# UFC 83 Payouts Released



## antiscian (Jan 28, 2007)

_**The Quebec Alcohol, Racing and Gaming Commission: Ultimate Fighting Championship Presents UFC 83: Sierra vs St-Pierre 2 Total Gate: $7,212,010 Venue: Bell Centre Values: USD**

Brad Morris (8,000) Cain Velasquez (12,000 + 10,000)
Kuniyoshi Hironaka (6,000) Jonathan Goulet (18,000 + 15,000)
Rich Clementi (26,550 + 17,000) Sam Stout (22,000)
Ed Herman (30,000) Demian Maia (15,000 + 22,000)
Jason Day (22,000 + 17,000) Alan Belcher (17,250)
Joe Doerksen (13,250) Jason MacDonald (34,000 + 20,000)
Mark Bocek (21,000) Mac Danzig (41,000 + 19,000)
Charles McCarthy (19,000) Michael Bisping (44,000 + 24,000)
Nate Quarry (35,000 + 26,000) Kalib Starnes (31,550)
Travis Lutter (63,000) Rich Franklin (74,000 + 33,000)
Matt Serra (75,000) Georges St-Pierre (124,000 + 100,000)

************************************************************









_


----------



## Charles Lee Ray (May 4, 2008)

Nice find.


I don't understand ow the pay structure works though. 


Why is a guy like Kuniyoshi Hironaka who is fighting his fourth fight in the UFC make 6,000 while a guy who is just as much as an unknown like Brad Morris is making 8,000 in his debut?


Like wise how is a an unknown making his debut like Jason Day make 22,000 while a UFC veteran like Joe Doerksen who has had multiple fights (some on the main cards of PPVs) make 13,250?


It just doesn't make sense. Still, its good to see the payouts steadly increasing.


----------



## LeeM (Nov 23, 2007)

Danzig is getting good money for a TUF guy.


----------



## looney liam (Jun 22, 2007)

the ufc has finally sorted out the fighter salaries! usually tuf fighters get 8-12k to show and double to win, but they make more to show now than they used to get for a win. pretty much everyone in that list has had a boost in pay.
we can finally put the "underpaid fighter" debate to a rest.

theres only a couple of fighters there with low pay, but i'm guessing the ufc will sign them to better contracts soon.


----------



## doburg717 (Apr 25, 2008)

im suprised serra's base amount is more then franklins, though i guess its probably due to the way each is paid with bonus for each ppv buy or something.


----------



## looney liam (Jun 22, 2007)

doburg717 said:


> im suprised serra's base amount is more then franklins, though i guess its probably due to the way each is paid with bonus for each ppv buy or something.


its because champions make more than non-champions. these salaries seem to be very fair. no-ones getting paid too much, nor too little.


----------



## Tripod87 (Dec 30, 2007)

So for the first time, I decided to add up all the fighters' salaries and compare them to the total amount of money that the UFC made...

and I'm SHOCKED. I knew it was bad, but not this bad.

In total, all the fighter made (minus the bonuses, which will make minimal difference) $1,034,600

UFC made $7,212,010 from gate sells and approximately 600,000*$44.95 (600,000 buyer approximation came from this thread http://www.mmaforum.com/ufc/35604-ufc-tackles-long-term-growth-issues.html) = $26,970,000

So...unless I'm missing something HUGE here, the fighters in this event got about 3% of what the UFC made. Even if the number of buyers for the ppv are grossly wrong, 14% of the gate is still pretty horribly low. This makes me sick :thumbsdown:


----------



## ZZtigerZZ81 (Jul 8, 2006)

Tripod87 said:


> So for the first time, I decided to add up all the fighters' salaries and compare them to the total amount of money that the UFC made...
> 
> and I'm SHOCKED. I knew it was bad, but not this bad.
> 
> ...


Compare that to the NFL where players make roughly 60% of what the owners take in. NBA and baseball are less, but I don't know how much. I think they hover around the 40-50% range.


----------



## recon6991 (Nov 21, 2007)

Theres an interview with Dana on a Quebec news show and he said some of the bigger fighters get cuts of the PPV numbers as part of there contracts, but their actual winnings are less. I think thats why Franklins money is less than Serras, because he is a huge draw.


----------



## Terry77 (Jan 5, 2007)

UFC undercards get paid way more than their counterparts in boxing and other promotions.


----------



## Tripod87 (Dec 30, 2007)

Terry77 said:


> UFC undercards get paid way more than their counterparts in boxing and other promotions.


Although true...but ~3% of the events total revenue for all the fighters? No thanks.


----------



## ZZtigerZZ81 (Jul 8, 2006)

Tripod87 said:


> Although true...but ~3% of the events total revenue for all the fighters? No thanks.


