Bloody Elbow

I here I never thought anything in MMA could be more subjective and based upon assumptions then Rankings...

Both subjects should always come with disclaimers…
WARNING: THE TOPIC YOU ARE ABOUT TO ENGAGE IN IS SUBJECTIVE!

**And Here I Never thought....

I think they should a bit.

I think there should be a minimum salary that comes along with sacrificing your body, risking your health, and doing what is necessary, day in day out all year long, to be a successful fighter.

I think 30-40k a Year is a reasonable salary, one that is enough to live on and train full-time. If you make more than that in Winnings in a year then you don’t get your salary, which should be everyone’s goal anyway.

More than enough for one man to live, eat, and train full time. If you got a family counting on you then get a real fucking job, idiot.

Or hustle up some sponsors

Make some noise on social media and become more popular and you’ll get paid.

If you got a family counting on you then get a real fucking job, idiot.

This is what I don’t understand from people. It’s like they forget being a professional cage fighter is a choice. If you can get to the point to where you make 10K debuting in the UFC (aside from whatever earnings/expenses are included) maybe you should use some of that money to hit up a community college in your area if you don’t already have a back-up plan.

Word.

Fighting isn’t, or should never be, a “career choice.”

I find the “fighting chose Me” sentiment quite absurd, we’re not talking sexual preference here.

People keep forgetting that fighters are not salaried employees.

They are independent contractors. Given that the low paid guys are the one and done guys, the UFC shouldn’t be paying them guaranteed salaries for the year.

Well, a certain amount of success would have to qualify you for the salary,

or the UFC could offer that up front, with the fighter agreeing to honour a certain amount of fights, lets say 3 minimum per year.

We would certainly have a larger talent pool with more fighters to choose from, thus more fights to watch.

Although the current system seems to be working just fine.

Shotokanman - January 14, 2012 reply

I agree

We see this in boxing all the time. Guys who can’t fill an arena but get paid millions of dollars. The UFC is not a charity. If you make the promotion money you should get paid. If you are an undercard fighter, your importance isn’t as much (quite frankly you’re replaceable).

Would I like to see fighter paid more? Sure, but that doesn’t mean they’re entitled to it.

"Fighters" is just one industry... and I'll be it's not the only "underpaid" one

If I asked you if you’d like to see sweatshop workers paid more, you’d probably be sympathetic and say yes. If you have some friends who are waiters, and I asked you if you’d like to see waiters get paid more, you’d probably say yes. The downside is that with many many industries, the employees all feel they should get paid more, and can make a reasonable case for it. Now, if everyone gets paid more, then the cost of whatever they produce is higher, companies will charge more for it, and we’re back to square one, because the higher salaries of the workers don’t buy more goods/services when the cost of those goods and services has also become higher.

mcpeepants23200 - January 13, 2012 reply

Lets not compare sweatshop workers to MMA fighters.

discoandherpes - January 14, 2012 reply

yup.

flashlight cop - January 13, 2012 reply

It's the fighters jobs to get them to

not anyone else. No job pays you more than market share just to be nice. Give me a break. If they want to get paid more start a union.

It’s not the consumers or Ufcs job to get them higher pay.

Can't the fighters just join the Freelancers Union??

And if not I think to start union talks/ interest you only need like 30% of the work force to sign a petition saying they are interested…

Feel free to get the fighters to start a union

and I’m only being mildly sarcastic. I’d like to see one, but good luck getting it through.

Believe me I have no interest in this … I’m just saying it’s not this big fucking mystery, I think if the fighters really wanted it there would have been some sort of progress made already…

I would like to see a fighters union as well

But a Union isn’t some magical solution, it brings it’s own problems.

Problem with the fighter's union, or at least what I've always been under the impression of.

Low-level fighters aren’t as valuable to the company and could be eliminated if they caused problems such as union talks. You need the stars, who the UFC couldn’t punish, but they’re already making enough money to where they don’t need a union.

Randy Couture talked about this once, I could have sworn it was on an old E:60 segment.

Exactly.

The only guys that could make a Union happen have absolutely no reason to.

the union isn’t going to happen without sacrifice, and the big guys aren’t going to make the sacrifice until they have to. The unions in the other sports formed when the stars were getting fucked, keep the stars happy and it will be very hard to get going.

