League projections reveal a shocking $700 million revenue loss tied to player proposals, igniting fierce debate over the WNBA's financial future.
The widening divide between the WNBA and its players became clearer this week as league officials projected massive financial losses tied to a recent union proposal, raising new concerns about the trajectory of collective bargaining talks ahead of a looming deadline.
Multiple sources familiar with negotiations told ESPN that the league believes the latest proposal from the Women's National Basketball Players Association would result in approximately $700 million in losses over the life of the next collective bargaining agreement.
According to those sources, the projected deficit would exceed the combined losses of the WNBA and its teams across the league’s first 29 years of existence.
League officials believe the losses would threaten the long-term financial health of the league, which has experienced rapid growth in recent years but has historically operated at a loss. The projection was calculated using previously audited league financial data, sources said, and reflects concerns about sustainability rather than short-term growth.
The union’s proposal centers on a revenue-sharing model that would allocate roughly 30% of gross revenue to players. Recent versions of that proposal are believed to include a salary cap of approximately $10.5 million, a dramatic increase from the 2025 cap of just over $1.5 million. Under the union’s framework, compensation would be tied to revenue before expenses, a structure the players believe more accurately reflects their role in generating league income.
League officials, however, argue that such a system does not adequately account for rising costs, including team operations, travel, marketing, staffing and infrastructure investments needed to sustain expansion and commercial growth. From the league’s perspective, paying players a percentage of gross revenue could create a scenario where expenses outpace income, particularly in early years of the deal.
By contrast, the league has proposed a revenue-sharing system based on net revenue — defined as revenue after expenses — that would still result in players receiving more than 50% of that figure. A Dec. 18 proposal included uncapped revenue sharing, a salary cap starting at $5 million, maximum salaries exceeding $1.3 million and growing to nearly $2 million over the life of the agreement, and minimum salaries rising above $250,000 in the first year alone.
League officials say the proposal is designed to balance aggressive salary growth with incentives for owners to continue investing capital as the business moves toward sustained profitability.
Despite ongoing talks and two previous extensions of the current agreement, sources say the sides remain far apart as a Jan. 9 deadline approaches.