# UFC ripping off its fighters - from a different angle.



## Fine Wine (Aug 30, 2010)

Is the UFC structure REALLY a good thing for MMA?

Ok, after watching a bunch of UFC and boxing, I got to thinking about what cut goes to the promotors and what cut goes to the fighters. Given both would have similar cost structures and both gather revenue streams in similar ways.

Just for some numbers:

The promotors estimaated net worth:

Bob Arum, Don King, 2 promotors who have been around a long time and 2 of the biggest in boxing history. The former worth 200mil, the later worth 150mil.

The fighters estimated net worth:

Oscar De La Hoya, Floyd Mayweather Jr and Manny Pacquiao, worth 175mil (given also now a promotor), 90mil and 70mil respectively.

Now let's look at the UFC.

Promotors: 

Dana White, a baby in the sport in comparison to tbe boxing promotors above in Don King and Bob Arum. Net worth, 150mil.

The fighters:

Chuck Liddell, GSP, Anderson Silva, worth 16mil, 14mil and 4.5mil respectively.

And some here say Dana and Zuffa aren't ripping off their fighters? WTF are the guy who are risking their lives doing earning a dime in comparison to what boxing promotors are paying their fighters?

In both sports, the smaller fighters get little, but at least one great strucutre in boxing, is that international fighters, rather than fight on a UFC card in the US for 20k, can fight in their home land and raise both potential home PPVs and large gates. Such as Anthony Mundine or Danny Green in Australia who earn more in one fight sometimes than Anderson Silva has in his career though scheduling such as this http://ringtv.craveonline.com/schedule (half these fights are in Armenia, Germany, Australia, Brittain, Poland or Singapore (I realise smaller promotions can do the same in MMA, but it appears if you aren't in the UFC going forward, you won't be recognized as a big star in your home country)).

It appears the UFC structure is the best for generating rediculous money for the owners whereas boxing far better for the fighters. For the fans? International fans get far more benefit from their home growtn fighters in boxing in that they generally get to watch them live and close to home which in turn geneates more benefit for the fighters, yet the UFC is delivered as one product and as such is better for mass distrubution (yet this still means more for the owners).

Thoughts?


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

You're completely right bro, and you even forgot to mention that Dana is only a TEN PERCENT promoter / owner and his net worth is already equal to the top boxing promoters. Think about how much the Fertittas are making. And then compare it to the fighters.

The UFC is a monopoly shafting it's main entertainers and moneymakers, plain and simple. Dana did nothing magical except being in the right place at the right time, the world was ready to move away from the watered down hugfest that is modern boxing. 

Combat sports are the OLDEST sport, it's the male instinct since prehistory to admire warrior fighting prowess and for most of human tribal history it was the single most important criteria for social standing and power. 

The point is that the sport that best captures that prowess in any era will always be wildly popular and moneymaking. In ancient greece it was wrestling, In Rome it was (unfortunately) the barbaric Gladiator combat, in the modern era it was boxing and now it's MMA. It will make money no matter who is at the head.

The only thing Dana does is act like some god because of his success that is due to nothing except First Mover's advantage. The rest of it is plain greed and shafting, I don't care how people defend it with advertising costs, entertainment costs etc., which are much lower than boxing anyway.


----------



## Squirrelfighter (Oct 28, 2009)

Did I miss an interview where UFC fighters said they didn't make enough money to live off of? 

Is there a single noted incident where a UFC fighter was unable to compete to his fullest potential because the UFC didn't pay him enough? 

Last time I checked UFC fighters (for their first fight) make, for one fight, above the poverty line, for two they make the average Middle Class wage (assuming they win). For 3 fights (all wins, or two wins and a loss) any fighter in the UFC makes ample to train and live on. 

On top of that the UFC is providing FREE full coverage medical insurance for both taining, and non-training injuries. As well as access to some of the very best doctors in the world. 

From the competitive stand point there's no better location in the world than the UFC. And ANY fighter who wins has the chance to legitimately earn the monicre of the best in the world. 

Frankly, complaining about the UFC screwing its fighters, when UFC fighters aren't complaining about being screwed is just plain stupid.


----------



## anderton46 (Apr 23, 2010)

I was waiting for this 'new angle' that you spoke of in your title, but again its just someone complaining about fighter pay. 

It's a new sport, you can't just jump the pay scales immediately thats the most retarded thing anyone could do. Odds are they will increase slowly over time as has every other sport in the world as more money is invested. 

But yeah, if you want to see mma stars paid boxing money then I assume you don't actually want to see the top guys fight because if they earned millions off of one fight im sure alot would be retiring very early. Rampage, GSP, Nick Diaz etc


----------



## IllegalLegKick (Apr 13, 2010)

While I agree the fighters do deserve to make a bit more money especially some of the lower guys making only $10,000 a fight even less sometimes. I think your off in comparing Dana to King and Arum. Dana is the president of the UFC and owns a stake in the company of course he is going to make a considerable amount more than the fighter. Thats just how business works regardless of if we agree with it or not.

edit: I guess Don King is the president of his promotion.....show what I know about boxing.....


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

I see no one is addressing what I felt was a very important point to his argument- that Dana has made a fortune to match top boxing promoters while paying out much less to the top fighters... and of course the Fertittas owning majority shares of Zuffa probably have made much more. 

The implication I think is that some of that could be used to push up fighters' pay, rather than lining the promotion's pockets.

edit: Illegalkick did kind of address it while I was posting...



> While I agree the fighters do deserve to make a bit more money especially some of the lower guys making only $10,000 a fight even less sometimes. I think your off in comparing Dana to King and Arum. Dana is the president of the UFC and owns a stake in the company of course he is going to make a considerable amount more than the fighter. Thats just how business works regardless of if we agree with it or not.


Don King is president and owner of his own promotions as well.


----------



## UKMMAGURU (Nov 15, 2009)

I'm all for the fighters getting a fair share but if they let this become an _open market_ like Boxing you'll get to the point where the fighters have all the power and refuse to do the big fights, see; Pacman-Mayweather.

:confused05:


----------



## M_D (Apr 8, 2007)

im confused here, are you guys really saying that a ceo should make as much as his employees?

new employees to a buisness make less then people that have been promoted, so on and so forth. if a owner starts making the same as his employees he is one shitty owner.

Also even with training and the fight i bet dana puts in way more hours into working then most fighters do for the ufc


----------



## locnott (Apr 1, 2009)

Squirrelfighter said:


> Did I miss an interview where UFC fighters said they didn't make enough money to live off of?
> 
> Is there a single noted incident where a UFC fighter was unable to compete to his fullest potential because the UFC didn't pay him enough?
> 
> ...


I hear ya bro, I think they are doing ok all things considerd..
I think to even compare the two you would have to have a Boxing Title fight every time the UFC does and then you would have to see the pay of all the undercard fighters. I think your average UFC fighter makes a lot more money than your average boxer, if you drop just the top 5 highest paid guys in both sport and compare the rest I have a feeling the UFC fighter is way ahead on the pay scale. I will do a little research to find out then I will try to bring some facts. 
'The above comment is just my opinion so no need to neg me or call me retarded just yet if you have a diffrent one"


----------



## Fine Wine (Aug 30, 2010)

anderton46 said:


> I was waiting for this 'new angle' that you spoke of in your title, but again its just someone complaining about fighter pay.


Sorry, I meant to put "Is the UFC structure REALLY a good thing for MMA?" as the title and realised after I posted the title was misleading and tried to change it. Can a mod somehow change the the quotation above? My main aim wasn't just about the pay fact, the last two paragraphs were also part of my point, in that is the structure of the UFC pretty much owning MMA actually good for the sport.....


----------



## Guy Incognito (Apr 3, 2010)

No MMA fighters are as big as Mayweather,Pacquiao etc.

Fighters on the undercard of Boxing get paid just as much as ones on UFC cards.

And Arum is screwing the lesser known fighters of his promotion just as bad as Dana is.

Not my opinion though, the fight game is a huge gamble just like a lot of other professions. you're never guaranteed to make it so it's up to the individual to decide if they are going to sacrifice a lot to "try" and succeed.

So if they are barely getting by then it's on them.


----------



## Fine Wine (Aug 30, 2010)

HexRei said:


> Don King is president and owner of his own promotions as well.


Yes and Bob Arum of Top Rank, one of the biggest promotions for decades.



locnott said:


> I think your average UFC fighter makes a lot more money than your average boxer, if you drop just the top 5 highest paid guys in both sport and compare the rest I have a feeling the UFC fighter is way ahead on the pay scale. I will do a little research to find out then I will try to bring some facts.
> 'The above comment is just my opinion so no need to neg me or call me retarded just yet if you have a diffrent one"


lol, I won't be negging you. But I think your research will come up with something very startling, which was part of my original post. Guys like Anthony Mundine, Danny Green (Australia), Chris John (Indonesia), Arthur Abraham (Germany I believe by war of Armenia), Ricky Hatton or Amir Khan (UK), Saul Alvarez (Mexico) et al would make a STACK more than not just their UFC peers in rankings, but I dare say would be on par with the top UFC fighters. This is because they fight in their own backyards much of the time, raise large gates and get cuts of their home PPV sales. Some of these guys get a few mil per fight just to turn up. This is a huge advantage of the boxing set-up, in that guys can fight infront of THEIR fans. In the UFC, it is built around mass production.


----------



## locnott (Apr 1, 2009)

Fine Wine said:


> Sorry, I meant to put "Is the UFC structure REALLY a good thing for MMA?" as the title and realised after I posted the title was misleading and tried to change it. Can a mod somehow change the the quotation above? My main aim wasn't just about the pay fact, the last two paragraphs were also part of my point, in that is the structure of the UFC pretty much owning MMA actually good for the sport.....


I see your point, IMO if the sport is still growing, expanding and making people money is good, Some time in the future there will be something to come along to compete with the UFC (I hope).As with most things I guess it depends on personal opinion.


----------



## Breadfan (Jan 3, 2008)

All athletes are overpaid damn near. (Baseball, Basketball, Football? What a joke)

If a fighter only fights 2 times a year and makes 20K from Dana and has ZERO endorsements, he's doing just fine. 

The lower level fighters use this as a hobby. Just like a lot of you guys on this forum train and are avid fighters... But have dayjobs. 

Once you go from Hobby to job, you have other things that pay you other than Dana, and these guys don't go hungry.

This thread should be named "All athletes ripping off their bosses except UFC Fighters"


----------



## Sambo de Amigo (Sep 24, 2010)

Squirrelfighter said:


> Did I miss an interview where UFC fighters said they didn't make enough money to live off of?
> 
> Is there a single noted incident where a UFC fighter was unable to compete to his fullest potential because the UFC didn't pay him enough?
> 
> ...


You're plain ignorant if you cant realise that the UFC is pretty much 90% of MMA now and if any fighter was to complain they end up Cut or screwed over. 

It happened to Kos , Fitch and Cain they didnt want to sign THEIR rights over to Dana for a video game it resulted in them being cut until they did...............


Complaining works if there is a UNION behind you or stiff competition to move to , look at Football ( Soccer ) for an example a player wants more money he complains threatens to leave BECAUSE he has OPTIONS they either pay him or he leaves. With the UFC being the top dog and the only show in town if a fighter was to kick a fuss up they end up in some regional show.

Its take what they pay which is nothing to what it should be or go scrap the barrel.


----------



## Fine Wine (Aug 30, 2010)

Squirrelfighter said:


> Frankly, complaining about the UFC screwing its fighters, when UFC fighters aren't complaining about being screwed is just plain stupid.


Can the UFC fighters afford to voice it? Given Cain Velasquez, Josh Koscheck and Jon FItch (almost BJ Penn too) were cut for not signing over lifetime image rights for a few K, what do you think will happy to a fighter who speaks up? Ah, ***** just beat me to the exact same statement.


----------



## HaVoK (Dec 31, 2006)

Here we go again. Fanboys.

Fighters are grown ass men who can handle their own "personal business". When a Zuffa employee is asked, they express happiness and satisfaction regarding their job. If only the rest of us could be so happy in our careers. Let me guess...they fear the UFC brass so of course they will say something positive. Bullshit. Is there a single person here who fears their boss? Didn't think so.

Fighting is a privileged hobby, not a birth right. They choose to sign the contracts and they choose to fight. Nobody is robbing anyone. It beats Roofing for a living.

There are many reasons fighters desire and strive to reach the UFC and being robbed by their employer isn't one of them.

Your are either a Fight fan, or a promotion fan, drama fan, and/or a fan of the spectacle.

Fighters do not require your ignorant assistance. You have not a single clue as to the inside workings of the UFC. They are grown men who are more than capable of making personal decisions that affect their lives without your help.


Comparing the UFC to a Boxing promotion is not just ignorant, its down right ridiculous. Zuffa employees hundreds of fighters and hundreds of people who help run the business. All of which need paid and insured. Since the UFC is privately own they can pay their fighters undisclosed bonuses on top of the bonuses made public. Boxing...lol, Boxing promoters can afford to pay a couple fighters really well. How about the rest of them. The OP named a handful of fighters and that is it. Why? What about the thousands of other boxers around the world? What do you think their compensation is? Fact is...you do not know and it is none of your business. You are either a fan of fighting or you are not. Getting wrapped up in people's private affairs is distasteful and obnoxious. Worry about your own life.


----------



## Fine Wine (Aug 30, 2010)

^^^^^^^^^^

haha, do you actually live at a place called Mt Union HaVoK? That would be quiet ironic!


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

I think that a lot was risked in purchasing/promoting the UFC under it's new ownership. I know that a lot of fans don't think about it, but it hasn't really been raking in money for THAT long. I'd say we are just getting to the point now where things are becoming stable, but now the expansion is in coming in to full effect. 

If anything, I would be in favor of a higher base salary. Even 15gs would be a good base considering sponsorships/appearances. I don't think main event fighters need to make more money AT ALL until that happens.

I guess I just can't justify the thought that Dana, the Fertitas, Joe Silva etc, do not deserve what they are getting - because the fact is that they risked what they had for it.

I also couldn't justify the thought that these guys do not get paid enough - we've had plenty of reports where fighters will mention that they got a little extra here and there. On top of that, there are sponsorships, which there are a ton of to choose from right now. We also don't see any of the flight/hotel etc expenses that are taken care of. How about how NO ONE mentions the money they make though personal appearances or autograph signings? I think about all of those things.

