# 5 Shocking Facts About The UFC Pay Scale



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

> In the past few weeks the topic of UFC fighter pay has been a huge point of discussion.
> Personally, I don’t really see anything wrong with the UFC’s model or how they conduct their business. If it wasn’t for the sport’s popularity, that they built, I wouldn’t have this amazing job that I have and none of you would be reading this.
> That being said, these 5 statistics are very eye-opening.
> ALL THE CREDIT FOR THIS LIST GO TO MMASENTINAL.COM
> ...


http://www.bjpenn.com/5-shocking-facts-about-the-ufc-pay-scale/

Sounds low when you put it that way.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jan 5, 2013)

That Floyd Mayweather statistic is unsurprising and should be taken with a grain of salt. No one makes Floyd Mayweather money.

Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

Cowgirl said:


> That Floyd Mayweather statistic is unsurprising and should be taken with a grain of salt. No one makes Floyd Mayweather money.
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## SlowGraffiti (Dec 29, 2007)

UFC just doesn't make as much money as other sports. WNBA players also mostly required to play in college, even benchwarmers. Sometimes it seems UFC will grab some 5-2 dude off the streets to fill a prelim spot just because they're from the area the event is held in.


----------



## AlphaDawg (Nov 16, 2009)

Why are people so obsessed with how much fighters make? I don't get it. They willingly signed a contract. It's not like they were tricked into doing something they didn't want to do.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Jan 5, 2013)

AlphaDawg said:


> Why are people so obsessed with how much fighters make? I don't get it. They willingly signed a contract. It's not like they were tricked into doing something they didn't want to do.


My thoughts exactly!

Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Trix (Dec 15, 2009)

> Did you know, a fighter received only $12,000 in disclosed pay while fighting for a title and main-eventing a Pay-Per-View, this year?


Not sure if that counts with new divisions.

*UFC 157*
Liz Carmouche: $12,000


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Maywheather promotes his own fights its an unfair comparison since he is both the UFC and the fighter in that sense.


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

AlphaDawg said:


> Why are people so obsessed with how much fighters make? I don't get it. They willingly signed a contract. It's not like they were tricked into doing something they didn't want to do.


I think people are naturally curious where all the money is going when they see low fighter payouts.


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

Don't like the pay? Get a real job.

Simple as that.


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

Mayweather money.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Cowgirl said:


> That Floyd Mayweather statistic is unsurprising and should be taken with a grain of salt. No one makes Floyd Mayweather money.
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


No ONE wouldn't be a problem. It's no 383 COMBINED that's worrying.

You really think Floyd sells more PPVs in his two appearances than all 383 fighters currently on the UFC roster all year COMBINED?

FTR, Mayweather is estimated to have sold 850K PPVs for the Guerrero fight and 1.5 million against Cotto. This is without even considering what other boxers were on those cards.

On average it takes the UFC 4 PPVs to match those two from Mayweather above. The UFC does 12-14 PPV events in a year. This is without even considering all the money they make from the Fox and FX shows.

So considering the UFC brings at least 3-5 times (and in reality probably 10 times) what Mayweather does with ALL other boxers on his cards, you'd think they would pay all their fighters COMBINED at least 2-3 times what one boxer Mayweather makes for bringing in far less money? But no, they actually pay them LESS! FOUR TIMES LESS!! All 383 fighters COMBINED!

But nm Dana spouts the usual garbage about paying what people bring in, growing sport, drops a couple of stupid F-bombs and acts gangster and all the Dana-ites buy his nonsense.



Killz said:


> Don't like the pay? Get a real job.
> 
> Simple as that.


Don't think sports are a real job? Stop watching them.

Simple as that.

I like how the guy that does nothing but dress in a tacky suit, drop F-bombs and give stupid interviews is the one with the "real job" who deserves all the money made by the people doing the "fake job" that people throw millions of dollars to actually watch and learn from.


----------



## Hammerlock2.0 (Jun 17, 2009)

I need a little perspective. Is 30k dollars a year considered a lot? Average? Below average?


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Hammerlock2.0 said:


> I need a little perspective. Is 30k dollars a year considered a lot? Average? Below average?


Far below average ($45,000) and slightly below median ($32,140) for workers aged above 25, which is what 95% of the UFC roster is aged. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States

Keep in mind you're talking about the top .1% athletes on the planet compared to guys greeting at Walmart or flipping burgers that make up that median.


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Don't think sports are a real job? Stop watching them.
> 
> Simple as that.
> 
> I like how the guy that does nothing but dress in a tacky suit, drop F-bombs and give stupid interviews is the one with the "real job" who deserves all the money made by the people doing the "fake job" that people throw millions of dollars to actually watch and learn from.


What are you talking about? How does me saying if you don't like your pay as a fighter, then you should get a real job, translate to 'I shouldnt like or watch sports because I dont see it as a real job?' :confused03:

I'd go as far as to say most people dont consider fighters, or sports players in general to have 'real jobs'. Whilst yes, they are working and are employed, I bet if you were to ask 100 people to name 5 real jobs, 99 of them would not say MMA fighter.

Guess what, If I didn't like my pay in the job I do, I'd get a new one. I certainly wouldn't complain about how much my boss makes. I'd find something else, or I'd work harder to try and get that pay rise. 

Nobody is forcing anybody to fight for a living. It isnt a secret that low level UFC fighters and fighters in small promotions don't make a tonne of money, so to become a pro fighter and then complain about your lack of money is a bit silly.


----------



## Hammerlock2.0 (Jun 17, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Far below average ($45,000) and slightly below median ($32,140) for workers aged above 25, which is what 95% of the UFC roster is aged.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States
> 
> Keep in mind you're talking about the top .1% athletes on the planet compared to guys greeting at Walmart or flipping burgers that make up that median.


That's pretty bad to be honest. Obviously there's still sponsor pay so I guess it's closer to 45k than 30k but considering we're talking top 10 guys here it sounds pretty low.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Killz said:


> What are you talking about? How does me saying if you don't like your pay as a fighter, then you should get a real job, translate to 'I shouldnt like or watch sports because I dont see it as a real job?' :confused03:
> 
> I'd go as far as to say most people dont consider fighters, or sports players in general to have 'real jobs'. Whilst yes, they are working and are employed, I bet if you were to ask 100 people to name 5 real jobs, 99 of them would not say MMA fighter.
> 
> ...


Because if you don't think it's a real job that contributes to society in any way then you probably shouldn't be spending half your waking life watching it and obsessing over it on the internet, that just makes you a hypocrite. If it contributes to society, whether through entertainment, learning, inspiration or fitness, then it's a real job.

What constitutes a "real job" nowadays anyway? How does some asshole manager who wears a suit and makes a chart about what other people make have a "real job" that deserves $200,000 salary? I have worked in enough corporations to know that the stupid powerpoints and charts they make have absolutely no bearing on what gets made and what quality it is, it's more who they are golf buddies with / sleeping with, which usually ties to some investment bank or VC that bought the whole thing with unlimited money.

Speaking of banks, now useless gambling that was outlawed and illegal through most of history is now considered a "real job" worthy of essentially owning 90% of the world's wealth. Useless gambling such as Derivatives and Credit Default Swaps which are nothing more than "bets" about whether something's price will go up or down. Bets worth more than 1000 trillion dollars or more floating around, not tied to any real asset or value, adding nothing to society except enriching a few at the cost of billions, but tanking entire economies when they bust. These of course are "real jobs". 

Yet the athlete that spends a lifetime perfecting physical skills and labor to be the elite physical specimens of all of mankind, teaching and inspiring millions self-defense, self-respect, self-discipline, good nutrition and good exercise. Those are "fake jobs".

What amazing "real job" do you do that gives you such a high moral ground anyway? Besides moderating a forum discussing people doing fake jobs I mean.