Does anyone know what percentage of fighters would have to support a union? Is it 50%? Maybe someone could anonymously petition the low level guys and try to pass it without any stars. I think most fighters would be smart enough to understand why the most famous guys are against it, though those guys probably have a lot of influence in their camps.

Bolshevik - January 13, 2012 reply

it doesn’t matter without the stars, they can’t make the stars not fight, and if the stars are going to fight the union has no leverage.

But if enough low and mid level fighters support a UFC union couldn’t it be mandatory for everyone?

Bolshevik - January 13, 2012 reply

I’m not sure how that works, but I don’t think they can force people to join, and I really don’t think they can force people to strike, which will take away a lot of their leverage.

You can't make union membership mandatory

It would be an infringement of people’s rights and freedoms

Fatty Fish Belly - January 14, 2012 reply

I don't see how it could work

Unions are generally for workers pursuing long term engagement, and ultimately seeking pension. For most UFC Starters the exit is after three losses or less if there is a lack of desire. Would that mean the Fighter is out of the Union or would it include the hundreds of small MMA Promotions around the country? Could they afford to participate? How long is an average MMA career? More so, without a unified league in the first place (just individual fighters and camps), how could they unify?
I think its unlikely.

I don't think a "union" is the right model

A fighter’s association makes more sense. Like what the tennis players have. And it can potentially include fighters from many organisations. In tennis, there are broadly two “promotions”, one which is the ATP and the other (name escapes me at the moment) that is the group of 4 grand slams. The biggest events are the grand slams but the ATP (player org) actually has just about all the other events.

The association can lobby for various changes like pay, work conditions, schedule, etc.

The fighters aren't getting free market value

Gross’ story focused on the lower level fighters, and and that’s great for a sob story, but the reality is that it’s their fault for hundreds of them pursuing a full-time career in MMA when only tens of fighters would earn that kind of pay.

However, the fighters as a whole, especially the top fighters, deserve a lot more than ~20% (BTW, Roth’s math is atrocious). The reason they get such a small share is that there is NO free market. The UFC’s contracts prevent anyone else from bidding on a fighter except at the end of a contract, and you can’t put together a fight card with one fighter. In almost every other profession, would be illegal (restraint of trade).

Think about it: In what other profession is an employer able to say, “here’s a contract for three days of work, but for the other 362 days of the year, you can’t use your skill for anyone else. BTW, we can terminate the contract at any time, but you can’t.”

And don’t give me this “they signed the contract, tough luck” bullshit. We have labor and competition laws for a reason.

paythefighters - January 13, 2012 reply

Your screen name is more appropriate than ever.

That's a bit of a spurious argument

"here’s a contract for three days of work, but for the other 362 days of the year, you can’t use your skill for anyone else."

Three days is 3 fights I assume. But it takes 2-3 months work to prepare for each fight. So really, you’re getting e.g. $24000 for 9 months work for a fight, rather than $24000 for 3 days.

Given that 3 fights uses up most of the year, and fighting for another promotion could torpedo UFC match-ups due to schedule clashes or injuries suffered, the exclusivity is reasonable and a fighter doesn’t have to take the deal if he doesn’t want it.

Also, most other uses of the skill are allowed – for example, teaching or appearing in a movie. The only thing prohibited is working for a competitor (and that includes WWE). And even that is subject to UFC approval. If they knew there’s no way they could get you a fight for a 9 month period, and you asked to do a WWE appearance, they might be OK with it. The contract may even specify that the UFC has an obligation to set up 3 fights a year or else the fighter could do some outside work, but that’s just speculation.

The UFC doesn't make the fighters clock in to train during those 2-3 months

Fighters are free to use the time as they wish. GSP trains almost 365 days a year, Carwin trains part time and does engineering, BJ eats burritos, etc. Besides, fighting is the best form of training anyway.

Injuries happen all the time during training. The UFC doesn’t monitor their training to make sure that a fighter’s training partners don’t go 100%. They can train however they see fit. There is already a strong incentive to avoid injury: if you get injured, you don’t get paid. The fighters are under no obligation to guarantee their availability on a particular date.

Prohibition of working for a competitor is restraint of trade.

paythefighters - January 14, 2012 reply

It is restraint of trade, but if it is clearly illegal, then the contract can be overturned by a court

There are many contracts which contain “unconscionable” clauses. A typical one is where you work for a company as a contractor through an agency. The agency stipulates in its contract that you cannot, within 6 months of the end of the contract, go to work directly for the client company as a contractor – you must still go through them so they get their cut. Supposedly this clause which also seems like restraint of trade, is “unconscionable” and can be struck out by a court.