They even take groups of the countries shittiest fighters, put them in a house, give them a reality show, and a decent cheque for appearing. After that, they are making money on appearances!! And most of them should never be employed by the UFC!! It's making the UFC money but goddamnit it's charity!!

I refuse to get sucked in by anyone calling out from a forum that these guys don't get paid enough. I will listen when a fighter of character complains about it. 

There is of course always the feeling: "I always want to make more money", BUT realistically, if you don't see the system in front of you and what it takes to get to the top and in turn: make more money - then you aren't going to understand a lot of situations in life.

For now, I think if you are competing in, but not good enough to make a living in MMA, and you are lucky enough to still have all 10 senses and you should IMMEDIATELY go study a trade or open a gym. 

This isn't some game for people to make a living, it is an outlet for trained killers and high level athletes to entertain people. 

So, get a good manager!


----------



## Squirrelfighter (Oct 28, 2009)

***** de Amigo said:


> You're plain ignorant if you cant realise that the UFC is pretty much 90% of MMA now and if any fighter was to complain they end up Cut or screwed over.
> 
> It happened to Kos , Fitch and Cain they didnt want to sign THEIR rights over to Dana for a video game it resulted in them being cut until they did...............
> 
> ...


Figured I'll address this right off the bat since its such a blatant generalization its pitiful. You're plain stupid if you think the UFC is 90% of MMA. Zuffa makes up the majority of internationally boradcasted MMA, but the UFC is by no means 90% of the sport. 

Last time I checked no one put a gun to those fighters heads and made them sign their images away. If they didn't want to they didn't have to. Contrary to what you apparently believe there is more to professional MMA than just the UFC, especially at the time those events occured. 

A fighter's pay which is released by the Athletic Commission is a fraction of what a fighter actually makes. Lets give an example shall we:

Chris Camozzi (relative unknown, only got into the UFC because he was impressive on TUF) fought on the 121 undercard and made 16,000 to win. He fought on the Tuf 11 finale and made 16,000 to win. He fought twice in 2010 and made 32,000, not including any endorsements and/or back room bonuses. That's twice what I make in a year, as well as more than 1/3 of all Americans who are able to survive on their own, including myself. That is more than ample to survive on in the United States, including endorsements for those two wins, he probably made north of 60,000 that year. More than sufficient to pay for training/general expenses and to save for the future/potential injuries. Had he won against Noke, and stayed in the UFC he would likely be making a larger payday on his next fight than he did on either of those.


----------



## MMAnWEED (Aug 8, 2010)

Squirrelfighter said:


> A fighter's pay which is released by the Athletic Commission is a fraction of what a fighter actually makes. Lets give an example shall we:
> 
> Chris Camozzi (relative unknown, only got into the UFC because he was impressive on TUF) fought on the 121 undercard and made 16,000 to win. He fought on the Tuf 11 finale and made 16,000 to win. He fought twice in 2010 and made 32,000, not including any endorsements and/or back room bonuses. That's twice what I make in a year, as well as more than 1/3 of all Americans who are able to survive on their own, including myself. That is more than ample to survive on in the United States, including endorsements for those two wins, he probably made north of 60,000 that year. More than sufficient to pay for training/general expenses and to save for the future/potential injuries. Had he won against Noke, and stayed in the UFC he would likely be making a larger payday on his next fight than he did on either of those.


You have to realize something. The amount of years a fighter can fight is numbered greatly. Its an incredibly intense sport and once they can no longer efficiently fight, unless they have a college degree which a lot of them do not, they're kinda screwed. So the lower to mid ranked fighters aren't exactly in the greatest of financial situations when it comes to the future.

In addition to this, its the entertainment business and only making 60,000 is actually quite pathetic really especially considering the phenomenal success of the UFC.


----------



## The Horticulturist (Feb 16, 2009)

MMAnWEED said:


> You have to realize something. The amount of years a fighter can fight is numbered greatly. Its an incredibly intense sport and* once they can no longer efficiently fight, unless they have a college degree which a lot of them do not, they're kinda screwed.* So the lower to mid ranked fighters aren't exactly in the greatest of financial situations when it comes to the future.
> 
> In addition to this, its the entertainment business and only making 60,000 is actually quite pathetic really especially considering the phenomenal success of the UFC.


That's the way of the world. You should be able to make yourself useful to the rest of us when the dream is over. Putting 'all of your eggs in one basket', is dangerous in any profession - let alone one that almost entirely depends on your physical body to perform and absorb damage.


----------



## Squirrelfighter (Oct 28, 2009)

MMAnWEED said:


> You have to realize something. The amount of years a fighter can fight is numbered greatly. Its an incredibly intense sport and once they can no longer efficiently fight, unless they have a college degree which a lot of them do not, they're kinda screwed. So the lower to mid ranked fighters aren't exactly in the greatest of financial situations when it comes to the future.
> 
> *In addition to this, its the entertainment business and only making 60,000 is actually quite pathetic really especially considering the phenomenal success of the UFC*.


If they've made 60,000 a year for 8-10 years and didn't get a college degree at some point in that time, or don't have a plan for their future, they'll get no pitty from me. They're grown men and women, if they don't have the wherewithall to prepare for their later years, they don't deserve anyone's pity or advocasy. 

Are we now comparing MMA fighters to actors? Or to football players (a much, much older and more established sport)?


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

Fine Wine said:


> Given both would have similar cost structures and both gather revenue streams in similar ways.


Completely false, the UFC is a league they take on all of the financial risk and directly pay for everything involved. Boxing promoters don't do any of that they are more like sports agents. 

The fighters aren't being ripped off. In boxing a company like HBO has its own PPV channels and gets all of the money from the buys so they actually put the money up for the fight. The ufc gets between 20 and 30 dollars out of around 50 for every PPV buy. The arena fees are different since the UFC is a touring company they can't get the sweetheart deals boxing fights often do. Showtime and HBO don't run sponsored advertisements since they are pay channels and can advertise their fights as much as they want on them for free. The UFC has to pay for all of its advertising. 

The boxing equivalent to the guys who are making 10k to show on UFC shows aren't on PPVs they are fighting for like 1000 dollars in a high school gym somewhere. The top MMA fighters aren't making ridiculous amounts of money but only like 2-5 guys a time in boxing make a ton of money and then a handful more make really good money and everyone else doesn't make shit. The 10-25 guys in MMA weight classes can make considerably more than their boxing counterparts.


----------



## Breadfan (Jan 3, 2008)

If they are smart, they'll open a gym and be good to go. Or open 10 gyms and be in a ton of movies or go over to WWE or something. 


Long story short, they are fine.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Breadfan said:


> If they are smart, they'll open a gym and be good to go. Or open 10 gyms and be in a ton of movies or go over to WWE or something.
> 
> 
> Long story short, they are fine.


Opening gyms requires tons of money which most of them aren't getting from the UFC in the first place, we've all seen what gangsta wannabe dana does or threatens to do to people who even contemplate the movies / other orgs, and WWE is not a viable option for anyone except the ripped heavyweights and those willing to take steroids and ruin their life and health.




Squirrelfighter said:


> Did I miss an interview where UFC fighters said they didn't make enough money to live off of?
> 
> Is there a single noted incident where a UFC fighter was unable to compete to his fullest potential because the UFC didn't pay him enough?
> 
> ...


Yes, you've missed a bunch of interviews by Ortiz, Couture, Werdum, Fitch, BJ, Frank Shamrock and many others then. There aren't more because the moment they open their mouths, Dana kicks them out or shafts them as long as they're in the company, and they have no where else to go if they want to fight at a high level.


----------



## astrallite (Mar 14, 2010)

Squirrelfighter said:


> Did I miss an interview where UFC fighters said they didn't make enough money to live off of?
> 
> Is there a single noted incident where a UFC fighter was unable to compete to his fullest potential because the UFC didn't pay him enough?


Duffee says he was broke while fighting in the UFC and Pat Barry said last year he was living off of ketchup and rice and was about to be evicted from his apartment if he didn't win knock out of the night.


Rich Franklin said in an interview he is making good money but he wish guys at the bottom made more.


----------



## astrallite (Mar 14, 2010)

Double post


----------



## Guy Incognito (Apr 3, 2010)

astrallite said:


> Duffee says he was broke while fighting in the UFC and Pat Barry said last year he was living off of ketchup and rice and was about to be evicted from his apartment if he didn't win knock out of the night.


That'd be the same with a lot of Boxers,Kickboxers,Actors and Musician.

I have no idea why people think fighters(most far) below championship level should be looked after a lot better then everyone else in in the world


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

IIRC Sherk was working as a carpenter still during his early UFC days, and not because he just loved the 9 to 5.


----------



## "El Guapo" (Jun 25, 2010)

Yeh I think its pretty disgusting how fighters are treated. Yes of course high level fighters make enough to survive, but in the grand scheme of things (including comparisons to other sports) they get absolutely shafted. 

Seriously some of the new/lower tier guys must be absolutely broke having to pay for accommodation, food, mma gym fees and bills etc. while some are only earning 5k-10k per fight (and fight what 3/4 times a year MAX) ? . Aint a sport to get into for the money !


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

guy incognito said:


> That'd be the same with a lot of Boxers,Kickboxers,Actors and Musician.
> 
> I have no idea why people think fighters(most far) below championship level should be looked after a lot better then everyone else in in the world


So you're saying that someone that is in the TOP 25 of the WORLD in their profession making barely minimum wage and living off rice and ketchup is somehow "better looked after" than the rest of the world?

Even for crap professions, if you're among the best in the world, you make a ton. How much do you think the 25th best plumber in the world is making? The 25th best scientist? The 25th best farmer? The 25th best doctor, psychologist, fitness instructor, dance instructor, actor etc. IN THE WORLD? A lot more than Pat Barry I'm guessing.


----------



## Guy Incognito (Apr 3, 2010)

Liddellianenko said:


> So you're saying that someone that is in the TOP 25 of the WORLD in their profession making barely minimum wage and living off rice and ketchup is somehow "better looked after" than the rest of the world?
> 
> Even for crap professions, if you're among the best in the world, you make a ton. How much do you think the 25th best plumber in the world is making? The 25th best scientist? The 25th best farmer? The 25th best doctor, psychologist, fitness instructor, dance instructor, actor etc. IN THE WORLD? A lot more than Pat Barry I'm guessing.


And thats perfectly fine, fighters aren't helping people live in their everyday lives.


----------



## Spec0688 (Sep 9, 2007)

You have to realize that the UFC only hit the big stage about 3 years ago and you want to compare boxing numbers to a sport that has had only 4 years of main stream success? 

I'm sure 5-10 years down the line, athletes will be getting paid more then Brock Lesnar or GSP make per fight.


----------



## No_Mercy (Oct 17, 2006)

I use to think the same exact way until we consulted and put on a show ourselves. After studying the spreadsheets of Affliction, Elite, Bodog, HFC, among others I realized they all overpaid their talent and spent millions on marketing. The ones still in business negotiated top sponsor deals, TV deals (necessary for exposure for sponsors), venue costs, marketing expenses, and kept costs at a minimal for fighters' purse. There's lots more, but that's the basics. This is one of the quickest sports or business ventures where the management and talent have been able to churn a healthy profit. Remember they were in the negatives for many years. For them to overcompensate their talent or any other areas could have meant their demise. 

1.) Their number one priority was to keep the organization afloat. 
2.) Then it was about branding. TUF on Spike.
3.) Produce more shows nationally to generate more income and in return gain more sponsors.
4.) Get title sponsors (Harley, Budlight) on board and going international.
5.) Monopolize. Buy out competitors.
6.) Strategic partnership vs IPO. Enter Flash Ent. 
- increase cash flow
- increase global reach
7.) By 2030 you're going to have UFC restaurants, UFC gyms, UFC theaters, UFC amusement parks, UFC casinos, UFC airlines, UFC movies, UFC sports arena, etc. Did I miss anything...lolz!

The fighters' purse have increased dramatically over the years. If the champs or mid tiered fighters aren't complaining then we shouldn't. Boxing has been around for over a century. It will get there when we see the champions get multi millions for a fight. Probably 15 years or so. 

It feels great to be a part of history. Now I just gotta get Dana White to hire me as a consultant.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

guy incognito said:


> And thats perfectly fine, fighters aren't helping people live in their everyday lives.


And what, shite professions like psychologists, wall street bankers, politicians etc. that rake in billions are helping everyday people? right.

At least fighters inspire people, teach them how to defend themselves, and to keep them in awesome physical shape and health. In addition most of them are humble, hard-working, respectful human beings and great to their fans, and are far nicer than 90% of the professions out there.

And if you think fighters and fighting are such useless professions, why do you spend your time watching them and obsessing over them in an online forum?


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

M_D said:


> *im confused here, are you guys really saying that a ceo should make as much as his employees?*
> 
> new employees to a buisness make less then people that have been promoted, so on and so forth. if a owner starts making the same as his employees he is one shitty owner.
> 
> Also even with training and the fight i bet dana puts in way more hours into working then most fighters do for the ufc


Can you quote the post that said this?? Im real curious about this.


----------



## Hiro (Mar 9, 2010)

What I'm tired of seeing is countless fighters earning 8k to show. The top fighters get large sums of money, some of them are rich so I don't care about their pay, but there's way too many prelim fighters and even some main card fighters who are on ridiculously low money.

If they are good enough to be in the UFC they should be paid accordingly, it's been the same way for years which means the company has grown but that salaries only have for the top guys.

$8000 is shit all considering what these guys go through and how they put their health on the line. If they're good enough to get a shot in the UFC then god damn pay them a wedge, it isn't too much to ask :thumbsdown:


----------



## Vale_Tudo (Nov 18, 2007)

The company I work for make about $12 million every month.
I get payed $4300 every month, and I actually work 7.5 hours a day unlike the guys who own the company and probably make hundreds of thousands a month.

Is it fair? Meh, they were smart and started the company with their own money, made it successful and .. yeah, I didnt.

And the prelim fighters are just starting out, everyone gets payed shit In a new job with little or no experience to show for. Keep working/winning and you'll get noticed and get payed more.


Its business, and Its how the word works. And the UFC Is not a sport.

