Writer: Mahlet Habteyes | Editor: Emma-Jane Burns
Basketball is a game of three-pointers, buzzer-beaters, and stunning athleticism, whether it’s being played by men or women. Yet, while NBA stars soar to fame and fortune, WNBA players are left to navigate financial hurdles. WNBA star Angel Reese says that her salary of just over $70,000 is barely enough to make ends meet. And she’s not alone in the league. The lowest earner in the NBA earns 4.6 times more than the highest earner in the WNBA – a $1,157,143 salary compared to $250,000. The pay disparity between the leagues is a statement about who we value in sports; and it’s not looking good for the women.
Revenue Splits
Let’s start with the revenue. The NBA generated $13 billion in its most recent season, while the WNBA earned just $200 million. That’s not a typo, the NBA’s revenue is 52 times that of the WNBA. It’s no wonder LeBron James pulls in a cool $47 million annually while WNBA MVPs like Breanna Stewart are lucky to clear six figures.
Where does all the NBA’s money come from? Media deals, merchandise sales, and global fan engagement pour billions into the NBA’s pockets. Meanwhile, the WNBA’s financial engine sputters along with limited sponsorships and inconsistent TV coverage.
The WNBA’s revenue split adds insult to injury: NBA players enjoy nearly 50% of the league’s revenue, while WNBA players get just over 9%. If this were a game, we’d be blowing the whistle for a foul.
The rest of the WNBA’s revenue is allocated to operational expenses that are important for keeping the league afloat. This includes administrative costs such as salaries and travel logistics. Additionally, a significant portion is dedicated to marketing and promotional campaigns aimed at expanding the WNBA’s fan base and boosting overall visibility. Community outreach programs and youth basketball initiatives also receive funding, as the league works to grow the sport at the grassroots level. And while all these investments are indeed important for long-term development, the glaring disparity in revenue share leaves players with an unequal piece of the pie, pointing to a structural imbalance that needs addressing.
New Contracts?
The reason for the WNBA’s low pay isn’t because it’s not growing, because it has been. The 2024 season saw staggering growth, with a 170% increase in viewership and a 601% increase in merchandise sales.
Rather, the reason for the pay disparity is at least partly due to the contracts. The 9.3% revenue split in the WNBA is a result of the contract negotiated by the player’s union, the WNBPA, and the league owners. This contract is called a collective bargaining agreement, or CBA. This type of CBA means that even if the WNBA revenue grows, player salaries won’t grow with it.
That’s why, in October, the WNBPA decided to opt out of the CBA and demand a higher revenue split for its players. The decision came after a doubling in revenue for the league, from $102 million to $200 million, all while player salaries remained virtually unchanged. If a new CBA isn’t reached before the beginning of the new season, there will be a league shutdown, also known as a lockout, until the players and owners can negotiate a new contract, something that’s already happened 4 times in the history of the NBA. All 4 times the NBA had a lockout, it was for the same reason: salary dissatisfaction. A lockout is the last resort, but if it came to it, the WNBA would be following in the footsteps of the NBA, and perhaps their salaries might as well.
In the event the situation does come to a lockout, there would be direct short-term impacts on the players, who would lose income when they’re already struggling. Unlike their NBA counterparts, who would have major endorsement deals or accumulated wealth to fall back on, WNBA players would be left to come up with new streams of income as a new contract was negotiated. On the fan side, audiences might become frustrated and start to lose interest in the league, and viewership could take time to recover once the season resumes.
Despite the short-term challenges though, the WNBA would emerge stronger with a new CBA that fairly values them and gives them the salaries that they deserve.
Soft Cap vs. Hard Cap Salaries
One of the things the WNBA is asking for in the new player agreement is something called a “soft cap” on salaries. A soft cap is a team budget that sets a spending limit on players, but it allows for some flexibility. This flexibility allows teams to review the spending limit in special cases, like keeping a star player who has been with the team for a long time or signing new, up-and-coming players.