As far as them having a free will to not fight, change professions or change contracts, many of them do, and the "fans" on here rag on them for it instead of sympathizing. They also have a free will to SPEAK THEIR MIND. Their boss doesn't own them and their right to say how they feel, if they are being treated unfairly or getting shafted, you seem to think he does.


----------



## kney (Jan 16, 2012)

Pro MMA fighters in Belgium get $650 to $3250 per fight.
And the latter is mostly for title fights..
The difference is that we could fight every weekend if we wanted to.
Even twice a weekend.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

kney said:


> Pro MMA fighters in Belgium get $650 to $3250 per fight.
> And the latter is mostly for title fights..
> The difference is that we could fight every weekend if we wanted to.
> Even twice a weekend.


You're talking small time local orgs. That's like comparing what my high school football running back makes to what an NFL all star makes.

And yes, they can fight as much as they want in as many orgs as they want. It's sad that those guys can actually make more doing so than someone at the entry level in the UFC, the top .1% in the world.

There's no defending what these guys are paying. It's shit.


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Because if you don't think it's a real job that contributes to society in any way then you probably shouldn't be spending half your waking life watching it and obsessing over it on the internet, that just makes you a hypocrite. If it contributes to society, whether through entertainment, learning, inspiration or fitness, then it's a real job.
> 
> What constitutes a "real job" nowadays anyway? How does some asshole manager who wears a suit and makes a chart about what people make have a "real job" that deserves $200,000 salary? I have worked in enough corporations to know that the stupid powerpoints and charts they make have absolutely no bearing on what gets made and what quality it is, it's more who they are golf buddies with / sleeping with, which usually ties to some investment bank or VC that bought the whole thing with unlimited money.
> 
> ...



Ok Liddellianenko, this is going nowhere (as usual).

Insults and aggression, always my favourite aspect of debating any subject with you.

I'm out.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Killz said:


> Ok Liddellianenko, this is going nowhere (as usual).
> 
> Insults and aggression, always my favourite aspect of debating any subject with you.
> 
> I'm out.


I'm sorry what you said was just terribly offensive to anyone who is remotely passionate about MMA and cares for these guys as anything more than pieces of meat for entertainment.


----------



## kney (Jan 16, 2012)

Liddellianenko said:


> You're talking small time local orgs. That's like comparing what my high school football running back makes to what an NFL all star makes.
> 
> And yes, they can fight as much as they want in as many orgs as they want. It's sad that those guys can actually make more doing so than someone at the entry level in the UFC, the top .1% in the world.
> 
> There's no defending what these guys are paying. It's shit.


I'm not defending it by any means!
A friend of mine fights in the UFC
And he gets paid the usual 8k base + 8k win bonus.. 
And then he still has to pay his management and his trip to US!


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

kney said:


> I'm not defending it by any means!
> A friend of mine fights in the UFC
> And he gets paid the usual 8k base + 8k win bonus..
> And then he still has to pay his management and his trip to US!


I figured you weren't actually, sorry if my tone came off like that. 

That's the thing too, people who always mention endorsements etc. as extra income never mention the training, management and travel expenses. For most entry level fighters in the UFC, I would imagine those expenses are higher than any small sponsorship they get for their almost negligible level of fame.


----------



## Killz (Oct 5, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> I'm sorry what you said was just terribly offensive to anyone who is remotely passionate about MMA and cares for these guys as anything more than pieces of meat for entertainment.


Perhaps I should phrased it better and said 'normal job' or 'typical job' instead of 'real job', as that is what I meant.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Killz said:


> Perhaps I should phrased it better and said 'normal job' or 'typical job' instead of 'real job', as that is what I meant.


Perhaps I owe you an apology then :hug:


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

SlowGraffiti said:


> UFC just doesn't make as much money as other sports. WNBA players also mostly required to play in college, even benchwarmers. Sometimes it seems UFC will grab some 5-2 dude off the streets to fill a prelim spot just because they're from the area the event is held in.


You don't think the UFC makes as much money as the WNBA? That's funny because the WNBA made a $12 million loss last year, but they're still better paid than an org making $300 million+ per year.



Toxic said:


> Maywheather promotes his own fights its an unfair comparison since he is both the UFC and the fighter in that sense.


And where exactly did he get enough money to finance entire fight promotions? From his boxing payouts from orgs right?


----------



## Dr Gonzo (May 27, 2010)

Liddellianenko said:


> Because if you don't think it's a real job that contributes to society in any way then you probably shouldn't be spending half your waking life watching it and obsessing over it on the internet, that just makes you a hypocrite. If it contributes to society, whether through entertainment, learning, inspiration or fitness, then it's a real job.
> 
> What constitutes a "real job" nowadays anyway? How does some asshole manager who wears a suit and makes a chart about what other people make have a "real job" that deserves $200,000 salary? I have worked in enough corporations to know that the stupid powerpoints and charts they make have absolutely no bearing on what gets made and what quality it is, it's more who they are golf buddies with / sleeping with, which usually ties to some investment bank or VC that bought the whole thing with unlimited money.
> 
> ...


The tone of this post could come across little harsh maybe but I agree with it all. Awesome post. Can't rep.


----------



## Rauno (Nov 20, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Don't think sports are a real job? Stop watching them.
> 
> Simple as that.


He didn't really say he didn't like it though.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Rauno said:


> He didn't really say he didn't like it though.


They're not gladiators, they're paid athletes. 

IMO this idea that hey I'll pay to watch them bleed for my entertainment but still think at the back of my mind that they're basically worthless crap doing nothing worthwhile to deserve that money I pay for them, that's pretty appalling. I suppose that may not be what he meant but that's what was implied by his choice of words.

If you pay for something, the common sense logic is that means you think they deserve it for whatever service they are providing. That means it's a real job. If you don't think that service is necessary or useful for you then you shouldn't be availing it.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

Liddellianenko said:


> You don't think the UFC makes as much money as the WNBA? That's funny because the WNBA made a $12 million loss last year, but they're still better paid than an org making $300 million+ per year.


Kind of points out how one org knows the reality of what it's athletes are worth to it vs one that doesn't. 

The contracts are also completely different as well. A bench warmer in the WNBA is signed to a contract to "play" (sitting on the bench is playing) for x number of years for x number of cash. Some incentives may be built into the contract, but typically majority of the pay is stated up front. MMA has X amount for Y fights. There are also bonuses and incentives not written into the contract that are given. So there really is no comparison.

The one thing I wish would happen though is that fighters were guaranteed to be offered a fight that takes place within X number of days of their last fight. The real problem I think for guys in the UFC is they can't fight as often as they want unless they are a big name. And those guys usually fight less. If you were on contract to make 12/12 for 5 fights, but only get to fight once or twice a year, that is crushing. But if you had a guarantee that as long as you were medically cleared you would be offered a fight to take place within 60 days of your last fight you could reasonably fight 4 of your fights in a year and make a decent salary with more potential for incentives.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

cdtcpl said:


> Kind of points out how one org knows the reality of what it's athletes are worth to it vs one that doesn't.
> 
> The contracts are also completely different as well. A bench warmer in the WNBA is signed to a contract to "play" (sitting on the bench is playing) for x number of years for x number of cash. Some incentives may be built into the contract, but typically majority of the pay is stated up front. MMA has X amount for Y fights. There are also bonuses and incentives not written into the contract that are given. So there really is no comparison.
> 
> The one thing I wish would happen though is that fighters were guaranteed to be offered a fight that takes place within X number of days of their last fight. The real problem I think for guys in the UFC is they can't fight as often as they want unless they are a big name. And those guys usually fight less. If you were on contract to make 12/12 for 5 fights, but only get to fight once or twice a year, that is crushing. But if you had a guarantee that as long as you were medically cleared you would be offered a fight to take place within 60 days of your last fight you could reasonably fight 4 of your fights in a year and make a decent salary with more potential for incentives.