If a fighter chose to fight outside the UFC and got sued by the UFC, potentially the UFC would lose due to the court deciding the exclusivity clause is illegal restraint of trade.

Just because clauses are unconscionable, it doesn’t mean you can’t put them in a contract, and all over the world, such clauses exist in contracts.

But don't forget...

The fighters voluntarily sign these contracts. And even if legal advice may indicate the contract can legally be broken, they choose to play ball. It’s better to get paid a higher rate exclusively by the UFC than to get a lower rate at promotions that don’t demand exclusivity.

Also… the contract is a 1 or multi year contract that books the fighter’s entire MMA performances during that period, exclusively. You don’t have to do any particular thing during that time except show up for the scheduled fights and do certain promotional work. And the pay structure is focused on the fights. It’s not a contract for 3 days work in the year. Theoretically the UFC can ask you to fight every day (of course, they won’t, and you don’t need to accept every fight offered)… hence people like Leben or Jones getting some fights very close to the previous fight.

Nah that's actually the problem is that everything is subjective and speculative unitl we know the entire story and we don't and probably won't for quite some time to come.

Nah, man. End of story. We can all go home now, Joe Show Radio has it from here.

El Pablo Diablo - January 13, 2012 reply

that is one scary creature.

like the ninja turtles, is was born of green glowing goo.

anteater, dude

Damnatio Memoriae - January 13, 2012 reply

X

oh shit.

he said end of story. guess we can all just leave now. shows over. everybody out. you dont have to go home, but you cant stay here….i know, who i want to take me home…..sorry, couldnt help it.

El Pablo Diablo - January 13, 2012 reply

Other sports don't have to lobby states or territories just to hold events legally.

Other sports have MUCH better TV licensing deals because they’re more established, socially accepted and truly mainstream.

KJ Gould - January 13, 2012 reply

and have many more events to generate revenue from, and….

Interesting point

I’m sure the UFC spends a lot of money to try and legalize the sport in different areas.

Not to mention better merchandising. Bigger sports are in another world in this regard.

Machiel Van - January 13, 2012 reply

You've just evidenced that you understand nothing about operating a succesful business

Charles Awad - January 13, 2012 reply

They do.

They are the ones who win. Keep winning and you’ll get paid more, pretty simple really.

Success is rewarded, even more so than in Sports.

A guy who never wins should be getting more than 10k to show?

Nah.

wtf?

mcpeepants23200 - January 13, 2012 reply

That's such a dumb point.

“(Insert major sports league here) can afford to pay their athletes more.”

Machiel Van - January 13, 2012 reply

I'm in the car biz.

and that never works when I say that to my clients.

djganesh - January 13, 2012 reply

You're worth what the market says you're worth

end of story

Mongoose44 - January 14, 2012 reply

well said

some of the figures on that piece were so out of wack it was ridiculous. The 5% of total revenue figure was ridiculous. Say the Ufc brings home 400 million that would mean 20 million. Brock and Reem made 5 million combined(at least and maybe much more) at Ufc 141. Add Gsp who makes at least 3 and they are saying combined the rest of the roster made less than 12 million. Metzler put the revenue percent at something like 25 %. Which sounds more reasonable.

Also their statement that more than half the roster makes less than 40,000 is crazy. Most of these fighters we don’t have any idea how much they are making because tons of AC don’t release salary data.

Basically the entire article was filled with falsehoods and stats that were so awful they come off as bold faced lies. Gross is going to come out looking like an idiot for this piece.

That’s what happens when your only sources that aren’t “anonymous” are good ol’ Google and Wikipedia.

Machiel Van - January 13, 2012 reply

Dana's comment was fantabulous btw

They’re gonna “blast em with unedited interviews” and an infinite number of f bombs.

the quote for the record

from Mania:

Josh (Gross) is a pessimistic scumbag who pitched the story. The beauty is we filmed the interview too. We will air the entire interview as is no edits after ESPN airs theirs! Looking very forward to this :) an attempt by gross and ESPN to do a hack job on us we were ready this time!! We are gonna blast these hacks!! I’m in Rio but my stuff is ready to roll!!! I’m excited to smash and discredit ESPN and the piece they did!! So pumped! can’t stand the lying 2 faced media fucks!! So glad we did this one right cause ESPN can NOT be trusted. can’t stand the lying 2 faced media fucks!!

