--- title: Sports: How to Solve the Gender Wage Gap in International Soccer description: The usual go-to explanation of the huge disparities—supply and demand—seems to fall a little short canonical: https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/ author: TIME article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2015-07-22T20:25:08.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-08-04T07:38:18.685Z article:section: Ideas og:title: How to Solve the Gender Wage Gap in International Soccer og:description: The usual go-to explanation of the huge disparities—supply and demand—seems to fall a little short og:url: https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltde093bcdab65f2d0/6988d9b9bc6cfc69913e2a3c/time-logo.jpg?branch=production og:image:width: 1200 og:image:height: 675 og:image:alt: TIME og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: How to Solve the Gender Wage Gap in International Soccer twitter:description: The usual go-to explanation of the huge disparities—supply and demand—seems to fall a little short twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltde093bcdab65f2d0/6988d9b9bc6cfc69913e2a3c/time-logo.jpg?branch=production --- # How to Solve the Gender Wage Gap in International Soccer > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: September 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=2167bcb5-81e5-4bea-ba48-d192487ffbc7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Weekdays | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Weekly | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Twice a week | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=2167bcb5-81e5-4bea-ba48-d192487ffbc7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=2167bcb5-81e5-4bea-ba48-d192487ffbc7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (health, weekdays), Worth Your Time (culture, weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, twice weekly), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. ### Sources * TIME Newsletters: [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=2167bcb5-81e5-4bea-ba48-d192487ffbc7&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1) ## Video: Behind The Scenes with the USWNT at an SI Cover Shoot [Watch (HLS stream): Behind The Scenes with the USWNT at an SI Cover Shoot](https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/fuCedTxq.m3u8) (2:30)  _Published 2015-07-13. Behind The Scenes with the USWNT at an SI Cover Shoot_ by [Thomas More Smith, Emory University / The Conversation](https://time.com/author/thomas-more-smith/) ## Thomas More Smith, Emory University / The Conversation Jul 22, 2015 8:25 PM UTC by [Thomas More Smith, Emory University / The Conversation](https://time.com/author/thomas-more-smith/) ## Thomas More Smith, Emory University / The Conversation Jul 22, 2015 8:25 PM UTC As I watched the Women’s World Cup final recently with my family, my 11-year-old son, who plays on a local soccer team, remarked that he was amazed at how quickly and how often the U.S. team scored. “Seriously, Dad, teams don’t just score like that in soccer.” Of course, he was right. The match set a [record](http://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2015/07/05/21/19/150705-wnt-v-jpn-game-story) for most combined goals scored in a FIFA final for either men or women. It’s that level of action and excitement that made the game the most-watched soccer event in U.S. history. The Nielsen overnight [rating](http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/66/united-states/2015/07/06/13353212/womens-world-cup-final-draws-huge-us-tv-ratings) for the women’s final was 15.2, with more than 25.4 million viewers in the U.S. By comparison, the men’s final last year received a 9.1 Nielsen rating, with 17.3 million viewers. (That US viewers had skin in the game in the women’s final tells only part of the story, but more on that and global viewership later.) Shortly after the game, however, some took to Twitter to point out a less favorable disparity: This is a shockingly huge pay gap, and looks even worse when considering that the US men’s team, which lost in the first round last year, [earned](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-leadership/wp/2015/07/09/the-gap-in-prize-money-for-men-and-women-across-major-world-sports/) US$9 million for their efforts. The usual go-to explanation of such disparities, “it’s all supply and demand,” seems to fall a little short given that the demand (people watching the game) was actually greater for the women’s team than for that of the winning German men’s team, at least in terms of US viewership. But, in fact, this explanation does help in understanding why the gap exists. It also suggests a solution: increase demand. ## Where do other sports stand? The pay gap between the women’s team and men’s team for the FIFA World Cup Finals is significant. The male-female ratio for the payout is 17.5 (men’s pay divided by women’s). That is, men earn $17.50 for every $1 earned by women for winning the championship game. For comparison, see the chart below showing wages and prize money for men versus women for the sports in which men and women have equal or similar representation. The FIFA ratio is considerably greater than those for the U.S. and British Open golf tournaments, though not quite as large as that of professional basketball – the average NBA player earn 65 times as much as a woman in the WNBA. Tennis, notably, has been awarding men and women equal prize money for years. Wimbledon became the [last Grand Slam](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-leadership/wp/2014/09/05/how-womens-tennis-fought-for-equal-pay/) to do so in 2007. ## Where sports revenue comes from So why are women tennis players paid the same as male players at Wimbledon but not for the FIFA World Cup? The difference comes down to how the sports generate revenue, which does not primarily come from ticket sales, as some believe. Basketball is a case in point. Walking