No it points out two different extremes. Just because the WNBA made a loss doesn't mean the UFC knows what it's athletes are worth by paying them less than 1% of it's revenue. No other sport, heck no other INDUSTRY gets away with paying so little of it's revenue as salaries and wages. Least of all industries like sports, where employees ARE the product. In most industries manpower expenses amount to at least 20-70% of revenue.

Heck you'll get more people on here harping about how the WNBA deserves more attention and women's sports are so important and pivotal to society. When in reality the WNBA's losses are being entirely subsidized by the massive profits from the NBA. But those same people will then turn around and say how the NBA athletes are not doing real jobs throwing a ball around and should ideally be get paid $200 plus a bowl of rice and stop bitching. Maybe do a little janitor work on the side if the rice isn't enough, get a real job.

However different the WNBA contracts are to MMA is irrelevant, the bottomline is that those athletes get paid twice as much for mostly sitting on a bench doing nothing in an org that hardly anyone watches. Yet in this org that has millions of viewers worldwide shelling out hard cash per pop, the athletes are getting paid less. If you calculate what the UFC fighters make per year, incentives and all, fighting the usual 3 times, they get paid less. Much less. We can make all speculations about how they could fight 50 times a year and be getting 10 billion in these locker room bonuses that no one hears about, but that is speculation and this is the reality.

You wanna compare with a sport that pays athletes what they are worth? Compare to Boxing. They pay 10 times as much with maybe twice as much revenue, and I don't see them complaining about being broke or "growing pains".

More fights per fighter per year would be good but they need to pay more per fight period. Until then I won't be buying any PPVs unless I know a cut is going to a hard working humble fighter I like (like Weidman/Aldo/Jones etc.). I'll still grudge the lion's share that goes to the suits, but at least a small chunk is going to the guy that actually deserves it. In the meantime I'll support every mid scale promotion that is putting up good fights and paying well for their size.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

Liddellianenko said:


> You wanna compare with a sport that pays athletes what they are worth? Compare to Boxing. They pay 10 times as much with maybe twice as much revenue, and I don't see them complaining about being broke or "growing pains".


Wrong, dead wrong. There are fighters who fight on ESPN cards who don't even clear $2K. Source, my father has an employee who has fought twice on the ESPN undercard and gotten paid $1K for the first fight (a loss) and $1.3K for the second fight (a win). The UFC on the low ends pays way more than boxing on the low end



> More fights per fighter per year would be good but they need to pay more per fight period. Until then I won't be buying any PPVs unless I know a cut is going to a hard working humble fighter I like (like Weidman/Aldo/Jones etc.). I'll still grudge the lion's share that goes to the suits, but at least a small chunk is going to the guy that actually deserves it. In the meantime I'll support every mid scale promotion that is putting up good fights and paying well for their size.


No, they don't, they need to prove they are worth more. This is an entertainment industry and like any industry it pays what a fighter is worth. If they are worth more then they can finish out there contract and go somewhere else where it will pay more. 

It's obvious we will never agree on this so instead of typing up a 8 page rebuttal I will just end it with that.


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

Killz said:


> Don't like the pay? Get a real job.
> 
> Simple as that.


Orrrrr start a conversation that might lead to improvements in the system?

Nothing wrong with asking questions or having conversations.


----------



## kc1983 (May 27, 2007)

This obviously doesn't factor in any other sponsorship money the fighters are getting and PPV buys....but at the end of the day yes a lot of the pay scales are rather low when you compare it to other sports. But we also have to remember that the UFC and MMA are extremely young compared to Boxing and Basketball. When Dana and the Fertita's took over the company was in the shitter. Yes UFC has exploded in the last 5-7 years but they are nowhere near the level of major Boxing promotions. 

I'm curious to see how much the average top 15 boxer earns in comparison to a top 15 fighter in the UFC.


----------



## GDPofDRB (Apr 18, 2013)

AlphaDawg said:


> Why are people so obsessed with how much fighters make? I don't get it. They willingly signed a contract. It's not like they were tricked into doing something they didn't want to do.


Probably because people care about actual fighters more then the promoters, I hope. They should. 

The response to these story's bugs me a lot of the time. Just don't get why people want to defend not paying the guys who deliver the product everyone like so much, actual fights, more money, like it is a bad thing for guys putting in this work to not want to get paid so little. It's frustrating when the narrative plows on that the rich should get richer while it's the fighters who are greedy or should get out of the sport if they don't want to get paid in peanuts.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

SlowGraffiti said:


> UFC just doesn't make as much money as other sports. WNBA players also mostly required to play in college, even benchwarmers. Sometimes it seems UFC will grab some 5-2 dude off the streets to fill a prelim spot just because they're from the area the event is held in.


Maybe ten years ago. Today pretty much everyone coming into the UFC has experience on regional circuits and/or some kind of other high-level related combat experience like NCAA wrestling.


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

cdtcpl said:


> Wrong, dead wrong. There are fighters who fight on ESPN cards who don't even clear $2K. Source, my father has an employee who has fought twice on the ESPN undercard and gotten paid $1K for the first fight (a loss) and $1.3K for the second fight (a win). The UFC on the low ends pays way more than boxing on the low end


go look at the average pay of a fighter on a ppv boxing card. One instance from your father is terrible evidence and frankly quite ridiculous


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> You don't think the UFC makes as much money as the WNBA? That's funny because the WNBA made a $12 million loss last year, but they're still better paid than an org making $300 million+ per year.


Sounds like the UFC has a little better business model then doesn't it?

I don't make enough is the age old story, nobody ever thinks they make enough. Like others have said you know going in if you just an average fight, by UFC standards, then you are not going to get rich. 

Also everyone keeps bringing up Dana, I personally don't believe Dana has that much power. The Fertitta's are the money guys, Dana is just the front man.


----------



## 3DLee (Aug 30, 2006)

My opinion has already been stated by others. The top dogs that win and draw money do get paid very well. Anderson Silva kept winning and to my knowledge has the highest disclosed pay of any mma fighter in an American org. 600k to show and 200k to win (but he lost). 

The main point here and the reason why I don't sympathize for these guys is because they sign up for it. Our military service men and women get paid way less than some of these guys and they are literally fighting for their lives. But, they also signed up for it. 

None of these guys (mma fighters) are slaves. They know that through fighting they open themselves up to becoming a very valuable brand. This branding of themselves has led to several of them to have their own brand of nutritional and MMA related products, become movie stars, and all other sorts of revenue. They open gyms, do signings, write books, I mean the UFC puts these guys in front of people. They help advertise them as a brand. The disclosed pay may seem small, but when you have millions of people that know your name and associate you with being of the one best, they'll buy your shit. 

I just posted here because I think it can be kind of crazy how other people are so upset about fighter pay. I really don't care. If I think a fighter is exciting, Ill watch him. His pay is irrelevant to me as a fan. But like others have said, if the fighters think their time is worth more money and that this sport isn't generating the revenue for them that they need or want, they should look for other gigs. Why don't they? I think its a combination of them getting to do what they love and that they understand, unlike some of the fans, that this is a long term investment and if they become popular and or keep winning, the possible revenue for them outside of fighting is endless.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

rabakill said:


> go look at the average pay of a fighter on a ppv boxing card. One instance from your father is terrible evidence and frankly quite ridiculous


Here you go, it is from 2011, but very little has changed:

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2011/3/15/2053137/examining-pay-structure-in-boxing-and-mma

The point stands that on the low end UFC fighters are paid better than boxers. On the high end boxers significantly out earn UFC fighters.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

3DLee said:


> My opinion has already been stated by others. The top dogs that win and draw money do get paid very well. Anderson Silva kept winning and to my knowledge has the highest disclosed pay of any mma fighter in an American org. 600k to show and 200k to win (but he lost).
> 
> The main point here and the reason why I don't sympathize for these guys is because they sign up for it. Our military service men and women get paid way less than some of these guys and they are literally fighting for their lives. But, they also signed up for it.
> 
> ...


