The U.S. Open, tennis’s most lucrative tournament, is experiencing record attendance and rising profits even as concerns grow about accessibility for average fans. Last year, more than one million spectators attended the event at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center in New York, marking a 30 percent increase from pre-pandemic levels. Operating profits during the period from 2019 to 2024 rose by over 35 percent, underscoring the Open’s financial success.
Despite the economic gains, criticism has mounted over the cost of attending the tournament, with many fans and observers arguing that ticket prices have become prohibitive. While the United States Tennis Association (USTA), the nonprofit organizer of the event, maintains that its ticket prices have remained relatively stable—inexpensive tiers start at $65 for a one-day grounds pass—resale prices have surged dramatically due to scalping and automated bots. This secondary market is dominated by platforms such as Ticketmaster, which reap significant profits, whereas the USTA receives only a fraction of the resale revenue.
The issue of ticket reselling is not unique to the U.S. Open but is more acute compared to other Grand Slam events. Tournaments in Australia, France, and Britain either restrict resale entirely or permit it only near face value, resulting in lower overall ticket prices and fewer profits for intermediaries. Efforts to address such practices at the federal level have faced setbacks; notably, the Trump administration dropped an antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation, which owns Ticketmaster.
In response to criticism, the USTA recently introduced a limited number of lower-priced tickets and held a fan week with free admission, though the latter occurred outside the tournament’s main stages and saw available spots fill rapidly. Meanwhile, the Open is investing in stadium renovations that increase luxury seating, potentially reducing the number of affordable options further. Food pricing has also drawn negative attention, with basic concessions, such as chicken nuggets, selling for premium prices.
Prize money for players reached an all-time high this year, with a total purse of $108 million. The singles champion receives $5.5 million, while first-round losers still earn $140,000 — amounts that far exceed the median U.S. household income. Nonetheless, player earnings represent less than 20 percent of the tournament’s total revenue, notably lower than the roughly 50 percent share athletes receive in major U.S. professional leagues like the NBA, NHL, or NFL.
The financial burden on tennis players extends beyond prize money; unlike team sports athletes, they cover their own coaching, travel, and medical expenses. This dynamic poses challenges for lower-ranked players who lack sponsorships and steady income. Case in point, French Open finalist Maja Chwalinska recently required a last-minute sponsorship to cover hotel costs for the qualifiers, illustrating the precarious financial position of many competitors. Unlike team sports, tennis players operate as independent contractors without union representation or collective bargaining, limiting their influence over earnings and conditions.
Some progress has been made with the establishment of a Player Advisory Council aimed at improving dialogue between athletes and tournament organizers. However, meaningful reform may be slow due to the absence of a unified players’ association.
Observers suggest that the USTA might explore a strategy favoring lower ticket prices and reduced revenues paired with increased prize money to promote broader accessibility and player support. Given that the Open accounts for approximately 90 percent of USTA’s revenue, balancing growth with inclusivity remains a critical challenge as the tournament looks to maintain its position at the pinnacle of tennis while cultivating the sport’s future.