through the revenue model for an NBA team relative to a WNBA team is revealing. The average NBA team generates 25% to 30% of its total revenue from ticket sales. The lion’s share of revenue comes from local and national broadcast rights. ([Here’s a link](http://edge-cache.deadspin.com/deadspin/nets04.pdf) to the New Jersey Nets’ profit and loss statement – very revealing.) The current NBA television deal, which provides networks the right to broadcast games during the regular season and gives specific networks rights to broadcast different rounds in the playoffs, is around $930 million, or approximately $31 million per team. Local television deals can add another $25 to $30 million. The Los Angeles Lakers, for example, reaped $122 million in 2013 [selling](http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome%5Fmjx.shtml) their local broadcasting rights (and are set to earn much more in coming years), while other marquee teams typically earn $30 million to $40 million. By contrast, the WNBA in 2012 [signed](http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2013/03/28/Media/WNBA.aspx) an extension on its national broadcast deal in the amount of $12 million per year (about $1 million per team). If the local broadcast deal for a WNBA team is similar to its national deal (as is the case with the men), then a women’s team likely generates about $2 million per year in broadcast rights, compared with more than $55 million in the NBA. The revenue gap makes some sense when considering that the average [attendance](http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance) for a NBA game is 17,000, [compared](http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomvanriper/2014/05/23/is-it-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-the-wnba/) with 7,500 per WNBA game, and that the men play 41 home games a year, compared with 17 for women. In this case, the demand and supply explanation works very well. There is clearly greater demand for NBA games than for WNBA games, and, as a result, revenues are significantly higher, as are the salaries. ## Tennis v. soccer Tennis is a less complex beast. The men and the women (at major tournaments) are playing at the same venue, the broadcasters are purchasing a bundle of programming that includes both men’s and women’s matches, and tickets are priced according to the round in the tournament, the location of the match (marquee matches are played in the premier court relative to the surrounding courts) and the seats within the stadium. The revenue generated by the tournament is a function of both men and women, so women deserve an equal share. And women have had a [terrific advocate](http://edition.cnn.com/2013/08/20/sport/tennis/tennis-billie-jean-king-wta-equality/) in Billie Jean King, who started pushing for equality in tennis nearly four decades ago. The Women’s World Cup, unfortunately, looks much more like basketball than tennis. FIFA releases annual reports of its financials – income and expenses relating to promoting and running various FIFA events. Looking back at 2011 (the last time the women played in the World Cup), FIFA [reported](http://resources.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/01/60/80/10/fifafinanzberichteinternet.pdf) television revenue of $550 million, of which $537 million was from presales for the 2014 Men’s World Cup. The remaining $13 million in television revenue was generated from the sale of broadcast rights to a variety of FIFA events, including (presumably) the 2011 Women’s World Cup. If these types of revenue disparities persisted through the 2014 and 2015 Men’s and Women’s World Cups, the television revenues for the 2015 women’s event was a [fraction](http://www.fifa.com/governance/finances/index.html) of the $1 billion plus taken in for the 2014 Brazil games. So one could conclude that the payments to the men’s and women’s teams should be proportional to the revenue generated from the individual events. This might be a good assumption, except that FIFA spends money on events and promotion of soccer throughout the world that have no chance of paying for themselves. And, if we think about an investment or impact, the Women’s World Cup obviously had a nice reach – the final out-drew the men’s final, at least in the U.S. It is unclear, however, whether the viewership for the Women’s World Cup was larger than that of the men’s outside of the U.S. (FIFA prepares a television audience outreach document after the World Cup; [here](http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/tv/01/47/32/73/2010fifaworldcupsouthafricatvaudiencereport.pdf) is the one from 2010). Americans had good reason to watch their home team compete in the final, and in a similar time zone no less. We can make a few comparisons with the numbers that have been released from other countries. The television [viewership](http://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/news/y=2015/m=6/news=fifa-women-s-world-cuptm-breaks-more-tv-records-in-round-of-16-2653174.html) in Canada for the host team’s game against Switzerland in the round of 16 tallied 2.8 million viewers. That [compares](http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/y=2014/m=6/news=fifa-world-cuptm-group-stages-break-new-ground-in-tv-viewing-2388418.html) with 16.7 million in France who watched its men’s team compete against Switzerland in a group stage game in 2014\. France’s population is roughly twice that of Canada, yet viewership was more than six times higher. So perhaps on a global scale, the supply and demand argument works after all. The women were popular in the U.S., but that is only a very small part of the global market (weak market demand will have downward pressure on prices). ## FIFA needs to look ahead FIFA’s reaction to the underpayment controversy was to [suggest](http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/12/06/soccer-world-women-money-idINKCN0JK02120141206) that the women haven’t earned a bigger paycheck because the