The "top dog" of all MMA Anderson Silva still got paid less than 1/50th of what the top dog in Boxing (Mayweather) or even a tenth of what the not so top dogs in Boxing like Pacquaio or Cotto do, for pulling in comparable PPV numbers (Sonnen II pulled in a million+, as much as any Pacman or Cotto fight). 

Nothing the UFC does for giving fighters "a brand" is unique to it by any means. The same holds true for ANY sport or entertainment profession such as acting, music etc. Their fame is incidental, not something the UFC "gives" them. The fighters MAKE their own brand with their amazing hard work and spellbounding talents. 

If anything the UFC is THE WORST possible employer for anyone with a brand because they have the most restrictions on sponsors out of any sport, take a major cut of the sponsorships, steal all the brand rights from the fighters (video game rights, action figure rights, publicity rights) and give them absolutely nothing for it. Compare this to Boxing etc. where the athletes are free to sign up for any sponsor and own the rights to their own likeness for all such purposes. 

Most UFC fighters barely get enough to feed their families and you think they'll have enough money to open gyms and training centers? The ones that do are the richer superstars like Wanderlei, those are not the ones I'm worried about.

The "future prospects" carrot is the age old sucker prospect given by every exploitative arrangement since the dawn of time. In feudalism it was "oh, work hard and you could be free someday!". In the corporate world it's "work 15 hour days for 3 months straight and we'll see about that promotion!". It's all bollocks though, just a way to sucker the 99% to work for peanuts in the hope that they can become that .1% that these promises are actually fulfilled for. How about EVERYONE gets what they are worth instead? From the bottom to the top.

My views on the military are mixed. As such I don't think signing up to unquestioningly go slaughter a bunch of people you've never met, for no reason other than "my lord / politician told me he's brown and evil" is the greatest boon to society. If someone invades you then yes defend yourself, but most wars are not fought for that. Afghanistan is somewhat arguable as a war for defense. Not Iraq or Libya or Vietnam. 

In that sense I think a trained but not full-time defense only military like Switzerland is admirable. There everyone trains 2 years to know how to defend the country if invaded, but from that point on they are no longer "soldiers" who can be ordered to go invade other places and slaughter their people. Just citizens who know how to kick anyone's ass that tries to conquer them.

I think the people who sign up for the military mean well and a lot of them are really good people, but overall I don't respect that "real job" as much as most of society seems to or wants to force you to.


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

Pro athletes are generally very overpaid. I love watching football, but I think it is completely insane that people who are playing a game for the sake of entertainment make insane amounts of money when compared to people who actually provide a necessary and useful service (feel free to pick an example, plenty of them out there). I don't think MMA fighters are underpaid, I think they are in the minority of professional athletes that get paid fairly.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

joshua7789 said:


> Pro athletes are generally very overpaid. I love watching football, but I think it is completely insane that people who are playing a game for the sake of entertainment make insane amounts of money when compared to people who actually provide a necessary and useful service (feel free to pick an example, plenty of them out there). I don't think MMA fighters are underpaid, I think they are in the minority of professional athletes that get paid fairly.


So you're saying the Fertittas and Dana are more deserving because the services they're providing you are more necessary and useful? 1000x more necessary and useful? Pray tell what these services are.

It's not that by paying the fighters less the money is being automatically distributed to firefighters and teachers and nurses or whatever you consider useful professions. It's most likely going towards more hookers and blow money honestly, that and expanding an empire of gambling addictions and casinos.


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> My views on the military are mixed. As such I don't think signing up to unquestioningly go slaughter a bunch of people you've never met, for no reason other than "my lord / politician told me he's brown and evil" is the greatest boon to society.


You think this is why people join the Military?

:confused01:


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Term said:


> You think this is why people join the Military?
> 
> :confused01:


No they're told they sign up to defend their country, but once they sign that line they have absolutely no say in what constitutes defending their country. If they refuse to kill who the politician tells them to kill, they are deserters and criminals.

As I said they mean well, but I don't respect the system they sign up for.


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> So you're saying the Fertittas and Dana are more deserving because the services they're providing you are more necessary and useful? 1000x more necessary and useful? Pray tell what these services are.
> 
> It's not that by paying the fighters less the money is being automatically distributed to firefighters and teachers and nurses or whatever you consider useful professions. It's most likely going towards more hookers and blow money honestly, that and expanding an empire of gambling addictions and casinos.


You really do make some of the silliest jumps in logic when it comes to things that people say on here. At what point did I mention Dana or either of the Fertittas or how much they deserve to make? 

My point is that athletes are seriously overpaid in general and should not bitch about how much they get paid for playing a game (or fighting in this case), which are things that millions of people do for free.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

joshua7789 said:


> You really do make some of the silliest jumps in logic when it comes to things that people say on here. At what point did I mention Dana or either of the Fertittas or how much they deserve to make?
> 
> My point is that athletes are seriously overpaid in general and should not bitch about how much they get paid for playing a game (or fighting in this case), which are things that millions of people do for free.


Then why don't you expect the Fertittas to do it for free, why only the fighters? It's hypocritical really.

You didn't mention it but those are the only two options. Lowered fighter pay means the money goes to the Fertittas. You can't just say, well fighters should be paid squat and then sit mum about where that money ACTUALLY goes. If they get paid squat then guess who DOES get paid?


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Then why don't you expect the Fertittas to do it for free, why only the fighters? It's hypocritical really.
> 
> You didn't mention it but those are the only two options. Lowered fighter pay means the money goes to the Fertittas. You can't just say, well fighters should be paid squat and then sit mum about where that money ACTUALLY goes. If they get paid squat then guess who DOES get paid?


You really do just pull things out of your ass in an attempt to make everything fit into your anti Dana white/anti UFC attitude.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

joshua7789 said:


> You really do just pull things out of your ass in an attempt to make everything fit into your anti Dana white/anti UFC attitude.


Seems like you're the one with the anti-athlete attitude really. They should "work for free", "it's just a game". How about you work for free and see how that treats you, and let the fighters speak for themselves?


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Seems like you're the one with the anti-athlete attitude really. They should "work for free", "it's just a game". How about you work for free and see how that treats you, and let the fighters speak for themselves?


Once again, I didn't say they should work for free, nor did I mention anything about how much I think the UFC, NFL, NBA, etc. should charge for tickets, ppv or whatever else, or how much the owners in those organizations should make. You just jump to conclusions that are in line with your ridiculous bias.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

joshua7789 said:


> Once again, I didn't say they should work for free, nor did I mention anything about how much I think the UFC, NFL, NBA, etc. should charge for tickets, ppv or whatever else, or how much the owners in those organizations should make. You just jump to conclusions that are in line with your ridiculous bias.


My bad, you implied as much by saying these are things that people do for free. 

If the UFC charges less or gives it's product away for 5 cents a piece I doubt the fighters would be complaining. They are only complaining because the UFC is in fact charging $60 a view, making $300 million a year and paying out less than $12 million. 

You have no say in what the UFC charges, yet you are ready to shout down the fighters who ask more given the UFC CAN AND WILL continue to charge what it does?


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Liddellianenko said:


> The "top dog" of all MMA Anderson Silva still got paid less than 1/50th of what the top dog in Boxing (Mayweather) or even a tenth of what the not so top dogs in Boxing like Pacquaio or Cotto do, for pulling in comparable PPV numbers (Sonnen II pulled in a million+, as much as any Pacman or Cotto fight).
> 
> Nothing the UFC does for giving fighters "a brand" is unique to it by any means. The same holds true for ANY sport or entertainment profession such as acting, music etc. Their fame is incidental, not something the UFC "gives" them. The fighters MAKE their own brand with their amazing hard work and spellbounding talents.
> 
> ...



