I've fallen a bit behind on the sport recently but I've been noticing spoilt little girl Venus Williams attempting to vent her spleen about equal pay. As has been pointed out by quite a few people in intelligent society she doesn't seem to be either:a) resenting it enough to boycott the tournament
b) protesting that the women are playing 40% fewer games but only getting 4% less prize money.
She can be extremely pleased with her result on Saturday then... which now means she can earn just as much as the majority of the men.
She can be happy with that and the rest of us can be happy that we don't need to experience her fecking spoilt brat attitude for another year.
2 comments:
Women's golf and football have far lower profiles than women's tennis - so they naturally command less prize money/sponsorship. But women's tennis is as high profile as the men's, so where does the disparity come from?
I can't feel too sorry for her, though - the ladies seem to earn shiteloads from endorsments - Kournikova only got into tennis to break into modelling, it seems.
So, the men might earn more in prize money, but they aren't as immediately marketable as the Russian supermodels. I may be wrong or wide of the mark, but does it not balance out?
It's not just less games - their games are shorter as well, so ticket prices have to be less than mens games to make up for the less entertainment time (generally 10 minutes or thereabouts)
Less ticket revenue = less prize money. A simple fact of life that people like the Williamses have failed to grasp.
Post a Comment