We are gonna blast these hacks!!

Classy as always. Ignores the fact that ESPN.com has devoted actual staff members to covering MMA, mostly UFC, for quite a while, and yet their broadcast partner, Fox, has a web site that still covers MMA by linking to other web sites’ articles, rather than dedicating any staff resources to it. Who are the hacks?

( . Y . ) - January 13, 2012 reply

All of them?

higgledy-piggledy - January 13, 2012 reply

so b/c espn covers a MMA, does it mean espn is incapable of ‘hack’ journalism?

bq.Unfortunately, the article and story that could been a great first step down that path was sullied with inaccuracies and fact-checking failures which ruined the message.

If so called jurnalist can’t get their facts right, one should ignore all they have to say.

I’m excited to smash and discredit ESPN and the piece they did!!

He’s never going to learn

learn what?

He's shitting on the "Worldwide Leader in Sports"

Regardless of whether he’s right, publicly insulting them probably isn’t the best idea when he’s so worried about increasing exposure to his organization. I love Dana, but at times he acts like a jaded 16-year old who just caught their bf/gf cheating on them.

Exactly right – the only thing saving him is that these tirades haven’t gotten back to the ESPN executives

oh i'm sure they have

The ones that can affect change in programming are pretty far removed from twitter and MMA sites

he’s defending his company against a pretty shitty article. He’s not the first person to call espn out for some nonsense recently, he won’t be the last. This isn’t like when the NHL left the network, because then the NHL was relying on ESPN for a lot of money/publicity. They’ve done pretty well without ESPN so far, this isn’t going to change much, especially once cooler heads prevail.

How bad did ESPN react when he cursed them out before UFC Rio?

God, he writes like a 12 year old.. embarrassing.

Horselover Fat - January 13, 2012 reply

Capitalism

Pay your workers as little as possible in order to make the greatest profit possible, plain and simple. The only hope the UFC has with regards to a monopoly is to get the same treatment other big time sports get (ie NFL, MLB, NBA)

I don’t think all of the extra revenue goes towards Dana’s Ferrari’s either. They’re internationally expanding, and taking hits on certain events just to introduce themselves into new markets…

Plus, don’t they have like a 400 million dollar loan out that needs paid in the next 4 years? I was just reading something about that on here a couple days ago.

Nobody mentions this, but that’s exactly what big businesses do. They take those profits and re-invest in their own growth. UFC wouldn’t be growing at the rate they are by paying big cash to these guys.

If the fighters are truly fed up, get everyone on the same page and form a union. If you aren’t happy with the pay, leave and fight regionally. There are options, although the best one is the UFC at this point, mainly due to opportunity.

It’s baffling to me that people think Zuffa should willingly hand out more money to its employees, rather than invest for the long-term growth of the corporation…

Well, in every other business… there is competition. I think that’s really the soul of this argument. The pay could definitely go up, but there isn’t any competition. Unless the fighters are willing to say… ya know what, there just isn’t enough money in this and it stifles the production of prospects on a grand scale… it’s always going to be this way.

That is, until the government gets involved or these guys all one day decide enough is enough and don’t show up for work.

El Pablo Diablo - January 13, 2012 reply

great points, both of you.

i can always appreciate an even headed thought

"Well, in every other business… there is competition."

I’m sorry, but that’s not true at all. Who is the competition to the NFL? Who is the competition to the NBA, MLB, NHL….you get the idea. Since the article specifically compares the UFC to the NFL, name one NFL player that’s allowed to go play in the Canadian league in the off season? Or that is allowed to go play for a different team if they choose. Every major sports organization has a strangle hold on its players, yes most of them have unions, but how many decades had they been around before unions were a viable option?

M C M - January 13, 2012 reply

I'm actually comparing the UFC to an NFL team

What do you mean who's the competition to the NFL

The NFL has 31 teams all vying against each other in the same talent pool. That’s a lot of competition.

Chris Hall - January 13, 2012 reply

The teams are the competitors, the league is the NFL,

The fighters are the competitors (and you can argue that their trainers and sparring partners make up their Team), the league is the UFC.

The NFL has the monopoly on Teams and Players. The UFC doesn’t even have a monopoly on Teams and Fighters. It’s just that the competition (Bellator, One FC, previously Strikeforce and Pride) are/were weak and either die, got bought by the UFC, or bumble along without being too much of a threat.

