which to pay salaries etc. 3. WNBA marketing stinks. When the league first began they had some first class marketing but now? It's awful. And to be honest I think the NBA has a lot to do with that. When David Stern was commissioner he was seen to be fiercely supportive of the WNBA & determined to see it thrive. I don't think his successor has the same commitment (his name escapes me at the moment). I think his attitude is "here's your 10-12 million subsidy now get out of here while we get on with the real business of growing the NBA & its development leagues". JMO.

 

[cordarone]

And yet, the European leagues pay top dollar to all of their players, and not only survive, but thrive.

Anyone who's been here a while knows this is your pet windmill and all but that isn't true, and you know it. Locals who fill out the roster are paid orders of magnitude less than the foreign players. The top teams are subsidized by their oligarch owners or by some local company or government entity and that's been discussed previously as well. But yeah, by all means, let's go a-tilting anyway

 

[Zinethar]

The big sports franchises make a very small amount of their budget by the fans in the seats. It is made on merchandise and TV rights. This issue is how things get changed in sports. Something gets out to the public and it becomes a bone of contention in the next CBA. For the league to run out a billionaire owner would be one of the dumbest things they have done. Those are the types of owners that would make the league a success. Yes they need a "harsh" penalty for violating the rules. That is why penalties exist. The problem with penalties is that the money generated is not really used to make a league stronger. For example in baseball the "Yankee" penalty for overspending above the salary cap is split among the owners but is generally just used to make them more money rather than reinvesting it to improve they salaries.

 

[JoePgh]

And yet, the European leagues pay top dollar to all of their players, and not only survive, but thrive. What's wrong with the WNBA? It's not "simply a matter of economics." Indeed, were it simple economics, the league would not have negotiated substantially higher (yet still too meager) salaries and benefits for its players not long ago.

Everything I've seen on this subject says that European teams do NOT make money in the way that we normally think of that -- attendance at games is lower than in the WNBA, and ticket prices are lower than in the WNBA. I'm not aware that TV or streaming rights are a significant revenue factor for European teams.

My understanding is that the teams are subsidized by rich owners or in some cases by governments. Even with that, it's not uncommon for teams not to make payroll, as Renee Montgomery once discovered. As far as I know, that has never happened to a WNBA team.

I am also not aware of the factual basis for the claim that the WNBA loses $10 million per year. I know that the Connecticut Sun have claimed that their team breaks even, although it is not profitable on its own terms. If it lost some money, I'm sure that the Mohegan Sun Casino would cover its small loss happily, since they view it as a marketing expense.

I do not know about the financial results for other teams, many of whom are not owned by the NBA or any NBA team. But obviously if there are losses, they are being willingly borne by the teams' owners. However, it is understandable that the league is concerned that if deep-pocketed owners (like those of the Liberty or the Sun) were permitted to pay for first-class or charter flights for their teams, it would create a competitive imbalance. So from that perspective, the rule has a sensible basis.

 

[BobbyJ]

Everything I've seen on this subject says that European teams do NOT make money in the way that we normally think of that -- attendance at games is lower than in the WNBA, and ticket prices are lower than in the WNBA. I'm not aware that TV or streaming rights are a significant revenue factor for European teams.

My understanding is that the teams are subsidized by rich owners or in some cases by governments. Even with that, it's not uncommon for teams not to make payroll, as Renee Montgomery once discovered. As far as I know, that has never happened to a WNBA team.

I am also not aware of the factual basis for the claim that the WNBA loses $10 million per year. I know that the Connecticut Sun have claimed that their team breaks even, although it is not profitable on its own terms. If it lost some money, I'm sure that the Mohegan Sun Casino would cover its small loss happily, since they view it as a marketing expense.

I do not know about the financial results for other teams, many of whom are not owned by the NBA or any NBA team. But obviously if there are losses, they are being willingly borne by the teams' owners. However, it is understandable that the league is concerned that if deep-pocketed owners (like those of the Liberty or the Sun) were permitted to pay for first-class or charter flights for their teams, it would create a competitive imbalance. So from that perspective, the rule has a sensible basis.

Is the WNBA Profitable? (Quick Answer & Reasons Why)

The WNBA, while an impressive display of athleticism and skill, is not necessarily known for its popularity. Though it undoubtedly has its fans, the larger market and direct competition with the NBA has made it difficult to stay afloat in recent years. While I don’t actively keep up with the...

dunkorthree.com

 

[SVCBeercats]

This is BS, most major college teams fly charter, and the W fines the owners because they flew their team via charter planes. This is an insult to these basketball players and they call the W the premier basketball league for women's basketball. UConn players have it better then the teams in the W. With the onset of NIL I see very few early graduations of the top players, because they are probably making more money and get better treatment in college then in the W.

most major college teams fly charter
Are most colleges contractually tied to a collective bargaining agreement which deems charter flights as a competitive advantage? No.
call the W the premier basketball league for women's basketball
Who calls it (WNBA) the premier basketball league? Americans? See Questions on NIL and a POI [?] of ours Certainly not in revenues. I have no idea how the IRS does not label the WNBA as a hobby or a charity based on decades of not earning a profit.