Do you support PTPA - Poll

Do you support PTPA


  • Total voters
    142
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
This guy called 'Reality' seems to be another way of referring to yourself and your obsolete opinions.
It is the freight train that runs over your feeble attempts at "predicting" anything based on your confused state of mind. The salvage attempts are the most entertaining.

:cool:
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I've got the freight train blues, obviously. That's an old blues classic, and you seem to do 'old'. Long live the 'new' ... PTPA!

It is the freight train that runs over your feeble attempts at "predicting" anything based on your confused state of mind. The salvage attempts are the most entertaining.
 
Last edited:

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Djokovic's new association clearly has a majority support despite the many fans of the other two of the big three.
 

NiCo515

New User
Is it any individual sport where it’s possible to earn more than that if you are number 400 In the sport?
Golf is the most frequently used comparison for tennis because they have a nearly identical tour structure and calendar, with golfers also being individual athletes like tennis players. Yet the PGA pays golfers 30-35% of tournament earnings, versus 10-15% in tennis. So even if we discount the major team sports and their near 50/50 split between teams and players, golf is still paying their athletes 2-3x more than tennis.

And to the posters who keep going on about second-division Spanish football teams and their devoted fanbase, please look at the global viewing numbers for tennis tournaments. You're comparing a local market team and their ability to put 20 thousand fans in a stadium once a week and get good ratings in a tiny local market, versus a tour that gets broadcasted in nearly every country on earth, pretty much year-round, for hours every single day.

A majority of sports revenues comes from television deals. So a company like ESPN pays the ATP, ITF, and slams hundreds of millions of dollars in order to have exclusive rights to their matches. Subsequently, ESPN sells each 30-second commercial during those tournaments for tens of thousands of dollars (depending on ratings, a single 30-second spot can cost hundreds of thousands for a big name final). Tennis also draws a very affluent audience, so those tv spots cost even more, exceeding $50 per thousand views at times. It's why you see companies like Rolex, Mercedes-Benz, and every other luxury brand advertising during tennis tournaments. When in factor in sponsorships (also high-value due to the prestige, affluent audience, and implied endorsement from a prestigious tournament), tennis ends up being some of the most desirable advertising inventory that luxury and aspirational brands can buy.

I'm not going to research the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if the total revenue from the year-long tour (tv deals in every country, global sponsorships, local sponsorships, ticket sales, executive suites, food & drink, etc) surpass a billion dollars annually. And the tournaments get to keep 85% of that. It's absurd, to the point where tournaments are willingly taking fines just so they don't have to disclose their earnings. The tennis infrastructure certainly isn't more complex than golf's, so why is the PGA paying their athletes a share that's three times as large as tennis'?

The reality is that it's pure, unadulterated greed. The people at the top have gotten used to getting rich by exploiting tennis players, keeping them in the dark with regard to their true value and worth, and promising change that's perpetually in the "process" of being addressed. Meanwhile, only the top 20 players on tour make a living that's comparable to minimum salary in the NBA. When your #50 ranked player is struggling to break even and a missed year of play very well could end their career for lack of finances, your sport is in a shït state. The sheer number of smooth-brained idiots in this thread who are looking for every nit to pick just so they can satisfy the status quo of a rich executive class and a handful of top athletes thriving while 95% of players are being paid a pittance is disgusting. The system is broken. All players but the top are getting fückęd. Look out for your fellow working-class human and support them in this endeavor.
 
Novak can't even organize a safe tennis event. He seems to be too emotional and often looked or sounded angry during his online conferences during the lockdown time. He just doesn't have the charisma to be a leader of a political organization. He is too unstable and in my opinion he is a divisive figure.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Fortunately Pospisil will be running the show, and associations endure over time. Long past Djokovic's involvement.
 

