
via Imago
Jul 9, 2024; Los Angeles, California, USA; The WNBA logo on the court at Crypto.com Arena. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-Imagn Images

via Imago
Jul 9, 2024; Los Angeles, California, USA; The WNBA logo on the court at Crypto.com Arena. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-Imagn Images
In April 2024, ESPN’s Alexa Philippou would report that Commissioner Cathy Engelbert was “pretty confident” the league would expand to 16 teams by 2028. Less than a year in, what seemed like an ambitious vision is quickly becoming a reality. WNBA has now successfully locked in 3 teams, with one more to come by the set deadline. Kevin Durant, Patrick Mahomes, Candace Parker, and more glaring names have made clear they are set on the race. Serena Williams, too, recently secured her share. Now, that’s a pretty picture. But what is the final result going to mean for the WNBA owners? It certainly doesn’t look like a high-spirited, glossy reality.
In 2022, a group of investors including Nike, Michael Dell, Linda Henry, Dee Haslam, Condoleezza Rice, Micky Arison, and Laurene Powell Jobs invested $75 million at a $400 million valuation, or $475 million post-money value in the WNBA. This marked the beginning of a significant shift in the league’s ownership structure, carving out of the 50-50 split between WNBA and NBA owners. 16% of the stake went to the new investors, while both the WNBA and NBA were left with 42% each.
This worked perfectly for the new investors. They got in ahead of the interest generated by the arrival of Iowa superstar Caitlin Clark. As a cherry on top, in addition to keeping their equity intact, they are entitled to an annual preferred equity payment and will receive their share of the nine-figure WNBA expansion fees.
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
With new teams on the horizon, Sportico has delivered some surprising news. It has revealed that the addition of new teams will only dilute the 42% equity stake held by WNBA team owners, without affecting the stake held by the NBA and the investors. Following the announcement of three new franchises—the Golden State Valkyries, Toronto Tempo, and Portland franchise—the existing 12 WNBA teams saw their stake in the league drop from 3.5% to 2.8%.
While the ownership model might not be benefiting the WNBA team owners, the revenue model surely does.
WNBA revenue sharing model gives hope to the W owners
According to a WNBA spokesperson, “Those running WNBA teams and covering player costs and operating expenses receive a greater portion of league distributions.” This is a positive sign for the W owners, who have seen their ownership stakes decrease with the rapid expansion of the league.
According to the Sportico article, WNBA teams do receive more than 42% of national revenue through a complex formula, with part of the NBA’s share flowing to WNBA teams. This is particularly important with the league’s new TV contracts with Disney, ESPN, NBC, and Amazon, which are worth $200 million a year–six times the previous ESPN annual average. On top of that, the WNBA is poised to sell additional packages of games, which could rake in an extra $60 million or more annually. It’s clear that the league is on a serious growth trajectory!
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Perhaps this is why the WNBA players opted out of the league’s CBA agreement late last year. “Today, with a stronger foundation and new investments flowing in, they’re opting out again—this time to fully professionalize the league, secure proper wages, improve working conditions and lock in meaningful benefits.” Union head Terri Carmichael Jackson said confirming that the players will push for an “equity-based” economic model. This will likely make the ownership and the revenue model even more complex.
What’s your perspective on:
Is the WNBA's rapid expansion a game-changer or a risky move for team owners?
Have an interesting take?
ADVERTISEMENT
Article continues below this ad
Have something to say?
Let the world know your perspective.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Debate
Is the WNBA's rapid expansion a game-changer or a risky move for team owners?