I'm just so bummed out about this news 
. I remember when I was a kid, watching tennis on TV with my grandpa, and the prize money was so much smaller. Now it's over £55m, but is it really enough? I mean, Sinner and Sabalenka are talking about wanting more shares of the revenue... it's like they're asking for a decent slice of the pie 
. And what's with all these changes happening now? Five years from now, we'll be lucky if there's any consistency at all. It's like the sport is just spinning its wheels, you know? Still, Craig Tiley says they're committed to supporting tennis careers... that sounds nice, but how about giving players some real power in deciding their own futures? 
. I remember when I was a kid, watching tennis on TV with my grandpa, and the prize money was so much smaller. Now it's over £55m, but is it really enough? I mean, Sinner and Sabalenka are talking about wanting more shares of the revenue... it's like they're asking for a decent slice of the pie . And what's with all these changes happening now? Five years from now, we'll be lucky if there's any consistency at all. It's like the sport is just spinning its wheels, you know? Still, Craig Tiley says they're committed to supporting tennis careers... that sounds nice, but how about giving players some real power in deciding their own futures? 
. Tennis Australia has still managed to make the Aussie Open one of the most popular and profitable tournaments globally, so £55m is no bad start! 
Of course, it's all about finding the right balance between prize money and revenue sharing... the players want more $$, but there are also costs like venue maintenance, security & staff to consider 
. And Craig Tiley's "supporting tennis careers at every level" sounds like just a PR spin 
... where's the substance behind it? It feels like they're just paying lip service to the players' demands without really addressing the elephant in the room: the wealth disparity between the top dogs and everyone else 
.