40L0VE

Semi-Pro
The Tour is in a weakened state so this striking when the enemy is down is not a good look for Novak. It might not end well for him.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
When your #50 ranked player is struggling to break even and a missed year of play very well could end their career for lack of finances, your sport is in a shït state. The sheer number of smooth-brained idiots in this thread who are looking for every nit to pick just so they can satisfy the status quo of a rich executive class and a handful of top athletes thriving while 95% of players are being paid a pittance is disgusting. The system is broken. All players but the top are getting fückęd. Look out for your fellow working-class human and support them in this e
We need to be concerned about the millions of underpaid public school teachers who have to work two jobs to survive.

Not whether the #50 has to "survive" on only $200,000 a year.

Cry us a river!

 
Last edited:

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Teachers are not underpaid in Finland, so it's your problem that you have a class-divided society that under-educates its children.

We need to be concerned about the millions of underpaid public school teachers who have to work two jobs to survive.

Not whether the #50 has to "survive" on only $200,000 a year.

Cry us a river!

 

NiCo515

New User
We need to be concerned about the millions of underpaid public school teachers who have to work two jobs to survive.

Not whether the #50 has to "survive" on only $200,000 a year.

Cry us a river!

That $200k per year doesn't include expenses, which can easily exceed those earnings. You're not accounting for the cost of coaches, trainers, travel, lodging, and other expenses involved with being a professional athlete who travels around the world each week. Without external support (in this case British Tennis and conceivably her family), she would be in the negative. Most players don't have the support of a wealthy country behind them.
 

NonP

Hall of Fame
Golf is the most frequently used comparison for tennis because they have a nearly identical tour structure and calendar, with golfers also being individual athletes like tennis players. Yet the PGA pays golfers 30-35% of tournament earnings, versus 10-15% in tennis. So even if we discount the major team sports and their near 50/50 split between teams and players, golf is still paying their athletes 2-3x more than tennis.

And to the posters who keep going on about second-division Spanish football teams and their devoted fanbase, please look at the global viewing numbers for tennis tournaments. You're comparing a local market team and their ability to put 20 thousand fans in a stadium once a week and get good ratings in a tiny local market, versus a tour that gets broadcasted in nearly every country on earth, pretty much year-round, for hours every single day.

A majority of sports revenues comes from television deals. So a company like ESPN pays the ATP, ITF, and slams hundreds of millions of dollars in order to have exclusive rights to their matches. Subsequently, ESPN sells each 30-second commercial during those tournaments for tens of thousands of dollars (depending on ratings, a single 30-second spot can cost hundreds of thousands for a big name final). Tennis also draws a very affluent audience, so those tv spots cost even more, exceeding $50 per thousand views at times. It's why you see companies like Rolex, Mercedes-Benz, and every other luxury brand advertising during tennis tournaments. When in factor in sponsorships (also high-value due to the prestige, affluent audience, and implied endorsement from a prestigious tournament), tennis ends up being some of the most desirable advertising inventory that luxury and aspirational brands can buy.

I'm not going to research the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if the total revenue from the year-long tour (tv deals in every country, global sponsorships, local sponsorships, ticket sales, executive suites, food & drink, etc) surpass a billion dollars annually. And the tournaments get to keep 85% of that. It's absurd, to the point where tournaments are willingly taking fines just so they don't have to disclose their earnings. The tennis infrastructure certainly isn't more complex than golf's, so why is the PGA paying their athletes a share that's three times as large as tennis'?

The reality is that it's pure, unadulterated greed. The people at the top have gotten used to getting rich by exploiting tennis players, keeping them in the dark with regard to their true value and worth, and promising change that's perpetually in the "process" of being addressed. Meanwhile, only the top 20 players on tour make a living that's comparable to minimum salary in the NBA. When your #50 ranked player is struggling to break even and a missed year of play very well could end their career for lack of finances, your sport is in a shït state. The sheer number of smooth-brained idiots in this thread who are looking for every nit to pick just so they can satisfy the status quo of a rich executive class and a handful of top athletes thriving while 95% of players are being paid a pittance is disgusting. The system is broken. All players but the top are getting fückęd. Look out for your fellow working-class human and support them in this endeavor.
You're somewhat off on the range of break-even rankings:


Agreed more or less on the rest, though. This initiative is not about Djokovic but rather a group of professionals who keep getting shortchanged by an unsustainable system. All this talk about lack of leadership, direction or inclusiveness is a smoke screen designed to distract from the real issue.
 