The problem is that the UFC/Fertitas made quite a smart business move to monopolize the power. They are the organisation where the fights actually take place AND they are the one and only promotion for the fights that take place under the banner of that organisation. The fighters are not employees, but independent contractors with little negotiation power. Against such a monopoly of negotiation power, fighters would need to unite in some way to negotiate better pay, but they don't. It's somehow weird that people who chose to fight as their job and way of life actually seem to be unable to fight efficiently for a better pay.



> My views on the military are mixed. As such I don't think signing up to unquestioningly go slaughter a bunch of people you've never met, for no reason other than "my lord / politician told me he's brown and evil" is the greatest boon to society. If someone invades you then yes defend yourself, but most wars are not fought for that. Afghanistan is somewhat arguable as a war for defense. Not Iraq or Libya or Vietnam.
> 
> In that sense I think a trained but not full-time defense only military like Switzerland is admirable. There everyone trains 2 years to know how to defend the country if invaded, but from that point on they are no longer "soldiers" who can be ordered to go invade other places and slaughter their people. Just citizens who know how to kick anyone's ass that tries to conquer them.
> 
> I think the people who sign up for the military mean well and a lot of them are really good people, but overall I don't respect that "real job" as much as most of society seems to or wants to force you to.


Actually, Afghanistan was/is not really a defensive war. Catching bin Laden and Al Qaido, ok no problem, but bombing a bunch of stone-age donkey riders and their innocent women and children doesn't make the world more safe. On the contrary, killing innocents only makes more people join the extremists. The US should have concentrated on a search and seize (or kill) mission like the one with which they finally got bin Laden, but that was not what the whole story was about.



Liddellianenko said:


> No they're told they sign up to defend their country, but once they sign that line they have absolutely no say in what constitutes defending their country. If they refuse to kill who the politician tells them to kill, they are deserters and criminals.
> 
> As I said they mean well, but I don't respect the system they sign up for.


Actually a good part of those who sign up these days are people from the lower class who don't find any other job, because of the economic situation in many parts of the US there just are not enough jobs. That's why the military does its advertisement strategies particularly in areas with a lot of lower class population.


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> My bad, you implied as much by saying these are things that people do for free.
> 
> If the UFC charges less or gives it's product away for 5 cents a piece I doubt the fighters would be complaining. They are only complaining because the UFC is in fact charging $60 a view, making $300 million a year and paying out less than $12 million.
> 
> You have no say in what the UFC charges, yet you are ready to shout down the fighters who ask more given the UFC CAN AND WILL continue to charge what it does?


They do charge more then I am consistently willing to pay for pay per views, so I usually go to a bar that shows them (gotta love Twin Peaks on fight nights). I assumed that it was implied that I think professional sports (and the film and music industries) are a ridiculous industry when it comes to the revenue that they bring in. That goes for the athletes (generally speaking), the owners, the executives, the refs, and whoever the hell else is making shit loads of money off of a ******* game.


----------



## The_Senator (Jun 5, 2008)

Affliction payed a lot to Sylvia, Fedor, etc and ended up going bankrupt. UFC doesn't owe anyone anything really. Their business model in the only one that successfully works so far.


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

The_Senator said:


> Affliction payed a lot to Sylvia, Fedor, etc and ended up going bankrupt. UFC doesn't owe anyone anything really. Their business model in the only one that successfully works so far.


not really true. The UFC forced the other guys out, regardless of their pay to the fighters. Stacking UFC shows at the same time as their competitors made it pretty obvious they were trying to force everyone out. Other org's were profitable that the UFC muscled out.


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

rabakill said:


> not really true. The UFC forced the other guys out, regardless of their pay to the fighters. Stacking UFC shows at the same time as their competitors made it pretty obvious they were trying to force everyone out. Other org's were profitable that the UFC muscled out.


Its called competition and it exists in every single industry.


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

thanks for pointing that out Einstein, he made the point that the only business model that works is the UFC's because of their payscale and that is blatantly untrue. Whatever, people start arguments for no reason trying to make themselves feel smart.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

joshua7789 said:


> Its called competition and it exists in every single industry.


I think his point was that their pay model wasn't flawed, this idea that if you pay more than a rice bowl then the org is destined to go bankrupt. Sans the UFC the model was just fine.

As far as the competition goes , it borders on unfair and monopolistic. Microsoft got taken to court for less, simply bundling IE with windows. It's not free market when a monopoly uses artificial pricing (in this case stacked free cards) to run competition into the ground..


----------



## joshua7789 (Apr 25, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> I think his point was that their pay model wasn't flawed, this idea that if you pay more than a rice bowl then the org is destined to go bankrupt. Sans the UFC the model was just fine.
> 
> As far as the competition goes , it borders on unfair and monopolistic. Microsoft got taken to court for less, simply bundling IE with windows. It's not free market when a monopoly uses artificial pricing (in this case stacked free cards) to run competition into the ground..


Point taken, but clearly the UFC and Bellator are the only really successful business models in mma so far. The UFC has built in extremely well known brand and Bellator has done a good job of building some of there own talent without spending too crazy money on big names (I am pretty curious to see what kind of money Rampage is pulling with them).


----------



## mastodon2222 (Feb 4, 2010)

They're underpaid.

UFC is a monopoly so they can pay the bare minimum. If they had competition like the NFL, where 32 teams bid for a players services, you'd see Andy, JBJ, GSP and Cain pulling down tens of millions per year.


----------



## butters (Sep 30, 2009)

Yeah the fighters are underpaid, but I think that's what motivates them more to get better. If they all got paid so much right off the bat I think we would see a lot of fighters just there to make money and not to get better or try.


All in all though I'm just sick of hearing about all this pay stuff already.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

Floyd can't be compared realistically to the UFC in any way.


The people who paid Floyd lost money for his last fight..and they need over 1.2 million buys or so to even break even. They are essentially having this guy on for no financial gain for themselves. The UFC can't and will never operate that way.


----------



## ptw (Aug 13, 2009)

I don't think fighter pay is that much of a problem. If you're starting a new career you're going to need some sort of back up plan or foundation to build off of. Look at Weidman for instance, he was living in his parents house when he decided to try fighting, now he's got his own house and is the mw champ and probably making reasonable money. If you're serious about making it in this career you have to sacrifice a lot to do it. You have to make 5-8k per fight and live without many luxuries for awhile. A majority of people in the US live under 20k a year, no reason a fighter can't either, you're not going to have the best trainers or the best camps or whatever, but it's something for you to build off of.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

ptw said:


> I don't think fighter pay is that much of a problem. If you're starting a new career you're going to need some sort of back up plan or foundation to build off of. Look at Weidman for instance, he was living in his parents house when he decided to try fighting, now he's got his own house and is the mw champ and probably making reasonable money. If you're serious about making it in this career you have to sacrifice a lot to do it. You have to make 5-8k per fight and live without many luxuries for awhile. A majority of people in the US live under 20k a year, no reason a fighter can't either, you're not going to have the best trainers or the best camps or whatever, but it's something for you to build off of.


Making reasonable money?? Weidman just made $12,000 + $12,000 for knocking out the UFC GOAT! 

This was his only fight in a year, so the UFC MW champ, the guy that knocked out Anderson Silva, just made slightly over US minimum wage for the year! If he had lost a close decision he would actually have made LESS THAN MINIMUM WAGE, the guy greeting you at Walmart would have made $4000 more. You couldn't make this stuff up!

