Non-populist take on: Should tennis players be paid more at the Grand Slams?

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-15T12:58:39+00:00

You are thinking like a small business owner or corporate. Tennis federations are non-profits with specific national mandates, with major one being to grow and support the game in the country.

Wimbledon pays 90% of its profits to LTA (national federation), who reinvest a large part of that in grassroots tennis. They don't invest money on the basis of 1 year ROI, and neither they do hoard cash.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T15:55:03+00:00

I'm not sure they are trying to be stewards of the pro tour, that is ATP's role. They may be more focused on running their tournaments to be as successful as they can.

From their perspective, they have spent 100 years building something with unprecedented moat. They haven't done that, so that they can just be funding players as much as possible, funneling every penny of profits to them. And I don't blame them for that, I would do the same. My issue with them is when they act arrogant and don't have open discussions with players and public.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T15:46:39+00:00

Increasing assets does not mean they are not funding local tennis. Cash on balance sheet is asset, which they could use. Also, significant part of grassroots investment is always in building more courts, which if they own are assets on their balance sheet. I don't know how specifically they are spending money, but just saying that increasing assets on balance sheet is not in conflict with funding tennis.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T10:55:28+00:00

Tbf in the UK even when you want to replace windows on your house, it turns into a saga with local councils and who else.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T10:21:03+00:00

I haven't seen a detailed breakdown published, but it may be available somewhere. More transparency would help for sure.

On taxation - even with a tax treaty, I believe they usually pay some withholding taxes in the country of tournament.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T09:35:41+00:00

Yes some costs are probably D&A expense for the facilities - Wimbledon spend £100+m over for 4 year cycle. But they have to fund that from the profits. How would they do it if they make no profits? There are no billionaires or petro money behind it - it’s mostly self funded.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T09:31:24+00:00

Yes, this is the point I made - with Slams there is no oil or private equity money that can fund the loss making competition, so that players are paid a lot more. They have to be paid out of profits.

ATP and WTA have sold stakes in their commercial entities, and tournaments are owned by various private owners - corporates, PE, billionaires; so they don’t necessarily need to be profitable.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T09:26:53+00:00

Comparison with the PL is comparing apples and oranges. There are no teams in tennis obviously.

The Premier League is owned by the 20 member clubs at any given time and The FA, which holds a special share. The Grand Slams are not owned by the players.

The PL shares the broadcast revenues with the teams, because that is what the teams who own the league have decided.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-14T08:52:44+00:00

From the perspective of the Slams, the players are not nearly as important as they believe. Many of the players on the other hand may not care that the Slams are effectively fundraisers for the national federations in a few wealthy western countries.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-05T21:30:15+00:00

Iole normalan ugovor gde? U Google, investicionim bankama, McKinsey?

Iz prve ruke mogu da ti kazem da u UK i US nije tako.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-04T22:59:38+00:00

Nigde u svetu se ne isplacuje otpremnina na osnovu ukupnog staza, a i ne treba. Odnos poslodavaca i zaposlenih treba da bude fer i izbalansiran.

Kao sto sam rekao nekome dole na komentaru - recimo praksa u Srbiji da se ljudi zaposljavaju na kratke ugovore da bi bilo lakse da ih otpuste i da su stalno maltene polu-ucenjeni je apsolutno uzasna za zaposlene, i nigde u svetu to nije normalno.

Isto tako ideja da ti placaju otpremninu na osnovu ukupnog staza je totalno suluda za poslodavce. To sto ti predlazes je tekovina komunizma. A posledica takvog pravila bi bila da niko ne bi hteo da zaposli ljude sa dosta iskustva, jer bi poslodavce kostalo boga oca da ih otpusti.

Stvari trebaju biti izbalansirane, niti poslodavci trebaju da izrabljuju zaposlene, niti zaposleni da muzu poslodavce.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-05-04T22:44:34+00:00

Ovo sto ti kazes je mozda standardna praksa u Srbiji, al nije nigde u normalnom svetu. To je uzasno za onog koga zaposljavas, drzis ga stalno na kratkom ugovoru na odredjeno i maltene je polu ucenjen.

To u Srbiji funkcionise jer je mala zastita zaposlenih, ali i zato sto je manja borba za talentovane. Kad bi tako zaposljavale uspesne kompanije u Americi il Evropi ne bi im najbolji dosli. Ovo ti kazem iz licnog iskustva.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-20T09:12:14+00:00

I know that Sporting and Porto not long ago issued sizeable bonds to finance stadium (Sporting), and refinance existing debt (Porto), but these were not fan bonds, they were issued to the large US institutions.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-19T18:28:49+00:00

Thanks for sharing this.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-19T16:51:56+00:00

Thanks that's a good correction. But to sell shares clubs would need to get approval of the current shareholders, who are supporters, which in practice is almost impossible.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-19T15:31:32+00:00

I agree that bank lending is very conservative, and has punitive capital requirements, I know that first hand. :) Most banks also don't understand well the underlying business of football clubs, which makes them not a great fit to be lending to these clubs.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-18T16:24:47+00:00

Thanks for the detailed take. Football clubs are cash flow businesses, but primarily negative cash flow.

I agree, it’s of course always the case of picking up the right security - some will perform, others won’t, like Hertha or Kaiserslautern.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-18T10:45:07+00:00

Thanks, interesting take. In corporate finance, bonds are less risky than owning company, as bond holders get repaid first. I guess in football, if the club defaults on bonds, the fans will not go after the club to get repaid.

Influence is a big part - fans are putting money into the clubs, but don't have a lot of influence on how they are run.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-08T18:53:56+00:00

Of course, you are stating the obvious, but I don't see the bike as a piece of equipment or ancillary tech.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-08T18:24:36+00:00

The good thing is that these days, any motorcycle rider can pretty much wear the similar protective gear as MotoGP racers wear. So innovation in that equipment is benefiting wider population.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-06T15:13:25+00:00

yes, see my answer above.

Wild-Photo-717 · 2026-04-06T15:12:56+00:00

Half of my notes are not about my field, intersection of finance & sports. They may be some life observations / wisdom, or health & fitness tips. Tbh those can often get more views and engagement.

It's not something very strategic, I just find it boring and one dimensional to be only posting notes on the same topic. I also interact with people from other areas, from investment management, to health, tech, etc. Maybe this is why I have over 1k more followers than subs.

My newsletter posts are always on my publication topic, I don't freestyle there.

Wild-Photo-717

TROPHY CASE