Djokovic's PTPA Sues ATP and WTA

[jimlosaltos]

Curious read, as a non-lawyer, main complaints of damages come from restriction of events, and coordination so .... the PTPA wants more tournaments and to have them be overlapping.
Will tennis have a LIV Golf moment?

Futterman/Athletic: "The Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), the organization co-founded by 24-time Grand Slam champion Novak Djokovic, has labeled the biggest governing bodies in tennis as a “cartel” which suppresses wages, player opportunity and rival tournaments “to the harm of players and fans alike.”

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday March 18 in New York City, London and Brussels, the PTPA names the men’s ATP and women’s WTA tours, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) as defendants. The suit, filed in those three cities to reflect the four bodies’ global remit, accuses them of several antitrust violations, with the goal of overturning the fundamental structure of one of the most popular global sports.

"The lawsuit names the four Grand Slam tournaments, Wimbledon and the Australian, French and U.S. Opens, as co-conspirators alongside the ATP, WTA, ITF and ITIA. The Grand Slams, it says, act in concert with the defendants “to enrich themselves at the players’ expense, to the detriment of fans and the game.”



Article on The Athletic, paywall / NYT: Tennis antitrust lawsuit: PTPA, co-founded by Novak Djokovic, sues ATP, WTA tours

[stotty]

Curious read, as a non-lawyer, main complaints of damages come from restriction of events, and coordination so .... the PTPA wants more tournaments and to have them be overlapping.
Will tennis have a LIV Golf moment?

Futterman/Athletic: "The Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), the organization co-founded by 24-time Grand Slam champion Novak Djokovic, has labeled the biggest governing bodies in tennis as a “cartel” which suppresses wages, player opportunity and rival tournaments “to the harm of players and fans alike.”

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday March 18 in New York City, London and Brussels, the PTPA names the men’s ATP and women’s WTA tours, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) as defendants. The suit, filed in those three cities to reflect the four bodies’ global remit, accuses them of several antitrust violations, with the goal of overturning the fundamental structure of one of the most popular global sports.

"The lawsuit names the four Grand Slam tournaments, Wimbledon and the Australian, French and U.S. Opens, as co-conspirators alongside the ATP, WTA, ITF and ITIA. The Grand Slams, it says, act in concert with the defendants “to enrich themselves at the players’ expense, to the detriment of fans and the game.”



Article on The Athletic, paywall / NYT: Tennis antitrust lawsuit: PTPA, co-founded by Novak Djokovic, sues ATP, WTA tours

I'm not quite following this. I don't have a subscription to The Athletic, but I understand that the Grand Slams need to compete with each other to stay relevant and differentiate themselves from lower-tier tournaments. It's worth noting that the Slams accommodate a significant number of players when you include qualifying, which features a draw of 128 players. Combined with the main draw, that totals 256 players.

So how are slams enriching themselves at the expense of the players exactly? And what are they offering as an alternative?

[jimlosaltos]

I'm not quite following this. I don't have a subscription to The Athletic, but I understand that the Grand Slams need to compete with each other to stay relevant and differentiate themselves from lower-tier tournaments. It's worth noting that the Slams accommodate a significant number of players when you include qualifying, which features a draw of 128 players. Combined with the main draw, that totals 256 players.

So how are slams enriching themselves at the expense of the players exactly? And what are they offering as an alternative?

My personal opinion, the PTPA is like most populist movements - very good at criticizing others, not of much value at offering practical solutions.

It's telling that they did NOT sue Tennis Australia, FFT, AELTC, USTA -- which is where the real money is.

PTPA hired a big name sports lawyer that has wins over NBA to boost. On the other hand, Nick Kyrgios is a party to the law suit. If I'm one of the ATP lawyers, I'd salivate at deposing Nick.

[jimlosaltos]

Peter Bodo, one of few journalists remaining that was around at the founding of the ATP, has this in the jpg.

The players organized to form the ATP, now the PTPA is organizing to attack it.

