70-100 ATP players sign petition to increase prize money share - Dan Evans asked Djokovic if he'd stand down from slams to achieve the increase

Do you think the players deserve a higher share & should they boycott events to get the share?

  • Yes to a higher share and yes to boycott

    Votes: 22 41.5%
  • Yes to a higher share but no to boycott

    Votes: 22 41.5%
  • No to a higher share and no to boycott

    Votes: 9 17.0%

  • Total voters
    53

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Sorry for the confusing title, tried to fit the two juicy parts in.

Tennis’s backstage turmoil is continuing in New York, with hardliners from the ATP player council gathering signatures on a petition designed to boost prize money on the men’s tour. Around 70 to 100 players are believed to have signed up, although many of the biggest names have declined.
Vasek Pospisil and Jurgen Melzer are among the players understood to be promoting the idea, which requests that all tournaments – both grand slams and ATP events – introduce a profit-sharing model. In an article published in Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail at the start of this month, Pospisil suggested that the slams are only returning around 14 per cent of their profits to the players, whereas American franchises such as the NBA pay almost 50 per cent back.
The legal firm Norton Rose Fulbright has been recruited to back up the process, and insiders say that the lawyers would take 10 per cent of any increase in prize money that results from the petition. But some are questioning whether the politicking should be going on at such a major event, when most players are focused on their games. Thus far, the slams have shown no interest in scheduling a meeting with NRF.

At an open meeting of the players on Friday night, Britain's Dan Evans is understood to have questioned whether the idea of boycotting tournaments is either realistic or sensible. According to those who attended the meeting, Evans challenged Novak Djokovic – the world No 1 and president of the player council, who is strongly aligned with Pospisil – by asking him whether he was planning to stand down from grand-slam events in the case that they refused to follow the players’ requests.
The player council was recently augmented by the return of Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, but they have not backed the Pospisil plan.

So basically the ATP players want a higher share of the revenue, Pospisil argues that currently the players are only getting 14% of the profits vs the NBA which gets 50% back.

At the meeting it's rumored that Dan Evans challenged Djokovic to the idea of boycotting slams and tournaments if the ATP don't follow the demands.
 

Legend of Borg

G.O.A.T.
why are Fed and Rafa against this proposition?

are they simply against increased pay in general or do they have a better more streamlined plan?
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
What juicy parts? Isn't this what Pospisil has been asking for for almost a year now and wrote an open letter for everyone to see? No surprise that meeting info was leaked again by the British press. The real story is Pospisil getting WTA players to join him in his fight, and is the main tactician behind the scenes.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
What juicy parts? Isn't this what Pospisil has been asking for for almost a year now and wrote an open letter for everyone to see? No surprise that meeting info was leaked again by the British press. The real story is Pospisil getting WTA players to join him in his fight, and is the main tactician behind the scenes.
Dan Evans challenging Djokovic to boycott, the idea that the players could actually boycott tournaments and slams. 70-100 players agreeing with the petition. I feel that's all pretty juicy. Pospisil is one person, but 70-100?
 

NoleFam

Bionic Poster
Dan Evans challenging Djokovic to boycott, the idea that the players could actually boycott tournaments and slams. 70-100 players agreeing with the petition. I feel that's all pretty juicy. Pospisil is one person, but 70-100?

He challenged Djokovic? To what? Sounds like the the lame British press at their shenanigans again and nothing more. They need to insert Djokovic's name in anything for sensationalism and no surprise it involves a British player. Pospisil already has multiple players, and if Djokovic signed it he's only one player. This is still nothing new as we've known Pospisil's position for months. What we didn't know is WTA players are on his side as well.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
OP, some more information that contradicts the intitial report. i swear journalism in this sport is horrendous

Very interesting! I was just reposting what I read from the article. I have a feeling these players are working behind the scenes and don't want it out in the media but I can't ever see a boycott happening like the original Virginia Slims/WTA players did back in the day.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Very interesting! I was just reposting what I read from the article. I have a feeling these players are working behind the scenes and don't want it out in the media but I can't ever see a boycott happening like the original Virginia Slims/WTA players did back in the day.

