Eileen Gu, an Olympic skier, is currently trending due to her recognition as one of the highest paid female athletes, as highlighted by an unidentified source. This status has likely contributed to increased interest in her career and visibility, prompting many searches related to her achievements and endorsements.
Additionally, coverage about her participation in the upcoming Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Olympics has intensified interest. Various articles, including one from dailymail.co.uk, spotlight her alongside other notable Winter Olympians, which generates curiosity about her performance and potential star power at the event.
Furthermore, detailed information regarding how and when to watch Eileen Gu compete in the freestyle skiing events at the 2026 Olympics is now available. This scheduling information, provided by official Olympic channels, encourages fans and sports enthusiasts to search for specific viewing details and her anticipated performances.
Watch the Moment
Internet Reacts
B
Damn Eileen Gu, those earnings from endorsements
O
maybe you know but in china they call her morning c, evening a – like the skincare routine, but because she’s chinese by day, american by night
H
lol that is so funny
A
I didn’t get that
T
Common skincare is applying vitamin C in the morning and vitamin A/retinoids at night
D
早C晚A保洋品
B
She is half American half Chinese And also time zones
B
She’s American at night meaning…?
O
She’s basically a model who skies.
I
Which goes to show how ridiculously stunning she is. She’s *extremely* good at skiing
O
Oh 100%!
T
Eileen having more endorsement money than Qinwen is surprising. I know Eileen has more golds and won them earlier, but I was expecting tennis being an overall bigger market share since it’s a more popular spectator sport, more access (relative to skiing), and a history of winning in China (Li Na).
O
With all due respect…Eileen Gu is next level gorgeous. That kind of helps out massively here.
B
Being half Asian half white appeals aesthetically to all the Asian markets (unfortunately)
P
She’s also half Chinese/half American, the two biggest markets in the world. Unlike Raducanu it appears her Chinese is fluent enough to do marketing promo in that region as well
H
I remember reading that the year before she won Olympics for first time she has already gotten 30M in endorsements. These numbers are probably under reported.
U
Same with Caitlin Clark and angel reese and all wnba players. I think their salary is like 60k a year from their clubs because they don’t make money. WNBA has lost millions every season since established and can only run because it is 100% subsidised by the NBA.
T
I was surprised too
D
I think the main driver is that tennis must be one of, if not the most popular women’s sport globally in terms of fandom. Grand slams have equal billing and prize money, so they get more attention and viewing. Endorsements flow with that popularity. Compare with women’s golf which has generous prize money thanks to luxury corporate sponsors, but gets a fraction of the viewership and attention.
M
It really can’t be overstated how significant the work of Billie Jean King and the WTA was for women’s tennis. While there are obviously still legitimate discussions about inequalities between the men’s and women’s game, there is no doubt that they are far closer to each other than in any other sport. And, as you mention, the success in getting equal prize money (and comparable if not totally-equal billing) at the Slams has led to far greater attention and endorsement opportunities for generations now that simply don’t exist for the vast majority of other female athletes.
N
The prize money is equal because the Women’s game is just as good to watch as the Men’s. In fact, with how OP serving has become in the Men’s game the Women’s by contrast can be more entertaining. A clutch serve is entertaining, but multiple 40-0 games a set because there is a 7ft serve bot at one end is super boring. The Women’s game has had 100 years of development alongside the Men and it shows. Give the other sports a chance to catch up and they will be a product that’s great to follow. You can’t just give them more money and then expect attention to follow, that’s not how it works.
M
>You can’t just give them more money and then expect attention to follow, that’s not how it works. In many respects, this is exactly how it works. There are plenty of women’s sports that are just as exciting/entertaining/competitive as the men’s version, but they simply don’t get the same attention. Think about the Olympics – how many sports are there (both men’s and women’s) that people love to watch for a week or two every four years, but otherwise pay no attention to. It’s not that the sports aren’t fun to watch, but without the spotlight, it can be hard to maintain eyeballs/interest. The integration of both men’s and women’s tournaments at the Slams (and many other tournaments) has brought consistent attention for decades to the women’s game, and created a viewing culture with a significant portion of tennis fans that enjoy both tours. It has very little to do with subjective opinions of which side is better to watch, and you can find decades of commentary (including all over this sub) complaining about various aspects of the women’s game.
P
It’s never been clearer to see this than women’s football (soccer). The next gen of players are joining fully professionalised setups + there’s much less of a stigma against playing football as a girl. The last Euros/WC I was seeing the women pull of slick skill/passing moves that was unimaginable a decade ago.