It's small thinking to say the UFC has no competition

Their real competition is other sports. On the supply side: talented young people can decide to play football or fight or do other sports. On the demand side: UFC is going up against other sports for eyeballs (people’s time) and money (tickets, PPVs, merchandise). And they’re also competing in the finance arena (sponsorship).

True on many levels but

A union will fail if it doesnt have the support of the biggest most recognizable stars like GSP, Silva, Lesnar. If the bottom half of UFC fighters organized they will be cut and no progress will be made. The truth is fighters simply cant go to another organization any more as there is only one player in town now it’s either play the UFC way or find a new career.

I don’t think all of the extra revenue goes towards Dana’s Ferrari’s either. They’re internationally expanding, and taking hits on certain events just to introduce themselves into new markets…

THIS.

I always wonder why this is never brought up. Almost every other org. that has come along saying that they’re better because they pay their fighters more has folded. The UFC pays their guys well enough that this can be their job, not their second job, and re-invests money back into expanding MMA as a whole. Getting MMA sanctioned in New York isn’t free. Expanding to new markets isn’t free.

Because of all this, the UFC has not only added stability to their own company, but to the entire sport of MMA, and every single person who enjoys training or watching fights has benefited.

Why should you pay your workers more than you have to?

Businesses are for making money, not employing the masses. If they can get a better wage somewhere else they have every right to do so. That competition is the beauty of capitalism.

How much is what you "have to" pay workers?

Enough for them to be content enough that they do their jobs well? Enough that they don’t go looking for another job? Enough that they’re not going into debt while making a few casino owners multi-millionaires? How much is “have to”?

Enough that they prefer your job as opposed to others, or unemployment

Are you a member of the Culinary Workers Union?

No, but I am unionized.

And proud of it.

OK but if you had a small company of your own...

Let’s say you have $300000 revenue per year and three employees, whose market value is $20000 per year (ie. that is what your competitors pay equally skilled employees). Would you pay $20000 each and keep $240000 for yourself (before paying rent and other costs) or would you voluntarily pay more? Let’s assume other costs are $120000 and you are left with $120000 profit if you pay $20000 per head.

Have to is whatever the market dictates

If I have a business and pay someone $10 an hour to work and the guy across the street is paying $11, I’m not gonna get the first crack at employees unless I raise my wages. If people are disengaged because they don’t make enough money, they’ll either quit or I’ll have to increase the wages to make them more productive. It’s not a business’ job to keep their employees out of debt…why do they need to care what their employees spend their $ on?

The MMA labor market is horribly distorted...

…as is the labor market for other professional sports. This is why other professional sports, from the NFL to boxing, are regulated differently than other industries. Why not MMA?

Wage rates are difficult to determine to begin with, but they’re doubly difficult when you’re dealing with both professional sports and monopolies. My point is what you “have to” pay a worker isn’t clear-cut in these circumstances.

There is no 'have to'

You don’t really understand much about economics if you keep using that term. There are different levels of pay and there are reactions to those different levels from labor. ‘Have to’ doesn’t exist.

The UFC pays fighters well enough that they prefer to be pro fighters as opposed to wrestling coaches or construction workers or whatever.

That's not my term. That's MemphisMike's term.

And since you’re the economics expert, explain to me why there are vastly different standards, and far more lax regulations, when it comes to paying MMA fighters as opposed to other professional athletes.

You realize minor league baseball players get paid absolute shit right?

And don’t call it my term. I said it once…you started quoting it over and over again.

Bold definitions of what capitalism is..

… get quoted. Sorry, it’s one of my pet peeves.

If minor league baseball is the comparative basis for the UFC’s pay structure, then I want cheaper tickets and better hot dogs.

Your pet peeve is bolded definitions of capitalism (that aren't even definitions of capitalism but simply statements)?

And if you went to a UFC card headlined by Roli Delgado vs John Polakowski you sure as shit would be paying much less. You’re not paying to see the last undercard fights, you’re paying for the main card.

Because other professional athletes have unions. None of those sports pay 50% of revenue because they want to, they do it because they have to.

The other sports have government intervention...

And they’ve been around longer and have went through this long ago. This is a ridiculously new sport, you gotta keep that in mind. I honestly think it will never reach the stature of a sport like the NFL due to people fighting not being as widely accepted, but to even be comparable to other mainstream sports it’s going to need more than 18 years.

