Equal pay LPGA vs PGA -I disagree

[lowheel]

Just read the article. The goal seems to be equality of outcome. As the sponsor that is their prerogative.

 

Or the goal is they want us to perceive that is their goal LoL.

 

AON leadership team on their website is 11/14 Male. Wonder what their internal pay discrepancies are ?

 

2M bucks for one of the largest insurance companies in the world isn't much. And look at the publicity it's gotten them about how much they care about pay inequality. It's money well spent regardless of what the tours actually generate. That same money gets you what, a single ad during the super bowl. It's a good PR move

 

Thats misleading as that industry is almost 80% male. Some industries/jobs are attractive to one sex not the other.

 

I personally love the LPGA and have played with and respect a ton of ladies on that tour over the years but dont understand what this company is trying to accomplish with this. Their money to burn i guess

[BlackDiamondPar5]

I see two different things. I can agree with the OP, in that your value is exactly what you can get for your time, just like the value of your house, or the value of a rental car. That's especially true in entertainment, and really that's what all spectator sports are. If people simply won't pay as for something (women's golf), then its not worth as much. So I don't really have a problem with women golfers earning less than their male counterparts.

 

On the other hand, I have no problem with a company making a value judgement in deciding to offer the same pay-out for the man and woman who win their competition. Its quite possible that AON believe the image boost they get from treating men and women equally will be worth the "extra" money they're offering the woman who wins. More important, their image would take a beating of they offer the men's winner double the prize as the woman winner.

This ^^^

[Z1ggy16]

I wish they made more because they are extremely talented. I think what Whan is doing here is very cool and is fair. Women can't help that people aren't viewing their talent in as high regard as they should.

 

One thing that is nice about LGPA events is that you know everybody there is a real golf fan. There's no ridiculous screaming, BABABOOEY's or MAAAASHED POTATOEZ to be heard. Just people enjoying the game being played by the top females in the world.

 

I've gone to Men's pro events and heard people there talking and they have no idea who any of the players are and generally just seem like people who like to go to sports events purely for drinking/social reasons.

 

I've always thought the ladies deserved more attention both socially and monetarily.

 

As terrible as it sounds, you just highlighted a big reason why the pay gap exists. Dingdongs who only attend events to spend $$$$ on booze and have fun are largely why PGA purses are larger.

 

In the world of sports/entertainment, viewership is everything. Case in point, instagram/twitter "social media influencers", an area completely dominated by females.

If I remember correctly.... When I went to the Women's US Open in 2017, beer wasn't even being served. Not sure why anybody would have wanted to drink anyway, it was a cool 95 degrees out and not a cloud in the sky. I drank 3 bottles of water, 2 bananas, 2 lemon iceys and I still ended up severely dehydrated after being there for about 7 hours.

 

Beer would have been a waste though because I'd say 80% of attendance were either Dad's with their little girls an older men and women. I felt like the other person there between the age of 25-40.

 

As far as purses for events... Does a majority of that money come from the cost of rights to broadcast, or ticket/food sales? Tickets for the Men's US Open were $125 I think... Women's were only $50. I'm sure the ticket price is based on demand, but that's a fairly large difference.

[pinhigh27]

Not a chance. The product is not as attractive to sponsors or viewers and the large non US contingent don't seem to bring in revenues from Asian businesses. And don't get me started on female tennis players earning the same at Wimbledon...45 mins for a match against up to 5 hours for men.

 

If they draw the same viewership, who cares how long the matches are?

 

More time for ads

[golfortennis]

Just read the article. The goal seems to be equality of outcome. As the sponsor that is their prerogative.

 

Or the goal is they want us to perceive that is their goal LoL.

 

AON leadership team on their website is 11/14 Male. Wonder what their internal pay discrepancies are ?

 

2M bucks for one of the largest insurance companies in the world isn't much. And look at the publicity it's gotten them about how much they care about pay inequality. It's money well spent regardless of what the tours actually generate. That same money gets you what, a single ad during the super bowl. It's a good PR move

 

You could be right, I don't know. If its a PR move then I suppose time will tell if its a good one.