Raz11

Semi-Pro
Yet the PGA pays golfers 30-35% of tournament earnings, versus 10-15% in tennis
I think those numbers are meaningless without any further information. If the costs to run a golf tournament is a lot lower compared to a slam than obviously PGA would be able to afford to pay the players a higher percentage of revenue.

If you look at the financial statements between USTA and PGA, you would find USTA pays a lower proportion (7% of revenue) of their revenue to administration compared to PGA (12%). Seems a big chunk of USTA revenue goes towards funding local lower tier tournaments which ultimately fund the lower players. So how can you compare golf with tennis when they are different in nature and tennis administration gets less of the share than their golf counterpart. If anything golf organizers are screwing their players.

If players want another 15% of the share,where is it going to come from? About 50% goes towards local tournaments, clubs and player development. Maybe we should take from that.
 
Last edited:

NiCo515

New User
I think those numbers are meaningless without any further information. If the costs to run a golf tournament is a lot lower compared to a slam than obviously PGA would be able to afford to pay the players a higher percentage of revenue.

If you look at the financial statements between USTA and PGA, you would find USTA pays a lower proportion (7% of revenue) of their revenue to administration compared to PGA (12%). Seems a big chunk of USTA revenue goes towards funding local lower tier tournaments which ultimately fund the lower players. So how can you compare golf with tennis when they are different in nature and tennis administration gets less of the share than their golf counterpart. If anything golf organizers are screwing their players.

If players want another 15% of the share,where is it going to come from? About 50% goes towards local tournaments, clubs and player development. Maybe we should take from that.
Why should players from the entire world be funding American (and English, French, Australian) local tournaments while they themselves are severely underpaid? And where exactly are these hundreds of millions of dollars being spent? Most academies are privately funded and for-profit businesses, and you're not going to convince me that the majority of all tennis revenue is being spent on developing the youth, because that's clearly total bs.
 

Raz11

Semi-Pro
Why should players from the entire world be funding American (and English, French, Australian) local tournaments while they themselves are severely underpaid? And where exactly are these hundreds of millions of dollars being spent? Most academies are privately funded and for-profit businesses, and you're not going to convince me that the majority of all tennis revenue is being spent on developing the youth, because that's clearly total bs.
Any evidence or financial statements that the revenue is being spent on executives or tournament owners? Based on information so far, majority of revenue goes towards local facilities, tennis programs and development. Where is the greed?

It is debatable whether revenue should be funding these local expensive programs but these programs is also what drives interest in tennis to some degree. Maybe they could be sustainable without funding or maybe not. You don't know that. I do know that there would be backlash if the players decided to cut funding to these programs for themselves. "We want more money so screw your local tennis communities and programs". I;m sure if you were to ask Vasek or Novak on where they would get their extra prize money from, they would have no idea and would publicly reject the idea of cutting funding from these programs.
 

NiCo515

New User
Any evidence or financial statements that the revenue is being spent on executives or tournament owners? Based on information so far, majority of revenue goes towards local facilities, tennis programs and development. Where is the greed?

It is debatable whether revenue should be funding these local expensive programs but these programs is also what drives interest in tennis to some degree. Maybe they could be sustainable without funding or maybe not. You don't know that. I do know that there would be backlash if the players decided to cut funding to these programs for themselves. "We want more money so screw your local tennis communities and programs". I;m sure if you were to ask Vasek or Novak on where they would get their extra prize money from, they would have no idea and would publicly reject the idea of cutting funding from these programs.
Many tournaments don't release their financials—in spite of being fined for lack of transparency—because they're trying to obfuscate the money distribution. If we had a clear itemized statement of how funds are being allocated, it would help explain why tennis is paying its athletes one quarter of the revenue share of major American sports leagues and less than a half of its most comparable competitor in professional golf.