honestly that could very well be but lets be real tennis journalism has a habit of reporting without getting all the facts or just reporting piece meal and it makes zero sense.
 

icedevil0289

G.O.A.T.
Dan Evans challenging Djokovic to boycott, the idea that the players could actually boycott tournaments and slams. 70-100 players agreeing with the petition. I feel that's all pretty juicy. Pospisil is one person, but 70-100?

well aside from whether parts of the article or true or not given melzer's recent tweet, i do have to wonder how successful this boycott would be. i'm not so sure evans challenged djokovic to boycott because the way i read it was more like is this necessarily the best route to go. honestly sometimes you do have to entirely dismantle a system but if they do go the boycott route i do fear that it will affect teh lower ranked players more.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
ATP need to sack the big 3
They earn 80% of total prize money

or ATP can increase more the payments to lower ranked players, as opposed to boosting the prize money for the winner.
Also it's worth looking at the prize money for Challengers and Futures. Those look frozen since approximately 30 years, while the cost of life sky-rocketed
 

SumYungGai

Semi-Pro
Yes I made a comment in another thread to this effect. The winners of these tournament should not be getting 77x what a loser gets (US Open 2019 first round loss 50k, winner 3.85mil). They need to increase the size of the earnings portion for the majority of the tour, not just the tip top. Nobody deserves 77x more money for winning against players arguably on a similar level. It would help the lower level players so much.
 

topher

Hall of Fame
So basically the ATP players want a higher share of the revenue, Pospisil argues that currently the players are only getting 14% of the profits vs the NBA which gets 50% back.

If this were true, it would be interesting. But revenue vs. profit are very different, and I've always understood that the NBA players get 50% of the league's revenue - so that the article got that wrong would call a lot of it into question. You also can't trust the accounting numbers from either side fully, especially if they're being quoted from lawyers who will use the most biased numbers they can in their arguments.

the lawyers would take 10 per cent of any increase in prize money that results from the petition

What? That's a huge chunk of change if we're talking about tripling the prize money (supposedly).
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
If this were true, it would be interesting. But revenue vs. profit are very different, and I've always understood that the NBA players get 50% of the league's revenue - so that the article got that wrong would call a lot of it into question. You also can't trust the accounting numbers from either side fully, especially if they're being quoted from lawyers who will use the most biased numbers they can in their arguments.



What? That's a huge chunk of change if we're talking about tripling the prize money (supposedly).

That would be a one time thing and quite reasonable if they agree to work for free and get paid only if they win. It is a standard legal model.
 

topher

Hall of Fame
That would be a one time thing and quite reasonable if they agree to work for free and get paid only if they win. It is a standard legal model.

One time for what? Every tournament? If the 14% => 50% figure would be true, I guess that would be...40 million paid to the lawyers? Not as bad as I thought actually.
 

Demented

Semi-Pro
If the players were really serious about this then you'd see more Laver Cup style tournaments appearing. You don't have to boycott the slams because this isn't like other pro sports. They aren't barred from playing non-sanctioned events for money. The players could simply run their own tournaments and as long as the names showed up then they'd be successful.
 

insideguy

G.O.A.T.
Sounds like the players could have some leverage. Like in the big team sports. Problem is its hard to get everyone on the same page in these individual sports.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
To save the volume of really uninformed opinions being put forward again about the percentages of profit disbursed between sports please read this which explains why anyone who starts with the basketball figure as something tennis should move to is outing themselves as either too dumb or too dishonest to engage in a meaningful debate with here. The distinguishing details are just too significant for the comparison to hold true.

