The WNBA and the players' union (WNBPA) are still in a labor dispute as the WNBA 2026 season rapidly approaches. By this point, we all know the basics of the argument - the league wants to share net revenue (profits after expenses are paid), while the union is fighting for a share of gross revenue (the total money brought in before expenses are deducted). The players' union wants an average 27.5% share of gross revenue over the life of the new deal, and of course the league considers this demand "unrealistic,” and claims that agreeing to the union's proposal would result in massive operating losses totaling $460 million over the lifetime of the agreement. On top of everything, the league and its teams are expected to lose roughly $50 million this year, according to league projections. The league continues to frame the negotiations around operating constraints.
Despite the league’s argument, taking a deeper look at the league's true financial situation reveals a different situation. First off, the league has a new media rights agreement valued at $2.2 billion, which will average out to $200 million annually over 11 years. Next is the added expansion cash. Since late 2023, the league has been approaching approaching $1 billion in expansion fees. As we shared, the WNBA does not count these fees as part of shared league revenue, keeping the capital entirely out of the players' hands. Then there are the "paper losses." Stanford economics professor Roger G. Noll argues that the "income statements of the teams are meaningless" due to the league's convoluted ownership structure. Noll points out that currently, the WNBA legally allows owners to finesse their administrative costs, meaning it is structurally possible for owners to pay themselves hefty bonuses that "absorb all the profits" to show a deficit on paper. While it remains unverified if any specific WNBA owner is actively utilizing this exact mechanism, the lack of transparency makes the league's public claims of operating losses difficult to take at face value.
When you look at the equity split of the league we have: NBA owners hold 42%, WNBA owners hold 42%, and an outside investment group holds 16%. In 2022, the WNBA sold that 16% stake to outside investors for $75 million. While widely reported at the time as a $1 billion valuation, sources later revealed the true post-money valuation of the league was closer to $475 million. The league has gone from needing the cash 4 years ago to exploring a massive repurchase of that same equity in just 48 months. This is where we start asking questions.
Just four years after selling off that 16% stake, Front Office Sports reported that the WNBA is in the "exploratory stages" of buying it back, though it is "not clear how buying back the stake would be structured or funded.
Because franchise valuations have increased since 2022, the cost to buy back the equity would be massive. If the entire league was valued at $475 million just four years ago, and individual expansion fees have since hit $250 million per team, the current valuation of the league is clearly going to be higher than it was. Buying back that 16% equity stake today would be close to 9 figures.
Exploring an equity repurchase conflicts directly with the narrative that the league is facing the threat of $460 million in operating losses. Equity repurchases are typically associated with confidence in long-term valuation, not short-term distress.
Simply put, the buyback exploration shows that the league's ownership views the WNBA as a valuable, rapidly appreciating asset, despite whatever the annual operating ledgers might suggest.
The league is claiming a nine-figure operating loss while also exploring a nine-figure equity repurchase. Equity buybacks are a signal of financial confidence, not financial distress. The math only works if one of those narratives isn't the full story.