[GUEST ACCESS MODE: Data is scrambled or limited to provide examples. Make requests using your API key to unlock full data. Check https://lunarcrush.ai/auth for authentication information.]

![whartonMIT Avatar](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:24/cr:twitter::1911136792931373056.png) Enzo MacGregor [@whartonMIT](/creator/twitter/whartonMIT) on x XXX followers
Created: 2025-07-20 17:21:57 UTC

Way to misrepresent the point at hand.

The point being - in hope you finally get it ...

X. The NBA pays out XX% of revenue in salaries.
X. The WNBA pays out XX% - that is capped.
X. ~half the teams are profitable.
X.  Salaries expense in the NBA is the highest expense line item.
X.  Salaries expense in the WNBA is like 4th highest.

Given that landscape?  They "probably" have a case for some sort of raise.

The NBA subsidy BTW, is only ~20% of annual loses.  What does that mean?  It means the OWNERS of the franchises are subsidizing loses.  That means ... they could probably afford "some" raise.


XX engagements

![Engagements Line Chart](https://lunarcrush.com/gi/w:600/p:tweet::1946983932999893014/c:line.svg)

**Related Topics**
[wnba](/topic/wnba)
[nba](/topic/nba)

[Post Link](https://x.com/whartonMIT/status/1946983932999893014)