{"id":18985,"date":"2022-07-30T01:00:00","date_gmt":"2022-07-30T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.economicsobservatory.com\/?post_type=question&p=18985"},"modified":"2022-08-01T09:13:02","modified_gmt":"2022-08-01T08:13:02","slug":"what-next-for-the-growth-of-womens-football","status":"publish","type":"question","link":"https:\/\/www.economicsobservatory.com\/test\/what-next-for-the-growth-of-womens-football","title":{"rendered":"What next for the growth of women\u2019s football?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In many jobs, men and women do not face equal opportunities. According to one recent study, during recruitment men are typically evaluated for their potential, while women are judged on their past performance<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sports investments work in a similar way. Men's sports often attract investors if there is even a small chance of potential returns. But for women\u2019s sports, investors often seem to focus entirely on past performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unfortunately for women athletes, several structural conditions and underlying biases have limited returns to women's sports in the past. This means they are judged against historic conditions where the odds have been stacked against them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consider the story of women playing professional football. On 9 November 2019, 77,768 fans travelled to Wembley<\/a> to see the England women\u2019s team play Germany. This attendance broke a record set seven years earlier at the same stadium when 70,584 people attended an Olympic match between Great Britain and Brazil<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This latter game also broke an attendance record that had been in place for more than 100 years ago. Back in 1920, 53,000 fans reportedly showed up at Goodison Park to see a match between Dick, Kerr's and St Helens<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why did it take so long for attendance at women's matches to grow? One obvious reason is that soon after the fixture in 1920, the English Football Association (FA) essentially banned women from professional football<\/a>. That ban would remain in place until 1971.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even after it was lifted, women's football teams in the UK \u2013 as with other sports globally \u2013 \u00a0were denied the resources seen in the men\u2019s game<\/a>. When it comes to sports around the world, we see obvious gender gaps in wages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The maximum salary in the FA Women\u2019s Super League (WSL) is reportedly $250,000 <\/a>(or about \u00a3210,000). Meanwhile the average salary in the English Premier League (EPL) is \u00a33,090,200<\/a>. So, the highest paid women in the WSL are paid less than 10% of the average player in the EPL. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such gaps in pay between the men and women in professional sports are often attributed to differences in revenue. But a study of wages<\/a> in the National Basketball Association (NBA) and the Women\u2019s National Basketball Association (WNBA) revealed that the women of the WNBA (relative to the men of the NBA) are paid a much lower percentage of league revenue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The differences don\u2019t just relate to wages. There is also a substantial gap<\/a> in coverage from the male-dominated sports media. We also see very large gaps in sponsorship spending<\/a> and in public spending on sports<\/a>. There is even a difference in the quantity of statistics produced<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All these gaps are important. But perhaps none matter more than the significant disparity in private investment. When it comes to sports, investors (who are often men) seem to have a strong preference for the men\u2019s teams, leagues and competitions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But why? If we look at past performance, in England, football played by men does substantially better than football played by women in terms of both attendance and revenue. Of course, this is largely because women were banned from elite football for so long. In addition, men\u2019s teams also enjoy significant advantages in media coverage and sponsorship spending. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For many, this is evidence of gender discrimination in the sport. But some argue that this isn\u2019t the story at all, and instead that men\u2019s football teams are simply \u2018better\u2019 to watch. But is there any truth in this?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recent research<\/a> indicates that this is not the case. The conclusion that these critics of the women\u2019s game are reaching is not based on the matches they watch. To see this, researchers began by showing football fans (both men and women) videos of professional athletes (again, both men and women) playing the game. In general, viewers rated the male players as better.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The researchers then showed the same fans new videos. This time the sex of the athletes was blurred out. When people were shown the blurred videos, they no longer thought that the men playing football were definitely better than the women.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What this tells us is that the preference men have for watching men play football is not necessarily driven by any real perceptions of quality of play. These preferences are driven by an underlying belief that men are better football players. This bias may be a key factor in why women\u2019s teams and leagues are consistently underfunded in comparison with men\u2019s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What recent successes has the women\u2019s game had?