That the PTPA suit is joined by an odd array of players, including Nick Kyrgios, but not the PTPA founder Djokovic stands out to many.

This is Djokovic's second attempt to essentially take over the ATP, his first involved a coup to kick out Kermode, I believe it was, over the objections of Rafa and Fed (who argued prize money had increased faster under the then ATP head than ever) and install Djokovic's partner, Justin Gimbelstob. The players rejected Gimelstob who had to resign in disgrace after his arrest and conviction for assault in one of 6 accusations of violence against him, and self-dealing, when he pushed through a $5 Million contract to create video for the ATP web site, then "won" the contract himself and used funds to film his own wedding.

Curious politics indeed.


filedata/fetch?id=106757&d=1742494340&type=thumb

#

[stroke]

This is just absurd to me. Just way too many beyond ridiculous lawsuits nowadays. I wish they could bundle this up with the Blake Lively Justin Baldoni lawsuit for one big beautiful lawsuit.

[stotty]

The plot thickens...

[jimlosaltos]

The plot thickens...

Carlos Alcaraz and Coco Gauff, both quote in the PTPA lawsuit, say they knew nothing about the suit until they saw word of it on social media, and both disapprove of the suit.
Using their names implies support, when they're opposed.

Slimy

[jimlosaltos]

Two long articles provide more info for anyone interested in the arm wrestling over the future of professional tennis.

Ben Rothenberg has an extremely in-depth interview with Ahmad Nassar, Executive Director of the PTPA, about the 163-page suit the PTPA filed against the ATP and WTA (notably and perhaps strangely, not against the four majors that produce over half of all revenue in professional tennis, nor does it include or name large for-profit firms such as IMG that both own and run tournaments.). Ben's piece is open for free access at this link, despite being on Ben's paid Substack hub.

Ben is a prickly sort, but he does old style investigative reporting, digs deep, and isn't afraid to tackle topics like how betting on tennis works and the Zverev assault accusations. IMHO Nassar and the PTPA look aimless, lots of complaints, no meaningful focus other than whining -- which is reflected by the co-complainants they chose: Nick Kyrgios, Reilly Opelka, Tennys Sandgren.

This gist of the PTPA suit appears to be that the ATP, WTA and four Majors restriction competition and damages the players. Then the PTPA suit cites the Six Kings exhibition in Saudi Arabia as an example of how arbitrary the free market is, which directly undermines their suit. ( Excerpt as image below)

Another conflict is the PTPA claiming it wants players below the very top to get a greater share of revenues, yet the PTPA itself claims to only represent the Top 500 singles players and top 200 doubles players - a tiny fraction of professional tennis players. Actual membership appears to be less than half of that. There are roughly 1,814 professional tennis players ranked on the ATP Tour, while the WTA features over 1,600 players.

Nothing I can find explains how the PTPA addresses the fact that the majors generate over half of the total revenue for pro tennis, act as non-profits and use most of the margin from their events for the support and development of junior tennis players. {Professional tennis generates $2.2 Billion annually, majority from the majors aka 'Slams, 30% from ATP, under 10% from WTA, and a trickle from the ITF.}.

Secondly, The Athletic (paywall) describes a new, joint proposal by the ATP and WTA to the slams for a reorganization of pro tennis, "Tennis leaders of ATP and WTA Tours present the Grand Slams with a new plan to fix the sport". Both a prior proposal by the slams and this response by the ATP/WTA aim to grow the big events, somehow share the majors media system and revenue, and reduce the smaller events.

Excerpt from TheAthletic: "Its substance is familiar. Four Grand Slams. Ten top-level mixed events. A pooling of media rights and sponsorship revenues to fund it all. And a new board structure that would oversee sporting matters, with representatives for the Grand Slams, the tournaments and ATP and WTA players."