Can you explain exactly what makes the overhead on the tennis tour cost 2-3 as much as golf's, in order to explain the pay distribution discrepancy? You keep mentioning some nebulous "local tennis communities and programs," as if whatever the fück this is supposed to be referencing can account for 85% OF ALL TENNIS REVENUE. And even if we were to pretend that all this money is in fact being invested into "local tennis communities and programs" (LMFAO), that doesn't benefit 99% of the tour, they didn't approve of it, and they should have a chance to negotiate this distribution collectively.

Some of you people are so propagandized that you're gleefully fighting on behalf of Larry Ellison against the likes of Damir Dzumhur.
 

Raz11

Semi-Pro
Many tournaments don't release their financials—in spite of being fined for lack of transparency—because they're trying to obfuscate the money distribution. If we had a clear itemized statement of how funds are being allocated, it would help explain why tennis is paying its athletes one quarter of the revenue share of major American sports leagues and less than a half of its most comparable competitor in professional golf.

Can you explain exactly what makes the overhead on the tennis tour cost 2-3 as much as golf's, in order to explain the pay distribution discrepancy? You keep mentioning some nebulous "local tennis communities and programs," as if whatever the fück this is supposed to be referencing can account for 85% OF ALL TENNIS REVENUE. And even if we were to pretend that all this money is in fact being invested into "local tennis communities and programs" (LMFAO), that doesn't benefit 99% of the tour, they didn't approve of it, and they should have a chance to negotiate this distribution collectively.

Some of you people are so propagandized that you're gleefully fighting on behalf of Larry Ellison against the likes of Damir Dzumhur.
Not really that difficult to search up USTA financial statement on google and look at their breakdown of revenue and expense for yourself. Certainly better than just quoting "10-15% share of revenue, omg what greed". You don't have to believe in the numbers but you certainly don't have anything to back your hate for the "establishment".

I agree that USTA shouldnt have to fund these programs and players should be given the choice to negotiate the distribution of revenue. But if PTPA is jsut a way to give them power to force USTA to cut funding so they don't have to face any backlash then screw that. If players want more money and the only way is to cut funding to these local programs, then they should be up front and transparent about it. I want someone to ask Novak and Vasek publicly, where are you hoping to get your extra increase from and are you prepared to cut funding to these local programs. If they say no then they are just deluded about wanting more money but providing no other alternative on how to get it.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Not really that difficult to search up USTA financial statement on google and look at their breakdown of revenue and expense for yourself. Certainly better than just quoting "10-15% share of revenue, omg what greed". You don't have to believe in the numbers but you certainly don't have anything to back your hate for the "establishment".

I agree that USTA shouldnt have to fund these programs and players should be given the choice to negotiate the distribution of revenue. But if PTPA is jsut a way to give them power to force USTA to cut funding so they don't have to face any backlash then screw that. If players want more money and the only way is to cut funding to these local programs, then they should be up front and transparent about it. I want someone to ask Novak and Vasek publicly, where are you hoping to get your extra increase from and are you prepared to cut funding to these local programs. If they say no then they are just deluded about wanting more money but providing no other alternative on how to get it.
Yes, and guess what: you won't be hearing about these things from PITA any time soon.

:cool:
 

NiCo515

New User
Yes, and guess what: you won't be hearing about these things from PITA any time soon.

:cool:
It's not the players union's responsibility to determine how the USTA allocates its share of tournament revenues; the union is fighting to increase the players' share.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
It's not the players union's responsibility to determine how the USTA allocates its share of tournament revenues; the union is fighting to increase the players' share.
So, Djokovic is looking to benefit himself above all, while stroking his ego.

I know.

:cool:
 

NiCo515

New User
So, Djokovic is looking to benefit himself above all, while stroking his ego.

I know.

:cool:
Of course, a larger share of tournament revenues going to fringe players surely benefits Novak more than anyone. I'm sure he welcomes all the bad press too, because we all know that a few extra shekels means the world to the highest earning player in professional tennis history.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Of course, a larger share of tournament revenues going to fringe players surely benefits Novak more than anyone. I'm sure he welcomes all the bad press too, because we all know that a few extra shekels means the world to the highest earning player in professional tennis history.
He doesn't solve any problems of the system (not that he ever committed to anything) and larger share of the revenue to the fringe players has been happening already for years, so he is trying to steal the results of someone else's work.