A majority of the people in the US live under 20K? What are you on about? That is ghetto wages, struggling to make ends meat. The US Median wage is $28,000, so obviously at least 50% of the US population is making over $28,000 and the majority can in no way be making less than 20K. 

This median also includes 15 year old boys delivering newspapers and guys sitting around in wifebeaters working 5 hours a week part time. The median annual wage for adults over 25 including part timers is $35,000. The median annual wage for adults over 25 WORKING FULL TIME (as MMA fighters usually train) is *$43,317*.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_States



Voiceless said:


> The problem is that the UFC/Fertitas made quite a smart business move to monopolize the power. They are the organisation where the fights actually take place AND they are the one and only promotion for the fights that take place under the banner of that organisation. The fighters are not employees, but independent contractors with little negotiation power. Against such a monopoly of negotiation power, fighters would need to unite in some way to negotiate better pay, but they don't. It's somehow weird that people who chose to fight as their job and way of life actually seem to be unable to fight efficiently for a better pay.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree completely, I was just trying to be tactful and not offend patriotic sentiments too much. A lot of people have friends and family in the military and it's a touchy topic for them. Which is why I said Afghanistan was "arguably" a defensive war... I don't believe it any more than you do, but at least it can be "argued" with the whole Al Qaeda thing, unlike the others. 

You're right, all it does is create more hate filled enemies, but that is what they want isn't it? Use the terrorist threat to create a perpetual war, then "kill Osama" near election time when the public is starting to wake up to their being suckered. No photos or bodies of course, that would be disrespectful to the terrorist and create more terrorists. You know, because showing a picture will push guys over the edge, the ones who's families we have blown to bits but they were fine with that part, a picture of dead Osama would be too much. 

We will just claim the #1 most wanted man in the world dead, toss his fully intact body in the ocean, and not show you any proof whatsoever. Hey, trust us! C'mooonnn!! (I think he died a long time ago in Tora Bora, but that wouldn't allow you to keep up an invasion now would it?)

IMO War has always been a racket, where soldiers and taxpayers are the suckers and politicians / banks / arms dealers / resource looting companies (nowadays Oil and Gas, just like the East India company etc. in the old days) are the beneficiaries.

Yes the fighters need a union, this was always what I figured too. It's really weird how no one has thought of it yet ... maybe there is some pressure or contractual traps by the UFC that make it tough for them to band together.


----------



## hadoq (Jan 6, 2011)

butters said:


> Yeah the fighters are underpaid, but I think that's what motivates them more to get better. If they all got paid so much right off the bat I think we would see a lot of fighters just there to make money and not to get better or try.
> 
> 
> All in all though I'm just sick of hearing about all this pay stuff already.


thank you


----------



## locnott (Apr 1, 2009)

butters said:


> Yeah the fighters are underpaid, but I think that's what motivates them more to get better. If they all got paid so much right off the bat I think we would see a lot of fighters just there to make money and not to get better or try.
> 
> 
> All in all though I'm just sick of hearing about all this pay stuff already.


Thats about what I thought and had decided, then I think about how much Dana tips a waiter that spent 1 hour waiting on him at a casino restaurant, If I remember correctly he tips the guy 10,000 bucks. This was something he is known to do on a regular basis... 
That changed my prospective a little..

For the record there is nothing implied or insinuated in what I wrote, just what I read that made me think..


----------



## Soojooko (Jun 4, 2009)

Didn't Oliver McCall do an interview where he admitted he made over 4 times his disclosed salary for a fight?

With that in mind, is only looking at disclosed salaries really an accurate gauge of fighter earnings?


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Soojooko said:


> Didn't Oliver McCall do an interview where he admitted he made over 4 times his disclosed salary for a fight?
> 
> With that in mind, is only looking at disclosed salaries really an accurate gauge of fighter earnings?


Jon Fitch and some other fighters have come out and said that yes, the disclosed pay (purse and "of the night bonuses) is pretty close to what they actually make. 

These amazing locker room bonuses that supposedly quadruple everything? Completely overblown. Fitch made only $170,000 in undisclosed locker room bonuses in addition to $130,000 FOTN disclosed bonuses out of his career winnings of 1,300,000 over 7.5 years. Slightly more than 10% of disclosed pay, not 400% or quadruple or anything like that.

Now thats good money he made overall but this is a guy that was rank #2 WW in the world for almost 5 years running with the longest win streaks of anyone not a champ in UFC history. He made pretty good money, but nothing more than a run of the mill middle manager in any corporation makes, about 170K a year, certainly not comparable to what a perennial #2 rank boxer would make. So an entry level fighter making $24000 a year would probably not be getting more than a few thousand bucks here and there in locker room bonuses.

There are other like Pat Barry, DHK, Volkmann etc. that talk about how they were literally living paycheck to paycheck to pay the rent and eat. Barry was apparently surviving on Ketchup. But never mind that probably keeps him hungry (pun intended ) and motivated to fight for the great sympathetic fans of this sport. Are you not entertained?


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

When are people gonna understand the difference between fighting for an organization like the UFC and promoting or copromoting a fight like most major boxers? Do you realize the millions of dollars that the UFC spends securing arena's, liscensing, advertising, as well as all the people they pay to work behind the scenes are spent by the top fighters in boxing? Maywesther isn't Anderson silva he is both Fertittas and Anderson Silva since he Floyd lays the money that makes the fights possible. this is the same system that has made boxing the mess it is. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Toxic said:


> When are people gonna understand the difference between fighting for an organization like the UFC and promoting or copromoting a fight like most major boxers? Do you realize the millions of dollars that the UFC spends securing arena's, liscensing, advertising, as well as all the people they pay to work behind the scenes are spent by the top fighters in boxing? Maywesther isn't Anderson silva he is both Fertittas and Anderson Silva since he Floyd lays the money that makes the fights possible. this is the same system that has made boxing the mess it is.
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


What about Cotto or Pacquaio or Marquez? Are they also promoting their own fights? No they are not, but they still make $30 million, $10 million, $5 million etc.

You really think the UFC is spending $250 million plus on a cast iron cage, some stupid flashing lights, that "Save the pain" song for 10 years straight, and Bruce freaking Buffer? Oh and "licensing", how much do these licenses run nowadays, say $20 million per event? The only thing that would actually cost anything is advertising, and the UFC has to be the most low key advertised sports org ever... they are only promoted by the channels they tie up with themselves, and I never see ads for UFC PPVs during prime time slots or anything. I'd be surprised if these all of these things combined cross $10 million in a year, and that's being generous.

Boxing was ruined by watering down of rules, not by paying boxers more money. The Klitschkos are fabulously rich and they are still willing to fight any damn boxer on the planet and knock them out. 

This bs notion of poor starving fighters make better fights was spread by the promoters themselves. Only they benefit from it, not the sport.

Besides I don't care if Anderson makes $1 million or 10, I care if guys like DHK make enough to train full time, eat healthy, and pay their rent so they can actually concentrate on what matters.


----------



## Ludinator (Mar 15, 2012)

I made 18k last year, so ******* what. These guys pick to fight, there not forced and they know what there signing.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Liddellianenko said:


> What about Cotto or Pacquaio or Marquez? Are they also promoting their own fights? No they are not, but they still make $30 million, $10 million, $5 million etc.
> 
> Boxing was ruined by watering down of rules, not by paying boxers more money. The Klitschkos are fabulously rich and they are still willing to fight any damn boxer on the planet and knock them out.
> 
> This bs notion of poor starving fighters make better fights was spread by the promoters themselves. Only they benefit from it, not the sport.


