If the ATP and WTA Merged Their Business Tomorrow, Who Would Win and Who Would Lose?

I pay for two tennis streaming services to follow one sport. That's what happens when the men's and women's tours sell their rights separately, and it's the simplest way I know to explain why a commercial merger keeps coming up. It's also why I wanted to look at who actually gains and who loses, because the people proposing it and the people who would live with it don't always want the same thing.

What a Merger Would Actually Mean

Nobody is proposing one tour. When the two sides confirmed talks, they described a joint commercial entity "while remaining as separate Tours." The proposed vehicle, called Tennis Ventures, would house broadcast, data and central sponsorship rights. ATP chairman Andrea Gaudenzi has said it wouldn't change scheduling, prize money or tournament relations, and that combining the sporting side would be far more complicated, which is why the talks start with the money.

The idea isn't new. Roger Federer floated it in 2020, and Billie Jean King has backed it.

Where It Stands

The tours were reportedly close to a deal in 2025 under former WTA chair Steve Simon. According to The Guardian's report in July, his successor, Valerie Camillo, found the revenue-share terms unacceptable, and the talks were put on hold indefinitely. The same reporting said financial difficulties had forced the ATP to cut its doubles programming, while the WTA had started cost-cutting of its own. I haven't seen the talks restart since.

Who Already Holds the Rights

Here is where each tour's rights sit in the markets I could confirm.

Where one broadcaster already holds both tours, a joint package would be close to paperwork. Where different broadcasters hold each, a merger would run into existing contracts.

Other markets show different problems. In Brazil, the WTA's rights move from ESPN to CazéTV in 2027 on a deal running through 2030, and CazéTV's coverage is free and YouTube-first. A single package sold to the highest bidder could end that kind of free access. In Australia, beIN SPORTS holds the WTA rights and sub-licenses them to Stan Sport, which also shows all four Grand Slams. The WTA's long-running DAZN deal expires this year, with new deals due to start in 2027, which makes 2027 the natural window to try anything joint.

Who Gains and Who Loses

Fans. The gain is simple: one place to watch, instead of two subscriptions. The risk is losing the free options that have opened up, and paying more for a larger bundle with nothing to stop the price rising.

The WTA. It could gain a bigger revenue base and shared costs, at a time when it is reportedly projected to have about $15 million in cash at the end of 2026 against a $23 million operating loss. It could lose control of a commercial arm that is growing. WTA Ventures said its revenue rose 25 percent in its first full year, with a goal of tripling by 2029. The tour has also committed to equal prize money at every combined WTA 1000 from 2027, and it would want those commitments protected in any deal.

The ATP. It could gain a simpler structure, because its commercial rights are divided across several units while the WTA keeps everything under one roof. But it generates significantly more revenue than the WTA, so it gives up the most in any split. A 70-30 split was reportedly floated at one point, and the tours have used consultants to produce a number.

CVC. The private equity firm paid $150 million in 2023 for a 20 percent share of WTA Ventures. The value of that holding would depend on what WTA Ventures brings to a combined entity and what it receives from it. A 2024 report put a combined entity's value at around $3.84 billion.

Players and tournaments. Both groups would want guarantees that a bigger pie reaches prize money. ATP player compensation reached a record $261 million for 2024, and Gaudenzi has said a merger wouldn't change prize money. Combined events are already moving toward equal pay, while standalone events run on different economics.

Broadcasters and the Grand Slams. Tennis Channel and Sky already hold both tours in their markets, so a joint package would simplify their lives, but their contracts end on different dates, running as far as 2032 for the WTA in the US. The Grand Slams sell their own rights. Gaudenzi has said he wants them and the ITF at the table, which would be a much bigger step.

Where I Land

I think a commercial merger is worth restarting, but only on terms the WTA can accept. That means equal governance, prize-money commitments in writing and a phased start. The 2027 reset of the WTA's rights is the natural place to try a joint package.

The strongest case against is the split. If the WTA gives up more value than it gains, it would be trading a growing business for relief from a cash problem. Whether that cash gap changes how Camillo sees the terms is what I'd watch next.

Rights details come from SportsPro's business breakdowns of the 2025 ATP and WTA Finals, Tennis Channel, Stan and WTA announcements, and earlier reporting from The Guardian, Front Office Sports, Tennis Majors and CNBC.

Jake Scudder

Journalist – topics of tennis