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Despite this belief, women\u2019s teams can attract impressive audiences. One example is the success of FC Barcelona. On 30 March 2022, 91,553 fans showed up <\/a>to see Barcelona play Real Madrid, breaking the attendance record at a game between two women\u2019s teams. Just three weeks later (on 22 April), the attendance record was broken again, when 91,648 fans watched Barcelona take on Vfl Wolfsburg<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These record-breaking spectator numbers may be, in part, due to efforts by FC Barcelona to promote its women\u2019s team (perhaps more so than other clubs have done). At the women\u2019s Champions League final in Turin, between Barcelona and Olympique Lyonnais, there were 32,257 spectators. It is reported that of those who attended this match, at least 13,000 were from Barcelona<\/a>. In contrast, only around 3,500 fans traveled from France.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This fixture didn\u2019t just attract fans to the stadium. It is reported that 3.6 million people<\/a> watched the match across all the broadcasting platforms. Despite these viewers, though, the broadcasting deal for the women's Champion\u2019s League remains quite small. It is reported their latest deal is only worth $8 million<\/a> (or around \u00a36.67 million). To put that in perspective, the EPL\u2019s broadcasting deal is worth more than \u00a35 billion<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judging by these broadcasting deals, one might think that no one is really interested in matches between women\u2019s teams. But as recent matches have shown, Barcelona and Lyon certainly are attracting an audience. So why are these two teams drawing such a crowd, relative to other women\u2019s teams?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yara El-Shaboury \u2013 a freelance sports journalist \u2013 recently wrote about the success of the two teams. Each club has taken a different approach to building a successful team. Lyon has focused primarily on spending money to acquire established stars from around the world, whereas Barcelona has concentrated on developing talent by investing in \u2018the best coaches, analysts, and medical staff money could buy<\/a>\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although these approaches appear different, there is something the two clubs have in common. Both Olympique Lyonnais and FC Barcelona have found success by investing in their women\u2019s teams. As El-Shaboury notes, this is not quite the same approach seen elsewhere: \u2018for many other women\u2019s soccer clubs, a few bad months can lead to funding drying up, which then results in permanent regression<\/a>\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This pattern appears to be a significant problem in women\u2019s sports, where many investors focus on the financial returns being seen right now. It is a very different story in men\u2019s sports. And perhaps nothing illustrates this difference better than the story of Major League Soccer in the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why are men\u2019s sports teams so well-funded?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Compared with the leagues in England, Spain, Italy, France or Germany (known as \u2018the big five\u2019), the MLS is hardly a major football league. Whether we look at revenue or wages, the MLS lags far behind its European counterparts<\/a>. Most teams in the MLS are not even profitable<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite this, investors are lining up to buy teams in the US league. In 2019 an expansion team \u2013 a new franchise in the league \u2013 sold for $325 million<\/a>.\u00a0 This is an enormous value even by global standards. As sports journalist Graham Ruthven argued in 2021, this amount \u2018would buy a mid-table club in the Premier League or pretty much any of Europe\u2019s other big five leagues<\/a>\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To put this price in perspective, the parent company of Olympique Lyonnais agreed to take a controlling interest in the Seattle Reign of the National Women's Soccer League (NWSL) in 2019 for just over $3 million<\/a>. Given what was paid, the value of the Reign was put at $3.51 million. Apparently, a top team in women\u2019s professional football is only worth about 1% of an expansion team in minor league men\u2019s football.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why would investors value these teams so differently? Financiers often say that the MLS, despite a history of losses, has a bright future. So, investors are willing to pump money into the league in the hope that a bright future will be realised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But whether MLS teams will ever be able to compete with the five established football leagues in Europe is highly uncertain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What about potential in professional women\u2019s football teams? FC Barcelona is not the only women\u2019s team to see more than 90,000 fans at the gate. The United States women\u2019s national team has also attracted similar numbers<\/a> to one of their matches. Their players are paid the same wages<\/a> as the men\u2019s team, and actually generate more<\/em> revenue for the United States Soccer Federation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, for now at least, this proven popularity does not seem to translate to financial investment. No one is offering hundreds of millions for a women\u2019s professional football team. For would-be buyers, past profits don\u2019t seem to justify the investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And that is ultimately the difference in men\u2019s and women\u2019s sports. Like managers who are men, men playing sports are consistently evaluated on what investors imagine might happen in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Women in sports \u2013 like women in management \u2013 are consistently judged on past returns. But because those returns are limited by lack of media coverage, sponsorship spending and public spending, women teams, leagues and competitions continue to suffer from a lack of investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Where can I find out more?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n