women’s tournament has not run as long as the men’s. That is really a rubbish argument. I have yet to hear a corporate chief financial officer tell a new worker that she or he can’t be paid their value because the job hasn’t been around long enough – if this were true, most chief technology officers would be earning less than the mailroom staff. Ultimately I believe FIFA is thinking about this all wrong. The organization should be thinking about this as an investment, an avenue to increase participation in women’s soccer across the globe and a mechanism to propel equality between men and women. Consider the impact that FIFA could have if it spent the time and resources promoting the women’s game with the same intensity it uses for the men’s game. Sports is a powerful vehicle for social change. Although in the past the women’s tournament generated less money for FiFA than the men’s, no business or sports empire can live in the past and expect to be relevant in the future. Sporting goods companies [know](http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/03/most-powerful-sports-names-tiger-woods-nike-cmo-network-sports-brands.html) this. To continue to survive and make profit, they think ahead and bet their financial futures on promising young athletes who have not proven themselves. And the companies in turn use their power to guarantee (as much as they can guarantee) a return on investment. Under Armour did a deal with the Golden State Warriors’ Stephen Curry before he helped them win the NBA Championship. The same argument goes for women’s soccer. In the 2015 FIFA World Cup, women’s soccer proved itself. It likely won’t be long before their earning power rivals the men as their popularity grows. It’s easy to make an argument about the social justice of equal pay. But if that’s not enough for FIFA, the group would do well to simply think ahead, pursue its self-interest and follow the age-old mantra: “Don’t be stupid.” _This_ [_article_](https://theconversation.com/how-to-solve-the-men-women-wage-gap-in-international-soccer-44523) _originally appeared on_ [_The Conversation_](http://theconversation.com) ## Transcript All right. Here we go. I'm out, I'm out, I'm out. Beautiful. All right, that's brilliant. I love it. [ MUSIC ] [ UNKNOWN ] takes my hand, ever. I didnt even know stuff like that existed. The parade? Yes. I know. Our top story, this half hour. For honoring the [ CROSSTALK ]. American's World Cup Champion is made. I'm nervous about getting my picture taken for the cover of Sports Illustrated magazine. Let's do this thing. Give me that trophy. Oh, here we go. Here we go. Thank you. Maybe a little bit. [ LAUGH ] Now can't really get much better. Are you saying that because you're seeing me? Totally. 100 %. That's good. That's good! We are shooting Happens each of the USA Women's Soccer team. This is the cover shot. So, today, they've definitely got a ton of energy and it's fun. It's fun further off. I kinda wanna balance it on my head. But I don't think they're gonna let me do that. I'm gonna try. [ MUSIC ] It looks so nice, doesn't it? We were saying that this is. Our star forever. Good, good. And then it's all yours. You gotta, you gotta, yeah. You gotta This third star is pretty incredible feat. I mean, that'll be on the jersey forever and that's something that we accomplished together, and now putting on the jersey is gonna be that much more special. It's been crazy. Yeah? But good crazy. But good, right? Yeah. The journey that we took to get to the final was Super inspiring. We're etched in that history, which is awesome, but I think that we fought through everything, and we came together and played our best soccer in that final. [ APPLAUSE ] This is a great day. This is the best day ever! I want girls Dreams to be alive. I want them to know that with hard work, with confidence, with sacrifices, you can be in this position too. Who- hoo. Hang on. This team was a full team. I think that the depth of our roster is the reason why we were able to bring home the World Cup. Can't be that, huh? No, can't beat that. Yeah. So many people had an impact, on some level. And obviously, we're gonna be talking about Carly Lloyd, because she deserves it. But everybody had their own little piece to the puzzle, in order for this thing to align perfectly. And the way that it did for us to bring home the trophy. And to come here to New York City to celebrate a ticker tape parade. I don't know if it gets better then this. [ MUSIC ] ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/"},"headline":"How to Solve the Gender Wage Gap in International Soccer","datePublished":"2015-07-22T20:25:08.000Z","dateModified":"2026-08-04T07:38:18.685Z","description":"The usual go-to explanation of the huge disparities—supply and demand—seems to fall a little short","url":"https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/","keywords":["society","Sports topic","Soccer","World Cup","sexism","FIFA","world affairs"],"thumbnailUrl":"","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Thomas More Smith, Emory University / The Conversation"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/society/","name":"society"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/","name":"How to Solve the Gender Wage Gap in International Soccer"}}]},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"VideoObject","name":"Behind The Scenes with the USWNT at an SI Cover Shoot","description":"Behind The Scenes with the USWNT at an SI Cover Shoot","thumbnailUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/v2/media/fuCedTxq/poster.jpg?width=720","uploadDate":"2015-07-13T16:57:33.000Z","contentUrl":"https://cdn.jwplayer.com/manifests/fuCedTxq.m3u8","embedUrl":"https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/","duration":"PT2M30S","potentialAction":{"@type":"SeekToAction","target":"https://time.com/3968632/soccer-gender-wage-gap/?jw_start={seek_to_second_number}","startOffset-input":"required name=seek_to_second_number"}}] ```