 

The article is less than 1,000 words so I wouldn't say we can fully know what AON's end goal here is from such a small article. The article is written in a way that makes me feel they are striving for equality of outcome.

 

Of course it's PR. AON doesn't *care* about equal pay, etc. They care about growing their companies and increasing the value for their shareholders. One way they have felt might be possible is to do what they have done, because this thread is exactly what they want. People are talking about AON.

 

Don't fool yourself that a company has a goal that is something other than increasing its own value. They do things along the way that will help, or not help, but claiming they are striving for equality of outcome is playing into their hands. That is to say they have convinced you they are pushing a social goal rather than doing something for their business interests.

 

They have every right to do this, or not do this, but let's stop eating the pabulum from the flacks that this is about some kind of social message. Someone said earlier that they would have gotten negative press if they offered a much bigger men's prize. Yeah, I don't think so. The number of people who actually care about this award is tiny. But this move/stunt/whateveryouwanttocallit has generated publicity. Which is what they want.

[GolfChannel]

When you only read the headline and assume it matches your own close-mindedness. Oh, what a time to be alive...

[I_HATE_SNOW]

I just read this article and disagree with some of the statements

https://www.golfchan...owerful-message

 

If there is less viewership, less high exposure sponsors, less history and frankly a lot less people are caring about female golf - why are people so hung up on making sure women get paid the same?

 

I whole-heartedly disagree with this notion. I believe you should be getting paid the same but only if you do the same work (blue / white collar jobs etc). But if you're paycheck depends on being a professional athlete entertainer etc... It's the size of the audience that matters, not what you do. Otherwise welcome to socialism at its best...

 

What's your take?

 

I'm still amazed that entertainers make so much money.

[smashdn]

You're a muppet.

 

Don't drag innocent muppets into this.

[ebrasmus21]

Just read the article. The goal seems to be equality of outcome. As the sponsor that is their prerogative.

 

Or the goal is they want us to perceive that is their goal LoL.

 

AON leadership team on their website is 11/14 Male. Wonder what their internal pay discrepancies are ?

 

2M bucks for one of the largest insurance companies in the world isn't much. And look at the publicity it's gotten them about how much they care about pay inequality. It's money well spent regardless of what the tours actually generate. That same money gets you what, a single ad during the super bowl. It's a good PR move

 

You could be right, I don't know. If its a PR move then I suppose time will tell if its a good one.

 

The article is less than 1,000 words so I wouldn't say we can fully know what AON's end goal here is from such a small article. The article is written in a way that makes me feel they are striving for equality of outcome.

 

Of course it's PR. AON doesn't *care* about equal pay, etc. They care about growing their companies and increasing the value for their shareholders. One way they have felt might be possible is to do what they have done, because this thread is exactly what they want. People are talking about AON.

 

Don't fool yourself that a company has a goal that is something other than increasing its own value. They do things along the way that will help, or not help, but claiming they are striving for equality of outcome is playing into their hands. That is to say they have convinced you they are pushing a social goal rather than doing something for their business interests.

 

They have every right to do this, or not do this, but let's stop eating the pabulum from the flacks that this is about some kind of social message. Someone said earlier that they would have gotten negative press if they offered a much bigger men's prize. Yeah, I don't think so. The number of people who actually care about this award is tiny. But this move/stunt/whateveryouwanttocallit has generated publicity. Which is what they want.

 

When the article and AON's CMO use terms like diversity, inclusion and equality how am I supposed to read it? It's a PR move crafted by AON with political and social overtones.

 

I watch sports to get away from politics and yet here I am.

[davep043]

Just read the article. The goal seems to be equality of outcome. As the sponsor that is their prerogative.

 

Or the goal is they want us to perceive that is their goal LoL.

 

AON leadership team on their website is 11/14 Male. Wonder what their internal pay discrepancies are ?

