Angel Reese Facing ‘Financial Turmoil’ After Losing $50M in Endorsements?

Angel Reese Facing ‘Financial Turmoil’ After Losing $50M in Endorsements?

Viral posts claimed that the WNBA star’s on-court behavior was to blame.

(Getty Images)

Image courtesy of Getty Images

Claim:
WNBA star Angel Reese lost nearly $50 million in endorsements because of her on-court behavior.

In mid-June 2024, posts on Facebook, among other places, claimed that WNBA star Angel Reese was in “financial turmoil” after losing $50 million in endorsement deals:

This claim was not true. This story originated from a website, SpaceXMania, that explicitly describes most of its output as satirical, including this Angel Reese story. The story attempted to tie Reese’s on-court behavior toward rival Caitlin Clark to a loss of endorsement deals:

Angel Reese, one of the brightest stars in women’s basketball, is facing a financial crisis after losing nearly $50 million in endorsement deals. This significant loss threatens to overshadow her illustrious career and has sparked widespread discussion about the volatility of endorsement deals, the pressures on professional athletes, and the importance of financial management.

There is no evidence that Reese has lost any significant endorsement deals at the time of this reporting, nor is there evidence that she is in any sort of financial distress. The story was filed under “satire,” which the site describes as stories that are “meant to be humorous” and “are often entirely made up.”

Reese founded a nonprofit organization that teaches financial literacy and other skills to “young women and underrepresented groups” in July 2023. In May 2024 she became part-owner of a new professional women’s soccer team in Washington D.C. — the DC Power Football Club.

Reese and Clark are common targets of satire pages like SpaceXMania, whose content is sometimes confused with real news.

Because the claim that Reese lost $50 million in endorsement deals stems from a website whose output is explicitly described as satirical in nature, this claim is rated “Labeled Satire.”