Shows the control in the sports...UFC and other org's control MMA while Boxers enjoy control over their "sport". I quoted sport because I think it is borderline that it can still be called that. Boxing has seen a huge decline in quality since this shift and I don't even watch anymore.


----------



## Extreme MMA (Jul 11, 2006)

I love how you look at the money the UFC drew in and assume it's profit. You obviously dont take into consideration money the UFC put into advertising and organizing the event.


----------



## Terry77 (Jan 5, 2007)

Tripod87 said:


> Although true...but ~3% of the events total revenue for all the fighters? No thanks.


St. Pierre deserves a big chunk of that loot.


----------



## Ryan1522 (Oct 31, 2006)

Jason Day (22,000 + 17,000) UFC Debut... wow made out like a bandit

Jason MacDonald (34,000 + 20,000) $54 000 a fight is good money he could make over $200 000 a year which is good

Nate Quarry (35,000 + 26,000) $61 000 for doing retard hammerfists and immitating Kalib's running.


----------



## GKY (Jun 3, 2007)

If those payouts are legit then I would say that is terrific salaries with no real complaints.


----------



## Tripod87 (Dec 30, 2007)

Extreme MMA said:


> I love how you look at the money the UFC drew in and assume it's profit. You obviously dont take into consideration money the UFC put into advertising and organizing the event.


I didn't. I said how much the UFC made from the events, not profited. I guess made is a pretty vague term, but it is what I meant. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I know millions do have to go into advertising, but even after that, even if i say $20 million goes into advertising (huge overestimate imo, although I'm not sure since I'm not a marketing major or anything), that's still 7% that the fighters are making of what's left.


----------



## UseOf_A_Weapon (Aug 6, 2007)

I do marketing and event promotion for a publication firm, and while its not the same thing and our events are (obviously) much much smaller, we operate very similar to these types of events (UFC, Boxing, etc). Promotion for an event costs a lot of money. There are tons of people in the pipeline that have to be paid, there are venues to pay for (I know that arena in Montreal was a good chunk of change. no less than $3mil more likely $5mil.) and so on. UFC runs a good number of TV ads. You end up paying anywhere from 5 to 10 different people to get an ad put on TV. (depending on what agencies you use and how perfect you want your ad). The fighters arent the only ones getting paid to show up for this event. the Gaming commission takes a cut, the judges are paid (not well, but they are compensated) there's security, set-up staff, etc. Personally I think I'd have a heart attack if I were the UFC's book keeper. 

Now, don't get me wrong. I know Dana and the Fertitta's are getting first cut and I'm sure its probably upwards of 30% or more. Thats just the way this is gonna work for a while. The fighters, while not making as much as pro boxers, are still doing very well for themselves and really, you can't expect to get paid $3million to show while the sport is still this new. I say give it 10 years and yes, we will start seeing boxing payouts in MMA. But it's gonna take some time and the sport still needs to draw in more fans.


----------



## milkkid291 (Dec 31, 2006)

Tripod87 said:


> I didn't. I said how much the UFC made from the events, not profited. I guess made is a pretty vague term, but it is what I meant. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
> 
> I know millions do have to go into advertising, but even after that, even if i say $20 million goes into advertising (huge overestimate imo, although I'm not sure since I'm not a marketing major or anything), that's still 7% that the fighters are making of what's left.


Tripod, you are forgetting the money that is not released to us such as PPV % bonuses, locker room checks, etc. etc.


----------



## ezcw (May 9, 2007)

Did the UFC up the win bonus(which would be awesome)? It looks a lot higher than it was before for the lower tier fights. Either that, or I could just be having selective memory.


----------



## milkkid291 (Dec 31, 2006)

ezcw said:


> Did the UFC up the win bonus(which would be awesome)? It looks a lot higher than it was before for the lower tier fights. Either that, or I could just be having selective memory.


Oh yeah, they definately did.

It was $70,000 for submission, knockout, and fight of the night.


----------



## Tripod87 (Dec 30, 2007)

milkkid291 said:


> Tripod, you are forgetting the money that is not released to us such as PPV % bonuses, locker room checks, etc. etc.


Ah yes, it seems like my attempts are getting beaten down with every post. Ya'll got me


----------



## DanTheJu (Mar 3, 2007)

Here comes my 2 cents!

Comparing what the fighters make to what you think the UFC’s gross receipts are is an extremely ignorant way of valuating the event. You’re estimated gross receipts are way off to begin with and the gross profit is far less than you would imagine.

I, in no way, know what each event the UFC puts on costs, but I do work in TV so I have a good insight as to what it would cost. 

First, lets look at the gate. The UFC probably takes in the entire gate, but they had to pay for the venue. That is a huge chuck of the gate.