His fans speculate that the bad press gives him strength, so they view this as a net positive, regrdlesss of what you say.

Good that you mention that he made his fortune in the system that he finds so appalling. Unfortunately, his days as a top player are coming to an end, and he needs to find something else to keep his financial and power streams flowing, so, that "association" is his investment into his future.

:cool:
 

NiCo515

New User
He doesn't solve any problems of the system (not that he ever committed to anything) and larger share of the revenue to the fringe players has been happening already for years, so he is trying to steal the results of someone else's work.

His fans speculate that the bad press gives him strength, so they view this as a net positive, regrdlesss of what you say.

Good that you mention that he made his fortune in the system that he finds so appalling. Unfortunately, his days as a top player are coming to an end, and he needs to find something else to keep his financial and power streams flowing, so, that "association" is his investment into his future.

:cool:
He made his fortune because he's the most successful male player of all time, having won more big titles (1000+) than anyone in history. He would have earned a fortune even if prize money were halved, which isn't the point. Novak is very close friends with players like Tipsy, Troicki, Krajinovic, Coric, Dodig, Dzumhur, and many others, all of whom have hovered between 50-20 in rankings for years, so he knows their plight w/r/t finances.

The concessions they've received to date are scraps. They need to retool the entire structure, or at least negotiate for new terms as a union with their lawyers involved. It's about time to get in line with what other sports are paying their players, and it will ultimately be good for the sport's future. It's difficult for parents to devote their 6-year old's life to tennis when their only chance at being financially secure is becoming a top 20-50 player on the planet. Everyone in the top-500 who plays a full calendar schedule should be earning at least an upper middle-class income ($200-$300k) after paying for their coaches, travel, lodging and other expenses. That should be the aim of this association.

Novak isn't doing this for personal financial motives; he's looking at it as a good cause that will improve the lives of many players (& their families), as well as attract new youth from a lower socioeconomic strata. That's a much bigger personal prize for Novak than any check.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
He made his fortune because he's the most successful male player of all time, having won more big titles (1000+) than anyone in history. He would have earned a fortune even if prize money were halved, which isn't the point. Novak is very close friends with players like Tipsy, Troicki, Krajinovic, Coric, Dodig, Dzumhur, and many others, all of whom have hovered between 50-20 in rankings for years, so he knows their plight w/r/t finances.

The concessions they've received to date are scraps. They need to retool the entire structure, or at least negotiate for new terms as a union with their lawyers involved. It's about time to get in line with what other sports are paying their players, and it will ultimately be good for the sport's future. It's difficult for parents to devote their 6-year old's life to tennis when their only chance at being financially secure is becoming a top 20-50 player on the planet. Everyone in the top-500 who plays a full calendar schedule should be earning at least an upper middle-class income ($200-$300k) after paying for their coaches, travel, lodging and other expenses. That should be the aim of this association.

Novak isn't doing this for personal financial motives; he's looking at it as a good cause that will improve the lives of many players (& their families), as well as attract new youth from a lower socioeconomic strata. That's a much bigger personal prize for Novak than any check.
Playing in exactly that system (of top heavy financial awards) is what brought him the wealth.

What were the prize money for ATP250 in Serbia? Was it any different than those of other similar level events?

Your estimate about what they are is your own. You need to show what is possible and how. You don't have that answer, and neither does Djokovic as per his unwillingness to reveal his plan.

I will hold the entire Djokovic fanbase that argues about Djokovic's goal to your promise:

"Everyone in the top-500 who plays a full calendar schedule should be earning at least an upper middle-class income ($200-$300k) after paying for their coaches, travel, lodging and other expenses"

Just tell me what is the horizon in which this goal should be achieved by the new association, and we are done here.

:cool:
 
I know that soo many shi**y soccer players in Serbia drive Porsches and live in luxury penthouses, while for example Milos Krajinovic, who is currently ranked as 26th best tennis player "on Earth" cannot afford that style of living. I'm not saying that because I am concerned about his well being ;) but simply to pinpoint the differences.

