Tipsarevic: "pay in tennis is ridiculously low"

[Timbo's hopeless slice]

you sound like a socialist who possesses zero understanding of free market economics.

Like me, Bartleby lives in a country that hasn't been brought to it's knees by 'free market economics'

We seem to be able to provide health care, social security and various other evils of the welfare state without the place falling into the sea, perhaps y'all should try it?

 

[decades]

Name me two organizations that organize male professional tennis matches on a global basis each week?

Now name me one dozen organizations that manufacture tennis racquets?

Now name me two dozen organizations that manufacture tennis clothing?

your beef really should be with the top ten tennis players in the world. They take home the Lion's share of the prize money. If it is so unequal why don't they change the economics of tennis so that more money flows to the lower ranked players. They have the power to do this. I wonder why don't the top 4 players in the world reallocate the prize money so that more it goes to the others? your beef is really with the top players.

 

[decades]

Like me, Bartleby lives in a country that hasn't been brought to it's knees by 'free market economics'

We seem to be able to provide health care, social security and various other evils of the welfare state without the place falling into the sea, perhaps y'all should try it?

We are doing quite well thank you. Bloomberg tells me that the EU? not so much.

unfortunately the sport of tennis is a capitalist money making enterprise. if it were a socialist enterprise the top 4 would make way less and the bottom 396 would make much more. Take this issue up with the men at the top?

 

[Bartelby]

As well as the top ten are paid, its clear that they are not renumerated as highly as they should be from tennis itself.

I don't see this as a case of redistributing prize money but one where its a question of determining what percentage of revenues should go back into prize money.

If tennis does not want a healthy competition they should play every tournament as if it were a year end tournament and only invite the top 8 or 16 players in the world.

 

[Timbo's hopeless slice]

We are doing quite well thank you. Bloomberg tells me that the EU? not so much.

unfortunately the sport of tennis is a capitalist money making enterprise. if it were a socialist enterprise the top 4 would make way less and the bottom 396 would make much more. Take this issue up with the men at the top?

ah, but we aren't in the EU, lol

I do wonder at your inabilty to grasp the concept, though.

This is about percentage of existing revenue, a figure lower in tennis than in other comparable professional sports, most obviously golf.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of the pie, but everything to do with the size of the slice.

 

[Bartelby]

Nalby had a much criticised swipe at the ATP when he should have been eating crow, but let's not so easily forget what he said:


Nalbandian did not help his case by bringing criticisms of the ATP, unrelated to the incident, into the conversation, nor with an understandably defensive attitude in his press conference. Where the ATP is concerned, his objection seems to involve a similar lack of responsibility and accountability on the ATP’s part when they make mistakes: "When somebody else do a mistake, they have to pay in the same way […] n the beginning of the year you have to sign [something that says] you have to agree with everything that the ATP says, right? And sometimes you don’t. And if you don’t want to sign, you cannot play ATP tournaments. So you don’t have chance to ask, to tell, to change something, nothing. […] But sometimes ATP put a lot of pressure on the players, and sometimes you get injured because you play on dangerous surface and nothing happen. Keep rolling. Keep rolling all time. Nothing pay for that."

 

[decades]

ah, but we aren't in the EU, lol

I do wonder at your inabilty to grasp the concept, though.

This is about percentage of existing revenue, a figure lower in tennis than in other comparable professional sports, most obviously golf.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of the pie, but everything to do with the size of the slice.

except you haven't proven that there is any revenue to distribute after costs and profit for the risk taker. again you are comparing tennis to other sports without proving that they have the same economics as the other sports. so you see you comparing apples to oranges just won't fly so long as there are economically literate posters here on this thread. and there are.

 

[big_bill]

Tennis pay is a reflection of society as a whole - "the rich get richer".

 

[Bartelby]

A free market narcissist, the worst kind!

except you haven't proven that there is any revenue to distribute after costs and profit for the risk taker. again you are comparing tennis to other sports without proving that they have the same economics as the other sports. so you see you comparing apples to oranges just won't fly so long as there are economically literate posters here on this thread. and there are.

 

[tistrapukcipeht]

I think 50% or more of what the tournaments make should be given to the players in prize money the next year, if a tournament makes less, less money for the players the following year.

If you own the right of a tournament you can probably become a millionaire doing it, specially in eastern European countries where corruption is very high.