 

2M bucks for one of the largest insurance companies in the world isn't much. And look at the publicity it's gotten them about how much they care about pay inequality. It's money well spent regardless of what the tours actually generate. That same money gets you what, a single ad during the super bowl. It's a good PR move

 

You could be right, I don't know. If its a PR move then I suppose time will tell if its a good one.

 

The article is less than 1,000 words so I wouldn't say we can fully know what AON's end goal here is from such a small article. The article is written in a way that makes me feel they are striving for equality of outcome.

 

Of course it's PR. AON doesn't *care* about equal pay, etc. They care about growing their companies and increasing the value for their shareholders. One way they have felt might be possible is to do what they have done, because this thread is exactly what they want. People are talking about AON.

 

Don't fool yourself that a company has a goal that is something other than increasing its own value. They do things along the way that will help, or not help, but claiming they are striving for equality of outcome is playing into their hands. That is to say they have convinced you they are pushing a social goal rather than doing something for their business interests.

 

They have every right to do this, or not do this, but let's stop eating the pabulum from the flacks that this is about some kind of social message. Someone said earlier that they would have gotten negative press if they offered a much bigger men's prize. Yeah, I don't think so. The number of people who actually care about this award is tiny. But this move/stunt/whateveryouwanttocallit has generated publicity. Which is what they want.

 

When the article and AON's CMO use terms like diversity, inclusion and equality how am I supposed to read it? It's a PR move crafted by AON with political and social overtones.

 

I watch sports to get away from politics and yet here I am.

All advertising, including corporate sponsorship of golf tournaments, is PR. You can't escape it, but you can do your best to ignore it.

[ebrasmus21]

^^^

 

Me during all commercials now

 

[Shilgy]

Not a chance. The product is not as attractive to sponsors or viewers and the large non US contingent don't seem to bring in revenues from Asian businesses. And don't get me started on female tennis players earning the same at Wimbledon...45 mins for a match against up to 5 hours for men.

 

If they draw the same viewership, who cares how long the matches are?

 

More time for ads

IF the men's goes 5 sets. They might both go 3 sets. This whole part of the conversation makes it sound like in golf they should get extra pay for winning if it goes into a playoff. It is not an hourly job. No the women do not deserve equal pay as they do not generate the eyeballs and interest that the mens do-in golf. Tennis is a separate issue as iirc the ratings often are similar for the womens matches.

[bscinstnct]

It's a wonder that women don't realize that they could easily get paid as much or more than men instantly. All they have to do is band together and say,

 

Pay us or we won't talk to you anymore.

 

Women can hold their ground way longer than men can. Plus, we'd cave in out of fear of dying from hunger alone.

[Krt22]

I wish they made more because they are extremely talented. I think what Whan is doing here is very cool and is fair. Women can't help that people aren't viewing their talent in as high regard as they should.

 

One thing that is nice about LGPA events is that you know everybody there is a real golf fan. There's no ridiculous screaming, BABABOOEY's or MAAAASHED POTATOEZ to be heard. Just people enjoying the game being played by the top females in the world.

 

I've gone to Men's pro events and heard people there talking and they have no idea who any of the players are and generally just seem like people who like to go to sports events purely for drinking/social reasons.

 

I've always thought the ladies deserved more attention both socially and monetarily.

 

As terrible as it sounds, you just highlighted a big reason why the pay gap exists. Dingdongs who only attend events to spend $$$$ on booze and have fun are largely why PGA purses are larger.

 

In the world of sports/entertainment, viewership is everything. Case in point, instagram/twitter "social media influencers", an area completely dominated by females. (and male golfers in general)

 

 

 

The large majority of PGA Tour revenue comes from network TV deals, not money spent at events.

 

Which is exactly why I said viewership as well. How popular an event is and how much viewership it gets scale together.

 

Tournament attendance and TV viewership really don't scale together though. Which is why I pointed that out.

 

The Phoenix Open is #1 in attendance but not even top 10 for TV viewership, for example.

 

I think you and I both know that is an outlier, given it's essentially a glorified frat party.

