Mumbai: Coco Gauff had discreetly set a timer on her phone during the French Open ‘Media Day’ on Friday. Once her press conference reached the 10-minute mark, she excused herself. She spoke to the host broadcaster for another five minutes before ending her obligations for the day.
Fifteen minutes is what the players settled upon on the two mandatory media day duties. It was to protest the low, approximately 15%, revenue share Grand Slam organisers currently allot as prize money.
For over a year now, the players have wanted the Slam organisers to discuss raising the revenue share. In March 2025, they wrote to the officials asking for the share to be hiked to 22% by 2030, along with the Slams contributing to player pension, health and maternity benefits, while also forming a Grand Slam player council.
The first response by any of the four Slams came the day the players protested by wrapping up their media day early.
“I feel like the whole point here, it’s not about me,” world No.1 Aryna Sabalenka told a press conference. “It’s about the players who are lower in the ranking, who are suffering. It’s not easy to live in this tennis world with that percentage that we are earning.”
Tennis is by no means the only sport where players have sought a greater share of revenue. In the National Basketball Association (NBA), there was a 161-day lockout in 2011 after team owners wanted to reduce the revenue share for the players from 57% to 47%.
Eventually both parties agreed that players would receive approximately 50%. NBA’s revenue sharing model involves the league and its 30 franchises putting their entire Basketball Related Income into a pot. After the season, that pot was distributed evenly, and between 49% to 51% of what each team received would go as players’ salaries.
In this NBA season that has reached the playoff stage, $154.647mn has been set apart as the cap for player salaries with each team required to spend a minimum of $139.182mn.
The National Football League (NFL) follows a similar structure with players receiving 48% of the revenue, which amounted to a salary cap of $279.2mn in 2025.
In cricket, Cricket Australia has a 27.5% revenue share system with its men’s and women’s players receiving equal annual contract values. The BCCI sets apart around 26% of its annual revenue – ₹9741.71 crore according to the 2023-24 figures – for players. This includes player contracts, match fees, prize money, for both the international and domestic circuits.
In the English Premier League, broadcast revenue from domestic and international rights sales is distributed among the 20 top-flight teams. For the revenue received from domestic deals, it follows a broad 50-25-25 revenue policy. In that, 50% from the domestic TV deal is distributed evenly among the clubs, while 25% is distributed based on the matches involving a club that are televised. The remaining pot is handed out on the basis of where the team finishes in the league table.
All these leagues deal with team sports and are not entirely comparable to an individual sport like tennis. Golf is perhaps the more lucrative individual sport, but the PGA Tour does not disclose its annual revenue.
The breakaway LIV Golf circuit, which till the end of this season is backed by Saudi Arabia’s Private Investment Fund, provides rich resources to the players competing.
The prize purse for each of the 13 competitions this season is $20 million – the winner takes home a cool $4 million while the last placed player gets $50,000. LIV’s unique format is such that it’s run as a team event. Team prize money per event has gone up to $10mn per event and 40% of the sum is shared evenly by the four players in a team.
Tennis is a highly lucrative tour as well, but mainly for the top players who earn a bigger share of the prize money as they go deeper into tournaments.
The Grand Slams are where big money lies. The French Open has announced a prize purse of €56.3mn (Roland Garros earned €395mn from the 2025 edition). That amount will be split among the singles, doubles, legends and wheelchair events, and distributed after tax deduction. A higher revenue share would allow each player to take home more, which they can put back for their development.
A bigger pool would mean the Slams can use more face for bigger sponsor revenue. It’s a rewarding cycle but one, for the time being, which the Majors don’t seem keen on investing in.