And the live gates are 12-90 million compared to the ufc's 4-10. There ppvs routinely draw over a million buys instead of that being the exception with UFC averse aging like 4. Higher revenue = higher pay they arent % of revenue that far off the biggest names In mma like silva and Gsp


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Soojooko (Jun 4, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Jon Fitch and some other fighters have come out and said that yes, the disclosed pay (purse and "of the night bonuses) is pretty close to what they actually make.
> 
> These amazing locker room bonuses that supposedly quadruple everything? Completely overblown. Fitch made only $170,000 in undisclosed locker room bonuses in addition to $130,000 FOTN disclosed bonuses out of his career winnings of 1,300,000 over 7.5 years. Slightly more than 10% of disclosed pay, not 400% or quadruple or anything like that.
> 
> ...


It's not overblown at all. Here's the piece regards McCall:
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/7/16/3162364/ufc-ian-mccall-fighter-pay-mma-news

Either he's lying or he made 4 times disclosed salary. It's not as clear cut as you think.


----------



## LiteGladiator (Jun 22, 2010)

This is all kinds of biased. They don't talk about bonuses, undisclosed bonuses, and are comparing MMA to much larger sports. If fighters did not make enough money fighting then they would get another job and stop fighting. Fighters make enough to do what they do. If the sport grows more, they will make more money.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Toxic said:


> And the live gates are 12-90 million compared to the ufc's 4-10. There ppvs routinely draw over a million buys instead of that being the exception with UFC averse aging like 4. Higher revenue = higher pay they arent % of revenue that far off the biggest names In mma like silva and Gsp
> 
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


I'd like to see a source for that $90 million figure because that sounds completely wrong. Here are some real gate figures:

http://boxing.about.com/od/history/a/livegates.htm

http://www.badlefthook.com/2012/12/...million-gate-nevada-mgm-grand-hbo-boxing-news

Pacquaio vs Marquez collected live gate of $10.8 million and Mayweather Cotto did $12 Million. Heck Mayweather-De La Hoya did $19 million and that was the biggest fight in years. 

So no, they do about 2X the gates and slightly better PPV wise (like 1-1.5 million as opposed to a .7-1.1 million for an Anderson Silva fight), as in they make about 1.5-2X more in revenue total but pay out 20-50 times as much to the headliners.


----------



## Sambo de Amigo (Sep 24, 2010)

AlphaDawg said:


> Why are people so obsessed with how much fighters make? I don't get it. They willingly signed a contract. It's not like they were tricked into doing something they didn't want to do.


No they arent tricked , The UFC has Monopoly so either except what we give you or its back to the factory. 

People with Talent like the fighters should be paid accordingly. 




Killz said:


> Don't like the pay? Get a real job.
> 
> Simple as that.


Really ?

So a talented fighter who doesnt like his pay but wants to use his gifts should get a regular job because the UFC WON'T PAY what they should ?


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

I think in the long run the UFC is only hurting themselves. By monopolizing the industry and paying their fighters less than they deserve the quality of fights suffer from good fighters taking up other professions. Think how many Anderson Silva's took the Mcdonald's manager job because you make more money doing that than working for the UFC.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Liddellianenko said:


> I'd like to see a source for that $90 million figure because that sounds completely wrong. Here are some real gate figures:
> 
> http://boxing.about.com/od/history/a/livegates.htm
> 
> ...


Admittedly I did a google search and it showed 96 million but the decimal had to be wrong because even I thought it seemed absurd. 

That said they still do 2-3 times as much and I dont know where you get Silva's ppv numbers but he is usually in the 4-5 hundred thousand range not PAC mans 1.3-1.5 Silva's last 3 live gates combined are still less than Any of PAC mans last 3 alone. 

Never mind that the UFC spends far far more money in advertising pays the mid and lower tier guys more and isn't nearly as big globally. UFC money is fair for the top guys like Silva and Gsp and it is absurd to think it isn't. Are there guys in the UFC who are underpaid absolutely but it surely isn't the top superstars it's the guys who are top guys in there division big draws and all of that that or not the champ. Chael for example is underpaid and least from the disclosed pay because he puts asses in seats and sells ppvs hell Silva's ppv buy rate average went up drastically after fighting Sonnen the first time. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Rusty (Apr 13, 2010)

I don't know why people are so hurt that professional athletes aren't instant millionaires as soon as they sign. The working class are the people who need paid more. The cost of living in just the last 4-6 years has grown quite a bit and I don't know too many people who have been given raises.

People who are skilled at bouncing, throwing, or running with a ball are millionaires many times over and the people who make the world work are being overworked and underpaid.


----------



## rabakill (Apr 22, 2007)

Rusty said:


> I don't know why people are so hurt that professional athletes aren't instant millionaires as soon as they sign. The working class are the people who need paid more. The cost of living in just the last 4-6 years has grown quite a bit and I don't know too many people who have been given raises.
> 
> People who are skilled at bouncing, throwing, or running with a ball are millionaires many times over and the people who make the world work are being overworked and underpaid.


this would be a fair statement if Dana White didn't have a garage filled with Ferraris.


----------



## Rusty (Apr 13, 2010)

rabakill said:


> this would be a fair statement if Dana White didn't have a garage filled with Ferraris.


Couldn't care less about Dana or what he owns tbh. Bosses make the money no doubt, I'm worried about the pay of the working man.


----------



## SmackyBear (Feb 14, 2008)

Out of curiosity, if someone doesn't think the UFC pays fighters enough:

1. What do you think the UFC pays now?

2. What should they pay?


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

SmackyBear said:


> Out of curiosity, if someone doesn't think the UFC pays fighters enough:
> 
> 1. What do you think the UFC pays now?
> 
> 2. What should they pay?


Right now they pay about $8000 or sometimes $6000 for entry level fighters and $10000-$12000 for mid levels without a big name. Most fighters fight 3 times a year max if they are lucky and not injured. That means the majority of fighters on the roster make anywhere from $18,000-$36,000 in base pay IF THEY DON'T GET INJURED (big IF), far below the US median full time adult wage and not enough to raise a family, sometimes not enough to live, train and feed oneself properly.

I would be happy if this were basically doubled (at current purchasing power, and effectively kept up with inflation over time). The minimum per fight should be $16,000 ish or so, and scale upwards as you win. This would mean that most fighters make at least $36,000-$72,000, bringing them into a respectable middle class income range where they are at least living like hard working humans instead of welfare recipients. As one would expect of the elite physical talent on the planet, making more than $300 million in revenue (JUST in PPV, plus who knows how much from TV deals, games, merchandising, sponsorships etc) for the company. Even if they did this for every single fighter on their current roster, it still wouldn't cross $10 million in costs and would do absolutely nothing to hurt them considering their monster levels of annual revenue which are probably close to a billion.

Yes there are of the night bonuses and locker room bonuses, but that kind of thing depends a lot on luck. You could get 3 knockouts a year and still lose the bonus to any of the other 23 fighters on the card and still have to live on crap base pay. And having to rely on Lord Dana's discretionary bonuses to make a living is so tragically feudal, like the only way you can survive is be a complete suckup to the boss. Maybe. If he feels like it. Or maybe he'll just tip some guy putting a ball into a roulette wheel that money instead.

For the top I'd be happy to see every champ or PPV headliner automatically get a PPV share, because clearly they are anchoring those cards and making the co. millions. Them having a decent stake makes for better involvement in promotion as well as to deliver a good, exciting product if their next PPV is to sell well. The rest is fine as it is.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Liddellianenko said:


> Right now they pay about $8000 or sometimes $6000 for entry level fighters and $10000-$12000 for mid levels without a big name. Most fighters fight 3 times a year max if they are lucky and not injured. That means the majority of fighters on the roster make anywhere from $18,000-$36,000 in base pay IF THEY DON'T GET INJURED (big IF), far below the US median full time adult wage and not enough to raise a family, sometimes not enough to live, train and feed oneself properly.
> 
> I would be happy if this were basically doubled (at current purchasing power, and effectively kept up with inflation over time). The minimum per fight should be $16,000 ish or so, and scale upwards as you win. This would mean that most fighters make at least $36,000-$72,000, bringing them into a respectable middle class income range where they are at least living like hard working humans instead of welfare recipients. As one would expect of the elite physical talent on the planet, making more than $300 million in revenue (JUST in PPV, plus who knows how much from TV deals, games, merchandising, sponsorships etc) for the company. Even if they did this for every single fighter on their current roster, it still wouldn't cross $10 million in costs and would do absolutely nothing to hurt them considering their monster levels of annual revenue which are probably close to a billion.
> 
> ...