Oh, and Dana actually works his ass off! That guy deserves whatever he makes


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Vale_Tudo said:


> The company I work for make about $12 million every month.
> I get payed $4300 every month, and I actually work 7.5 hours a day unlike the guys who own the company and probably make hundreds of thousands a month.
> 
> Is it fair? Meh, they were smart and started the company with their own money, made it successful and .. yeah, I didnt.
> ...


How many employees does your company have?


----------



## astrallite (Mar 14, 2010)

Vale_Tudo said:


> The company I work for make about $12 million every month.


Well the UFC already holds 20-25 events a year. Three of them sold 1 million buys. Each one of those PPV events made 4 times what your company makes annually.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

astrallite said:


> Well the UFC already holds 20-25 events a year. Three of them sold 1 million buys. Each one of those PPV events made 4 times what your company makes annually.


And how manyy fighters are there in a UFC event?? Lets say there is 18 fighters. chances are 15 of those fighters make less then 200k all together.

I just think if you took 1% of the money that the Fertitas make and you spread it out to the lesser paid fighters. The pay out would look alot better.


----------



## astrallite (Mar 14, 2010)

Vale_Tudo said:


> The company I work for make about $12 million every month.


Just compare this to other sports for example. The average NFL team generates about $250 million annually in revenue, and pays out $110 million to the athletes.

The UFC generates "probably" about twice this amount (just estimating based on gate, ppv revenue, etc), although I highly doubt their entire annual payout is even half of that of an NFL team.


----------



## No_Mercy (Oct 17, 2006)

Hiro said:


> What I'm tired of seeing is countless fighters earning 8k to show. The top fighters get large sums of money, some of them are rich so I don't care about their pay, but there's way too many prelim fighters and even some main card fighters who are on ridiculously low money.
> 
> If they are good enough to be in the UFC they should be paid accordingly, it's been the same way for years which means the company has grown but that salaries only have for the top guys.
> 
> $8000 is shit all considering what these guys go through and how they put their health on the line. If they're good enough to get a shot in the UFC then god damn pay them a wedge, it isn't too much to ask :thumbsdown:


Again, I use to think the same way. But consider you're the CEO or accountant of an MMA show. How would you decide to pay your talent. It would be based on name recognition, followers, record, and finally drawing power. Then you base his pay and see what the breakeven is for amount of tickets sold to make it worthwhile to book em. Put it this way do people pay to see the undercards. Most likely not. It's almost always the main cards as the prelims serving as a warm up/bonus. 

Keep in mind every fighter at one point started at the same level. Heck even Anderson Silva was about to quit fighting and start up a car wash. I just feel bad for Jardine who should have made more than $10k after all those huge fights or the journeymen like James Irvin, Jeff Monson (at one point sleeping out of his car), or Wilson Gouvia who now fight in the small circuit shows. It's a VERY TOUGH business. 



Vale_Tudo said:


> The company I work for make about $12 million every month.
> I get payed $4300 every month, and I actually work 7.5 hours a day unlike the guys who own the company and probably make hundreds of thousands a month.
> 
> Is it fair? Meh, they were smart and started the company with their own money, made it successful and .. yeah, I didnt.
> ...


This is very true. It is indeed how the world works. I just worry how the UFC will continue after Dana White and the Fertittas retire.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

Anderson surely has more than that. He just bought a near 2 million dollar home. Plus from the data from that site, the way it was phrased made it seem like it was more than a year old.

Secondly, I wouldn't say the UFC is ripping anyone off. It's very different when you are comparing the net worth of a business owner and an athlete....Dana's assets include his share in the UFC, so of course, his net worth is inflated.



astrallite said:


> Just compare this to other sports for example. The average NFL team generates about $250 million annually in revenue, and pays out $110 million to the athletes.
> 
> The UFC generates "probably" about twice this amount (just estimating based on gate, ppv revenue, etc), although I highly doubt their entire annual payout is even half of that of an NFL team.


The UFC probably doesn't even come close to that. Keep in mind, the total net worth of the UFC and all of its assets is only a little over a billion. Which is absolutely chump change relatively.

The reason, and people still don't seem to realize it at this point, that the UFC doesn't pay as much as boxing is because they can't afford to. These promoters don't make enough to cover those ridiculous costs for the big events, they sell them to investors like HBO for obscene amounts of money. HBO can afford to throw comical ammounts....like 2 million dollar purses for B level fighters because they are owned by Time Warner....yes, the conglomerate....which is only about over 100 billion times richer than the UFC(literally).


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Anderson surely has more than that. He just bought a near 2 million dollar home. Plus from the data from that site, the way it was phrased made it seem like it was more than a year old.
> 
> Secondly, I wouldn't say the UFC is ripping anyone off. It's very different when you are comparing the net worth of a business owner and an athlete....Dana's assets include his share in the UFC, so of course, his net worth is inflated.
> 
> ...


I agree with you to a certain extent and i certainly believe the UFC cant and shouldnt pay its fighters boxing type money.
But at the same time i think the whole "Obviously employees wont make as much money as the owner, this is just common sense" i think that argument is literally retarded. I dont think a person here think thats the fighters should make as much as Dana White and iv never seen a post stating that.
But i think that the fighters pay can be changed without affecting the UFC in any way. 
Dana White owns 10% of the company?? I imagine the Fertitas own close to the rest. (I think the UFC sold a share to someone else over in Abu Dhabi). 
Imagine we take out 500k out of the Fertitas pockets and spread that out to the fighters. 500k an event to the Fertitas isnt much.. it probably isnt even 5% of the amount they take into their pockets an event. yet that 500k would help out ALL of the fighters a drastic amount, especially fighters that rake in 6k-15k to show and 6k-15k to win. You could literally spread out 25 thousand dollars to 20 different fighters an event. This would make even the preliminary fighters purse look decent, especially compared to boxing where preliminary fighters make about 1k-3k.
It would also help the UFCs image by making them not seem like money hungry thieves. 

I really would like to know the exact number the Fertias/Dana make an event. Im talking about the money that goes into their pockets. Not the money the UFC makes and has to pay out to the many different expenses for an event.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

You, like everyone else, grossly overstate how much money the UFC and the owners make. The first goal of business is to turn profit, and the UFC is doing that and that's what keeps them in business. But yeah, arbitrary numbers like 500k per event are not only big deals, but their utterly asinine. To expect an owner to give out 10 million dollars of his own money(ie profit) is ridiculous. 

The UFC has tons of debt....just the SF acquisition alone probably cost an absurd amount of money....all on a company that is only around a billion dollars in net worth.

Nor Dana White nor the Fertitta brothers have anywhere near the money that their net worth indicates....the majority of it is the worth of their ASSETS...mainly their shares of their businesses.

As far as prelim guys making 6-15k...they really have no need to be making any more. Their salaries are low, and will probably always remain low because they generate very little revenue. They are just there just to fill up time and space...or potentially develop as prospects and contenders and get their pay as they continue to win.

I also see it hard to "thieve" money that is theirs to begin with.


----------



## astrallite (Mar 14, 2010)

Roflcopter said:


> Anderson surely has more than that. He just bought a near 2 million dollar home. Plus from the data from that site, the way it was phrased made it seem like it was more than a year old.


Well let's not get to ahead of ourselves here, Anderson bought a $1.7 million home but that doesn't mean he paid it all in cash. There are a lot of $1.7 million homes in California that are smaller than $300,000 homes in Texas. Real estate is not cheap in many places in California. 

I have a friend who just "bought" a $2 million apartment in San Francisco and it's nothing to mail in about (you could probably buy a better apartment for $100k in most states), and he makes closer to average joe salary than Anderson Silva.

My parents bought a $1.4 million house back in 08 and it's and they live off a very average middle class salary and the house is SMALL...California real estate sucks hard.

Edit: Just checked up some homes in Anderson's area...they have 1800 square foot homes going for $1.4 million...I don't know Anderson's address but I can tell you right now $1.7 million isn't going to buy a big house in his neighborhood.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> You, like everyone else, grossly overstate how much money the UFC and the owners make. The first goal of business is to turn profit, and the UFC is doing that and that's what keeps them in business. But yeah, arbitrary numbers like 500k per event are not only big deals, but their utterly asinine. To expect an owner to give out 10 million dollars of his own money(ie profit) is ridiculous.
> 
> The UFC has tons of debt....just the SF acquisition alone probably cost an absurd amount of money....all on a company that is only around a billion dollars in net worth.
> 
> ...



Obviously your mind doesn't let you see the whole picture. You seem to only see things with 1 point of view which greatly hinders your view on this subject. For you to call more money going to the FIGHTERS in any terms similar to "asinine" is down right pathetic. I hear stories of Dana white blowing a million dollars a night at the casinos. For You to think that 500k a ppv is a huge amount of money to the Fertitas or Dana is down right laughable. Even though 500k is not as big of a deal as you think it is, even 250k spread between the lower paid fighters would greatly help the payouts look better. Btw those time/space fighters you are talking about whether they generate alot of views or not, they do the EXACT SAME JOB the main event-ers do. For you to try and justify a pay of 6k to be anything less the thievery is how would you say?? uhh... Asinine.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Obviously your mind doesn't let you see the whole picture. You seem to only see things with 1 point of view which greatly hinders your view on this subject. For you to call more money going to the FIGHTERS in any terms similar to "asinine" is down right pathetic. *I hear stories of Dana white blowing a million dollars a night at the casinos*. For You to think that 500k a ppv is a huge amount of money to the Fertitas or Dana is down right laughable. Even though 500k is not as big of a deal as you think it is, even 250k spread between the lower paid fighters would greatly help the payouts look better. *Btw those time/space fighters you are talking about whether they generate alot of views or not, they do the EXACT SAME JOB the main event-ers do. For you to try and justify a pay of 6k to be anything less the thievery is how would you say?? uhh... Asinine*.


Bullshit stories...So...? It makes me laugh that people associate big companies with larger than life, absurdly rich people who can just blow obscene amounts of money on a whim. It's as if Dana doesn't have a massive mortgage, property taxes, the highest tax bracket in the US, etc....like his 100 million or whatever he has is just chilling in a checking account and he just can't seem to spend it all. 

And yeah 10 million dollars a year of pocket money is a huge amount of money to anyone, these guys have very expensive lifestyles, they can't just afford to throw money at their fighters feet without just do. These guys are in the business to MAKE MONEY. I'm not sure you can grasp that concept. You think they are running MMA programming out of the kindness of their heart? 


And? I can run a local MMA promotion with just my cousins and a few of my friends. That makes me have the same exact job as Dana White.....it would be thievery for me not to have millions like him. O wait, no it wouldn't because I'd have to be good at my job.

So, exact job, but higher performance...hence higher money. Makes sense to me!




astrallite said:


> Well let's not get to ahead of ourselves here, Anderson bought a $1.7 million home but that doesn't mean he paid it all in cash. There are a lot of $1.7 million homes in California that are smaller than $300,000 homes in Texas. Real estate is not cheap in many places in California.
> 
> I have a friend who just "bought" a $2 million apartment in San Francisco and it's nothing to mail in about (you could probably buy a better apartment for $100k in most states), and he makes closer to average joe salary than Anderson Silva.
> 
> ...


Yes but this is NET WORTH. He doesn't necessarily have to pay it in cash with his awesome gobs of money. The point is that NET WORTH is a relatively useless stat that calculates the value of your assets....therefore Anderson's net worth is clearly understated....mainly probably because it's outdated information.


----------



## TheReturn (Sep 26, 2010)

Ya but at the same time I think we'd be pissed if we couldnt see good fights just because fighters werent fighting for the top of their division where the good money is.


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

Squirrelfighter said:


> *Did I miss an interview where UFC fighters said they didn't make enough money to live off of? *
> 
> Last time I checked UFC fighters (for their first fight) make, for one fight, above the poverty line, for two they make the average Middle Class wage (assuming they win). For 3 fights (all wins, or two wins and a loss) any fighter in the UFC makes ample to train and live on.



I believe it's: *complain - and you're OUT!*



locnott said:


> I hear ya bro, I think they are doing ok all things considerd.


At the end of the day, the fighters are the sellers and the UFC is the buyer.
On a free market, the price for the merchendise - in this case it's the fighter's ability to fight - is set by the market.

The fighter is free to ask the money he feels he's worth.
And the UFC is free to accept or decline to pay him the money he asks and/or come with a counter offer - usually smaller.
And the fighter can either:

A. accept the UFC's offer
B. take his "merchendise" and try to sell it to someone else for the price he wants

Simple as that!


But, i do believe some fighters should get more money honestly.
Something "Korean Zombie" expressed after his win against Garcia.



> "I'm especially glad to finally get my pay above the *$5,000 *level since I was stuck there for so long," Jung told MMAjunkie.com (www.mmajunkie.com) with a laugh. "I'm glad to finally move up in pay level."


Link

He was getting 5,000 and he's one of the most exciting fighters out there - always putting on great fights, that attract even the most casual fans, helping the UFC sell more PPVs = more money.

And, keep in mind: those 5,000 needed to be devided, to the members of his staff: manager, doctors, trainers, sparring partners etc

Yes, fighters also have sponsors, but the lower-tier fighters aren't making much money from sposorhsips.

Where i'm trying to get though is....what about a fighter that makes 5,000 a fight and gets injured and has to take a big break from fighting?! How is he supposed to live then?!


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Vale_Tudo said:


> The company I work for make about $12 million every month.
> I get payed $4300 every month, and I actually work 7.5 hours a day unlike the guys who own the company and probably make hundreds of thousands a month.
> 
> Is it fair? Meh, they were smart and started the company with their own money, made it successful and .. yeah, I didnt.
> ...


This is always a red herring argument, comparing the UFC to other, usually investment, machinery, technology and labor intensive businesses, instead of other entertainment, sports or combat sports businesses which makes for a more accurate comparison.

I once heard this comparison with an oil company etc... but it's silly because oil companies have sunk billions in investment, technology, exploration, equipment, have tens of thousands of employees and THEN their top dogs make billions. The consumer in such businesses is paying for the final product (gas) and not to watch an employee in an oil rig turn knobs. That employee is just a small cog in the whole machine.

This is not comparable in the least to the entertainment businesses, where the consumer IS paying just to watch the employee, and it's the BUSINESS/DISTIBUTOR that is the "overhead" expense. This is the reason people got so pissed at record labels, because they used to take 99% of the cut from the music industry just for spending 5 cents on cheap plastic for making a cd and some advertising / exposure for the musician. 