Without players, there is no tournaments, stadium for nobody to play mean nothing.

I think is about time for the players to go on strike, after the Olympics would be a perfect time, for a week at least, if nothing happens immediately, keep on strike, or let the top 3 play by themselves, as they always make the semis anyway.

 

[Bartelby]

The players need a smarter strategy than striking.

First they need to organise, then they need to negotiate and then they need to withdraw services that feed the PR machine and this will get them what they want.

But they can't do even this much.

People in team sports are easier to organise and probably get paid better as a consequence.

 

[decades]

The players need a smarter strategy than striking.

First they need to organise, then they need to negotiate and then they need to withdraw services that feed the PR machine and this will get them what they want.

But they can't do even this much.

People in team sports are easier to organise and probably get paid better as a consequence.

we saw what your kind of economic thinking did to the old Soviet Union. It brought it to it's knees and eventually it splintered into a hundred pieces. And all of the pieces now are attempting to emulate a system of economics that has worked over generations---the one we have in the good ole US of A.

 

[Bartelby]

We saw what your thinking did to the former Soviet Union when fabulously wealthy assets were given to gangster capitalists who killed their way to the top after being handed over wealth by the drunken Yeltsin to his tennis court cronies, bizarrely enough, and with Jeffrey Sachs in the background cheering things on.

we saw what your kind of economic thinking did to the old Soviet Union. It brought it to it's knees and eventually it splintered into a hundred pieces. And all of the pieces now are attempting to emulate a system that has worked over generations---the one we have in the good ole US of A.

 

[decades]

We saw what your thinking did to the former Soviet Union when fabulously wealthy assets were given to gangster capitalists who killed their way to the top after being handed over wealth by the drunken Yeltsin to his tennis court cronies, bizarrely enough, and with Jeffrey Sachs in the background cheering things on.

oh my. out come the tin foil hats. I guess this thread has now officially jumped the shark.

 

[Timbo's hopeless slice]

Forget it Bartleby, this clown has done some undergraduate economics unit and now he thinks he's Adam Davidson..

You can't reason with people like this...

 

[Bartelby]

Resorting to cliche after cllche is a sure sign you've lost the argument.

Mind you, the wealth of the Russian people has made English soccer players very happy.

oh my. out come the tin foil hats. I guess this thread has now officially jumped the shark.

 

[decades]

Nalby had a much criticised swipe at the ATP when he should have been eating crow, but let's not so easily forget what he said:


Nalbandian did not help his case by bringing criticisms of the ATP, unrelated to the incident, into the conversation, nor with an understandably defensive attitude in his press conference. Where the ATP is concerned, his objection seems to involve a similar lack of responsibility and accountability on the ATP’s part when they make mistakes: "When somebody else do a mistake, they have to pay in the same way […] n the beginning of the year you have to sign [something that says] you have to agree with everything that the ATP says, right? And sometimes you don’t. And if you don’t want to sign, you cannot play ATP tournaments. So you don’t have chance to ask, to tell, to change something, nothing. […] But sometimes ATP put a lot of pressure on the players, and sometimes you get injured because you play on dangerous surface and nothing happen. Keep rolling. Keep rolling all time. Nothing pay for that."

the ATP is partly responsible for making this guy a millionaire many times over. Perhaps he would rather leave this sport of tennis for others and cast his lot back with his compatriots in Argentina, who I have heard, aren't doing quite as well as David is at the moment.

 

[decades]

Forget it Bartleby, this clown has done some undergraduate economics unit and now he thinks he's Adam Davidson..

You can't reason with people like this...

you know the way out I presume?

 

[Timbo's hopeless slice]

You see, the problem with you is that you don't even understand why your fact premise is flawed, so it is impossible to engage your value premise in argument...

But that's ok, it isn't as if I care what you think. I just find it amusing.

cheerio, I am doen here

 

[darrinbaker00]

The few numbers that we have all point toward tennis players being under-paid.

That's the funniest post I have ever read on this board. Thank you so much for the laugh.

 

[Bartelby]

You're easily amused.

That's the funniest post I have ever read on this board. Thank you so much for the laugh.

 

[decades]

You see, the problem with you is that you don't even understand why your fact premise is flawed, so it is impossible to engage your value premise in argument...