L
Absolutely. I watch plenty of women’s tennis but not football or cricket.
N
surely missing out on women’s cricket tbf
L
Maybe, the thing is, there is only some much time and energy I can dedicate to following a sport.
U
This is it. Women’s tennis is just as good as watch as the men’s generally speaking. But this is a result of WTA player’s skill level. They don’t hit as fast as men’s but they’ve reached a level that is the highest level of mastery outside of physicality. Can’t say the same with women’s basketball or football. The level of mastery isn’t there. You don’t see they have practiced hard and mastered their craft at all. It’s laughably poor. Whereas you see players like Graf, Williams, swiantek etc there’s mastery in their work. That’s what fans like to watch. That’s what people pay money for.
P
Golf sucks and is boring to watch
M
I’m surprised that Raducanu isn’t on here. I figure the off-field earnings would carry her.
2
She’s probably right on the edge around 8m. In 2024 she reportedly earned about 14m from endorsements, but then lost her Vodafone endorsement and possibly others in 2025
C
The girl probably bought gold at the bottom.
H
the lack of titles means she doesnt have enough prize money to push her higher.
M
As the graph suggests, sponsorship money can outweigh WTA earnings.
T
IIRC she just barely dropped out of the top 10 for earnings in the last 1-2 years as her sponsorships expired
H
Right? Might just be what she is/isnt willing to do. Why sponsor someone like Coco instead of Raducanu
L
I had a bet after seeing Eileen Gu’s ratio that she was very good looking, I was correct
I
The most notable thing is that except for a golfer tennis is the only sport where a significant part of their money made is actually from playing the sport
C
Loving Paolini making this list. She is the ultimate underdog. Of course, she’s 30 now, probably her last few months in the top.
L
Is she underdog still this season? She had two really great seasons one after another and she still keeps her quite high place on the rankings. For me she is solid Top 10 player already.
S
I was like “where’s Coco?” and then I opened the image 😅
F
Holy moly me too! I was like how the hell is Madison Keyes above Coco (no offense to MK). Osaka’s lifetime number is huge though.
F
The prize-endorsement ratio is actually more interesting to look at. .
K
That was a big take away for me, too. Tennis and golf seem to be the only women’s sports where top players can realistically make millions each year just from playing. Being a top player in your sport definitely helps with endorsement contracts but there are a lot of other factors unrelated to athletic performance. Earnings are pretty limited for women in other sports if they aren’t telegenic enough or grew up in the wrong country even if you are very good at your sport.
V
Tennis is one of the most equal sports between the two genders (thanks Billie Jean King!) so not surprised at all. Where it lacks is overall payment for athletes, since some sports pay absurd amounts. But equality between the two genders is better, in my opinion
K
The problem is with lower-ranked players. If you are outside the top 200, you are barely breaking even. No sport the size of tennis will have the 200th best person in it be in that position.
J
The thing is though that with essentially 0 exceptions, no one is paying meaningful money to watch the 200th ranked tennis player. And while that’s also true of other sports, in team sports you need the other players to actually field a team/league, so even if no one is paying specifically to see the backup lineman or whomever, you still need to pay them to field a competent product.
B
Because almost no one watches the 200th best player. Grand slam qualies atleast can pay already fine too but without ever having a fixed base salary level these players will always struggle because on their own the interest for that level is just way too low to have any decent pay. The 200th best basketballer, footballer whatever big teamsports player, has a gigantic audience compared to the 200th best tennis player.
T
Yeah plenty of sports do. E.g. Boxing, F1
T
Why is equality good? Why should they make the same money when they generate FAR less revenue?
F
Cuz they’re clearly generating sponsorship money…if a tournament can break even just on the mens then pull in a $20m sponsorship it’s literally going from no profit to $20m. It’s the same with all sports/businesses. Even if one portion generates the majority of the “revenue” they absolutely cannot let go of the smaller business that pushes them over the line into profitability. Yea the men alone might cover the fixed costs of the stadium/event but they need extra events to fill in the gaps that produce $$. What they are they gonna offer on thurs and saturday of the tournament otherwise?? Womens tennis still sells way more tickets than doubles. The ticket sales for the womens finals of the AO would’ve been like $5m not to mention the ~$3m of ground passes for the day. And they probably make *more* for the semis and quarters. Additionally it’s rarely as clear cut as men/women. Tennis ticket sales/viewership can be very motivated by country of origin of which the womens tennis provides significant variety.
Additional Sources:
