Meme & Quote Thread

57Brave said:
below one example that draws a defining picture
you can also look up TV revenue based viewer ship and stadium attendance.

////
Even worse, the 16 men’s teams that were knocked out in the first round of the 2014 World Cup each received $8 million, and the 11th-place U.S. men’s team took home $9 million. That’s right the American women’s team won less than one-fourth what the American men earned, and the poorer pay went to the squad that was crowned champions, not the team that failed to come anywhere near reaching the finals. Overall, the total payout for the women’s World Cup was $15 million—less than 3% of the $538 million total earnings from the men’s side.

http://time.com/money/4277843/us-womens-soccer-equal-pay/
....

Above Z suggested Googling gender disparity
wouldn't hurt
Click to expand...

There's not much meat in that article...

They compare NWSL to MLS...OK...the total MLS attendance last season was ~7.33 million fans paying an average ticket price of $46.22. Total ticket revenue just under $340 million. Compare that to NWSL, which had a total attendance of 454 thousand fans. I found an article saying avg ticket price was $15-20, so let's be generous and use $20. That's a total ticket revenue of $9 million.

So is it really egregious that the MLS salary cap is 11x higher than the woman's league when it is generating 37x the ticket revenue? That's before factoring in MLS' $700 million tv deal, whereas NWSL has a deal to get 6 games a year on FS1.

Crude analysis, yes, but I'm not seeing how this is a good example of discrimination against women...
 
acesfull86 said:
There's not much meat in that article...

They compare NWSL to MLS...OK...the total MLS attendance last season was ~7.33 million fans paying an average ticket price of $46.22. Total ticket revenue just under $340 million. Compare that to NWSL, which had a total attendance of 454 thousand fans. I found an article saying avg ticket price was $15-20, so let's be generous and use $20. That's a total ticket revenue of $9 million.

So is it really egregious that the MLS salary cap is 11x higher than the woman's league when it is generating 37x the ticket revenue? That's before factoring in MLS' $700 million tv deal, whereas NWSL has a deal to get 6 games a year on FS1.

Crude analysis, yes, but I'm not seeing how this is a good example of discrimination against women...
Click to expand...

Too many numbers...
 
well i guess that solves it then. Gender inequity is a fabricated myth.

Let me know how that works out for ya
 
57Brave said:
well i guess that solves it then. Gender inequity is a fabricated myth.

Let me know how that works out for ya
Click to expand...

You seem to have no interest in actually digging into the numbers, yet you are convinced you're right and anyone who disagrees has his head in the sand.
 
support her or not, this is what is

13233019_1140462169380169_5645716105524508895_n.jpg
 
acesfull86 said:
There's not much meat in that article...

They compare NWSL to MLS...OK...the total MLS attendance last season was ~7.33 million fans paying an average ticket price of $46.22. Total ticket revenue just under $340 million. Compare that to NWSL, which had a total attendance of 454 thousand fans. I found an article saying avg ticket price was $15-20, so let's be generous and use $20. That's a total ticket revenue of $9 million.

So is it really egregious that the MLS salary cap is 11x higher than the woman's league when it is generating 37x the ticket revenue? That's before factoring in MLS' $700 million tv deal, whereas NWSL has a deal to get 6 games a year on FS1.

Crude analysis, yes, but I'm not seeing how this is a good example of discrimination against women...
Click to expand...

Stars in NWSL are the big draw. Alex Morgan is way more important to Orlando than anyone is in MLS.

But that's comparing Apples and Oranges.

3.2 Billions people watched the Men's World Cup, 750M watched the women's world cup. That would be about 23% of the viewers. Which wouldn't explain why men made about 36 times as much as the women for winning in terms of your raw data crunching. That's not including the viewership in quality markets as well. As viewership in USA, Canada, major European powers, and Japan are worth way more than viewership in say Ivory Coast as the television revenue will be way higher per viewer.

But that's none of my business. Let's compare leagues who's average salary is 32K to a league who's average salary is 225K, that's hyper relevant.
 
zitothebrave said:
Stars in NWSL are the big draw. Alex Morgan is way more important to Orlando than anyone is in MLS.

But that's comparing Apples and Oranges.

3.2 Billions people watched the Men's World Cup, 750M watched the women's world cup. That would be about 23% of the viewers. Which wouldn't explain why men made about 36 times as much as the women for winning in terms of your raw data crunching. That's not including the viewership in quality markets as well. As viewership in USA, Canada, major European powers, and Japan are worth way more than viewership in say Ivory Coast as the television revenue will be way higher per viewer.

But that's none of my business. Let's compare leagues who's average salary is 32K to a league who's average salary is 225K, that's hyper relevant.
Click to expand...

Soccer players were the example 57 brought up, not me...
 
sturg33 said:
Per usual, the article does not address such matters as time off for raising a family...

I'll dig up the analysis that disproves the bull ****... and you'll ignore it like you always do because data scares you
Click to expand...

+1. It doesn't look like they tried to drill into any of the details, just gave a broad overview. Id image the same factors that explain much of the gap in general are in play here too.
 
yeah, if you pay attention would realize the national women's team is suing for a fair shake. Do some research and come back and discuss on even terms where one poster has some time and thought invested and you and and your sidekick comeback with half assed opinions based on Fox News talking points and quarter formed experiences.

Data. 2 posters have produced numbers and quoted antidotes while you and boy wonder demand others to prove your point.

Google Gender Inequities. Then read .

Yes I posted about soccer players because I mistakenly thought you a had an inkling of current events kowledge.

Next ---ask some women about their experiences.
 
57Brave said:
yeah, if you pay attention would realize the national women's team is suing for a fair shake. Do some research and come back and discuss on even terms where one poster has some time and thought invested and you and and your sidekick comeback with half assed opinions based on Fox News talking points and quarter formed experiences.

Data. 2 posters have produced numbers and quoted antidotes while you and boy wonder demand others to prove your point.

Google Gender Inequities. Then read .

Yes I posted about soccer players because I mistakenly thought you a had an inkling of current events kowledge.

Next ---ask some women about their experiences.
Click to expand...

What is going on here? You are the one dumping links and running without actually reading what's in the article. I posted my own analysis explaining why I think there are rational, economic reasons why there is a gender pay gap in US Soccer - mainly that the men's game generates significantly higher revenues and interest. Now do you have a counterpoint to that, or do you think everyone should be paid the same thing regardless of the economic value generated ? I'm well aware of the USWNT's player's suit, BTW.

Then you come back with your usual playbook - "you disagree with me so you must be ignorant and a Fox News fanboy." Which is rich for two reasons 1) you've been complaining recently that Sturg personally attacks you while apparently not realizing you do the same thing and 2) you've admitted in the past you're not an expert in economics, and while I wouldn't profess to be one either, I've got degrees in it and studied under one of the leading labor economists in the country (at hyper right-wing institutions in redneck New York) so I feel pretty confident in saying I've read a hell of a lot more on this subject than you have. Including the actual studies performed by the actual economists, not the three paragraph, lazy fluff pieces from the HuffPost each time it thinks it has some sort of smoking gun.
 
sturg33 said:
Per usual, the article does not address such matters as time off for raising a family...

I'll dig up the analysis that disproves the bull ****... and you'll ignore it like you always do because data scares you
Click to expand...

That's a factor, but why aren't men shouldering the time off for raising a family burden?
 
zitothebrave said:
That's a factor, but why aren't men shouldering the time off for raising a family burden?
Click to expand...

I'd say that's up to the families...

But women tend to take more time off for raising children... probably due to their psychological attachment to the baby they just had growing in their stomachs for the past 9 months... that results in lost experience and lost skills.. It is what it is, and unless you want businesses to be charitable, then they won't earn as much money
 
acesfull86 said:
What is going on here? You are the one dumping links and running without actually reading what's in the article. I posted my own analysis explaining why I think there are rational, economic reasons why there is a gender pay gap in US Soccer - mainly that the men's game generates significantly higher revenues and interest. Now do you have a counterpoint to that, or do you think everyone should be paid the same thing regardless of the economic value generated ? I'm well aware of the USWNT's player's suit, BTW.

Then you come back with your usual playbook - "you disagree with me so you must be ignorant and a Fox News fanboy." Which is rich for two reasons 1) you've been complaining recently that Sturg personally attacks you while apparently not realizing you do the same thing and 2) you've admitted in the past you're not an expert in economics, and while I wouldn't profess to be one either, I've got degrees in it and studied under one of the leading labor economists in the country (at hyper right-wing institutions in redneck New York) so I feel pretty confident in saying I've read a hell of a lot more on this subject than you have. Including the actual studies performed by the actual economists, not the three paragraph, lazy fluff pieces from the HuffPost each time it thinks it has some sort of smoking gun.
Click to expand...

57 has never had an original thought and has never had any quantitative or objective data to support any of his ludicrous positions...

Remember, this is the guy who said that it doesn't matter if we can't pay for someone, what matters is the goal!
 
zitothebrave said:
He brought up World Cup, not MLS/NWSL.
Click to expand...

MLS/NWSL is included in the article:

In U.S. professional soccer leagues, women also trail far behind men in terms of earnings. The National Women’s Soccer League has a pay ceiling per player of just $37,800. That’s compared to an average of more than $300,000 and a median of about $100,000 for men’s Major League Soccer. Each team in the NWSL has a salary cap of just $265,000—compared to more than $3 million for men.
 
sturg33 said:
I'd say that's up to the families...

But women tend to take more time off for raising children... probably due to their psychological attachment to the baby they just had growing in their stomachs for the past 9 months... that results in lost experience and lost skills.. It is what it is, and unless you want businesses to be charitable, then they won't earn as much money
Click to expand...

Or they take more time off because they are expected to by society.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top