Social US Women's National Team Just Want To Be Treated Fairly - The Men's Can't Even Qualify For World Cup

TheStruggle said:
Women's soccer is not a big sport, it doesn't matter how good they are, it isn't as big as the men, this is like comparing the Los Angeles Sparks to the Phoenix Suns
Click to expand...

I pretty much assumed it wasn't but wanted to give the ladies the benefit of the doubt before I made up my opinion on this situation.
 
TheStruggle said:
You clearly have no idea how the sport works. The US women dominate a sport that is not very big to begin with, women's soccer doesn't not have the resources and revenue as mens, that is a fact. Men's soccer is the #1 sport in the world and is a massive money maker so when the men play, they generate more money then the big womens game. and FFS read the OP and the thread, the whole "women make more than the men" angle has already been discussed
Click to expand...

I am not concerned about men vs women's soccer. I am concerned about USA men's vs USA women's soccer.
Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more rev than the women, because the contrary proof is in the fucking OP. What some euro men's team makes means fuck all to me yeah soccer is big coz all those assholes are on the metric system which is based on how big a metal dildo is at a certain temperature. The metric system, like soccer, is inherently feminine.
Point this out or take an econ101 class ffs. Basic economic sense is to reward those who bring gains more than those who bring losses.

"According to the federation's most recent annual report, it was projecting a loss for the combined national teams for fiscal year 2016, but as a result of the success of the women's team, it is now projecting $17.7 million in profit. This disparity continues in 2017, when the women's team is expected to net $5 million in profit, whereas the men's team will be $1 million in the red. The women make less in terms of travel and per diems."

Proof.
 
Not to mention Alex Morgan is HOT...She should be paid more just because of that
 
Does men's soccer worldwide have a governing body or organization that doles out money to the USA soccer? Men's soccer worldwide is more popular than women's.

I can't see women's soccer standing alone. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
WrestlinganJudo said:
They brought in 20 more million? I am betting they are not doing a proper cost accounting creating the illusion of higher free cash flow that's not there.

If the women are honestly bringing in more after costs then there is a problem and the women are right.
Click to expand...

The proper revenue accounting for the national teams should be looking at the entire 4 year World Cup cycle.

Here's a better look at the numbers.

http://www.businessinsider.com/womens-small-soccer-salaries-are-fair-2015-7
 
http://www.businessinsider.com/womens-small-soccer-salaries-are-fair-2015-7

Facebook post share by a feminist friend of mine. She's actually one of the sane one's though, demands equality in all areas where it makes sense (such as sure let women be Rangers, but if and only of they pass all the same physical and other qualifications with zero changes) and also for people to take responsibility for what they can do instead of just whining on Facebook (key point the wage gap. Quit bitching, and get more females including yourself into engineering and doctor majors)

She highlighted this section from the article
"However, you, dear reader, can do only one thing and it's not complaining about prize money on social media. If you want to fix the income disparity in women's sports, go buy a jersey or tickets for a game."
 
Skip Reming said:
I am not concerned about men vs women's soccer. I am concerned about USA men's vs USA women's soccer.
Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more rev than the women, because the contrary proof is in the fucking OP. What some euro men's team makes means fuck all to me yeah soccer is big coz all those assholes are on the metric system which is based on how big a metal dildo is at a certain temperature. The metric system, like soccer, is inherently feminine.
Point this out or take an econ101 class ffs. Basic economic sense is to reward those who bring gains more than those who bring losses.

"According to the federation's most recent annual report, it was projecting a loss for the combined national teams for fiscal year 2016, but as a result of the success of the women's team, it is now projecting $17.7 million in profit. This disparity continues in 2017, when the women's team is expected to net $5 million in profit, whereas the men's team will be $1 million in the red. The women make less in terms of travel and per diems."

Proof.
Click to expand...

Projections are nice, but here are numbers from past years;

 
ripskater said:
Are they as good as the men?
Click to expand...

as far as their standings within their league, they are WAY better than the men. they also get higher ratings based on their better performance, i believe. i think that is the basis of the USWNT's argument. way higher ratings and profits....way lower pay for those achieving those ratings.
 
LilMountain said:
Projections are nice, but here are numbers from past years;

Click to expand...


Oh, you see they are looking to get paid more in the future not from previous years.
also, expenses exist not just revenue. Weird how there are debits and credits on an accounting sheet.

*National team expenses in 2014-15 were:
$31.1 million for the men’s national team.
$10.3 million for the women’s national team."

So again, it is being more profitable, not just revenue. This was for 2014-2015, not the future.

oh, yeah, you forgot to include this tweet from your boy

Danny Page ‏@DannyPage
And as noted in the NYT article, there was a $15M jump in sponsorship money from FY2015->FY2016, most of that likely for the USWNT. <--- the womenz
^ i think "projections" include sponsorship agreements.

Truth is america loves winners. The women are winners and the men are not. In basketball men and women USA are both winners, but bball is a man's sport.


InvestigatorIL said:
Not to mention Alex Morgan is HOT...She should be paid more just because of that
Click to expand...

yeah, so is hope and sydney leroux is NOM
SydUSA.jpeg
 
Last edited:
JonnyRingo84 said:
as far as their standings within their league, they are WAY better than the men. they also get higher ratings based on their better performance, i believe. i think that is the basis of the USWNT's argument. way higher ratings and profits....way lower pay for those achieving those ratings.
Click to expand...
The other question does US mens soccer get money from worldwide men's soccer? Which is more popular than women's worldwide.