The sport is relatively new and small - obvious obviousness is obvious

Public vs private

The reason they don’t disclose full fighter pay is because they’re a privately held company correct? Would it be worth while for the ufc to go public esp with debt payments coming up? Could u imagine the ipo for the ufc? Would this better help the fighters in the long run?

milliondollardreams - January 14, 2012 via Android app reply

being public didn’t help pro elite.

They only need to go public or sell if they don’t think they can make (or finance) the payments. They don’t disclose the payouts because they don’t want to. And it wouldn’t necessarily mean we’d know everything, all we saw from Pro Elite were the statements that were required to be filed. Those statements would give us a lot more info, but they wouldn’t necessarily mean that we would get to see every fighter’s contract.

Other sports disclose pay because the teams and the players want the information public, for whatever reason, the UFC doesn’t want that information public.

Aren’t the ufc in a much better position than pro elite?

milliondollardreams - January 14, 2012 via Android app reply

yes, but that doesn’t make being public a better option for them. If they can pay the debt themselves and want to keep doing it, why sell out?

I think you have a misconception about what a public company is

Publicly listed companies are ones whose shares are traded on an exchange. They have to release certain data to the public. But that data doesn’t include details of all their contracts with independent contractors. It’s high level summary data, for the most part. You might find the total costs of contractors, but not the individual fight purses and bonuses for each contractor.

People seem to have the idea that a “public” company must provide all its data to the “public”. Not true.

Bad Analogy

In you scenario there is someon across the street paying more making you raise your wages. There is no one like that in MMA any more The UFC bought them out or ran them out of business. Really the issue now becomes is it a monopoly and do they take advantage of the market which in turn hurts workers

You make it sound like these people HAVE to be mma fighters

if you can’t make a good enough wage because you aren’t worth enough to the company…do something else. Be a wrestling coach, bjj instructor, etc. No one is forcing these people to fight at the lower rungs of the UFC. If I absolutely demanded I had to play pro baseball for a living, I’d have to go to a shitty enough league where I’d probably get paid lunch money.

Entitlement, ya gotta love it!

ChillMike - January 13, 2012 reply

Word.

If your fighting to get paid your doing it for the wrong reason.

isn't that the point though of being a PRIZE fighter?

MaZZacare - January 13, 2012 reply

Yes but if you're not good enough to win prizes (i.e. win your fights and get a better contract), what are you doing in MMA?

or they ran themselves out of business by paying too much. If the guy across the street is offering 20 bucks an hour instead of the 11, those people will go crawling back for the 10 when the other guy goes out of business.

…while making a few casino owners multi-millionaires?

That’s completely irrelevant.

And I think you'll find:

1) it was not the UFC that made them multi-millionaires in the first place
2) they took a big risk, a leap of faith to get involved in the UFC and could well have lost their shirt or at least been less profitable, if TUF/ Griffin/Bonnar had not happened

Except there is no competition

The UFC does everything in it’s power to keep it that way.

If they can get a better wage somewhere else they have every right to do so.

Again, the UFC stops them from doing so. This is what fighters complain about when they talk about the UFC contracts being oppressive.

Only a severely retarded version of capitalism is at play here.

paythefighters - January 14, 2012 reply

For the UFC to eliminate competition for real,

It would have to remove all opportunities for fighters to earn money elsewhere. For example, buy out and close down the sports of boxing, kickboxing, and other fighting sports. After all, the MMA draws talent from wrestling, boxing, WWE (I used the word sport loosely), K1, BJJ, etc. At least two of these pay good money (boxing, WWE). K1 used to as well :/

Not to mention people with athletic skills frequently can play more than one sport. Aldo (soccer), Diaz (triathlon), Brock (football)… other sports compete for the athlete’s career choice.

everyone is free to do whatever they want when their contract expires. Please don’t act like contracts are somehow illegal, there are contracts in every industry in the universe.

cap·i·tal·ism [kap-i-tl-iz-uhm]

noun
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

Your point?

Yes the UFC wants to make as great a profit as possible and keeping wages down is a way to accomplish that, whats your point

His point is that's the way it should be

and that the UFC isn’t “evil” for doing it.

This isn’t a Disney movie.

the point

is that the UFC pays their employees what they are worth in the market. this worth is decided by both the UFC and the fighter, as they have agreed to the terms of their contract. what’s “plain and simple” is that the fighters can take their services elsewhere if they feel they are worth more than the UFC does. how many UFC fighters are not UFC fighters? none, therefore all UFC fighters fight for an amount that they have agreed to be worth.