On the other hand, soccer is a sport where players are traded so big money is made when managers "sell" the players to a big and famous club etc.
I agree with the rest of your point, but I'm sure Krajinovic having made around a mill last year in USD before any endorsements, exhibitions or appearance fees is doing pretty well for himself
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
I agree with the rest of your point, but I'm sure Krajinovic having made around a mill last year in USD before any endorsements, exhibitions or appearance fees is doing pretty well for himself
If Krajinovic was to launder money or receive state help like those teams he was speaking about do, he too would have a "comfortable living", even without what he earned. Unfortunately, tennis is not football, but that needs to be said only to people that pretend that they don't understand.

:cool:
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
The sheer number of smooth-brained idiots in this thread who are looking for every nit to pick just so they can satisfy the status quo of a rich executive class and a handful of top athletes thriving while 95% of players are being paid a pittance is disgusting.

(y)

65 idiots and counting at the moment.
 

blablavla

Legend
I think the ATP in five years will look incredibly different, both in prize money and locations, to what it looks like now
it might.
but don't forget that the reality is harsh.
and while players might theoretically want to have more countries represented in tournaments, and ATP certainly does, as it leverages on their turnover, reality is often different.

From player perspective.
Many countries require visa. That is time for players. In some cases you need to send your passport, so you might have difficulties in travelling.
Taxes often are collected at source of income. Meaning that if you decide to play a tournament in India, whatever prize money you collect, they will be taxed. You might be allowed to apply for tax refund, but it takes time, and it needs to be done in local language, so quite likely cost for administration. Then as local payments are handled in local currencies, your tax is collected in local currency and refund is paid in local currency as well, which easily can cut 20-30% of your money, due to foreign exchange rate.

So, a series of tournaments in US or Europe will be preferred by players, but not only for the above mentioned reasons.
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
We need to be concerned about the millions of underpaid public school teachers who have to work two jobs to survive.

Not whether the #50 has to "survive" on only $200,000 a year.

Cry us a river!

So, because an injustice is committed somewhere, let's extend it to all other professions ?

Sounds about right. :-D
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Golf is the most frequently used comparison for tennis because they have a nearly identical tour structure and calendar, with golfers also being individual athletes like tennis players. Yet the PGA pays golfers 30-35% of tournament earnings, versus 10-15% in tennis. So even if we discount the major team sports and their near 50/50 split between teams and players, golf is still paying their athletes 2-3x more than tennis.

And to the posters who keep going on about second-division Spanish football teams and their devoted fanbase, please look at the global viewing numbers for tennis tournaments. You're comparing a local market team and their ability to put 20 thousand fans in a stadium once a week and get good ratings in a tiny local market, versus a tour that gets broadcasted in nearly every country on earth, pretty much year-round, for hours every single day.

A majority of sports revenues comes from television deals. So a company like ESPN pays the ATP, ITF, and slams hundreds of millions of dollars in order to have exclusive rights to their matches. Subsequently, ESPN sells each 30-second commercial during those tournaments for tens of thousands of dollars (depending on ratings, a single 30-second spot can cost hundreds of thousands for a big name final). Tennis also draws a very affluent audience, so those tv spots cost even more, exceeding $50 per thousand views at times. It's why you see companies like Rolex, Mercedes-Benz, and every other luxury brand advertising during tennis tournaments. When in factor in sponsorships (also high-value due to the prestige, affluent audience, and implied endorsement from a prestigious tournament), tennis ends up being some of the most desirable advertising inventory that luxury and aspirational brands can buy.

I'm not going to research the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if the total revenue from the year-long tour (tv deals in every country, global sponsorships, local sponsorships, ticket sales, executive suites, food & drink, etc) surpass a billion dollars annually. And the tournaments get to keep 85% of that. It's absurd, to the point where tournaments are willingly taking fines just so they don't have to disclose their earnings. The tennis infrastructure certainly isn't more complex than golf's, so why is the PGA paying their athletes a share that's three times as large as tennis'?

