Here’s a bombshell that’s rocking the WNBA world: Chicago Sky minority owner Steven Rogers is suing majority owner Michael Alter, accusing him of ‘self-dealing’ to devalue minority shares and line his own pockets. But here’s where it gets controversial—while Alter is credited with bringing the Sky into the WNBA in 2006, Rogers claims he’s been systematically undermining the interests of other investors ever since. And this is the part most people miss: the lawsuit alleges that Alter manipulated franchise valuations and transactions to benefit himself, even as the team’s success and revenue soared after their 2021 championship win.
According to the lawsuit filed in Cook County Circuit Court, Rogers, an Englewood native and early investor, accuses Alter of breaching his fiduciary duty by misallocating the Sky’s financial gains. The suit claims Alter used his near-absolute control over the team’s finances to boost his own stake while diminishing the value of minority shares. Is this a case of shrewd business tactics or a blatant abuse of power? That’s the question at the heart of this legal battle.
The dispute began in September 2022, when Alter allegedly claimed minority stakes had dropped in value despite the team’s rising success. While he later revised this valuation, Rogers argues that minority investors have still been shortchanged as the Sky’s popularity and revenue continue to climb. For instance, in 2023, the team welcomed a new group of high-profile investors, including Cubs co-owner Laura Ricketts and NBA legend Dwyane Wade, valuing the team at $85 million. Yet, Rogers contends that Alter’s actions have systematically excluded minority owners from their fair share of the team’s growth.
But here’s the kicker: Forbes valued the Sky at a staggering $240 million in December 2025, ranking it among the most valuable women’s sports teams globally. Meanwhile, Alter has struggled to keep up with the league’s evolving financial demands, lagging in areas like player facilities and staffing. This raises a critical question: Has Alter’s leadership been a driving force behind the Sky’s success, or has it stifled the team’s potential?
The lawsuit doesn’t hold back, describing Alter’s management as ‘a mess’ and accusing him of flouting basic business standards. Yet, Alter’s defenders might argue that navigating the WNBA’s financial landscape—where expansion fees have skyrocketed from $10 million in 2006 to $250 million for new franchises—is no small feat. Is Rogers’ lawsuit a justified call for accountability, or an overreaction to the challenges of owning a professional sports team?
As the legal battle unfolds, one thing is clear: this case isn’t just about money—it’s about trust, transparency, and the future of the Chicago Sky. What do you think? Is Alter a visionary owner who’s been unfairly targeted, or has he crossed the line in prioritizing his own interests? Let us know in the comments—this is one debate you won’t want to miss.
