What are you even talking about. Just show the numbers dude. I havent seen anything but how much revenue is this bringing in? If its bringing in more than the mens... the women deserve more. If its identical, then identical pay.
Just show the numbers. You are just talking all around it with a bunch if virtue signaling that makes no sense. Just show the numbers.
If anything you are holding women back. If they out draw men, they damn well better get paid more.
I'm going to humor you, because once again, you're missing the point and I've said it already 3x in the thread.
The soccer federation pays its players. This thread is about the FIFA prize money for world cups, and THEIR stupid decisions with it, so let's talk about that...
#1 - the vast majority of the money FIFA has comes from the TV contracts they sell globally to (up until this cycle) a bundle of tournaments, including the men's and women's World Cups. So when you look at "the numbers" you want to use about men's revenue vs women's revenue; they put the entire amount of the TV money as "Men's" revenue and NONE as women's revenues (or the other tournaments). So all the numbers you want to see are pure bullshit.
#2 - The prize money ISN'T based on any kind of formula, equitable, or inequitable, or any kind of percentage of revenue or anything. It's literally whatever FIFA decides to do with it.
You need to separate the idea that the men's prize money is bigger "because the men bring in more revenue than the women." It's not. It's bigger on the men's side of things because (a) for 75+ years, they only HAD a men's side of things. and (b) When they started selling TV rights, a ton of money came in, and as a "non-profit" they technically CAN'T keep it. They HAVE to give it all to its members in some fashion. And there's dozens of ways they do it. But awarding prize money to the World Cup is part of it, and it makes sense.
FIFA had very little to no interest in anything with women's soccer. It took 20 years to get FIFA to agree to a women's championship, and they had so little faith in it, they didn't let the organizers CALL IT the FIFA Women's World Cup! They sold a sponsorship and it was the "M&Ms Cup."
But when it sold a half-million tickets, it became the FIFA Women's World Cup. They retroactively called 1991 the first WWC. So now they have a WWC on their hands. And since the men's tourney has prize money, they reluctantly have to give women prize money, too. So they did.
It's ALWAYS been reactionary: More of a "they're still complaining? Up their prize money til they shut up."
#3 - The prize money ISN'T a "reward" for earning FIFA money, but it IS a good idea for an ROI to the associations who invest in their programs!
And that's the key item in understanding my overall point: Reluctant and reactionary FIFA has a massive financial incentive to MAKE the WWC the same golden goose of profits that the MWC is. But they haven't through their own foolish decisions, and being combative with the confederations and associations that care about women's soccer, too.
This topic isn't a GENDER issue, it's a MARKETING issue. The business of women's soccer ISN'T "how much do they bring in" but how much FIFA has failed to double its business from one huge soccer tournament to TWO.
By setting equal prize money, they'd be telling all the countries that the way to get the most money back from FIFA, is to invest in both products. Set a ROI and the members will follow.
If the countries are investing, they're going to promote it. Because you can't wait 4 years without getting a paycheck, you have to sell tickets.
It's a complete and total business failure by FIFA. It's not that women don't "earn" enough revenue to get paid the same prize money, it's that FIFA hasn't invested in half of their business potential.
sports.yahoo.com