The NBA already uses this system. It helps their teams stay competitive because they don’t have to let go of their best players just because they’ve hit their spending limit, and also allows for some financial rules to keep things fair between the richer and smaller teams. The WNBA wants a similar system to allow their teams to grow and invest more in players while keeping things fair across the league. In the long run, a soft cap could help the WNBA retain its rising stars and create more competitive teams, which in turn could boost fan engagement, sponsorship deals, and overall revenue.
However, adopting a soft cap isn’t without challenges. If wealthier teams repeatedly exceed the cap to retain or attract star players, it could create an imbalance where only a few teams dominate, leaving others struggling to compete. To prevent this, the WNBA would likely need to implement additional measures, such as a luxury tax—a penalty for teams that exceed the cap, with the funds redistributed to support smaller teams. This balance would be important to ensure that a soft cap creates growth and competitiveness within the league rather than widening the gaps between the teams.
Media Coverage and Visibility
What fuels the NBA’s massive revenue? Coverage. From prime-time games on national networks to highlight reels dominating sports feeds on social media, the NBA is a well-oiled marketing machine. Turn on your TV or scroll through Instagram, and you’ll find courtside celebrity appearances and flashy ads featuring stars like LeBron James or Steph Curry. This saturation not only cements the NBA’s cultural dominance but also drives fan engagement, sponsorships, and billion-dollar revenue streams.
The WNBA? Not so much.
Despite showcasing elite athleticism, heart-stopping moments, and rising stars like Sabrina Ionescu, Caitlin Clark, and A’ja Wilson, the WNBA struggles to carve out similar media attention. The league’s games are often relegated to off-hours or lesser-known channels. But why is this the case?
Historically, women’s sports have received minimal media coverage, partly because of longstanding gender biases that perceive male sports as more competitive or exciting. These biases are still prevalent today, perpetuating a cycle where less coverage is allocated to women’s sports, which stunts the league’s growth. Broadcasters have also been hesitant to prioritize women’s games because they believe that these games won’t attract consistent viewership, despite the steady year-to-year increases we’ve been seeing in the league’s audience. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: fewer eyeballs on games mean fewer opportunities to build fan bases, which keeps revenue and player salaries low.
Along with game broadcasts, the NBA also benefits from a near-constant media drumbeat, with post-game interviews, pre-season buzz, podcasts dissecting player stats, and highlight reels that go viral in seconds. In contrast, WNBA narratives rarely make it past niche sports media. The problem isn’t a lack of compelling stories (think Ionescu’s triple-doubles or Brittney Griner’s emotional return after her detainment in Russia), it’s the systemic failure to elevate these stories into mainstream sports consciousness.
So what’s the solution? It starts with equal airtime. Placing WNBA games in prime-time slots on major networks would exponentially increase visibility. The harsh reality, however, is that without an evident profit incentive, these corporations, driven by bottom lines and shareholder interests, are unlikely to prioritize women’s sports.
Demonstrating that this investment would be worthwhile starts with showing the untapped market potential. Data from events like the NCAA women’s championship prove significant interest in women’s sports when made accessible and promoted effectively. The 2023 NCAA Women’s Basketball Championship game between LSU and Iowa drew 16 million viewers, making it the most-viewed women’s college basketball game ever, surpassing even the NBA playoffs viewership at certain points. The two biggest stars from that matchup, Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark are now in the WNBA, meaning that same excited viewership could easily be translated into the professional league.
Conclusion
With a revamped contract and increased media coverage, the WNBA could start to see its salaries soar. But change won’t happen overnight. It requires a collective effort from the league, players, broadcasters, sponsors, and fans. A more equitable revenue split and adopting a soft salary cap would give players the compensation they deserve and allow teams to build competitive rosters. Increased media visibility would amplify the league, showcasing the talent and dedication of its athletes to a larger audience
Fans, too, have a role to play in this. Watching games, buying merchandise, and advocating for better coverage can signal to corporations and media networks that investing in women’s basketball is both ethical and profitable. The WNBA has the talent, the narratives, and the momentum, now it’s just time to break the glass backboard and elevate the league to the heights it deserves.
Featured Image from Yahoo Sports
