The individual nature of tennis has been its greatest enemy. Tennis is not accessible enough as something like golf.
Worse than that, the individual nature of tennis
tournaments is an even greater enemy.
Each tournament (with few exceptions) is self-financing, self-marketed and adopts all the risk of its event which uses the facilities for about 5% of the year yet they are typically responsible for all of the infrastructure improvements/costs.
Golf is wildly different in that all golf events are held at venues which are used year-round and financed almost entirely by the club membership so the per-tournament cost structure is comparatively far less, and they also get a bigger chunk of the media rights for events held at their venue - so there's not only comparatively lower costs, but also comparatively higher revenue.
When you take these considerations across to basketball the mechanics improve five-fold immediately. Venues get used 50 times a year, they get all of the benefits of repeat patronage (season tickets, inter-generational local market support for the local team regardless of which people are on the team),
all of the endorsement revenue (team kit/associations),
all of the merchandising revenue, collectively negotiated media revenue, and a fit-for-purpose venue which can be rented out for hundreds of other events each year.
All of this is quite unlike almost any tennis venue/event. The comparative inefficiency of standalone tennis tournaments, especially in the cost structure and adopted risk means tennis will never be able to get close to basketball-type revenue splits. Even if the prize money split was doubled to 25-28% most tournaments would go bust within a year.
Golf should not be the norm that tennis tries to follow and/or emulate.
Not least because golf's success is hinged to the sponsors which, if priorities changed even by 10%, would harm golf's popularity massively in no time. Golf, from a sponsor's point of view is mostly a junket for corporate partners/clients which keeps the facade of golf's popularity.