What Market?

There is essentially NO market for these fighters. They get paid what the UFC thinks they are worth and not a dollar more. With Strikeforce there was more of a choice like when Dan Henderson left because he felt he was worth more and got more there is no longer that option. What Dana says you’re worth is now what you’re worth there is no market.Don’t bring up kickboxing or boxing either as its a completely different sport.

JG87 - January 14, 2012 reply

Strikeforce going away is part of the market. If SF’s business model was so great, someone else would have outbid zuffa, or they would still exist.

how many times does the guy paying more than the UFC need to die before people start to figure it out?

I just wrote a fanpost...

pretty much tackling the true injustice of low-level fighter pay compared to other athletes.

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2012/1/13/2705261/mma-fighter-pay-dana-vs-espn

it wasn't very good either imo

Sorry to be mean, but you didn’t write anything that a number of other people haven’t written already and it wasn’t as well written as some of them. Also comparing the NFL to the UFC is apples and watermelons

I haven't seen one other person break it down like that.

Not one other post showing just how underpaid fighters (active competitors)are compared to practice squad NFL players. And really what CAN you compare the UFC to? Boxing, which is equally criminally (perhaps more so)in their treatment of their athletes?

The UFC is an amalgamation of the PGA/WTA/WWE/Boxing

Is that... a word?

yes

I should probably read a book once in a while instead of an MMA blog.

But you learned it on an MMA blog!

I’M LEARNDING!

Next person who tries to shit on your writing...

I’ll say looky here bitch, he’s teaching me 5-syllable words.

Including WWE completely discredits you

You’re going to compare a legit competition to a staged product? Completely absurd!

HOLY SHIT

The UFC does a lot of what WWE does

And yet the WWE is a public company. End of debate.

How do you just end the debate when you're totally wrong?

First you say that including the WWE discredits me, then you say that they UFC does a lot of the same things that the WWE does. Which is it guy?

UFC runs their IN RING PRODUCT and PROMOTIONS like WWE

And yet the finances are polar opposites. Do you not know the difference between a “private” and “public” company?

Look, bud

If you’re going to start these arguments (which you clearly have already lost) keep in mind that you just wrote a fanpost on the topic while the man you’re arguing with is paid to put out these articles.

halitosis - January 14, 2012 via mobile reply

I think you are the one who doesn't understand.

Both private and public companies are owned by private individuals. The difference is that in the publicly LISTED company, the shares are traded on an exchange.

It is entirely possible for publicly listed companies to be held primarily my a single major shareholder or two or three, and thus its ownership structure would be similar to the UFC’s. The only difference would be that the shareholdings would be widely publicised by default. But note that most of us already know the UFC’s private shareholdings anyway as they’ve announced them for all to know.

*primarily BY a single...

Ummm. do you understand what a public company is?

While the actual product similarities make your argument confusing, the fact that Matt is comparing their business models makes your dead wrong.

castleeb - January 13, 2012 reply

LOL.

I’m glad I showed up in this comment section when I did.

mcpeepants23200 - January 13, 2012 reply

give me a break

it was an awful fanpost. Comparing players in the NFL was just plain silly.

You basically just said oh Ufc fighters don’t make enough money, they should make this amount of money because other athletes make more. It was silly and pointless.

Reading comprehension: A useful skill

The point was that the UFCs biggest argument is their value in relation to the financial bottom line. NFL practice squad players have indisputably less value since they aren’t even competitors, they don’t pay for their own “training”, and the teams profit less in most cases than the UFC does.

Reading, it’s FUNdamental!

boxing,

kickboxing, muay thai, sambo, wrestling, tennis, bowling and every other 1 person competition that doesn’t involve teams and leagues are what you should be comparing it to.

Look up PGA/WTA salaries some time

You’ll find competitors in every weekly event wayyyyyyy down on the results tally making FARRRRR more than undercard UFC fighter make.

Right...and those are from a corporate sponsor based on event.

Not a private company.

UFC doesn't have coporate sponsors?

You must not drink Bud Light

They have corporate sponsors

but not like The Buick Open.

Those companies are also a LOT more open with their books

Ever wonder why Lorenzo/Dana are so hesitant to ever release any financial info? If they want to squash all of these rumors all they have to do is let some accountants review their lots. There is a reason that they haven’t gone public after all.

