Why don't more people understand this?

They're not.

Doesn't matter what YOU can do, nigger. Male footballers, even from burgerland, are more famous, draw bigger crowds, provide higher quality play, provide more advertising revenue, and generally are higher profile than their female equivalents in every case because deep down everyone knows the women's game is still a pale imitation of the men's.

TYBT

Low iq post. They aren't more popular when it comes to the main source of revenue - that is TV revenue and stadium revenue. Posting emojis and reading about a waifu on the women's team don't generate any revenue for anyone, watching the matches on TV and attending stadium games does.

you don't matter tho

is anyone seriously arguing that women football players should be paid as much by their clubs as ronaldo is paid by juventus?
surely the argument is about national teams and prize money and the like, which i'd agree with, especially for rich fas like england's, it's hardly going to matter to them if they pay the women the same as the men. or fifa with their literal billions in cash reserve it;s hardly going to affect them if they pay the same prize money out to the women's teams

USWNT players don't ask to be paid like Ronaldo, they want to be paid like Jozy Altidore, that's quite different

The UN is shitting bricks about the amount Messi earns in regards to women.

twitter.com/UN/status/1142915986993164293

It's a smokescreen controversy, meant to distract from how simultaneously corrupt and incompetent FIFA still is and how Blatter's exit didn't actually do anything

So why don't they challenge sponsors and endorsements to pump more money into the women's game?

Well then they should start attracting more sponsors and viewership

The UN gave Anita Sarkeesian of all people a platform to complain about dumb inane shit

because that would cause reality to come crashing down upon them and burst their bubbles in a devastating way

Trump /strongmind/ confirmed

They are asking for more money from the US federation.

US men's team draws more money at international tournaments because all teams entering them has an initial equal share regardless of performance, but women's team performs better and gets more attention/honours.

A national federation's point isn't to make profit, it's to shine and get worldwide reputation, which the USWNT objectively contributes to more than the USMNT. They want as much of the federation's money as the men, which honestly seems quite a low demand considering how much more they contribute to the federation reaching its goal.

>challenge sponsors
Do you understand how business relationships are supposed to work?

How tho? The interest is just not there, for all the whining feminists and their soiboi slaves do not even they care enough to seek out and consistently follow the female leagues

>The interest is just not there
That's the thing, they don't actually care, they just want more money that they don't deserve.
This is a non-issue anyway, fuck women and fuck feminists

It's a smokescreen, but not in the way you think.

The entire argument presented by Hope Solo an co. is misleading and disingenuous. What they want is more money, but to present that argument will not attract support as they'll simply be accused of avarice. Instead, they make it a social justice issue, and in the current climate,; that gets attention and gets them noticed. Using inflammatory and sensationalist language, like Solo does, talking about patriarchy and male privilege, claiming the male-dominated FIFA are misogynist, etc. just feeds into that narrative that men are undeservedly powerful and oppressive and women are the victims and oppressed.

Solo knows why women in football are not rewarded in the same way men are due to revenues and she knows there exists massive inequality in salary amongst the male footballers too, but these are inconvenient facts that undermine her appeal-to-emotion argument.

>Do you understand how business relationships are supposed to work?
Yes. Do you understand that the rewards in football have a relationship with revenues generated at every single level?

Thanks Paco, go sell your bootleg dvds in your Atlanta Falcons super bowl champions t-shirt fag.

For the same reason that they don't invest massively in mushing, muay thai, orienteering or badminton? If nobody wants to watch it, it's a money sink. "Modern football" is a thing because rich people knew it would make them richer. Meme sports (curling, lacrosse, squash etc) aren't profitable for the same damn reason that women's football isn't profitable.

>They are asking for more money from the US federation.
And if they don't have it, where does it come from? Subsidies?

>US men's team draws more money at international tournaments because all teams entering them has an initial equal share regardless of performance, but women's team performs better and gets more attention/honours.
Performing better in an inferior sport doesn't warrant more reward.

>A national federation's point isn't to make profit, it's to shine and get worldwide reputation, which the USWNT objectively contributes to more than the USMNT. They want as much of the federation's money as the men, which honestly seems quite a low demand considering how much more they contribute to the federation reaching its goal.
Not only do you seem naive to how national football federations operate, but deluded to how they function as a business.

The women should be paid more than they are because they are good and people do watch the games in Buergerlandia, but they should be comparing to the same tv audience not just to the mens team because they are the mens team.

lol the us federation has a hoard of cash
they don't deserve as much as the men but both teams could get more and the execs that make the mens team shit could get less

now all of Yea Forums will be labeled a trumptard for using this argument.

based

A national federation's role is to promote the sport so they are more people playing it in organized form, hence going through the federation's system and formation with the ultimate goal to win international honours to prove the superiority of your federation/country on the others. It does not work with the same objectives as a club or a franchise.

Most of the money of national federations goes to amateur sports even if they don't bring any money on the table, that's totally different from the way a pro club works. Rewarding people that promote your sport the most is a long-term strategy and that is the way a federation should work.

Tbf. I can't say I'm well versed on the US feds finances, but I would be very surprised if the money they get from commercial and partners in the women's game surpasses that if the men.

I believe we're on the same side of the argument here

>It does not work with the same objectives as a club or a franchise.
Except they do though. They function as businesses just as much as clubs do.

wasn't that the women-centered branch of the UN that nobody cares about?

>deserve
this is such a retarded line of thought to use, also a slippery slope

This. If the discussion is purely about the relatively small amount of money that federations/associations pay out to international footballers then it's difficult to argue against it. That money doesn't make much difference to Jesse Lingard or Danny Welbeck anyway and represents only a tiny fraction of their overall income. It's not the same for women players, who operate within a much poorer side of the game.

Of course, this is probably a slippery slope that'll lead to calls for equal pay at club level, which is when people will really start to get upset.

Burger here. No we don't.

>being this retarded
if you don't have the views/revenue....which they clearly do not, then you can't pay out more money. why is this so hard to understand?

Attached: 1559843375130.png (793x688, 562K)

What is good for their business is to have more and more licensed players, and it comes from performing well at worldwide events. The US has the specificity that it is the only country in the world in which women's performances draw more new licensed players than men's performances. Revenue from international tournaments (what the difference in salary is based upon) is pocket money compared to what the federation earns from futbol developing in the US, and the women's team has contributed to this on a way higher level than the men's.

except nobody gives a fuck about womens football, so even if they win the international honors its still fuck all compared to men just playing against quality teams and not winning shit. it's not quality enough and even if it was somewhat entertaining this arrogant attitude that these retards are displaying will only turn me off from watching it even more

>That money doesn't make much difference to Jesse Lingard or Danny Welbeck anyway and represents only a tiny fraction of their overall income.
They donate their appearance fees to charity anyway

Doesn't the English national team donate all their salary?
I assume, if the English womens team wants to be paid more, it is only to donate more. Right spee?

But not revenues, as I am led to believe.

>a person makes an argument that wins the debate
>people who follow him are known as tards
really makes you think who made up the word trumptard because it makes no fucking sense, while libtad is completely fitting most of the time

>women's performances draw more new licensed players than men's performances
>the women's team has contributed to this on a way higher level than the men's
Do you have any solid data to back that up?

Attached: 1560365584522.jpg (1920x1152, 216K)

It's highly different in the US tho, hence why they are the only women's national team to call for equal pay. In any other country, nobody cares about the women's team and they don't demand to be paid as well as men because they know that.

fine. whatever. their tv contract is enough to up their pay.
tv deal says otherwise. i guess fox and espn are in the business of losing money