But that's ok, it isn't as if I care what you think. I just find it amusing.

cheerio, I am doen here

hardly. all you have is one fact: % of revenue in a grand slam that goes to the players. that's all you have. you have no idea what the economic costs are to bring tennis to the public. you have no idea what the profits (or losses) are that accrue to the risk takers. You basically have squat. Yet you rest your entire premise, that the risk takers make too much money, and the "workers" make too little, on this set of incomplete facts.

This is why it's so easy to beat down your arguments like Federer putting an overhead away. You don't bring anything tangible to the discussion. Just some righteous socialist concept that the players need to make more and the risk takers who put up the capital to bring you the sport, need to make less.

 

[Bartelby]

Risk takers?:


Name me two organizations that organize male professional tennis matches on a global basis each week?

Now name me one dozen organizations that manufacture tennis racquets?

Now name me two dozen organizations that manufacture tennis clothing?

hardly. all you have is one fact: % of revenue in a grand slam that goes to the players. that's all you have. you have no idea what the economic costs are to bring tennis to the public. you have no idea what the profits (or losses) are that accrue to the risk takers. You basically have squat. Yet you rest your entire premise, that the risk takers make too much money, and the "workers" make too little on this set of incomplete facts.

This is why it's so easy to beat down your arguments like Federer putting an overhead away. You don't bring anything tangible to the discussion. Just some righteous socialist concept that the players need to make more and the risk takers who put up the capital to bring you the sport, need to make less.

 

[FedererUberAlles]

I never said they could or couldn't "transition" to another career. That's not really the point of this discussion. That's not really our concern. Are we equally concerned when a laid off Auto worker must now, living in the middle of nowhere, have to transition his limited skills and find a new career? Are we equally concerned for the 10,000 employees of Nokia who are going to get laid off and now must transition to a new career?

Should we worry about these people if they are making a personal choice to play tennis and accept the supposedly horrendous pay and working conditions?

Understand that 9/10 pro tennis players come from a family of privilege and wealth. that's just the fact. And now you are asking us to feel sorry for, and fight for these people who likely have been babied and pampered their entire lives, who are making their very own personal choices about what they will and won't do for money.

I am sorry but there are way more important causes in the world worth fighting for than how much money a pro tennis player is making.

Come on decades, red herrings? This isn't about some appeal to emotion over other labor classes getting shafted. I never asked you to feel sorry for them, and don't turn this into some pedantic attempt to argue I did. However, you can feel as sorry as you want and I invite you to continue apologizing for your posts.

Moreover, you seem confused. You're posting on a tennis message board of a website that sells premium tennis goods and you're arguing with a stunning air of pretention. Yes, this is obviously some unremarkable issue – thank you for being so profound. This isn't the right place for your high horse attitude.

 

[diggler]

As far as I can tell, the ATP is the players union. They are not screwing the players, they represent the players.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Tennis_Professionals

They organise the majority of tour events.

The grand slams are organised by the ITF. Tipsaravic said the players only get 11 - 13% of the prizemoney at the slams. If anybody is screwing the players, it is the ITF at the slams, not the ATP in the regular tour events.

 

[Bartelby]

The ATP is not a union but an organisation split 50/50 between players and representatives of capital where capital gets the deciding vote and chooses the CEO.

At this level, the players are concerned with the health of the game, and not their pay and conditions.

At another level of the ATP there is an advisory council of players, which is not a union, and it advises the ATP on issues to do with pay and conditions but it has no power whatsoever.

Professional tennis players have no union of whatever kind.

 

[bjk]

Here's what the pros do. Have a regular USO, but the top 8 or 16 players have their own tournament indoors for a week during USO at MSG. Then the USO will be forced to hike pay up to the old level in order to lure back the top pros.

 

[li0scc0]

Has anybody actually looked in the STANDS of a tennis tournament? Empty.
Prince just went bankrupt.
Fewer people are playing tennis, the interest is down.
Me-thinks the tennis players should be happy they are getting what they are getting. Because the future is very, very dim.

 

[bjk]

More people attend the USO than any other sporting event. There is plenty of fan interest in tennis.

 

[Fearsome Forehand]

The pool of money is driven by TV contracts, corporate sponsorships, the gate, etc. Golf probably has more lucrative TV deals and certainly has more lucrative corporate deals.