Next lets look at the PPV buys. The estimates posted earlier are ignorant. Even if they did have 600,000 buys, the UFC does not get $44.95 per buy. Each outlet that provides the PPV takes a cut of each buy. Again, another large piece of the gross receipts that is being ignored.

Then there is the event its self. It is HIGHLY unfair to compare the percentage of gross receipts paid to players/fighters to the NFL and the such. Here is why. The NFL does not broadcast their product, NBC, CBS and ESPN does. They cover every bit of production costs. Not only do they cover all the production costs, they pay the NFL for the right to pay for the production costs.

Putting on a High Definition show the quality of the UFC is VERY expensive. There is a very large crew (far more people than anybody outside of TV could ever imagine). There are Producers, Directors, Camera Operators, Camera Assistants, Cable Pages, Audio Mixers, Boom Operators, Gaffers, Grips and many many others. The show its self cost multi-millions to produce.

Next, the fighters get paid more than what they show in the purse report. In America the athletic commissions (who also have to get paid) are required to release the purse for the fight, but they do not release any information about fighter contracts. Each fight signs a contract that we know nothing about, and really we shouldn’t. They may get a large chunk of the PPV sales if they are popular, and they may get a large signing bonus. Some may get yearly salary, or performance bonuses. We don’t know.

So to say the fighters only get 3% is ignorant! To compare what they make to NFL/NBA is ignorant. And to assume you know what they make is ignorant.

Again, just my 2 cents! ENJOY!


----------



## BrFighter07 (Jun 16, 2007)

wow look at how much starnes got paid what an opressive contract


----------



## Sojuuk (Apr 22, 2008)

BrFighter07 said:


> wow look at how much starnes got paid what an opressive contract


kinda surprised UFC didn't try to get that money back for "services not rendered" or some such.


----------



## towwffc (Jan 1, 2008)

Also I'm sure some of the more popular fighters got bonuses. I read that St. Pierre got a $500,000 bonus once that wasn't released to the public. So I wouldn't doubt that some of these guys made much more money than we realize.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

Wasnt Hironaka/Goulet the FOTN? IF so wouldnt they both get a bonus? Id also like to throw into the whole 14% of the gate argument that venues dont let you put on MMA cards in arenas that hold thousands of people for free.


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

Charles Lee Ray said:


> Nice find.
> 
> 
> I don't understand ow the pay structure works though.
> ...


The reason why it does not make sense is that each fighter negotiates his contract or fight contract individually. 

Depends how good a manger you have, and how big a draw you can make yourself out to be.


----------



## ozz525 (Oct 5, 2006)

I think that those payouts are a bunk of bull. GSP made more when he submited Hughes at UFC 79, why would his salary go down? http://mmamania.com/2008/04/28/ufc-83-payouts-and-salaries-for-serra-vs-st-pierre-2/
Don't believe anything without a link


----------



## mickkelly12 (Jan 19, 2008)

doburg717 said:


> im suprised serra's base amount is more then franklins, though i guess its probably due to the way each is paid with bonus for each ppv buy or something.


the bigger named fighters have an option of getting a percentage of the gate receipts im pretty sure franklin is one of them


----------



## ROCKBASS03 (Jul 27, 2006)

Tripod87 said:


> So for the first time, I decided to add up all the fighters' salaries and compare them to the total amount of money that the UFC made...
> 
> and I'm SHOCKED. I knew it was bad, but not this bad.
> 
> ...


The only problem with all your figuring is that you aren't considering what the UFC "made." You are looking what the totals were. Not taking into consideration the expenses it paid. These kind of posts are ignorant considering none of us know how much money the UFC made on any given event. Another factor is how much more money was paid to fighter's. We don't know all the numbers. We know the released amounts for the fights and bonus purses. 
Take a guess at how much it cost the UFC just to use that arena for the weekend. That cost alone took a lot off the total you came up with. Think it through before you jump to inane conclusions:dunno:


----------



## ZZtigerZZ81 (Jul 8, 2006)

DanTheJu said:


> *Putting on a High Definition show the quality of the UFC is VERY expensive. There is a very large crew (far more people than anybody outside of TV could ever imagine). There are Producers, Directors, Camera Operators, Camera Assistants, Cable Pages, Audio Mixers, Boom Operators, Gaffers, Grips and many many others. The show its self cost multi-millions to produce.*
> 
> So to say the fighters only get 3% is ignorant! To compare what they make to NFL/NBA is ignorant. And to assume you know what they make is ignorant.
> 
> Again, just my 2 cents! ENJOY!


Makes you wonder why Dana wouldn't work harder for a contract with a TV network. Since he would gain more income and elimnate costs at the same time. 

I wasn't comparing what UFC fighters make in terms of percentages to what NFL players make (just stating the two). Though since they are professional athletes, it shouldn't be considered ignorant, rather completely different situations that require completely different pay structures.