 

My point was, the PGA has far more leisure fans than the LGPA, likely highly related to their being far more leisure male golfers than females.

[cdnglf]

Not a chance. The product is not as attractive to sponsors or viewers and the large non US contingent don't seem to bring in revenues from Asian businesses. And don't get me started on female tennis players earning the same at Wimbledon...45 mins for a match against up to 5 hours for men.

 

If they draw the same viewership, who cares how long the matches are?

 

More time for ads

IF the men's goes 5 sets. They might both go 3 sets. This whole part of the conversation makes it sound like in golf they should get extra pay for winning if it goes into a playoff. It is not an hourly job. No the women do not deserve equal pay as they do not generate the eyeballs and interest that the mens do-in golf. Tennis is a separate issue as iirc the ratings often are similar for the womens matches.

 

Also, at the Tennis majors it is a shared event. One ticket to watch both men and women.

[buckeyefl]

I just read this article and disagree with some of the statements

https://www.golfchan...owerful-message

 

If there is less viewership, less high exposure sponsors, less history and frankly a lot less people are caring about female golf - why are people so hung up on making sure women get paid the same?

 

I whole-heartedly disagree with this notion. I believe you should be getting paid the same but only if you do the same work (blue / white collar jobs etc). But if you're paycheck depends on being a professional athlete entertainer etc... It's the size of the audience that matters, not what you do. Otherwise welcome to socialism at its best...

 

What's your take?

 

Its the new "In thing". Nothing based in reality suggests that they should make the same money as you correctly pointed out.

 

I just read this article and disagree with some of the statements

https://www.golfchan...owerful-message

 

If there is less viewership, less high exposure sponsors, less history and frankly a lot less people are caring about female golf - why are people so hung up on making sure women get paid the same?

 

I whole-heartedly disagree with this notion. I believe you should be getting paid the same but only if you do the same work (blue / white collar jobs etc). But if you're paycheck depends on being a professional athlete entertainer etc... It's the size of the audience that matters, not what you do. Otherwise welcome to socialism at its best...

 

What's your take?

 

I believe they should be paid a lot more, but not the same.

 

Why?

[davep043]

Now that the thread has (predictably) veered towards a discussion of the appropriate pay rates, I'm going back to the original post. The entire article was about Aon's choice to put up a prize for one man and one woman from their respective tours in a season-long competition. The prize is the same for the man who wins as it is for the woman who wins. Was Aon somehow WRONG for doing it that way?

[duffer987]

I just read this article and disagree with some of the statements

https://www.golfchan...owerful-message

 

If there is less viewership, less high exposure sponsors, less history and frankly a lot less people are caring about female golf - why are people so hung up on making sure women get paid the same?

 

I whole-heartedly disagree with this notion. I believe you should be getting paid the same but only if you do the same work (blue / white collar jobs etc). But if you're paycheck depends on being a professional athlete entertainer etc... It's the size of the audience that matters, not what you do. Otherwise welcome to socialism at its best...

 

What's your take?

 

Its the new "In thing". Nothing based in reality suggests that they should make the same money as you correctly pointed out.

 

 

Some company's golf-related marketing effort involves handing out the same monetary value oversized cardboard cheque to a man and a woman. That is all.

 

There is no "new in thing" going on here and apparently your reality doesn't include reading the article.

[Krt22]

Now that the thread has (predictably) veered towards a discussion of the appropriate pay rates, I'm going back to the original post. The entire article was about Aon's choice to put up a prize for one man and one woman from their respective tours in a season-long competition. The prize is the same for the man who wins as it is for the woman who wins. Was Aon somehow WRONG for doing it that way?

 

Not even remotely. Anyone who thinks otherwise is completely out of touch with the modern world. In this case it's clearly an exhibition, an exhibition with a purpose. If it's purely PR/optics or if its genuine drive for change is largely irrelevant IMO, so there cannot be anything inherently wrong about it. With all of the on going discussions about golf dying, I see this as a good thing. If women are given more motivation to play golf and women's professional golf grows, the sport as a whole will benefit.