Link to post: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...view-the-tennis-podcast.641582/#post-13275954
 

Archsree

Rookie
Grand slams should understand that if small atp tournaments start to fold ultimately their business will be in trouble.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
If the players were really serious about this then you'd see more Laver Cup style tournaments appearing. You don't have to boycott the slams because this isn't like other pro sports. They aren't barred from playing non-sanctioned events for money. The players could simply run their own tournaments and as long as the names showed up then they'd be successful.
Isn't that what the ATP cup is about that starts in January? Like a 2 week event that pays the big bucks and is held across several Australian cities.
 

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
This is laughable that he would even ask djoker. This is not even something he has the power to do, nor would any of the big name hop on. I mean, heck, would it matter if the top 500 outside the big 3 left?

It would still be the big 3 in the finals...
 
Fed paid Dan Evans to challenge Djoker to boycott the slams. Boycotts from Djoker and Nadal are the only way Fed's slam record stands from here.
 

Zoolander

Hall of Fame
Lets see....Fed asks for prizemoney to be increased for lower ranked players.

Djoko just asks for more prizemoney full stop, because a few mill for winning just isnt enough.....

Just remembered why i cant stand Novak. Ask him if they can increase the percentage take but make sure it goes to smaller tourneys and lower ranked players, rather then grand slam winners. See what he has to say about that. If he actually cares about the poorer players on tour he wont object, right??
 

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
Grand slams should understand that if small atp tournaments start to fold ultimately their business will be in trouble.

What is the evidence for that ?

The US has been bleeding ATP tournaments for 20 years or more and during the same period the USO revenue has gone way up.

VAMOS !
 

Gary Duane

Talk Tennis Guru
To save the volume of really uninformed opinions being put forward again about the percentages of profit disbursed between sports please read this which explains why anyone who starts with the basketball figure as something tennis should move to is outing themselves as either too dumb or too dishonest to engage in a meaningful debate with here. The distinguishing details are just too significant for the comparison to hold true.

Link to post: https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...view-the-tennis-podcast.641582/#post-13275954
OK. Read your post. I don't know anything about this, but your ideas at least seem logical. But does that mean that tennis couldn't share a bit better, at least?
 

Feather

Legend
How much money does a player get if he/she loses in the first round or second round or third round of US open?
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
OK. Read your post. I don't know anything about this, but your ideas at least seem logical. But does that mean that tennis couldn't share a bit better, at least?
A better share is definitely on the cards but for Pospisil to argue for a leap from 15% to close to 50% is a quick ticket to him being ignored.

Many tournaments lose money some years. This is about all tournaments, not just majors. And remember majors are distinct from the average tournament in that their business model includes providing a large chunk of the funding for their national body for the rest of the year.

The main thing about my linking to the other thread is to stop the same "but hey, basketball..." calls being dropped again when the businesses are about as similar as UFC and a Taco Bell franchise.
 

Gary Duane

Talk Tennis Guru
A better share is definitely on the cards but for Pospisil to argue for a leap from 15% to close to 50% is a quick ticket to him being ignored.

Many tournaments lose money some years. This is about all tournaments, not just majors. And remember majors are distinct from the average tournament in that their business model includes providing a large chunk of the funding for their national body for the rest of the year.

The main thing about my linking to the other thread is to stop the same "but hey, basketball..." calls being dropped again when the businesses are about as similar as UFC and a Taco Bell franchise.
As I said, I'm just reading about this without any knowledge. I have no idea how any of this works. But it does seem to me that a better share sounds reasonable. What is your take on Pospisil? If you are right, he is going to alienate people by not understanding things better.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
A better share is definitely on the cards but for Pospisil to argue for a leap from 15% to close to 50% is a quick ticket to him being ignored.

Many tournaments lose money some years. This is about all tournaments, not just majors. And remember majors are distinct from the average tournament in that their business model includes providing a large chunk of the funding for their national body for the rest of the year.

The main thing about my linking to the other thread is to stop the same "but hey, basketball..." calls being dropped again when the businesses are about as similar as UFC and a Taco Bell franchise.

I can assume that Pospisil doesn't count in 15% the appearance fees that a tournament has to pay to the "great" players to attract them.
So, tennis needs to become more transparent first.
 
Top