----------



## Toxic (Mar 1, 2007)

ozz525 said:


> I think that those payouts are a bunk of bull. GSP made more when he submited Hughes at UFC 79, why would his salary go down? http://mmamania.com/2008/04/28/ufc-83-payouts-and-salaries-for-serra-vs-st-pierre-2/
> Don't believe anything without a link


 I think its fishy but I do think GSP would have gotten a good bonus for taking the Hughes fight on short notice.


----------



## SimplyNate (May 27, 2007)

Yeah I can't really find anything else about these payouts. As ozz posted I didn't they were going to release them.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

Terry77 said:


> UFC undercards get paid way more than their counterparts in boxing and other promotions.


This is a good point, and one that's often overlooked.


----------



## DanTheJu (Mar 3, 2007)

ROCKBASS03 said:


> The only problem with all your figuring is that you aren't considering what the UFC "made." You are looking what the totals were. Not taking into consideration the expenses it paid. These kind of posts are ignorant considering none of us know how much money the UFC made on any given event. Another factor is how much more money was paid to fighter's. We don't know all the numbers. We know the released amounts for the fights and bonus purses.
> Take a guess at how much it cost the UFC just to use that arena for the weekend. That cost alone took a lot off the total you came up with. Think it through before you jump to inane conclusions:dunno:


Way to take my post, regurgitate it, and claim it as your own!


----------



## All_In (Aug 23, 2007)

DanTheJu said:


> Way to take my post, regurgitate it, and claim it as your own!


:laugh: Sucks, but rest assured that it will happen more often than you think.


----------



## kamikaze145 (Oct 3, 2006)

thats not including PPV bonuses, fotn, sotn, and kotn, so those look better than PPVs I have seen in the past. Things seem to be moving in the right direction. That is easily enough for most of these guys to train full time and make this a career and not have to worry about "paying the bills" and things will only get better.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Tripod87 said:


> So for the first time, I decided to add up all the fighters' salaries and compare them to the total amount of money that the UFC made...
> 
> and I'm SHOCKED. I knew it was bad, but not this bad.
> 
> ...


 No need to calculate the costs involved in renting the arena, producing the event, producing the PPV broadcast, etc, eh?

Edit: I see I'm too late.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

If GSP, Anderson Silva, Chuck Liddell or Tito Ortiz fight four times in roughly a year — which each did in 2007, give or take a few days — and make about $250,000 each fight, not including bonuses and endorsments, then thet's a base salary of roughly $1 million. 

Add potential Fight of the Night, knockout and submission bonuses, along with endorsements and other very valuable perks that aren't disclosed, and they're making pretty damn good money. Don't kid yourself.

This might not match the top level in boxing, a sport with foundation that reachers back more than 100 years, but it's impressive for an organization that is only 15 years old and has only really been lucrative for about the last five.

And as has been pointed out and widely reported, UFC's undercard salaries are regular higher than those in boxing.

We have no reason to believe both salaries and bonuses for those fighters won't rise in the coming months and years, and the organization and the sport gain fans and finiancial support. Bear in mind it was only during the current calendar year that UFC secured sponsorship from such companies as Harley-Davidson and Anheuser-Busch.

It's not fair to villify Dana White and label him a cheapskate. He doesn't even pull all the strings at UFC, as is often assumed, nor does he arbitrarily determine fighter payouts. 

And I have little doubt both he and others at Zuffa intend to pay their fighters accordingly as the company grows.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

One more point. Compare those salaries, and even those of lower-card fighters, to those of WWE wrestlers, whose employer does comparable PPV business to UFC.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22days+a+year%22+wwe&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Keep in mind also these people work and travel each day for _more than 300 days per yea_r and are often performing injured.


----------



## DanTheJu (Mar 3, 2007)

ZZtigerZZ81 said:


> Makes you wonder why Dana wouldn't work harder for a contract with a TV network. Since he would gain more income and elimnate costs at the same time.


This is also a rather large incorrect assumption!

I will assure you that NO network is willing to pay the UFC near what they make on PPV’s to broadcast a product that has absolutely no rating history on a network.

The only numbers they have is from the free events that are aired on spike and they get around 1 million viewers. 

1 million viewers is such a small number for a network that a show would get canceled after only airing one episode.

So I would guarantee that the first few Network Broadcasts would be a money-loosing venture for the UFC. It would be great marketing, but not lucrative at all!

And the money is not the only issue here. The UFC would also have to give up control of production. They would have an outside company controlling what is said (and many sports casters are anti-MMA), what is shown and how it is shown. The UFC puts on a great show, and they own it, so just giving it away and loosing money in the process is not a great way to gain income!

So how does the NFL make money this way? Because the broadcasters paid $21.4 BILLION for the rights to air the sport!


----------