"The deck proposes a calendar structured as follows:

Four Grand Slams.
10 ATP Masters 1,000 events and 10 WTA 1,000 events, with the new, 10th ATP event to be held in February. The venue is almost certain to be Saudi Arabia.
16 ATP 500 events and 17 WTA 500 events, to be held in concurrent weeks.
A plan to reduce the number of third-tier ATP and WTA 250 events through “buybacks,” allowing the tours to reacquire the license for an unspecified number of the 30 ATP and 21 WTA events.

filedata/fetch?id=106779&d=1742673355&type=thumb

#

[jimlosaltos]

PTPA is claiming nobody in tennis outside the top 100 can make a living and that far more players in golf are millionaires (600-1000 players pre some supporters). Elsewhere implication is that pro golf is more equitable than tennis.

Yet, PGA site shows 160th ranked player making $88,786 - presumably gross revenue. LPGA? A fraction of what either WTA, PGA, ATP players make.

Public stats paint a different picture than PTPA claims. { from golf digest, golf.com via Oleg S). I'd note this omits European golf winnings but they're much lower than PGA.

Table: Tournament prize money for tennis per ATP and WTA websites, for golf — per PGA and LPGA websites, for LIV Golf — per Golf . com .), for FedEx Cup bonus — per GolfDigest

https://golf.com/news/2024-liv-golf-money-list-each-pro-earned/#:~:text=The%20payout%20is%20not%20public,2024%20LIV%20Golf%20season%20below

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/final-pga-tour-fedex-cup-prize-money-payout-for-each-golfer-at-the-2024-tour-championship

filedata/fetch?id=106781&d=1742675764&type=thumb

#

[jimlosaltos]

As I was buying tickets for a group going to the Laver Cup in San Francisco this fall, I was reminded of this quote (screen cap) by Peter Bodo, the long-time tennis journalist, that is at the crux of the PTPA suits and the thus-far-failed attempts to further align the interest of the majors and the ATP/ WTA.

Basically, from a business standpoint, there is no need for nearly 5,000 ATP/WTA players. Heck, there is no need for a 128 player or 96 player draw. Fans/ sponsors pay for the top players. Period. If the PTPA got its way ( assuming we can figure out what the heck it actually wants) and broke the ATP/WTA restrictions, the "free market" would likely pay less for the 100th player, the 200th, the 300th and 500th player than the current system does. And doubles would be left to local clubs.

As Andy Roddick said to Christopher Eubanks on Andy's podcast, "Do you think if the PTPA gets its way that doubles players will get more than 20? Will they get 30? 40?" { Referring to percentage share of gross} Chris' response, "Heck, no".

filedata/fetch?id=106841&d=1743701781&type=thumb

Here a screen cap from Ticketmaster showing that September Laver Cup, which features six (6) star players is sold out in the lower bowl, baseline on April 2. That's entirely based on series tickets, they're just starting to sell other mini-packages. They're likely to sell out the ~18, 616 seat Chase Center. Again, they are marketing the ability to watch 6 of the top players, each play more than once, over only 3 days.

Grey is sold out over 6 months in advance. Avails in blue start at the top of the lower bowl and the top bowl.

filedata/fetch?id=106842&d=1743701781&type=thumb

#

[stotty]

I think the game is, and always has been, dependent on household names to get bums on seats. The bottom fell out of the women's game years ago and women's tennis became dependent on the men's game to make it pay. That's said, I switched to an outside in Miami to watch a men's match and the stadium was only a third full, if that. The best place to run a tournament is Britain; stadiums are always packed and the outside courts are squeezing room only. We like our tennis.

[jimlosaltos]

I think the game is, and always has been, dependent on household names to get bums on seats. The bottom fell out of the women's game years ago and women's tennis became dependent on the men's game to make it pay. That's said, I switched to an outside in Miami to watch a men's match and the stadium was only a third full, if that. The best place to run a tournament is Britain; stadiums are always packed and the outside courts are squeezing room only. We like our tennis.

I'm jealous

[jimlosaltos]

An impromptu meeting is apparently set in Monte Carlos where many of the top ATP and WTA players are meeting with representatives of the majors to seek more money and benefits.