Other than that, entertainers (actors, musicians, sportspeople etc.) throughout the world make and deserve a BIG chunk of what their marketers are making off them. It's not like normal businesses that require heavy technology, labor etc. to make the end product, they ARE the product. So with all due respect, they are nothing like you and me and our jobs. 

And even if it was, geez at $4400 a month you're making $50k + a year ... that is a DECENT chunk of a $150 mil pie (btw is that 12 mil / month profit or sales? cos sales don't count, it's profit that pays you) and allows you to live quite well. How can you even compare that to < $16k out of a > $250 million pie? And this is probably when there are far more people like you in the org you work for than the number of fighters in the UFC.

Your last line is just hypocritical... Dana "working his ass off" sitting in an a/c office basically acting gangsta all day and threatening people that "they're fuckin finished" all day long deserves whatever he makes, but the fighters also "working their asses off" far more than fatass dana and actually putting their mind and bodies on the line don't?


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Bullshit stories...So...? It makes me laugh that people associate big companies with larger than life, absurdly rich people who can just blow obscene amounts of money on a whim. It's as if Dana doesn't have a massive mortgage, property taxes, the highest tax bracket in the US, etc....like his 100 million or whatever he has is just chilling in a checking account and he just can't seem to spend it all.
> 
> And yeah 10 million dollars a year of pocket money is a huge amount of money to anyone, these guys have very expensive lifestyles, they can't just afford to throw money at their fighters feet without just do. *These guys are in the business to MAKE MONEY*. I'm not sure you can grasp that concept. You think they are running MMA programming out of the kindness of their heart?
> 
> ...




Bullshit stories?? Yeah cause you know better then credible news websites. Ok buddy.

Why do stupid people always put words in peoples mouths?? For some reason you and others like you think as soon as someone mentions any type of pay increase for fighters, you use this dumb ass argument 
"So Dana White shouldnt make any money??"
No one in this ENTIRE FORUM OR ANYWHERE ELSE stated that Dana White and the Fertitias should not make money from the UFC. Your reading imaginary tales that dont exist. If i thought increasing the pay outs from 250k to 500k per PPV to the lesser paid fighters ment that Dana White and Fertitas dont make any money, then i never would have mentioned it. If that were the case though, then the UFC would be in big trouble to begin with.
This might be a concept you DONT understand. *The UFC can increase its pay outs and still make a huge profit. * For you to not understand that concept is baffling. But then again.. its not the first time i ran into someone who believes, anyone that thinks that the fighters should get paid more money, also, believe that Dana and Fertita should be broke. This is the most common argument as to why the fighters should not get a slight pay increase and its also the dumbest one. 


UFC 132

Payout - 1,277,000

PPV Earnings alone "Low Estimate" 18million+

Thats a low estimate of the PPV earnings alone. Thats not even considering all the other ways a Event makes money (There are ALOT).
*Now lets see here*
What is 2% of 18million??
It is around.. 360 Thousand dollars. So if the UFC took just 2% of their PPV earnings they could spread 360 thousand dollars to their fighters. Now 360,000 dollars might not seem that much split 20 ways. BUT when you are a fighter making 6k to show or 8k to show, even that 15k-30k you get would help your LIFE out drastically. Not to mention the fact that the training camp probably costs more then 6k does. So this 360k that is pocket change for the UFC, can be a sons college fund for a fighter that does not have anything to fall back on. For anyone to think that this is asking too much of the UFC, you are simply a greedy piece of SH!T. Thats the simple truth. Dont hide behind "This is a business" because the truth is the UFC can easily afford a small pay increase depending on how well the PPV sales go. Only reason they wouldnt and you agree with them, is because they want every penny they can get in their pockets, and if you were them you would be doing acting the exact same way. In others word, being the scum of the earth.

In closing

*It is one thing being a smart business man and making the right choices for you and your employees.
It is another thing trying to make as much money as possible and giving your employees as little as possible.*

While we have people that justify this behavior, i fear things will not change for a long time.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> *Bullshit stories?? Yeah cause you know better then credible news websites. Ok buddy.*
> 
> Why do stupid people always put words in peoples mouths?? For some reason you and others like you think as soon as someone mentions any type of pay increase for fighters, *you use this dumb ass argument
> "So Dana White shouldnt make any money??"
> ...


I always get the latest scoop from TMZ. Amazingly credible site there. They once showed Floyd Mayweather burning a 100 dollar bill. Everything they say is true!

That actually never happened. It's odd that you would put quotations around something that wasn't a quote. But strawman arguments seem to pass as legitimate debate these days...so who am I to judge. :confused03:

Or they can keep their current payouts and make a bigger profit. Like they are (wisely) doing.


Where did this information come from? Where is your source?


Yes, that would be nice if the UFC gave out arbitrary raises backed by nothing...but it isn't realistic...nor necessary.

That's actually how business works, hence American industries outsourcing and contributing to the increasing poverty of its own people. That's why the NFL and the NBA are in lockouts right now. It makes sense when you really think about it. A good business' prices are based on demand.


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

SideWays222 said:


> *It is another thing trying to make as much money as possible and giving your employees as little as possible.*


MODERN CAPITALISM (slavery)!

_.....even though i don't approve with it._


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> I always get the latest scoop from TMZ. Amazingly credible site there. They once showed Floyd Mayweather burning a 100 dollar bill. Everything they say is true!
> 
> That actually never happened. *It's odd that you would put quotations around something that wasn't a quote*. But strawman arguments seem to pass as legitimate debate these days...so who am I to judge. :confused03:
> 
> ...


I generalized your argument and others arguments in my quote. People like you all come back to the same argument "Dana White/Fertitas ofcourse should make way more then their employees, or So Dana White shouldnt make any money!!" Its always something around there which shocks me because not a single person has EVER stated that in any forum but some how you all say it in different words but its always the same imaginary statement.

Do some research and youl find my source/sources. The payouts and PPV earnings arnt hard to find.

Yes paying your fighters more then the minimum isnt necessary. If it was necessary, guess what, they would be doing it already. The UFC is in a position of power where they can get away with paying the lowest minimum possible. And whats anyone going to do about it?? 
But that doesn't make it Right or OK. The UFC can afford to give 2% of the PPV revenue to the fighters. Not only would it help the public image, it would allow fighters to train better, it would give an even bigger incentive for the fighters to sell the PPV as much as they can, AND MOST OF ALL IT IS THE RIGHT AND HUMANLY THING TO DO. 

Your the type of person that wouldn't do anything for anyone unless you get something back in return. People like you literary disgust me and are the reason humanity would be better of never existing. I hope your opinion on this subject isnt an accurate reflection of the type of person you are, because if it is, i dont know how you look in the mirror and are happy with the type of person you have become.

Thats all im going to say on this subject.

Its next to impossible to convince a selfish man to spend more money then the absolute minimum. Proof of this is, when anyone mentions a pay increase, they all think the same thing "So the company owner should make less then the employees!!". Thats how selfish people think...


----------



## Voiceless (Nov 8, 2010)

Fine Wine said:


> Yes and Bob Arum of Top Rank, one of the biggest promotions for decades.
> 
> 
> 
> lol, I won't be negging you. But I think your research will come up with something very startling, which was part of my original post. Guys like Anthony Mundine, Danny Green (Australia), Chris John (Indonesia), Arthur Abraham (Germany I believe by war of Armenia), Ricky Hatton or Amir Khan (UK), Saul Alvarez (Mexico) et al would make a STACK more than not just their UFC peers in rankings, but I dare say would be on par with the top UFC fighters. This is because they fight in their own backyards much of the time, raise large gates and get cuts of their home PPV sales. Some of these guys get a few mil per fight just to turn up. This is a huge advantage of the boxing set-up, in that guys can fight infront of THEIR fans. In the UFC, it is built around mass production.


The problem is that MMA isn't really an international sport (yet). It seems to be big and growing in North America and maybe in Brazil with its many top level fighters. But in most of Europe for example it's somewhat where it was in the US in the 90s. Most people don't even know what MMA is or have that "oh these barbaric cage fights which should be forbidden" attitude. In a lot of countries there are still legal problems that prevent MMA from growing. In Germany for TV stations its forbidden to broadcast MMA shows, while boxing is even broadcast on public channels. In France MMA fights are even not allowed at all under the unified MMA rules, but only under a softened version of MMA. So fighters don't really have the possibility to get experience in "real" MMA fighting, but which would be necessary to become good MMA fighters. So while letting fighters fight in front of their home crowd to generate more money is basically a good idea, the conditions in a lot of countries unfortunately just don't play along.


----------



## Liddellianenko (Oct 8, 2006)

Roflcopter said:


> I always get the latest scoop from TMZ. Amazingly credible site there. They once showed Floyd Mayweather burning a 100 dollar bill. Everything they say is true!
> 
> That actually never happened. It's odd that you would put quotations around something that wasn't a quote. But strawman arguments seem to pass as legitimate debate these days...so who am I to judge. :confused03:
> 
> ...


Actually a good business' profits are based on a lot of things, including demand, technological edge, AND employee satisfaction and retention. Corporations aren't spending millions on HR, benefits and sops because employees are useless cogs. 

The only reason the UFC is able to disregard employee satisfaction completely is BECAUSE it's not a free market scenario yet, it's a short-term monopoly due to first mover's advantage. If all the top fighters left the UFC for a competitive org, Dana and his "awesome business sense" couldn't make a fuckin dime, short sighted profiteers rarely outlast businesses with long term vision and employee satisfaction balanced with the bottom line.

The problem is there is no competitive org yet because the sport is so young and the UFC is using every dirty trick in the monopolist's book to keep the competition from becoming too big. Lock in contracts, lifelong merchandising rights, free broadcasts on competitor's PPV nights etc. It won't last forever though, free market always catches up unless the govt. or some big brother prevents it.


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

Liddellianenko said:


> If all the top fighters left the UFC for a competitive org, Dana and his "awesome business sense" couldn't make a fuckin dime,
> 
> The problem is there is no competitive org yet because the sport is so young and the UFC is using every dirty trick in the monopolist's book to keep the competition from becoming too big. Lock in contracts, lifelong merchandising rights, free broadcasts on competitor's PPV nights etc.


Give this man the Nobel price in "MMA economics"......and a case of Jagermesiter! :thumbsup:


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

limba said:


> MODERN CAPITALISM (slavery)!
> 
> _.....even though i don't approve with it._


It's quite a bit different than slavery actually.



SideWays222 said:


> *I generalized your argument and others arguments in my quote. People like you all come back to the same argument "Dana White/Fertitas ofcourse should make way more then their employees, or So Dana White shouldnt make any money!!" Its always something around there which shocks me because not a single person has EVER stated that in any forum but some how you all say it in different words but its always the same imaginary statement.*
> 
> *Do some research and youl find my source/sources. The payouts and PPV earnings arnt hard to find.*
> 
> ...


No you didn't. You misrepresented my argument so it would be easier for you to defeat.










So you pulled the number from your ass. Good to know. I figured such.


LOL....morality in business discussion. What a complete non-sequitur. People don't get rich by being kind and gentlemanly. Hell, you are talking about individuals(Fertitas) who run things through Mafia ties, using extortion and violence to gain an upperhand. And you want to talk about giving money away because it's the right thing to do. :laugh:




Liddellianenko said:


> Actually a good business' profits are based on a lot of things, including demand, technological edge, AND employee satisfaction and retention. Corporations aren't spending millions on HR, benefits and sops because employees are useless cogs.
> 
> The only reason the UFC is able to disregard employee satisfaction completely is BECAUSE it's not a free market scenario yet, it's a short-term monopoly due to first mover's advantage. I*f all the top fighters left the UFC for a competitive org, Dana and his "awesome business sense" couldn't make a fuckin dime, *short sighted profiteers rarely outlast businesses with long term vision and employee satisfaction balanced with the bottom line.
> 
> *The problem is there is no competitive org yet because the sport is so young and the UFC is using every dirty trick in the monopolist's book to keep the competition from becoming too big*. Lock in contracts, lifelong merchandising rights, free broadcasts on competitor's PPV nights etc. It won't last forever though, free market always catches up unless the govt. or some big brother prevents it.



Sure, if something absurd such as that were to happen, it'd probably set the UFC back years. Fortunately, on brand power alone they'd make new stars, however, and continue to make money.

No, it's because MMA is a niche sport that is still in it's infancy in terms of how it's perceived in the public's view, and no one is really willing to throw billions of dollars away on an investment that could and has failed(Affliction, EliteXC, ect.)

The UFC's top dogs aren't going to leave the UFC, because no one is going to pay them the amount of money they are making in the UFC...that's why guys like Nick Diaz are threatening to go into boxing, it's the only real scenario where they can at least feign to have another potential suitor for their talents and drive their price up.


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

Roflcopter said:


> It's quite a bit different than slavery actually.


Yup, i know, i forgot the "" and maybe i should have said "paid slavery", just because modern (wild) capitalism is seen as a form of (paid) slavery, especially in the more economical-undeveloped countries.

There, "capitalism" thrives by exploiting the employees - wich, in most cases, aren't even official employees - until they're useless.

A romanian economics journalist, tried to explain this situatio like this:

*"I am the employer. You are he employee. You are a lemon.
The clients want lemonade.
SO...i'm gonna take you and squeeze you as hard as i can, to extract as much lemon juice as i can from you, in order to make lemonade and sell it to the clients.
And, from the money i get from the clients, i'm gonna give you some money also.
And i'm gonna repeat this, until you're dry and there's no more juice left in you. 
At that moment, i'm gonna get rid of you and i'm gonna get another "lemon."

If you don't like it, you can buy yourself a machine and squeeze yourself and you can sell your lemonade yourself.
Good luck."*

This pretty much describes what modern capitalism is all about.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> It's quite a bit different than slavery actually.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Basically your post just admitted that i am correct.

Also... you want to know something funny??
I gotta thank you.

I repped a guy on this thread after i posted a reply to you. And i pretty much summarized the bolded part to him and told him in my summary that your post is pretty much how kids like you that think they know business, think. Its actually kind of shocking how predictable people like you are. The funny thing is though, that i imagine you actually think you are being unique and thinking like a "Real businessman" would. Its laughable really. :sarcastic09:







People like you feed my genius ego. :thumb03:


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

limba said:


> Yup, i know, i forgot the "" and maybe i should have said "paid slavery", just because modern (wild) capitalism is seen as a form of (paid) slavery, especially in the more economical-undeveloped countries.
> 
> There, "capitalism" thrives by exploiting the employees - wich, in most cases, aren't even official employees - until they're useless.
> 
> ...