 

And anyone who thinks what a private sector company does has anything to do with "socialism" doesn't understand the meaning of the words they use.

[duffer987]

And anyone who thinks what a private sector company does has anything to do with "socialism" doesn't understand the meaning of the words they use.

LOL! Ya that was almost as funny/depressing as the rest of the rant. I hope no one tells the OP how the NFL works ;)

[Catty]

And anyone who thinks what a private sector company does has anything to do with "socialism" doesn't understand the meaning of the words they use.

LOL! Ya that was almost as funny/depressing as the rest of the rant. I hope no one tells the OP how the NFL works ;)

 

There are many forms of socialism, but the most basic understanding is of social ownership and means of production. Aon is a public company with a board managing shareholders money, which they take and give in the expedition of making more money. Capitalism. So this company take shareholders money and spread it out equally regardless of the persons means of production. That right there is your classic socialism. I think the op knows more about socialism then some others here.

[lowheel]

Just read the article. The goal seems to be equality of outcome. As the sponsor that is their prerogative.

 

Or the goal is they want us to perceive that is their goal LoL.

 

AON leadership team on their website is 11/14 Male. Wonder what their internal pay discrepancies are ?

 

2M bucks for one of the largest insurance companies in the world isn't much. And look at the publicity it's gotten them about how much they care about pay inequality. It's money well spent regardless of what the tours actually generate. That same money gets you what, a single ad during the super bowl. It's a good PR move

 

You could be right, I don't know. If its a PR move then I suppose time will tell if its a good one.

 

The article is less than 1,000 words so I wouldn't say we can fully know what AON's end goal here is from such a small article. The article is written in a way that makes me feel they are striving for equality of outcome.

 

Of course it's PR. AON doesn't *care* about equal pay, etc. They care about growing their companies and increasing the value for their shareholders. One way they have felt might be possible is to do what they have done, because this thread is exactly what they want. People are talking about AON.

 

Don't fool yourself that a company has a goal that is something other than increasing its own value. They do things along the way that will help, or not help, but claiming they are striving for equality of outcome is playing into their hands. That is to say they have convinced you they are pushing a social goal rather than doing something for their business interests.

 

They have every right to do this, or not do this, but let's stop eating the pabulum from the flacks that this is about some kind of social message. Someone said earlier that they would have gotten negative press if they offered a much bigger men's prize. Yeah, I don't think so. The number of people who actually care about this award is tiny. But this move/stunt/whateveryouwanttocallit has generated publicity. Which is what they want.

 

When the article and AON's CMO use terms like diversity, inclusion and equality how am I supposed to read it? It's a PR move crafted by AON with political and social overtones.

 

I watch sports to get away from politics and yet here I am.

 

they're practicing the art of...

 

[lowheel]

^^^

 

Me during all commercials now

 

 

 

Im with you man its cringeworthy 24-7...

[lowheel]

It's a wonder that women don't realize that they could easily get paid as much or more than men instantly. All they have to do is band together and say,

 

Pay us or we won't talk to you anymore.

 

Women can hold their ground way longer than men can. Plus, we'd cave in out of fear of dying from hunger alone.

 

[tatertot]

I think everyone who watches the PGA should watch the LPGA because that's fair.

 

And 50% of all jobs should be held by females and male, regardless of ability, because that's fair.

 

And men should have to give birth to half of all babies, because that's fair.

 

American sports leagues should be 72% white, 13% black, and 15% other, because that's fair.

 

We should make everybody live the exact same number of days, because that's fair.

 

Everybody should earn the same amount of money, no matter what they do or how well they do it, because that's fair.

 

We should have 1 TV channel, and "they" (whoever "they" are) can tell us what to watch, so we are all seeing the same thing and are equal.

 

No one should have to try and earn anything. No one should be able to spend their money the way the want to. We should all be told how to live, how to think and how to act in every aspect of our life. Only then will life be fair.