If the women are bringing in more money now, they should get a raise though.
 
Skip Reming said:
I am not concerned about men vs women's soccer. I am concerned about USA men's vs USA women's soccer.
Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more rev than the women, because the contrary proof is in the fucking OP. What some euro men's team makes means fuck all to me yeah soccer is big coz all those assholes are on the metric system which is based on how big a metal dildo is at a certain temperature. The metric system, like soccer, is inherently feminine.
Point this out or take an econ101 class ffs. Basic economic sense is to reward those who bring gains more than those who bring losses.

"According to the federation's most recent annual report, it was projecting a loss for the combined national teams for fiscal year 2016, but as a result of the success of the women's team, it is now projecting $17.7 million in profit. This disparity continues in 2017, when the women's team is expected to net $5 million in profit, whereas the men's team will be $1 million in the red. The women make less in terms of travel and per diems."

Proof.
Click to expand...


READ THE THREAD...DUMBASS
 
TheStruggle in this thread in like prime Fedor. Laying down knowledge on cans left and right. Good job.

I gotta give it to Skip for the hilarious "metric system is feminine" line. Amazing.
 
Skip Reming said:
Oh, you see they are looking to get paid more in the future not from previous years.
Click to expand...

Yes and their CBA ends at the end of this year but they're trying to force this now before projections potentially go down after the Olympics


Skip Reming said:
also, expenses exist not just revenue. Weird how there are debits and credits on an accounting sheet.

*National team expenses in 2014-15 were:
$31.1 million for the men’s national team.
$10.3 million for the women’s national team."

So again, it is being more profitable, not just revenue. This was for 2014-2015, not the future.
Click to expand...

Because that year includes them hosting the Gold Cup

oh, yeah, you forgot to include this tweet from your boy

Danny Page ‏@DannyPage
And as noted in the NYT article, there was a $15M jump in sponsorship money from FY2015->FY2016, most of that likely for the USWNT. <--- the womenz
^ i think "projections" include sponsorship agreements.

Truth is america loves winners. The women are winners and the men are not. In basketball men and women USA are both winners, but bball is a man's sport.
Click to expand...

He's on your side of this issue, so he's reaching. Fact is;

"I went to various companies around the world trying to sell women's football on its own out of the men's events," said Valcke. "And I failed. There was not a single company that said I am interested to just buy women's football. Most of the partners said, OK we are ready to support women's football, we are ready to do more than what we are doing but what we wish to receive is the men's football because that is where we want to put our money.

http://in.reuters.com/article/soccer-world-women-money-idINKCN0JK02120141206

America like winners until the glow from victory fades, which is why the women are in this position despite having previously won a World Cup and an Olympic Gold in the past 15 years
 
Last edited:
bref said:
Looks like the Women's World Cup final was watched by 750 million people.

http://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/...-cup-tops-750-million-tv-viewers-2745963.html

Those are international numbers, though. I was in Vancouver for that game (not for the event, just hanging out with some friends) and it was a total shit show of American and Japanese tourists.
Click to expand...
It was sad how many empty seats there were even in the quarter-final matches.

Look at how many of the seats you can see when they go to wide shots like at 0:32 or 1:17, and that was with the upper tier closed off as you see at 2:19

 
TheStruggle said:
READ THE THREAD...DUMBASS
Click to expand...

I have used the wrong word.
"Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more rev than the women"
should have been "Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more profit than the women"

You get your little rage out with your name calling?

But yes, in business, the bottom line is profit not revenue. Revenue is shit if your expenses are more, of course.

Now, show me where the men are more profitable than the women.

"It is the highest metered market rating ever for a soccer game in the U.S. on a single network," the company says.
 
Skip Reming said:
I am not concerned about men vs women's soccer. I am concerned about USA men's vs USA women's soccer.
Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more rev than the women, because the contrary proof is in the fucking OP. What some euro men's team makes means fuck all to me yeah soccer is big coz all those assholes are on the metric system which is based on how big a metal dildo is at a certain temperature. The metric system, like soccer, is inherently feminine.
Point this out or take an econ101 class ffs. Basic economic sense is to reward those who bring gains more than those who bring losses.

"According to the federation's most recent annual report, it was projecting a loss for the combined national teams for fiscal year 2016, but as a result of the success of the women's team, it is now projecting $17.7 million in profit. This disparity continues in 2017, when the women's team is expected to net $5 million in profit, whereas the men's team will be $1 million in the red. The women make less in terms of travel and per diems."

Proof.
Click to expand...
I've posted this like 3 times.

Really? I've seen that the last 4 years usmnt made 78 million in revenue and women made 55. That is before tv contracts and sponsorships though. Maybe the women make it up in tv contracts and sponsorships but I doubt it. Where are you getting your numbers?
 
Skip Reming said:
I have used the wrong word.
"Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more rev than the women"
should have been "Where is your proof that the USA men bring in more profit than the women"

You get your little rage out with your name calling?

But yes, in business, the bottom line is profit not revenue. Revenue is shit if your expenses are more, of course.

Now, show me where the men are more profitable than the women.

"It is the highest metered market rating ever for a soccer game in the U.S. on a single network," the company says.
Click to expand...


OMG....Read the thread
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,064
Messages
55,464,577
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top