Well pure capitalism is slavery and monopoly which we used to have in this country. It is a system of thievery and exploitation that has never worked for the masses without being altered by socialist policies and unions which are essentially a communist construct. So if the UFC fighters don't like their wages they should form a union like all the other prosports leagues.


----------



## Squirrelfighter (Oct 28, 2009)

limba said:


> Yup, i know, i forgot the "" and maybe i should have said "paid slavery", just because modern (wild) capitalism is seen as a form of (paid) slavery, especially in the more economical-undeveloped countries.
> 
> There, "capitalism" thrives by exploiting the employees - wich, in most cases, aren't even official employees - until they're useless.
> 
> ...


Actually, in many of those "underdeveloped" countries the money they are paid, while being absolutely abhoredly small compared to wages in a eveloped country, are more than sufficient to live off of. 

An example, is that in the early 2000's in came out in the media (as though it was new information:confused02 that Mexican-American immigrants to the US were sending about 1.50 a week back to Mexico to feed and clothe their families. They interviewed a few of these Mexican-Americans as well as their families and they explained that 1.50 a week American is more than enough to live on in Mexico. Which is why so many corporations moved their factories/production facilities there in the 1980s-2000s. 

As for the quote within the quote (quote-ception), that's not "modern capitalism" that's basic economics.


----------



## hadoq (Jan 6, 2011)

Breadfan said:


> All athletes are overpaid damn near. (Baseball, Basketball, Football? What a joke)
> 
> If a fighter only fights 2 times a year and makes 20K from Dana and has ZERO endorsements, he's doing just fine.
> 
> ...



couldn't have said it better

life doesn't cost more for fighter than it does to us, they're doing just fine, even those making like 5k a fight (+sponsorship deals)

even your average UFC fighter is doing MUCH better than you and I


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

hadoq said:


> couldn't have said it better
> 
> life doesn't cost more for fighter than it does to us, they're doing just fine, even those making like 5k a fight (+sponsorship deals)
> 
> even your average UFC fighter is doing MUCH better than you and I


...actually it does cost more for fighters than your average joe. they have to pay trainers, coaches, dieticians, sparring partners, cornermen, pay for training space and gear, purchase supplements and specific diet foods, pay travel and room and board costs if they want to train anywhere other than their home camp. even worse, if for some reason the fight doesn't happen, like they or their opponent has to pull out for some reason- all those costs are never reimbursed, they are just out of pocket for the fighter. until recently they also had to pay out of pocket for every doctor visit that wasn't a direct result of a fight they had recently.

doing just fine on 5k plus sponsorships? you're insane. that's poverty level even before you subtract all the aforementioned costs, and lots of these guys have families to support.


----------



## SmackyBear (Feb 14, 2008)

Fine Wine said:


> Is the UFC structure REALLY a good thing for MMA?
> 
> Ok, after watching a bunch of UFC and boxing, I got to thinking about what cut goes to the promotors and what cut goes to the fighters. Given both would have similar cost structures and both gather revenue streams in similar ways.
> 
> ...


Where are your net worth estimates coming from?

These are the first estimates I found for King and Arum:

King: $350M. Source. 2006

Arum: I found the $200M number, but it looked like it was a decade old.

Just a couple of days ago, I read that Pacman only had a net worth of $26M according to his government. I haven't been keeping up on it, so maybe it changed, but still, that would be quite a drop.



> Given both would have similar cost structures and both gather revenue streams in similar ways.


Actually, the models look similar, but they're incredibly different.

In boxing, promoters no longer shoulder much risk for events at all. 

Casinos pay site fees to host a fight and assume the responsibility for selling or giving away the tickets. They mainly give them away to people they think will spend money at the tables before and after the fight to increase the money gambled for the night.

Any fight on HBO or SHO PPV has downside guarantees provided by the network. The promoter's marketing job consists of conference calls, press conferences and press releases. The network pays the production costs for broadcasting and does the real promotional push.

The only time there's any risk is for an independent PPV offering.



Liddellianenko said:


> The UFC is a monopoly shafting it's main entertainers and moneymakers, plain and simple. Dana did nothing magical except being in the right place at the right time, the world was ready to move away from the watered down hugfest that is modern boxing.


They'd actually be a monopsony since you seem to be talking about their position as buyers for a section of the labor market.



Fine Wine said:


> Can the UFC fighters afford to voice it? Given Cain Velasquez, Josh Koscheck and Jon FItch (almost BJ Penn too) were cut for not signing over lifetime image rights for a few K, what do you think will happy to a fighter who speaks up? Ah, ***** just beat me to the exact same statement.


I think Only Fitch and Wellisch were ever actually cut. Kos and Cain were mentioned as possibly being next, but I don't remember reading that they were actually cut.



> Completely false, the UFC is a league they take on all of the financial risk and directly pay for everything involved. Boxing promoters don't do any of that they are more like sports agents.
> 
> The fighters aren't being ripped off. In boxing a company like HBO has its own PPV channels and gets all of the money from the buys so they actually put the money up for the fight. The ufc gets between 20 and 30 dollars out of around 50 for every PPV buy. The arena fees are different since the UFC is a touring company they can't get the sweetheart deals boxing fights often do. Showtime and HBO don't run sponsored advertisements since they are pay channels and can advertise their fights as much as they want on them for free. The UFC has to pay for all of its advertising.


You're right about everything except the HBO part. They barely make anything from PPV events.

From Ross Greenburg, the ex or soon to be ex-President of HBO Sports:



> "I can't tell you that pay-per-view helps the sport because it doesn't. It hurts the sport because it narrows our audience, but it's a fact of life. Every time we try to make an HBO World Championship Boxing fight, we're up against mythical pay-per-view numbers. HBO doesn't make a lot of money from pay-per-view. There's usually a cap on what we can make. But the promoters and fighters insist on pay-per-view because that's where their greatest profits lie."





Liddellianenko said:


> Yes, you've missed a bunch of interviews by Ortiz, Couture, Werdum, Fitch, BJ, Frank Shamrock and many others then. There aren't more because the moment they open their mouths, Dana kicks them out or shafts them as long as they're in the company, and they have no where else to go if they want to fight at a high level.


How has Zuffa treated Couture, Ortiz, and BJ very badly and shafted them while they were in the company? Moving them to the front of the line in title shots (Couture and BJ) or continuing to pay them cuts of the PPV when they no longer draw (Ortiz) and hadn't won a fight in years?



Liddellianenko said:


> So you're saying that someone that is in the TOP 25 of the WORLD in their profession making barely minimum wage and living off rice and ketchup is somehow "better looked after" than the rest of the world?
> 
> Even for crap professions, if you're among the best in the world, you make a ton. How much do you think the 25th best plumber in the world is making? The 25th best scientist? The 25th best farmer? The 25th best doctor, psychologist, fitness instructor, dance instructor, actor etc. IN THE WORLD? A lot more than Pat Barry I'm guessing.


You think when the UFC signed Barry, he was top 25 in the world? At 3-0? He's probably not even top 25 now, and in a division as thin as HW, that's saying something.

But further, what percent of your profession are you in when you're the 25th best doctor or lawyer? There are almost a million doctors in the U.S. and a couple hundred thousand fewer practicing lawyers. The 25th best doctor has risen to the top, what .0025% of their profession? Being the 25th best MMA HW (or any weight class) is nowhere near the accomplishment

And maybe Pat Barry's financial problems before the UFC gave him the chance to get two $60K bonuses for knocking out Hardonk, can more accurately be laid at his 5+ year kick boxing career than his infant MMA career?



astrallite said:


> Well the UFC already holds 20-25 events a year. Three of them sold 1 million buys. Each one of those PPV events made 4 times what your company makes annually.


What? He said his company made $12M/month. Four times what they make in a year would be $576M for one event. That has never, ever happened or even come close.



SideWays222 said:


> And how manyy fighters are there in a UFC event?? Lets say there is 18 fighters. chances are 15 of those fighters make less then 200k all together.
> 
> I just think if you took 1% of the money that the Fertitas make and you spread it out to the lesser paid fighters. The pay out would look alot better.


Out of curiosity, how much do you think the Fertittas make on an average card?



astrallite said:


> Just compare this to other sports for example. The average NFL team generates about $250 million annually in revenue, and pays out $110 million to the athletes.
> 
> The UFC generates "probably" about twice this amount (just estimating based on gate, ppv revenue, etc), although I highly doubt their entire annual payout is even half of that of an NFL team.


In 2009 (the last year I saw an estimate based on a credit report) it was $300M-$350M. They had a gross margin of about 30%. So, they obviously do pay out a lot of money to put on shows.



SideWays222 said:


> Imagine we take out 500k out of the Fertitas pockets and spread that out to the fighters. 500k an event to the Fertitas isnt much.. it probably isnt even 5% of the amount they take into their pockets an event. yet that 500k would help out ALL of the fighters a drastic amount, especially fighters that rake in 6k-15k to show and 6k-15k to win. You could literally spread out 25 thousand dollars to 20 different fighters an event. This would make even the preliminary fighters purse look decent, especially compared to boxing where preliminary fighters make about 1k-3k.
> It would also help the UFCs image by making them not seem like money hungry thieves.
> 
> I really would like to know the exact number the Fertias/Dana make an event. Im talking about the money that goes into their pockets. Not the money the UFC makes and has to pay out to the many different expenses for an event.


You don't think $500k is even 5% of what the Fertittas take into their pockets for an event? So you think the Fertittas are clearing at least $10M an event after all expenses?

Zuffa's credit rating is BB. That's junk, and it was even lower last year. They're making good money, but they don't net 90% of revenue.



limba said:


> But, i do believe some fighters should get more money honestly.
> Something "Korean Zombie" expressed after his win against Garcia.
> 
> He was getting 5,000 and he's one of the most exciting fighters out there - always putting on great fights, that attract even the most casual fans, helping the UFC sell more PPVs = more money.
> ...


I love the Korean Zombie. He was on a WEC contract and when it expired he got a better one that I'm sure took into account how exciting his fights were.

Fighters with low base pay can still make good money from sponsors by appearing on a UFC card that gets televised. I remember Joe Lauzon's agent saying he was on an 8k/8k deal, but being on a fight night on Spike let him earn over $50k in sponsorships when he was getting $500 in sponsorships at local shows.

Obviously, I highly doubt many fighters at that level are making anything close to that in sponsorships, but Matt Mitrione fired his agent for only getting him $5k from sponsors.




SideWays222 said:


> UFC 132
> 
> Payout - 1,277,000
> 
> ...


First, how did the UFC make $18M for UFC 132? The early PPV estimates were 350k-375k PPV buys. The PPV distributor and cable/sat companies sell the PPV for $45-$55 (I believe that's what I pay for standard or HD, respectively) each. I'll assume half are HD for ease of calculations, so that would be $17.5M in revenue for the event at the low end of the estimate, but that money never enters the UFC coffers. The distributor and cable company keep half of that for their services, so the UFC would be at just under $9M.

You really have no concept of Zuffa's costs or revenues, and yet you can throw around "scum of the earth?" What do you think it costs to broadcast an event? What do you think it costs to advertise? To pay for event related insurance for 24 fighters? The flat licensing fees and the percentages of the gate and PPV to the commission?


I'm glad so many people are talking about normative economics. Of course, nobody can prove a normative statement true, so it always ends in a bunch of people on two different sides looking down their noses at someone who doesn't agree with them. And it looks like that's the way this thread is going, without people even trying to first understand the positive economics.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

^^^if you're going to subtract UFC's operating costs from their net revenue you should also include merchandising and other sidebar profits in that revenue figure. although I think those numbers would be hard to find.


----------



## zath the champ (Feb 13, 2008)

Economics can be a tricky animal.

Dana/Frank/Lorenzo are all entrepreneurs. 

They took the risk (buying the UFC when there was no foreseeable profit without capital stimulus); they are reaping the rewards. For that matter, so are the fighters. Without the UFC platform, how would they get paid or promote (endorse) sponsors etc.? The UFC brand brings home the bacon more than ANY fighter ever could. Remember the amazing Affliction PPV buy-rates?

Most fighters make a decent living. Not Master P type money or anything, but they are not sleeping at the YMCA.

Zuffa is also investing close to half* (*saw this in an interview somewhere a while ago) of their net profit in growing the sport.

I am all for fighters making more money. Hell, I hope when I have a bad hip and grand kids, we will all be watching Thanksgiving Day MMA title fights.I hope the fighters eventually get to where there is enough public support to establish an NFL style league.


Until then, this is a niche sport that needs to just keep growing. One day we may see the GSPs making Millions just to step into the cage; but until then, the 10kshow/10kwin will be the standard.

Rome (and big paydays) was not built in a day.


----------



## SmackyBear (Feb 14, 2008)

HexRei said:


> ^^^if you're going to subtract UFC's operating costs from their net revenue you should also include merchandising and other sidebar profits in that revenue figure. although I think those numbers would be hard to find.


The $300M-$350M revenue for 2009 included all event and non event revenue.

Actually, it's not that hard to get an idea of the UFC's annual event driven but non-PPV revenue, and their non event revenue. But their specific costs in any area are harder. I'm particularly curious about general and administrative expenses.

The gross margin number is the only number concerning their profit I've seen since 2007. Their EBITDA (which isn't perfect, but I'd rather have than gross margin. However since everyone was talking about event driven revenue, gross margin was an important number) went from about 15% in 2005, to 40% in 2006, to about 20% in 2007.


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

I think all athletes are overpaid. At the end of the day, fighting is their hobby. What sane person would choose to fight for a living if they didn't thoroughly enjoy it and weren't passionate about it? The same can't be said for the majority of the population stuck in 9-5 jobs they don't want to work.

Fighters, footballers, all athletes LOVE their job, they are living out their career dream.


----------



## St.Paul Guy (Mar 8, 2011)

Mckeever said:


> I think all athletes are overpaid. At the end of the day, fighting is their hobby. What sane person would choose to fight for a living if they didn't thoroughly enjoy it and weren't passionate about it? The same can't be said for the majority of the population stuck in 9-5 jobs they don't want to work.
> 
> Fighters, footballers, all athletes LOVE their job, they are living out their career dream.