Men's tennis also has been forced to subsidize women's tennis at the majors and the shared big events. If they had separate events, the men's take would be much larger than it currently is. It is like the NBA having to split its revenue stream with the WNBA. It is ridiculous.

The ATP carries way too many players. If you are outside of the top 80, you should be in the minors, win there, grab some sponsors and try to make it on the big tour. Why someone who is 225 is traveling around trying to make it in a big tourney is hard to understand. Play the satellites, stay on your friends couch, and try to make it to the big tour if you win at the satellite level.

If anything, the top players are the ones who are cheated. They bring in all the money, not some dude who is 147 in the world.

If you want to make more money, win more matches. If you are not good enough to win, take the hint and go home.

 

[Netspirit]

Has anybody actually looked in the STANDS of a tennis tournament? Empty.
Prince just went bankrupt.
Fewer people are playing tennis, the interest is down.
Me-thinks the tennis players should be happy they are getting what they are getting. Because the future is very, very dim.

Because of its retarted 6-hour finals with 3-hour total toweling time, ******** second serves, ******** TV-unfriendly surface colors & attributes, ******** schedule (RG and Wimbledon back-to-back, seriously?), ******** lack of time violations, ******** "infinite" rules (deuces, 5th set, etc.) and so on.

And any attempt - any whatsoever - to introduce something modern in the game (like blue clay) is met with furious resistance instead of approval and hope. "Traditions!", blah-blah.

There was another British game equally in love with traditions: croquet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croquet). Just sayin'

 

[decades]

More people attend the USO than any other sporting event. There is plenty of fan interest in tennis.

the sporting event lasts 2 weeks, once per year. of course they will sell more tickets when they have 14 sessions. that's almost an entire season for the NFL. there is also plenty of giveaways to corporate sponsors of US open tickets. which is why they can claim record attendance every year.

 

[decades]

The pool of money is driven by TV contracts, corporate sponsorships, the gate, etc. Golf probably has more lucrative TV deals and certainly has more lucrative corporate deals.

Men's tennis also has been forced to subsidize women's tennis at the majors and the shared big events. If they had separate events, the men's take would be much larger than it currently is. It is like the NBA having to split its revenue stream with the WNBA. It is ridiculous.

The ATP carries way too many players. If you are outside of the top 80, you should be in the minors, win there, grab some sponsors and try to make it on the big tour. Why someone who is 225 is traveling around trying to make it in a big tourney is hard to understand. Play the satellites, stay on your friends couch, and try to make it to the big tour if you win at the satellite level.

If anything, the top players are the ones who are cheated. They bring in all the money, not some dude who is 147 in the world.

If you want to make more money, win more matches. If you are not good enough to win, take the hint and go home.

just look at TV in USA, which is the biggest market. How many sessions a year are they on broadcast TV? Most of the time they are on ESPN2 if they are lucky, and tennis channel and DirectTV. Golf is on broadcast TV every Saturday and Sunday for 9 months a year for 4 hours each day. Tennis is not as popular. Ergo, the players make less. Of the money that is to be divided, it rightly goes to the players who play on broadcast TV.

 

[loosegroove]

Decades, all I can think about when I read your posts is this scene from Good Will Hunting. As for which character you remind me of, I'll let you draw your own conclusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymsHLkB8u3s

 

[Fearsome Forehand]

The real question is When will professional curlers make the big bucks they so richly deserve?

 

[decades]

Decades, all I can think about when I read your posts is this scene from Good Will Hunting. As for which character you remind me of, I'll let you draw your own conclusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymsHLkB8u3s

I guess if you don't really have a contribution to make, any ideas at all, you post youtube links. everyone has their role.

ps: how do you like them Apples?

 

[Bartelby]

My God, you can seduce women quoting Gordon Wood with footnotes. I've never found this to be the case.

 

[Bartelby]

Not as popular, but how many thousands play professionally football, baseball, basketball and even golf?

There are only about 200 male tennis players that need a decent income at any one time.

just look at TV in USA, which is the biggest market. How many sessions a year are they on broadcast TV? Most of the time they are on ESPN2 if they are lucky, and tennis channel and DirectTV. Golf is on broadcast TV every Saturday and Sunday for 9 months a year for 4 hours each day. Tennis is not as popular. Ergo, the players make less. Of the money that is to be divided, it rightly goes to the players who play on broadcast TV.