The women are the No. 1-ranked Sabalenka, Gauff, Iga Swiatek, Jessica Pegula, Madison Keys, Jasmine Paolini, Emma Navarro, Zheng Qinwen, Paula Badosa and Mirra Andreeva. The men are the No. 1-ranked Sinner — who is currently serving a three-month doping ban — 24-time major champion Djokovic, Alexander Zverev, Carlos Alcaraz, Taylor Fritz, Casper Ruud, Daniil Medvedev, Andrey Rublev, Stefanos Tsitsipas and Alex de Minaur.

Per AP News/ Originally from L'eqjuipe: "
Novak Djokovic, Jannik Sinner, Aryna Sabalenka and Coco Gauff are among 20 leading tennis players who signed a letter sent to the heads of the four Grand Slam tournaments seeking more prize money and a greater say in what they called “decisions that directly impact us.”

The letter, a copy of which was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press, is dated March 21 and begins with a request for an in-person meeting at this month’s Madrid Open between representatives of the players and the four people to whom it was addressed: Craig Tiley of the Australian Open, Stephane Morel of the French Open, Sally Bolton of Wimbledon and Lew Sherr of the U.S. Open.

At the bottom of the message are the handwritten signatures of 10 of the top 11 women in the rankings from the week of March 3 — Elena Rybakina’s name is missing — and the full list of the top 10 men that week.


The players outline three areas they want to focus on:


— Grand Slam tournaments should make financial contributions to player welfare programs funded by the two pro tours.

— Prize money should increase “to a more appropriate percentage of tournament revenues, reflective of the players’ contribution to tournament value.”

— The athletes should have more say in decisions “directly impacting competition, as well as player health and welfare.”

News of the letter — which was first mentioned by French sports newspaper L’Equipe — arrives about two weeks after the players’ association co-founded by Djokovic filed an antitrust lawsuit against the women’s and men’s professional tours, the International Tennis Federation and the sport’s integrity agency in federal court in New York. Djokovic was not listed as one of the plaintiffs, because he said he wanted to see other players step up.


That suit seeks more money for players, saying too little of the revenues end up in the athletes’ hands, and lays out a series of other complaints about the way the sport is run.

The antitrust filing last month included a reference to a report “that the U.S. Open generated more revenue from the sale of one specialty cocktail ($12.8 million) than it paid to the men’s and women’s champions combined.”

The U.S. Tennis Association offered a record total of $75 million in total compensation — which includes prize money and payouts to cover players’ expenses — for its Grand Slam tournament in 2024. That represented an increase of about 15% from the $65 million offered in 2023 at the U.S. Open.

Based on currency exchange figures at the times of the events, Wimbledon had about $64 million in prizes last year, with the French Open and Australian Open both at about $58 mil

“The USTA is incredibly proud of the U.S. Open’s leadership in player compensation throughout its history and our support to grow professional tennis not only in the United States but worldwide,” he wrote. “This includes offering equal prize money to men and women for more than 50 years and awarding the largest purse in tennis history at the 2024 U.S. Open.”

The next Grand Slam tournament is the French Open, with main-draw matches starting in Paris on May 25.

[stroke]

I think the game is, and always has been, dependent on household names to get bums on seats. The bottom fell out of the women's game years ago and women's tennis became dependent on the men's game to make it pay. That's said, I switched to an outside in Miami to watch a men's match and the stadium was only a third full, if that. The best place to run a tournament is Britain; stadiums are always packed and the outside courts are squeezing room only. We like our tennis.

WTA has the sweetest deal ever. Completely non self supporting. Perfect for our times.

[neilchok]

I think the one thing which I love about tennis though is how we incorporate men's and women together. We also have them actually playing together in mixed grand slams. I think tennis does it so much better than other sports. I think promoting tennis for both men and women is great, because I think this is one of the big sports for girls growing up to get good at. I think it is also just so much fun to get that variety. Maybe you don't make as much money, but I think it is what makes tennis in my opinion unique