Hit it right on the head there.

I would also add that if the fighters are worth more than what they are paid somebody else with a big bankroll should/will jump into the market and offer to pay them more. 

Free market principles in action.


----------



## Steroid Steve (Oct 1, 2010)

Mckeever said:


> I think all athletes are overpaid. At the end of the day, fighting is their hobby. What sane person would choose to fight for a living if they didn't thoroughly enjoy it and weren't passionate about it? The same can't be said for the majority of the population stuck in 9-5 jobs they don't want to work.
> 
> Fighters, footballers, all athletes LOVE their job, they are living out their career dream.


Well the money we pay has to go somewhere... If we didn't invest so much money in entertainment, then they wouldn't be overpaid. I don't think we have any right to say that they are overpaid because in a way, we are the ones paying them.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Mckeever said:


> I think all athletes are overpaid. At the end of the day, fighting is their hobby. What sane person would choose to fight for a living if they didn't thoroughly enjoy it and weren't passionate about it? The same can't be said for the majority of the population stuck in 9-5 jobs they don't want to work.
> 
> Fighters, footballers, all athletes LOVE their job, they are living out their career dream.


My dad LOVES geology and would probably do it even if he didn't make 110k/year. That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve it.


----------



## Mckeever (Apr 26, 2009)

HexRei said:


> My dad LOVES geology and would probably do it even if he didn't make 110k/year. That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve it.


Your dad is a very fortunate man. The majority of the working population haven't really got any idea what their career passion is.

Getting payed good money to carry out your hobby as a career would be unbelievable.


----------



## Squirrelfighter (Oct 28, 2009)

Mckeever said:


> *Your dad is a very fortunate man*. The majority of the working population haven't really got any idea what their career passion is.
> 
> Getting payed good money to carry out your hobby as a career would be unbelievable.


He sure is. I make just above the Poverty line, and I would gladly take a pay cut to do something I love for a living, not something that makes me hate all human life.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Squirrelfighter said:


> He sure is. I make just above the Poverty line, and I would gladly take a pay cut to do something I love for a living, not something that makes me hate all human life.


what do you like to do? if your hobby is remotely interesting and you are good at it, there must be a way to make money at it.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Basically your post just admitted that i am correct.
> 
> Also... you want to know something funny??
> I gotta thank you.
> ...


Yeah, yeah more red herrings.

Come back when you have a real argument and not your hippie/socialist morality bullshit.


----------



## leifdawg (Jan 1, 2008)

First of all the money is distributed differently in MMA than in boxing. Sure the top 2 or 3 guys (one of which is a promoter) make a lot of money. But What about the rest of the card. Anyone who is a known UFC fighter for a while is going to be making good money. Part of putting the brand first means lower level guys can get exposure. In boxing people only show up for the main event. UFC events are 60-70% filled by the time the TV broadcast starts. This exposure allows various alternate earning potential, sponsors, endorsement deals, etc.

Secondly, where are you getting those net worth numbers from?


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

SmackyBear said:


> Where are your net worth estimates coming from?
> 
> These are the first estimates I found for King and Arum:
> 
> ...


What you looked at were the "Early' estimates. So the difference between 17.5mil - 18mil really isnt anything to even talk about.

The reason i didnt mention their costs is because that goes without saying. But then you need to include all the other ways the UFC makes money. Since i felt it was impossible to be completely accurate, id go with a generalization. 

The end


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

HexRei said:


> My dad LOVES geology and would probably do it even if he didn't make 110k/year. That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve it.


Well you cant compare a geologist to an athlete. Athletes tend to make 10x the money you just mentioned when in REALITY your dad should be getting paid more then them IMO. Now should we raise a geologist pay or should be lower an ahletes :confused02:


----------



## Sambo de Amigo (Sep 24, 2010)

Squirrelfighter said:


> Figured I'll address this right off the bat since its such a blatant generalization its pitiful. You're plain stupid if you think the UFC is 90% of MMA. Zuffa makes up the majority of internationally boradcasted MMA, but the UFC is by no means 90% of the sport.
> 
> Last time I checked no one put a gun to those fighters heads and made them sign their images away. If they didn't want to they didn't have to. Contrary to what you apparently believe there is more to professional MMA than just the UFC, especially at the time those events occured.
> 
> ...


The UFC is the top MMA organisation and now owns the second best one..............really the pay is going to get lower after these to organisations which is my point the UFC is paying them enough to stay away from other organisations but not paying them enough in comparison to what they generate or what the fighter is actually worth.

Also you just proved my point in your least paragraph , Camozzi risked his health to earn 60k in one year that figure is probably taken to about 35k after all the costs are taken away now he no longer fights in the UFC , he has to scrape the barrel in regional shows when he should have been paid alot more in the first place but now he has to fend off what he can get simply because he was paid a fraction of what he should have been.

Its like your boss giving you your annual salary then firing you after a mistake now what have you got to fall back on ? nothing and the fact of the matter is he was risking his health while earning his money and now has to look for shows across America with what ever money is left over.......


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Well you cant compare a geologist to an athlete. *Athletes tend to make 10x the money you just mentioned when in REALITY your dad should be getting paid more then them IMO*. Now should we raise a geologist pay or should be lower an ahletes :confused02:


:laugh:

:laugh:

:laugh:




***** de Amigo said:


> The UFC is the top MMA organisation and now owns the second best one..............really the pay is going to get lower after these to organisations which is my point the UFC is paying them enough to stay away from other organisations but not paying them enough in comparison to what they generate or what the fighter is actually worth.
> 
> Also you just proved my point in your least paragraph , Camozzi risked his health to earn 60k in one year that figure is probably taken to about 35k after all the costs are taken away now he no longer fights in the UFC , he has to scrape the barrel in regional shows when he should have been paid alot more in the first place but now he has to fend off what he can get simply because he was paid a fraction of what he should have been.
> 
> Its like your boss giving you your annual salary then firing you after a mistake now what have you got to fall back on ? nothing and the fact of the matter is he was risking his health while earning his money and now has to look for shows across America with what ever money is left over.......


So Camozzi was robbed? You said he was paid a fraction of what he should have been....why hasn't Camozzi sued the UFC? If he was owed money and only received a fraction of it I'm pretty sure he could take the ZUFFA brass to court.


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

Squirrelfighter said:


> As for the quote within the quote (quote-ception), that's not "modern capitalism" that's basic economics.


Yeah, but it's the way things run these days and in many countries this system has failed, leading to the current economical situation that is felt worldwide. 



HexRei said:


> ...actually it does cost more for fighters than your average joe. they have to pay trainers, coaches, dieticians, sparring partners, cornermen, pay for training space and gear, purchase supplements and specific diet foods, pay travel and room and board costs if they want to train anywhere other than their home camp. even worse, if for some reason the fight doesn't happen, like they or their opponent has to pull out for some reason- all those costs are never reimbursed, they are just out of pocket for the fighter. until recently they also had to pay out of pocket for every doctor visit that wasn't a direct result of a fight they had recently.
> 
> doing just fine on 5k plus sponsorships? you're insane. that's poverty level even before you subtract all the aforementioned costs, and lots of these guys have families to support.


Exactly!

And some of the fighters that are making 5-10k/fight - and split this money witht heir staff, may end up injured and unable to perform this "job" (fighting) = no money.

This is like a normal person, with a normal job, being unable to do their job, thus not making any money.

I'm not saying all fighters shoul get 50k-100k per fight, but some of them seem to earn s*it money, considering they bring a lot of money for the company, while putting their health at risk 6-8 months/year...or even often. Because a fighter's life doesn't mean fights only - a normal training camp lasts 8-10 weeks.



Mckeever said:


> *I think all athletes are overpaid.* At the end of the day, fighting is their hobby. What sane person would choose to fight for a living if they didn't thoroughly enjoy it and weren't passionate about it? The same can't be said for the majority of the population stuck in 9-5 jobs they don't want to work.
> 
> Fighters, footballers, all athletes LOVE their job, they are living out their career dream.


I think golfers are overpaid.
I think a lot of soccer players are overpaid.
And sam goes for the top NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL players, F1 drivers, top boxers and other disciplines.

But, they are involved in sports where the public interest in very high. Those sports became a part of people's every day life - and so, these sports generate A LOT OF MONEY. And this way, the best performers in this discipline can take their share of the money.

_PS: i could understand why top NBA players are getting paid that much, because i understand basketball...but i'll never understand how top golfers can earn that much money..._



Mckeever said:


> Getting payed good money to carry out your hobby as a career would be unbelievable.


That's every man's dream job.

I would love to be a test driver at Lamborgini, Porsche, Ferrari, Maseratti or other sports car manufacturers.

That dream is far though...


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

limba said:


> Yeah, but it's the way things run these days and in many countries this system has failed, leading to the current economical situation that is felt worldwide.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Golf is a massive money maker and it's interest is very high in obscenely rich people. Probably because it doesn't require athletic ability and because it has a relatively elitist feel to it.


Build up your resume! :thumb02:


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

Since you guys talked about it...

Why were Camozzi dropped by the UFC?


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

AmdM said:


> Since you guys talked about it...
> 
> Why were Camozzi dropped by the UFC?


Bad fighter.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> :laugh:
> 
> :laugh:
> 
> :laugh:


Are you okay?? :confused02:

Il cut back a bit, i can tell your developing "mental problems".


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Are you okay?? :confused02:
> 
> Il cut back a bit, i can tell your developing "mental problems".


The stuff you type is so senseless and devoid of any logic and reasoning. I can't help but laugh hysterically.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> The stuff you type is so senseless and devoid of any logic and reasoning. I can't help but laugh hysterically.


Laughing hysterically is the first symptom of wanting to commit suicide. 

Or
is it more like this?






Let me know all the details. I want to help you Roflcopter. Even though i think iv had more intelligent conversations with toddlers, i still think your life is worth something since your part of the MMAFORUM Family. Now that might not mean much to you!! but it means a whole lot to me!!

NOW TELL ME YOUR SYMPTOMS ROFLCOPTER!!! DAMMIT I WONT LET YOU HURT YOURSELF!!! :angry04:


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

Roflcopter said:


> Golf is a massive money maker and it's interest is very high in obscenely rich people. Probably because it doesn't require athletic ability and because it has a relatively elitist feel to it.


I know this sport goes well with rich people...but still don't understand how it generates so much money.

I understand NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL - all of them are adressed to large crowds, to the normal person.
Plus, these sports are team sports, with teams representing cities.
This way, people's interest is even bigger: evey new-yorker is happy and proud when the Yankees win the world series. And, for the club, that translates in more fans and increase sales (souvenirs, t-shirts and other merchendise) = more money = players get more money also.

Same goes for other team sports.

But i don't get golf...i just don't.



Roflcopter said:


> Build up your resume! :thumb02:


Will try to.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

limba said:


> I know this sport goes well with rich people...but still don't understand how it generates so much money.
> 
> I understand NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL - all of them are adressed to large crowds, to the normal person.
> Plus, these sports are team sports, with teams representing cities.
> ...


Im not sure about this but i always thought Gold didnt really generate a crazy amount of money. It just has extremely rich people backing it up, which is where the money comes from.

I could be completely off basis though since i never read anything to prove that thought.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Laughing hysterically is the first symptom of wanting to commit suicide.
> 
> Or
> is it more like this?
> ...

























Did you discuss hypothetical deserved salaries of various professions based off absolutely nothing?
Did you come to an agreement that geologists should arbitrarily make millions of dollars? Seems intelligent.






limba said:


> I know this sport goes well with rich people...but still don't understand how it generates so much money.
> 
> I understand NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL - all of them are adressed to large crowds, to the normal person.
> Plus, these sports are team sports, with teams representing cities.
> ...



Nike makes more money off of golf equipment than anything else. And IIRC it's not even close.

Golf has a pretty broad audience. There are quite a few middle class and rich white men and their wives in America that spends tons of money yearly golfing.

Mind you, these places are making their money because it costs (a lot of) money to play on their courses, the TV deals are just another piece of the pie.


----------



## astrallite (Mar 14, 2010)

Roflcopter said:


> That's actually how business works, hence American industries outsourcing and contributing to the increasing poverty of its own people. That's why the NFL and the NBA are in lockouts right now. It makes sense when you really think about it. A good business' prices are based on demand.



NFL and NBA are in lockouts because players want close to 60% of gross league revenue, and owners want closer to 50%.

I don't think Dana needs to worry about even 20% at this point.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

astrallite said:


> NFL and NBA are in lockouts because players want close to 60% of gross league revenue, and owners want closer to 50%.
> 
> I don't think Dana needs to worry about even 20% at this point.


Nope. Not yet. Maybe some day. I have a feeling, by the way, the owners will win.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Did you discuss hypothetical deserved salaries of various professions based off absolutely nothing?
> Did you come to an agreement that geologists should arbitrarily make millions of dollars? Seems intelligent.
> 
> 
> ...


Your main problem Roflcopter is that you make thing up in your head. You read something and then make up something completely different.

Quote my post where i said "Geologist should make millions and millions of dollars." 

Im curious to see if i made that exact statement.

This is the EXACT same thing you do for every single argument. Its hilarious really. You just put words in people mouths so nonchalantly. 

While you do that ima go to work. Bye.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Well you cant compare a geologist to an athlete. *Athletes tend to make 10x the money you just mentioned when in REALITY your dad should be getting paid more then them IMO*. Now should we raise a geologist pay or should be lower an ahletes :confused02:


Do I win yet?


10 x 110,000 = 1,100,000?

Y > 1,100,000?


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Do I win yet?
> 
> 
> 10 x 110,000 = 1,100,000?
> ...


Actually i win.

No where in that quote does it say "Geologist should make millions and millions of dollars".

That quote simply stated that i believe Geologist should get paid more then Athletes. I never said that i think Geologist should get a pay increase up to a million dollars. I actually think that your avereage Athlete should get paid less. And possibly that geologist should make a little more, not even close to a million though. 

So i win.

From now on only go by thing that i SAY. Not by things that you come up with. You do this very often which make your arguments down right imaginary.


----------



## tigerblood (Mar 20, 2011)

SideWays222 said:


> Laughing hysterically is the first symptom of wanting to commit suicide.
> 
> Or
> is it more like this?
> ...