 

[decades]

Not as popular, but how many thousands play professionally football, baseball, basketball and even golf?

There are only about 200 male tennis players that need a decent income at any one time.

apparently there isn't enough to go around. the revenues don't support million dollar incomes for this 200. perhaps the top 4 can be persuaded to give in a little?

 

[dcdoorknob]

apparently there isn't enough to go around. the revenues don't support million dollar incomes for this 200. perhaps the top 4 can be persuaded to give in a little?

If the slams ended up giving more than 13% of their revenue to the player payouts, there might be enough to go around, at least for the 80-150ish ranked players to do better than they do now.

 

[Bartelby]

You don't know what the revenues are and you're trying to turn this into the usual right wing trope of the 'resentful poor stealing from the justly rich'.

The problem is not one between players but between players and those who are benefiting enormously from tennis.

apparently there isn't enough to go around. the revenues don't support million dollar incomes for this 200. perhaps the top 4 can be persuaded to give in a little?

 

[10is]

Quick! Someone make an empirically probabilistic Lorenze curve based on the cumulative distribution of ATP income among beneficiaries.

 

[decades]

If the slams ended up giving more than 13% of their revenue to the player payouts, there might be enough to go around, at least for the 80-150ish ranked players to do better than they do now.

a player who loses in the first round of singles, doubles, and mixed stands to make $26.5k at 2011 us open. More this year. not bad for a few days "work" playing tennis. I don't think the problem is the slams. that's where the marginal player actually makes some money.

 

[decades]

You don't know what the revenues are and you're trying to turn this into the usual right wing trope of the 'resentful poor stealing from the justly rich'.

The problem is not one between players but between players and those who are benefiting enormously from tennis.

who is benefiting enormously from tennis (other than the top 4 players) and can you quantify it? it's not Prince is it?

 

[Bartelby]

Prince was bought with debt and died as a result of it. See Mitt Romney and Bain for details.

The Head of the USTA was paid over 9 million plus many years ago so he's obviously benefitting.

You only know what the top 4 get on the basis of the fact that prize money is advertised.

You're otherwise ignorant.

who is benefiting enormously from tennis (other than the top 4 players) and can you quantify it? it's not Prince is it?

 

[decades]

Prince was bought with debt and died as a result of it. See Mitt Romney and Bain for details.

The Head of the USTA was paid over 9 million plus many years ago so he's obviously benefitting.

You only know what the top 4 get on the basis of the fact that prize money is advertised.

You're otherwise ignorant.

well he has lots of work to do developing the next Donald Young.

 

[loosegroove]

I guess if you don't really have a contribution to make, any ideas at all, you post youtube links. everyone has their role.

ps: how do you like them Apples?

Well you completely validated my post with your condescending response...however you redeemed your character with your PS.

 

[decades]

Well you completely validated my post with your condescending response...however you redeemed your character with your PS.

will was the condescending one.

 

[diggler]

As far as I can tell, the ATP is the players union. They are not screwing the players, they represent the players.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Tennis_Professionals

They organise the majority of tour events.

The grand slams are organised by the ITF. Tipsaravic said the players only get 11 - 13% of the prizemoney at the slams. If anybody is screwing the players, it is the ITF at the slams, not the ATP in the regular tour events.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/16/sports/tennis/16iht-tennis16.html?pagewanted=all

It was an emotional occasion with Nadal and Andy Roddick and other speakers drawing extended applause and with growing support for pushing the Grand Slam tournaments to dedicate a greater percentage of their revenues to the players. While regular tour events routinely commit more than 30 percent of revenue to prize money, players claim that despite prize money increases, the Grand Slam event percentages remain considerably lower.

“They’re tired of the Grand Slams having the greatest deal in sport,” said a tour official who spoke on condition of anonymity.


As I said before, NOBODY in complaining about the ATP. They are complaining about the SLAMS. The slams are run by the ITF.


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS



ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS


ITF = SLAMS = SCREWING PLAYERS

 

[Bartelby]

The ATP makes room for the ITF in its calendar so players can play slams so they are not the only problem.

In fact, if slams keep prize money low then this benefits other tournament owners so its not simply the slams.