But your forgetting many are trainers, own gyms do seminars or have some other form of secondary income like appearance money on top of there base pay and the obvious exclusion here of sponsor money which for guys starting out in the UFC is often more than there base pay. A small patch can run $3000-15000. a relatively well known fighter can sell the patch across his rear for 6 digits. Haybusa signs guys for there fist UFC fights to one or two year deals that pay $4000 or more a month to wear there clothing at appearances in the gym etc a well as the cage. That's 48000 a year to wear there t shirts

Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Toxic said:


> But your forgetting many are trainers, own gyms do seminars or have some other form of secondary income like appearance money on top of there base pay and the obvious exclusion here of sponsor money which for guys starting out in the UFC is often more than there base pay. A small patch can run $3000-15000. a relatively well known fighter can sell the patch across his rear for 6 digits. Haybusa signs guys for there fist UFC fights to one or two year deals that pay $4000 or more a month to wear there clothing at appearances in the gym etc a well as the cage. That's 48000 a year to wear there t shirts
> 
> Sent from Verticalsports.com App


Do you have a source for these figures? Because those figures sound really large for an entry level / undercard fighter. I'd be pleasantly surprised if even a mid-level vet with a patchy record, like say Pay Barry, was making that kind of money.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Liddellianenko said:


> Do you have a source for these figures? Because those figures sound really large for an entry level / undercard fighter. I'd be pleasantly surprised if even a mid-level vet with a patchy record, like say Pay Barry, was making that kind of money.


I hate trying to post links and quotes on my phone but a simple google search gave me the article from mma fighting. Com 

Also Tim Kennedy complained that when the UFC put the sponsor tax in place he lost ranger up as a sponsor cutting his income in half which if true meant he was getting around 55000 per event from ranger up while fighting for strike force which due to less exposure would mean he was getting less than a similiar UFC fighter. 

Remember Matt mitre one was mad enough that he fired his agent when he could only get 5000 in sponsorship money at the 11th hour for a fight
Sent from Verticalsports.com App


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> far below the US median full time adult wage and not enough to raise a family, sometimes not enough to live, train and feed oneself properly.


An entry level fighter making this kind of money should not be trying to raise a family. If this is the life you choose 
you don't have kids until you can afford them.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Term said:


> An entry level fighter making this kind of money should not be trying to raise a family. If this is the life you choose
> you don't have kids until you can afford them.


Yeah a fighter should not be trying to raise a family, who does he think he is deserving basic human happiness while working his ass off full time. Why, when that money is so much more badly needed for ferrari #57.


----------



## Term (Jul 28, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> Yeah a fighter should not be trying to raise a family, who does he think he is deserving basic human happiness while working his ass off full time. Why, when that money is so much more badly needed for ferrari #57.


Exactly I am glad you understand. :confused05:


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Toxic said:


> I hate trying to post links and quotes on my phone but a simple google search gave me the article from mma fighting. Com
> 
> Also Tim Kennedy complained that when the UFC put the sponsor tax in place he lost ranger up as a sponsor cutting his income in half which if true meant he was getting around 55000 per event from ranger up while fighting for strike force which due to less exposure would mean he was getting less than a similiar UFC fighter.
> 
> ...


That's very convenient, being able to type paragraphs on the phone but not being able to hold a tap down, copy the url, and paste it in another window. The only thing I could find on mmafighting was this, and it makes no real mention of the figures, just the usual roundabout talk.

http://www.mmafighting.com/2011/09/13/the-truth-about-fighters-and-sponsors

Some offhand quote from Kennedy saying "I made half!" can't really be taken at face value as an actual calculation. It could most likely be hyperbole or figure of speech, like "oh I've been to a thousand UFC shows" etc., not like literal. Basically he wasn't happy with the sponsor tax and said an offhand sentence to express his displeasure.

This is the second time you haven't backed any of these tall claims up with a valid source, so right now I'm not convinced on your POV at all.

Also do you know what the average fighter's training/medical/travel/management expenses are? I'd bet they are higher than the sponsors for entry levels.


----------



## SmackyBear (Feb 14, 2008)

http://www.mmajunkie.com/news/2012/01/with-fighter-pay-in-spotlight-ufc-vets-shed-light-on-life-in-octagons-middle-class

That article has some information on the discretionary bonuses and/or sponsorship of Roop, Volkman and Phan in 2011.



> For the top I'd be happy to see every champ or PPV headliner automatically get a PPV share, because clearly they are anchoring those cards and making the co. millions. Them having a decent stake makes for better involvement in promotion as well as to deliver a good, exciting product if their next PPV is to sell well. The rest is fine as it is.


So a minimum for everyone and ppv shares for headliners? Anything like approximate percentage of revenue for total compensation?


----------



## H33LHooK (Jul 13, 2011)

Businessmen generally have this thing called a profit margin, and they don't like to see it eroded, so I'm guessing that even if they _did_ give the fighters a raise, Zuffa would simply jack the price on X/Y/Z in order to guarantee their ROI % doesn't change.

It's the same idea as minimum wages: when the price of labor increases, so does the cost of the fruits of that labor. 

.

.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

SmackyBear said:


> http://www.mmajunkie.com/news/2012/01/with-fighter-pay-in-spotlight-ufc-vets-shed-light-on-life-in-octagons-middle-class
> 
> That article has some information on the discretionary bonuses and/or sponsorship of Roop, Volkman and Phan in 2011.
> 
> ...


That's a great article, + rep. It does highlight though how much the non purse incomes and expenses vary.

On one hand you have a guy with a losing record like Roop who says he makes $20000 per fight on sponsorships which is a really large figure. I don't even know if he's being honest because in that article he is the one completely toeing the company line in everything and playing a suckup, but if it's true and everybody made that kind of sponsorship money I would not have a problem with the UFC's pay structure at all.

But when you look at the other two, Volkmann reveals he on average pockets only $1600 in sponsorships per fight, sometimes as low as $250. This is a guy with a winning record and much higher on the ladder than Roop, who at the time of the interview was on a 5 win streak in the UFC. So the sponsorship money varies drastically and is by no means a guarantee, same as OTN bonuses etc. 

It also highlights their expenses a bit, with some fighters claiming more than $22,000 in training expenses before travel. So as I was pointing out earlier, in many cases the expenses may far outstrip the sponsorship and appearance money. Such fighters do complain of barely making ends meet.

So yes a decent minimum purse to show as I said would go a long way. Just so there isn't an elite level fighter who is working his ass off and still dirt poor. A PPV cut for main eventers would also be nice; I don't know exactly what a fair percentage would be, but there are estimates that GSP for instance receives 10-15% PPV revenue cut after costs. 

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/ar...rticles/georges-stpierre-5-million-ufc-fight/

This is of course probably the current high end or gold standard, GSP being the highest selling and current longest reigning champ. I think even 2% or so after costs would be decent for starting main eventers, get them about 100K-200K for helping make the co. over $15 mil for the event pure profit AFTER costs. You know boxing main-eventers are taking 5-10 times as much.


----------



## joey.jupiter (Apr 7, 2010)

though some of the pay is low, there is still a good amount of money being made by most MMA fighters. they don't complain either though that's wise I suppose.


----------