Why is it you come off as such a wanker? Everything you type just seems to rub people the wrong way.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

tigerblood said:


> Why is it you come off as such a wanker? Everything you type just seems to rub people the wrong way.


Hahaha

Why is it that you come off as a stalker?? You seem to get sore over posts not even directed at you. Its really weird since i barely even notice you. 

And the reason that i come off as a "wanker" (As you would say) is because i dont post with the intent to make friends. I could really care less about that. I show respect to posters that have earned it. I let my opinion known whether its the popular opinion or not. When someone tries to act like a smart ass or w/e then i just respond accordingly. 
Is the reason you stalk me, to get my attention?? That is really weird. :confused05:

Il make you a deal!!

You quit stalking me and il stop calling you out on your silly/dumb opinions.??

Do we have a deal?


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Actually i win.
> 
> No where in that quote does it say "Geologist should make millions and millions of dollars".
> 
> ...


Yet your entire argument was about how UFC athletes are underpaid.


Good game.


You talk in circles long enough you are bound to look like a clown.




SideWays222 said:


> Well you cant compare a geologist to an athlete. Athletes tend to make 10x the money you just mentioned when in REALITY your dad should be getting paid more then them IMO.* Now should we raise a geologist pay or should be lower an ahletes :confused02*:



Also. You clearly entertained both ideas in a vague sentiment, but of course, now you change your argument as it suits you.

Nice try strawboy.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Yet your entire argument was about how UFC athletes are underpaid.
> 
> 
> Good game.
> ...


Lmfao..

You prove my point in every single post you make. I wrote this long post explaining all the ways you are wrong and all the ways you lie about stuff BUT then i realized, your brain probably cant understand it to begin with.
I am not sure why BUT for whatever reason, you still think the way a 12 year old thinks. So with that in mind il try to keep it as simple as possible.
I can think that alot of UFC fighters are underpaid and STILL think that your average athlete is overpaid, not only that, but i can also think that your Lawyers,scientist,geologists,doctors,etc. Should all get paid more then your average athlete does.
All those statements combined and NONE of it is contradictory. Most people understand this but for whatever reason your brain still works like a 12 years old does so in your brain those are contradicting statements.

You simply make things up. And you put words in peoples mouths. You also just down right cant understand things too well.
I used to think these were just isolated incidents with you BUT now im realizing that they are not. You for some reason truly cant understand things the way your normal person can. 
I really am not sure right now if i should continue talking to you because i cant tell if im talking to someone that is "special" or someone that just isnt that bright. Btw im not saying any of this to offend you, i truly have noticed this while talking to you in last few threads. I noticed its always the same exact thing/problem with you. You just seem to not understand stuff that well :shame01:


----------



## tigerblood (Mar 20, 2011)

SideWays222 said:


> Lmfao..
> 
> You prove my point in every single post you make. I wrote this long post explaining all the ways you are wrong and all the ways you lie about stuff BUT then i realized, your brain probably cant understand it to begin with.
> *I am not sure why BUT for whatever reason, you still think the way a 12 year old thinks*. So with that in mind il try to keep it as simple as possible.
> ...


WHY do you HAVE to type like THIS it is very VERY wierd and i DONT wont you to POST on my forums ANYMORE.

Why are you always calling people 12 year olds? When obviously you like watching cartoons, so does that make you think like a 12 year old? So do we have to simplify the way we speak to you?


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

tigerblood said:


> WHY do you HAVE to type like THIS it is very VERY wierd and i DONT wont you to POST on my forums ANYMORE.
> 
> Why are you always calling people 12 year olds? When obviously you like watching cartoons, so does that make you think like a 12 year old? So do we have to simplify the way we speak to you?


Wont you to post??

Hah what an amusing post. Wrong in sooo many different ways but still very amusing.

I like that you call it "Your" forum. 

Do i always call people 12 year olds?? Thats actually kind of funny. I have never noticed that. Can you please find my other posts where i call people 12 years old (PWETTTTYYY PWESSEEE)?? I think it will be funny to read that haha.

And.. im guessing you have not accepted my deal?? The deal where you stop stalking me and il pretend you dont exist?? Ring a bell?


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Lmfao..
> 
> You prove my point in every single post you make. *I wrote this long post explaining all the ways you are wrong and all the ways you lie about stuff BUT then i realized, your brain probably cant understand it to begin with.*
> I am not sure why BUT for whatever reason, you still think the way a 12 year old thinks. So with that in mind il try to keep it as simple as possible.
> ...


You type long, fallacious posts, fluffed with nothing but ad hominems and red herrings.

So right, greedy Dana White is a bad man for paying these lesser known guys around 16 per event 3 to 4 times per year....yet they are grossly underpaid.

Meanwhile they should also be paid less than the 100,000 a geologist makes. :laugh:


Right, quoting you directly is putting words into your mouth. Awesome. Meanwhile, the strawman himself continues to "debate" with his nonsensical retorts.

As far as me being "12 years old"...surely anyone reading this can see the irony in someone who can only see things in some childish, fantastic view of the world on how it SHOULD be in their own shortsighted mind...with not a shed of realism, logic and reasoning behind it.

Seriously, there isn't much to debate with someone championing arbitrary salaries and payouts based on nothing but their own personal views, then attempting to use conjecture as a serious debate tactic. It is comedy at best.


----------



## Breadfan (Jan 3, 2008)

*254495*



SideWays222 said:


> Wont you to post??
> 
> Hah what an amusing post. Wrong in sooo many different ways but still very amusing.
> 
> ...



I'm not even lying, about a week or so ago I was reading your posts and i thought "this guy is into the forum, posts some good news and has a good attitude" so I PMed a mod that I'm friends with asking what they think of your posts. Just as I sent it, you started your barrage of BS posts that, even if I sometimes agree with, are just an opinion wrapped in a page of insults and flame baits. 

You have your ups and downs. Right now is a down. Hope to see you on your up soon. 





Back on topic - If anyone wants to pay me $1k to fight Anderson Silva I'd love to do it, I'll even take a day off work and pay for the flight/hotel if need be. Make it happen. 

I just got UFC Personal Trainer and I'm HUNGRY.


----------



## H33LHooK (Jul 13, 2011)

Look, if the fighters are of a consensus opinion that they're not making enough, then at some point they'll form a union to do collective bargaining for them.

However, their silence on the subject is deafening in terms of any arguments made here that they are "underpaid".

In addition, the ownership of the UFC is accustomed to a certain profit level. Should it happen that their expenditures increase due to factors like CBA's, wage increases, etc, guess who's going to be out-of-pocket for it? 

The UFC will simply increase the price of PPV's and revenue-generators to offset the new cost increase, thereby maintaining the ROI's they're used to.

No thanks.

If a figher wants more money, he/she is free to negotiate for it. As detailed by previous posters, there are lots of other fight orgs.

.


----------



## hadoq (Jan 6, 2011)

Breadfan said:


> Back on topic - If anyone wants to pay me $1k to fight Anderson Silva I'd love to do it, I'll even take a day off work and pay for the flight/hotel if need be. Make it happen.
> 
> I just got UFC Personal Trainer and I'm HUNGRY.


hell, I'd pay $1k to get in there with the spider


----------



## osmium (Mar 6, 2007)

SmackyBear said:


> You're right about everything except the HBO part. They barely make anything from PPV events.
> 
> From Ross Greenburg, the ex or soon to be ex-President of HBO Sports:


I wasn't talking about the profit but how much they take in percentage wise from ppv buys. I am under the impression that they are themselves a PPV provider and don't give another company half of the ppv money off the top and how that along with lack of fighters on a card creates absurd paydays for some fighters.

The way I am reading the part of the article you are quoting he seems to be talking about profit for hbo versus profit for the boxers. Meaning that their main source of income is subscription fees and you aren't subscribing to HBO to watch a boxing PPV. 

When he says *BO doesn't make a lot of money from pay-per-view. There's usually a cap on what we can make. But the promoters and fighters insist on pay-per-view because that's where their greatest profits lie* he is saying that because of the built in percentages going to the fighters and all of the fees HBO has to pay they benefit less from PPVs than their numbers say they would from subsription fees if they aired the fights on their channels. The fighters would get considerably less money if the fights weren't on PPV however. So really he isn't talking about the financial viability of boxing but a dream scenario where they don't have to pay big name fighters very much money and can reap all of the rewards.

The article does point out a big difference in the two sports though. Boxing fights are events like the superbowl MMA and the UFC specifically is more like college football where the regular season carries the most value and importance. This impacts how the two can be commercialized in a major way. Having a league makes cable television a viable option for MMA and premium television a more viable option than it is for boxing. 

The contractual situations that everyone is bitching about makes this possible. Broadcast television and PPV are really the only options any name fighter has in boxing because they are selling their one or two fights a year not an entire promotion of fighters. The UFC can put Cruz/Johnson on cable because they are locked into contracts and can't cockblock the fight to get as much money as possible like boxers do. This essentially equates to a Florida/LSU regular season game which couldn't be given away for free by boxing.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

HBO DOES make money on boxing PPVs. The problem is overpaying for lesser tier fighters, putting them on PPV and getting marginal buy rates. THAT's when they don't make money. BUT, they want to build up a working relationship with both the fighters and promoters so they can get the very few MEGA fights that actually do drive in tons of PPV revenue for them.(Oscar vs Pacquiao, Oscar vs Mayweather, Mayweather vs Mosely, etc).


----------



## mastodon2222 (Feb 4, 2010)

Fine Wine said:


> Is the UFC structure REALLY a good thing for MMA?
> 
> Ok, after watching a bunch of UFC and boxing, I got to thinking about what cut goes to the promotors and what cut goes to the fighters. Given both would have similar cost structures and both gather revenue streams in similar ways.
> 
> ...


As far as $ goes, Fertittas >10x Dana White >10x fighters, so the Fertitta brothers are worth 100x than any of their fighters. Fair? Not really. Time and competition will even it out some, but I don't feel sorry for a any fighter who is a millionaire. Sure they risk their health every fight, but soldiers risk their lives and most have nothing.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> You type long, fallacious posts, fluffed with nothing but ad hominems and red herrings.
> 
> So right, greedy Dana White is a bad man for paying these lesser known guys around 16 per event 3 to 4 times per year....yet they are grossly underpaid.
> 
> ...



:sarcastic09:

Pretty much what i expected from you. You never disappoint me. Its amazing how you still understand such a little amount. Quiet shocking really...




Breadfan said:


> I'm not even lying, about a week or so ago I was reading your posts and i thought "this guy is into the forum, posts some good news and has a good attitude" so I PMed a mod that I'm friends with asking what they think of your posts. Just as I sent it, you started your barrage of BS posts that, even if I sometimes agree with, are just an opinion wrapped in a page of insults and flame baits.
> 
> You have your ups and downs. Right now is a down. Hope to see you on your up soon.
> 
> ...




There are posters i take seriously and then there are posters like Roflcopter and Tigerblood, etc, that i just find a fun way to pass the time. Pretty much nothing they say i take seriously and so its hard to be a "good" poster in return. Especially since they act so snobby in the arguments but are usually staying at the place furthest from the truth.

Im sorry that you sent that message as soon as i started talking to some members i look at as clowns. You should have messaged me and told me to be on my best behavior!!! :thumbsup:


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> :sarcastic09:
> 
> Pretty much what i expected from you. You never disappoint me. Its amazing how you still understand such a little amount. Quiet shocking really...
> 
> ...



Sideways argument


Red herring.

"You don't understand anything! You are clearly wrong! I expected this from you!"

Minus the proper grammar.

Followed by

Argumentum ad hominem

"I have better conversation with a 12 years old! You are a clown!"



Still in top form I see.



PREDICTION for Sideways' next retort

Something along the lines of "No u!"


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Sideways argument
> 
> 
> Red herring.
> ...



Haha as usual you are still just making stuff up. You are truly a creature of habit.


----------



## tigerblood (Mar 20, 2011)

SideWays222 said:


> Haha as usual you are still just making stuff up. You are truly a creature of habit.


How is this made up if everything he said was quoted from you? Read between the lines. matausi


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

tigerblood said:


> How is this made up if everything he said was quoted from you? Read between the lines. matausi


----------



## SmackyBear (Feb 14, 2008)

osmium said:


> I wasn't talking about the profit but how much they take in percentage wise from ppv buys. I am under the impression that they are themselves a PPV provider and don't give another company half of the ppv money off the top and how that along with lack of fighters on a card creates absurd paydays for some fighters.
> 
> The way I am reading the part of the article you are quoting he seems to be talking about profit for hbo versus profit for the boxers. Meaning that their main source of income is subscription fees and you aren't subscribing to HBO to watch a boxing PPV.


It's certainly true that subscription fees are where HBO makes its big revenue, and nobody subscribes to HBO to watch a boxing PPV. People don't even subscribe to watch World Championship Boxing and Boxing After Dark anywhere as much as they used to since HBO has been flushing its boxing budget down the toilet.

I can see where you'd get the idea that HBO PPV wasn't splitting the PPV revenue, but they are.

From a decent piece on Seconds Out about putting on a PPV in boxing:



> Assuming a pay-per-view retail price of $39.95, and following deduction of (a) the percentage of such pay-per-view fee to the cable operator (generally 50% of gross goes to the local cable operator although such percentage differs based upon the marketability of the event and the desire of the cable company to possess the ability to sell the event to its local cable subscribers) and (b) the approximate 7.5% distribution fee remitted to the distributor (SET or HBO PPV as discussed above) resulting in approximately $18.50 from each home purchase received by the promoter and comprising the domestic televison fee.


HBO takes all the risk by guaranteeing huge paydays but only gets a tiny piece of the pie for working with the cable operators, doing the broadcast production and devoting airtime to advertising it, and oftentimes building up the fighters in the first place by showcasing them on BAD and WCB.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Haha as usual you are still just making stuff up. You are truly a creature of habit.


Thanks for proving my point.


It isn't hard to predict that someone who is incapable of making an actual argument....won't.



SmackyBear said:


> It's certainly true that subscription fees are where HBO makes its big revenue, and nobody subscribes to HBO to watch a boxing PPV. People don't even subscribe to watch World Championship Boxing and Boxing After Dark anywhere as much as they used to since HBO has been flushing its boxing budget down the toilet.
> 
> I can see where you'd get the idea that HBO PPV wasn't splitting the PPV revenue, but they are.
> 
> ...