The reality is that it's pure, unadulterated greed. The people at the top have gotten used to getting rich by exploiting tennis players, keeping them in the dark with regard to their true value and worth, and promising change that's perpetually in the "process" of being addressed. Meanwhile, only the top 20 players on tour make a living that's comparable to minimum salary in the NBA. When your #50 ranked player is struggling to break even and a missed year of play very well could end their career for lack of finances, your sport is in a shït state. The sheer number of smooth-brained idiots in this thread who are looking for every nit to pick just so they can satisfy the status quo of a rich executive class and a handful of top athletes thriving while 95% of players are being paid a pittance is disgusting. The system is broken. All players but the top are getting fückęd. Look out for your fellow working-class human and support them in this endeavor.
Bravo, terrific post.
 

Ogi44

New User
Not really that difficult to search up USTA financial statement on google and look at their breakdown of revenue and expense for yourself. Certainly better than just quoting "10-15% share of revenue, omg what greed". You don't have to believe in the numbers but you certainly don't have anything to back your hate for the "establishment".

I agree that USTA shouldnt have to fund these programs and players should be given the choice to negotiate the distribution of revenue. But if PTPA is jsut a way to give them power to force USTA to cut funding so they don't have to face any backlash then screw that. If players want more money and the only way is to cut funding to these local programs, then they should be up front and transparent about it. I want someone to ask Novak and Vasek publicly, where are you hoping to get your extra increase from and are you prepared to cut funding to these local programs. If they say no then they are just deluded about wanting more money but providing no other alternative on how to get it.
USTA and grand slams are not ATP. ATP tournaments and owners are the main issue here. Do you see major difference in prize money between GS and Masters tournaments for example?
 

Raz11

Semi-Pro
It is free to watch every challenger match on the main website. Guess how many people around the world is watching a match between top 200 players atm? 100 people... Compare that to any other sport like basketball, golf and the opportunity to generate revenue signifcantly drops outside of the main ATP tournaments. Everyone would like to see them earn more money but the numbers just don't add up.

There isnt some invisible hand that is screwing over tennis players as some believe, it is just the nature and popularity of the sport outside of the top 100 that make it difficult financially for players outside the top. Plently of reasons why it can't be compared to golf. The knock out format means draw sizes have to be smaller compared to golf. A 400th rank golf players have a number of opportunties to compete in tournaments with more than a $million prize money. The same can't be said for the similar tennis player.
 

Raz11

Semi-Pro
USTA and grand slams are not ATP. ATP tournaments and owners are the main issue here. Do you see major difference in prize money between GS and Masters tournaments for example?
Do you have information on how much revenue from ATP tournaments go towards players? I imagine revenue for these tournaments are significantly less so I imagine it would be ever harder to give a large share to the players. Plently of ATP 250 have come and gone over the years so it isnt exactly a profitable business.

The 10-15% for tennis players comes from US Open and the other slams.
 

blablavla

Legend
Do you have information on how much revenue from ATP tournaments go towards players? I imagine revenue for these tournaments are significantly less so I imagine it would be ever harder to give a large share to the players. Plently of ATP 250 have come and gone over the years so it isnt exactly a profitable business.

The 10-15% for tennis players comes from US Open and the other slams.
that is without touching the real problem of prize money to low ranked players: Challenger and Futures tour.
Those are subsidized by local Federations, and I don't see PTPA saying anything.
But I see them crying about more money to the top 100 players.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
So, because an injustice is committed somewhere, let's extend it to all other professions ?

Sounds about right.
Yes, you are confused. We will help you. Injustice? No, it is not an injustice.
The millions of underpaid nurses, teachers and other essential workers are an injustice.
Athletes are entertainers. The reality is that the public only pays to watch the Top 50.
If the #100 ranked tennis player is not breaking even he needs to either improve his results or find a viable job in the real world.
Sports is a pure meritocracy. Players earnings are based on their results on the court..

Meritocracy - a system in which the talented are chosen and moved ahead on the basis of their achievement.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top