Hacker News Reader

Comment by thatguy0900 | Hacker News Reader

"The league’s low salaries and minimal efforts towards player support have for years forced even its biggest stars to treat their time in the WNBA as a part-time job. The maximum WNBA salary in 2022 was just over $228,000, and players can make far more than that playing in leagues overseas." This could have been worded far better, I broke out laughing. I hope the the average is far, far lower than that if I'm supposed to have sympathy or something here.

View on HN

>"players can make far more than that playing in leagues overseas"

THEN GO PLAY OVERSEAS!!!! Half of the people on HackerNews are immigrants to one country or another.

Why should we feel sympathy for this woman? People go overseas for better opportunities all the time. Why should I feel sympathy for her brining illegal drugs into Russia? She's can't follow the law there, so now America has to come break her out?

Let's put this in perspective. All the WNBA teams are in major cities, right? Earning $228k a year is not going to get you even a decent house in LA or SF or NY. And, you have to travel, so you will need a partner who has limited career options if you have kids, etc. I know life isn't fair, and the market is to some extent creating the salary levels, but a world class athlete deserves more. It perhaps says more about what we value as a society, and that's a fair assessment, but it seems like you are saying the $228k a year is a lot of money, and in context, it is not at all.

Earning $228k/year will definitely get you a decent house in the LA area. Especially if you also have a spouse. With $228k/year, you can afford Pasadena, Santa Monica, Culver City, Malibu, San Marino, Rancho Cucamonga, Chino Hills, La Canada Flintridge, Thousand Oaks, Calabasas, Woodland Hills, and other nice areas with good houses and schools.

$228k won't get you a house in a bougie area like Bel Air, Palos Verdes, or the Hollywood Hills, but at that point you're talking about mansions, not houses.

I just did a search on Zillow for Pasadena. Most houses were at least $1M, and their mortgage calculator says at current interest rates that is $6000/mo. After taxes, that $228k gets you about $12k a month. If you have a family, that's $1k a month for food, and many more expenses. Car payment? And, your career is only ten years.

There is a not a lot of room left over with $228k, and remember, that is the HIGHEST paid person on the team.

I read countless statements here on HN about people excited about living away from big cities and maximizing their tech incomes. This is not the case here.

I'm not saying it should be fair, but we should at least pay attention to it and be honest about what this means for exceptional women.

Your math doesn't make any sense. You have $6k a month after taxes and mortgage, not including spouse's income, and that's somehow not enough money? Food for a family leaves $5k/month. What sort of fancy expenses take up $5k each month?

And you claim that a career only lasts 10 years? Is that a weird tech thing? Most white-collar jobs last several decades.

For comparison, I know a number of people who make less than $228k/year, own houses that are around $1 million in and around Pasadena, Culver City, and Santa Monica, and have no problems making mortgage payments, paying for food, saving for retirement, and going on multiple vacations each year.

If you can't live on $5k/month after mandatory expenses, the problem is your spending...

We are talking about professional women's basketball players. Who might be traded, and then need to relocate with their spouse. It is a lot more complicated than you make it out.

Ten years is probably a very long WNBA career, on average. Then, add kids to that, and it is probably even shorter, and MUCH more complicated. I'm willing to bet you don't have kids and understand the expenses that come with them.

I'm not saying you can't live on the amount the highest paid player on a WNBA team makes, but this is the pinnacle, and it isn't the same as male players.

Sure, there are ways to constrain spending, but a WNBA player has far fewer choices than other families out there.

When Silicon Valley CEOs were caught in an illegal cartel like attempt to suppress wages did you have sympathy for your fellow programmers?

Why are wage caps in sports even allowed, but are apparently illegal in every other profession.

The WNBA players union negotiates a contract with the league that includes provisions like these. In general wage caps are included because the union wants to "spread out" money away from the top stars to raise the salaries of average players.

These sorts of arrangements are common in many industries with a union represented workforce.

It's worth noting that the WNBA Union contract includes a provision for 50% of revenues to go to player salaries. This is the same standard in the men's league. WNBA salaries being substantially lower than NBA salaries are a function of league revenue being far lower.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com