I honestly can't see the boxing scene continuing like this. I think it's telling that Grossburg is on his way out. The fact is, a ton of these guys are grossly overpaid and it's costing people money. It is just a testament to the clout of guys like Bob Arum that the charade has been able to continue so long.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> Thanks for proving my point.
> 
> 
> It isn't hard to predict that someone who is incapable of making an actual argument....won't.


Lmao
Again you are making stuff up.

I have gave you arguments left and right. You either completely REword them or just made stuff up. I dont know how many more arguments you want since you arnt even talking about them. 
You are literally talking about imaginary posts.

and even funnier
I predict every single post you make and you just keep going responding to these imaginary statements you made up in your head. And now since i admitted iv been predicting all your posts you are somehow imagining that it is your post and you are saying the same thing i told you.
I think you are/your evolving your behavior/sickness (Not sure which it is yet).

You are an astounding creature. If i had a lab, i would study you. :bored04:


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

What have I re-worded and made up? Please, show the court. Usually when someone re-words, something, it is called a "paraphrase" look it up. Usually this is done to state what the other person has stated without directly quoting them....it is absolutely fine to do as well as long as the person's argument isn't misrepresented.

You have a ton of baseless opinions and accusations, but I don't see anything concrete.

Also, more ad hominem...as per usual.


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

Now...for those of you who are uneducated, not mentioning any names.


This is a paraphrase. 




> Sideways argument
> 
> 
> Red herring.
> ...


Of course, nothing was "made up" at all. Except one thing. He actually said, "I have more intelligent discussions with toddlers" not 12 year olds. He said I have the brain of a 12 year old. I got my argumentum ad hominems mixed up.

Oh and he clearly states he thinks I'm a clown in the quoted post.

Yet SideWays's retort, as usual is that I'm making things up. :confused03:

It's almost as if he isn't even reading my posts(or is incapable) and is just copy and pasting pre-made responses. It would make sense, since he's basically done nothing but re-word his last 6 posts in the topic.






*
Now THIS...is a strawman.*



Roflcopter said:


> Bullshit stories...So...? It makes me laugh that people associate big companies with larger than life, absurdly rich people who can just blow obscene amounts of money on a whim. It's as if Dana doesn't have a massive mortgage, property taxes, the highest tax bracket in the US, etc....like his 100 million or whatever he has is just chilling in a checking account and he just can't seem to spend it all.
> 
> And yeah 10 million dollars a year of pocket money is a huge amount of money to anyone, these guys have very expensive lifestyles, they can't just afford to throw money at their fighters feet without just do. These guys are in the business to MAKE MONEY. I'm not sure you can grasp that concept. You think they are running MMA programming out of the kindness of their heart?
> 
> ...





SideWays222 said:


> Bullshit stories?? Yeah cause you know better then credible news websites. Ok buddy.
> 
> *Why do stupid people always put words in peoples mouths?? For some reason you and others like you think as soon as someone mentions any type of pay increase for fighters, you use this dumb ass argument
> "So Dana White shouldnt make any money??"
> ...




Person A proposes that morality and ethics do not play a role in business and the prime objective is to make money.


Person B counters that Person A put words into his mouth(which clearly not only didn't happen, but the exact opposite happened...) , and posed a rhetorical question that asked if Dana shouldn't make money. He obviously defeats and dismisses the argument as silly, because no one said they shouldn't make any money(you are right, no one did, strawboy)

Person B is clearly utterly full of straw and misrepresents Person A's argument and follows up with a nonsensical red herring.




THAT is what you call..."making things up".


----------



## Mirage445 (Dec 20, 2006)




----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

Yawn. Another bystander who has nothing of value to offer any conversation or debate hiding behind an anonymous reputation message to convey his feelings.

I'm not sure what's more of a staple to this forum or the internet in general....nonsensical, irrelevant diatribes passing off as legitimate debate, or just general cowardice.


Then again, based on the rep value and message itself, it probably was SideWays himself. :dunno:


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> What have I re-worded? Please, show the court.
> 
> You have a ton of baseless opinions and accusations, but I don't see anything concrete.
> 
> Also, more ad hominem...as per usual.


Court?? Whoa.. Your mental problems are worse then i thought.
Roflcopter you are not in court right now, snap out of it!! You are posting on a mixed martial arts forum. The courtroom you imagined is not real... :confused03:


Alright where do i start.

I said that the UFC should give mma fighters some sort of pay bonus. 
=
You turned it around and told me that the UFC is a business and needs to make money, and that Dana White needs to make money, and that i dont understand that. You also said, that i(SW2) believe, that the UFC runs MMA out of the kindness of their heart.

*I never stated that the UFC or Dana should not be making money and never stated that the UFC is not a business. A small pay increase does not in any way mean any of that.

NEXT

I generalized your above statement("UFC is a business and needs to make money") by saying that people like you believe that as soon as someone mentions any type of pay increase, that people like yourself always come back with this "So Dana White shouldnt make any money" or an argument similar to that.
=
You turned it around and said that "I(SW2) misrepresented your argument so it is easier for me to defeat."

*Me generalizing an argument just means its a common one. I never did anything just to make your arguments easy to defeat. You did that for me.

NEXT

I looked up the UFC 132 payout which was 1,277,000$ (Btw without Ortiz the number would be 827k). Then i looked up what the early PPV estimates were. The VERY EARLY estimates were around 375k. Where i live, the ufc PPV in HD cost 55 dollars but in regular it costs 45$. So i cut it in the center and found out that ufc 132 early estimate earnings are 18.75million$, i lowered that amount and made a statement that said "The early ufc 132 ppv earnings are 18million dollars." then "You asked me(SW2) where did you find these numbers" and "I(SW2) told you that, you can find these numbers online and do the math and figure it out yourself."
=
You then turned it around and told me(SW2) 
"so you pulled the number from your ass. Good to know. I figured such."

*I told you that i looked these numbers up. Why would you completely lie and imagine your post?? Its crazy.

NEXT

I said that i believe giving a small pay bonus depending on how well the PPV does, can help the UFCs public image, it would allow fighters to train better, it would give an even bigger incentive for the fighters to sell the PPV since it can directly affect their income, and most of all it is the right thing to do.
=
You completely ignored everything i said except 1 thing, and this is how you went about it. 
"LOL....morality in business discussion. What a complete non-sequitur. People don't get rich by being kind and gentlemanly. Hell, you are talking about individuals(Fertitas) who run things through Mafia ties, using extortion and violence to gain an upperhand. And you want to talk about giving money away because it's the right thing to do."

*Ignoring my whole post except the 1 statement that suits you. I know people dont get rich by being kind but there are people who were kind and became rich. Also paying UFC fighters more then 10k a fight wouldnt be considered "KIND and GENTLEMANLY". It would be considered something they should do. And once again you let your imagination get the best of you. The Fertitas arnt some type of Goodfellas and i see no proof to suggest they are. And yes i do want to talk about because its the right thing to do. This whole country is run by businesses and there are plenty of businesses that are fair and compensate their employees if they have just signed a great deal or even have a good year. My dad was given 5 grand last year just for it being Christmas. Guess what, he works for a business and that business did the right thing.

NEXT

I made an off the cuff remark to Hexrei that athletes make 10x the money a geologist(His dad is a geologist) does when in reality a geologist should be making more then a average athlete (Later i added i am talking about alot of jobs like Doctor,Scientist,Lawyer). Then i(SW2) said "Now should we raise a Geologists pay or should we lower the athletes pay :confused02:" 
which you first responded to by just posting a couple of laugh smilies.
=
Then in a different post you completely turned my post around and said
"Did you discuss hypothetical deserved salaries of various professions based off absolutely nothing?
Did you come to an agreement that geologists should arbitrarily make millions of dollars? Seems intelligent."

I then told you i never actually made a comment that said that Geologists should make millions of dollars and asked you to find me that post.

You then proceeded to make a math equation out of my post above and X Hexreis geologist dads salary X10 because i said Athletes make 10x the money his dad does. And then you acted as if that ment i was saying that geologist should make 1.1million dollars.
I then had to explain to you that i never said that Geologist salary should be raised to match that of an athlete, nor did i say that athletes should be making less then a geologist. I told you that that i believe the average athlete should get paid a bit less and that a geologist should be getting paid more but not close to a million.

I then told you to ONLY go by what i say exactly and not by things you come up with or imagine.

NEXT

I said that most of the UFC fighters are UNDERpaid and also i said i believe that there are alot of average athletes that are OVERpaid. I can believe that UFC fighters that are making 7k are completely underpaid and i can also think that an average athlete who makes millions on top of millions is being completely overpaid.
=
You turned it around and said, "your entire argument is about how UFC fighters are underpaid and yet you think athletes are overpaid. You are completely contradicting yourself, GOOD GAME."

In my response i explained to you how I can believe that UFC fighters are completely underpaid and how i can also think that an average athlete that makes millions on top of millions is being completely overpaid, and how i can believe that a Doctor, Lawyer, Scientist, etc, should realistically be making more then a average athlete. And that i can think all those things and none of it is contradictory to the other.
No matter how many times i explain that to you, this is the type of insane response you give me.
=
"So right, greedy Dana White is a bad man for paying these lesser known guys around 16 per event 3 to 4 times per year....yet they are grossly underpaid.
Meanwhile they should also be paid less than the 100,000 a geologist makes."


*My statements are not contradictory and the only reason you believe that is because you IMAGINED the amount i said everyone should get paid. And also yes 16k per fight is being grossly underpaid.


NEXT

You made up/turned the meaning of my posts so often, it is in the level of mental issues.

I still truly believe there is something mentally wrong with you and that is why you do this stuff. I called you out multiple times on the crap you are doing, you would ignore it rather then to confront the issues you have.

Anyway
I hope you read all this and see how crazy you are. Because this is probably as much time im willing to put into this conversation. Its already made me fall behind on some stuff i wanted to get done.

Get some help Roflcopter


Say whatever you have to say
get that 1 more reply post out of the way
then stop talking to me because you weird the out
make your last post a good one and then stop 


Sincerely - SideWays222


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

SideWays222 said:


> Court?? Whoa.. Your mental problems are worse then i thought.
> Roflcopter you are not in court right now, snap out of it!! You are posting on a mixed martial arts forum. The courtroom you imagined is not real... :confused03:
> 
> 
> ...



1: I totally see the re-wording there. I mean...you made a point(salaries should be uniformly raised). I stated small time fighters don't deserve pay raises based on the amount of revenue they generate. You bring in this balderdash about how you lament humanity for all of it's selfishness and how pay should be raised for nothing other than ethical reasons.

My response...and I quote "...they can't just afford to throw money at their fighters feet without just do. These guys are in the business to MAKE MONEY. I'm not sure you can grasp that concept. You think they are running MMA programming out of the kindness of their heart?"

Now is English your second language or something, because among other things it would explain why you are so utterly incompetent at comprehending rhetoric.


2: Again...quoting things that aren't quotes. And again, a clear misrepresentation of an argument. I claim the UFC is in the business to make money and not to make arbitrary pay rates based on ethics...this is bad business and leads to money problems, and you misrepresent that as saying "So Dana White shouldn't make any money". A clear strawman.


3: Right..so questioning unsourced/unverified data =/= putting words into someone's mouth. Furthermore, the revenue that the UFC gets from each events, I'm pretty sure hasn't been released to the public....like ever..and it certainly can't be estimated by something as basic as PPV buys x 55. That's absolutely laughable. Not only are their price fluctuations, the UFC has tons of expenses per event....mainly the very large percentage that the PPV providers get.


4: I still fail to see how I'm putting words into people's mouths or how I'm making things up. As for the argument itself....maybe I emphasized that particular part of the sentence....because...well I don't know...it was emphasized? "MOST OF ALL"....hence that is the most important part, according to you.


5: No, actually you were exceptionally vague about it and posed a hypothetical with multiple answers. 

"Athletes tend to make 10x the money you just mentioned when in REALITY your dad should be getting paid more then them IMO. Now should we raise a geologist pay or should be lower an ahletes"

Clearly suggests one of two things. Either

A: Geologists should make over a million dollars,
B: Athletes should make less than 100 thousand dollars.

The reason I assumed A? You went on a tirade about how Dana and co were evil little thieves for underpaying fighters.

Then of course, you later clarify this vague statement as it suited you and pretended that you had said that all along.

6: Yeah clarifying arguments after the fact doesn't mean you didn't contradict yourself. Nice try. Also 16 x 4 = 72 + ?(unknown quantity of money from sponsors, royalties, etc) < 100k. What's the problem exactly? Unless again you are going to clarify after the fact again by stating you think all fighters should be paid some arbitrary number like 90k! Yes! If fighters are paid 70k per year, the UFC is THIEVES! If they are paid more than a geologist(and others)...they are overpaid!


7: I believe you have trouble writing, reading and comprehending the English language...and the odds are I'm actually correct.


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

Roflcopter said:


> 1: I totally see the re-wording there. I mean...you made a point(salaries should be uniformly raised). I stated small time fighters don't deserve pay raises based on the amount of revenue they generate. You bring in this balderdash about how you lament humanity for all of it's selfishness and how pay should be raised for nothing other than ethical reasons.
> 
> My response...and I quote "...they can't just afford to throw money at their fighters feet without just do. These guys are in the business to MAKE MONEY. I'm not sure you can grasp that concept. You think they are running MMA programming out of the kindness of their heart?"
> 
> ...




Alright im glad you vented. Your happy now im happy now. Now lets stop annoying the masses.

wohoo :happy04: :happy04: :happy04: :happy04:

whooptidooo 
yay


----------



## Roflcopter (Sep 5, 2008)

Responding to balderdash directed towards me =/= venting.


----------



## AmdM (Apr 13, 2010)

lol just lol and afterwards some more lol


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

AmdM said:


> lol just lol and afterwards some more lol


Haha
Its incredibly sad that this is possibly the best post past page 3 in this thread.

You have earned yourself a rep with this incredibly insightful post!


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

AmdM said:


> lol just lol and afterwards some more lol


----------



## SideWays222 (Sep 9, 2008)

limba said:


>


And here i thought the post quality was only going to go up after AmdM. :confused05:


----------



## limba (Jul 21, 2009)

SideWays222 said:


> And here i thought the post quality was only going to go up after AmdM. :confused05:


Sorry to dissapoint you...

I was referring to the fact that you and Rofl hijacked it...


----------