The reason is that they have no need to go public. They got the loans they needed, then delivered the profits. End of story.

If you don't want media sources bringing up financial info

then open your books. Otherwise don’t get all pissy when they report and you provide 0 proof of your side of things. End of story.

They’re pissy because Gross is a horrible “journalist” and wrote a bunch of sensationalist bullshit.

How is it end of story when you're totally wrong?

I'm wrong...

and yet you brought the WWE in to this. The WWE is a publicly traded stock, meaning their books ARE OPEN.

lol

The UFC doesn’t open its books for the same reasons other private companies don’t. Public companies are forced to for a variety of reasons.

ruckus - January 13, 2012 reply

"Open" books as you call them are rarely "honest" books

The published statements in annual reports of public companies are prepared with various agendas in mind, including adherence to accounting standards, supporting share price, minimising exposure of any information that the company wants to conceal, minimising tax etc.

Companies often keep a separate set of internal accounts that represents more accurately the true state of the business, which they use for management/strategic decision making.

If you don’t want media sources bringing up financial info

The only annoyance is answering the questions over and over again. I doubt they give two shits whether we want to see their books.

Dana gets legit pissed about the speculation

Just look at his Twitter back-and-forth from yesterday.

So? Because he gets annoyed, he should let us rummage through his books? Sherdog is that way —>

Why get so worked up if you're not hiding anything?

Last I checked Station Casinos has been hit with dozens of anti-trust violations. These are the same people who run the UFC mind you. The same people who fight tooth and nail to exempt the UFC from the Muhammad Ali act. Yep, clearly they’re looking out for the best interests of their fighters.

I think it’s pretty obvious. ESPN reaches a lot of the UFC’s core demographic. A lot of casual fans they want to attract, and seeing a hit piece like this would surely anger White and company. They don’t want a piece available to a wide swath of their demo saying bad things about them.

It would be so simple to say...

Here is your proof that they are lying. And yet they refuse to provide the evidence. We know what our favorite NFL/MLB/NBA players make and yet it’s a secret what most UFC fighters actually make because of “discretionary” bonuses. The UFC wants the benefits of being considered a sport when it’s convenient and yet they want to say that they are “entertainment” when it’s convenient.

You are like the MMA version of a Birther.

Sqwibbs - January 13, 2012 reply

The UFC has no obligation to tell you what it pays its independent contractors.

In the words of the immortal Arnold: “Stop Whining!”

So..

Just to get this straight:

The UFC should stop keeping bonuses private, even though it has several benefits for them to do exactly that, and if they don’t then it’s ok for people to make up bullshit about them till they do?

You really think that’s ok?

Bonuses are great

Guaranteed pay is better. The bonus system in and of itself is a joke because 90% of the bonuses go to main card fighters anyways and not the guys on the unaired who would actually need the money more.

Hmm...

Got any proof of that? I’m interested in seeing where you got your info about who gets the undeclared bonuses. Or did you just invent that?

Talking about Fight/Knockout/Sub of the Night bonuses

Would you care to dispute that statement? The behind the scene bonuses are essentially ways of skirting the athletic commissions. They are basically under the table type of bonuses. You think that legitimate sports businesses run in this fashion?

I wonder if "Sorry but I didn't get a discretionary bonus"

is a legit excuse to give to a land lord or gas company when they come looking for their money.

well

“90% of the bonuses go to main card fighters anyways and not the guys on the unaired who would actually need the money more.”

maybe, perhaps, the bonuses go to those who deserve them? i don’t agree with every _ of the night, but most, if not all, of the fighters on the undercard are there because they: 1) are up and coming, 2) have a poorer record and are trying to climb the ladder, 3) are still working on their skillset and are simply not very good yet, 4)…….

many of these fighters do receive bonuses, and you taking issue with fighters getting paid less who “need” money more is utterly absurd. why not just pay all fighters the same? if they “need” more money, then they “need” to become better fighters and earn more money.

Why pay a main card fighter for a weak submission

When a undercard fighter pulls off an amazing one? It’s happened quite a few times.

And my issue with bonuses is that they are “discretionary”. You might get one, you might not. Doesn’t do you much good in the real world when you “might” have enough money or you “might not”

i agree

that the best sub, ko, and fight should get the nod, regardless of where it’s positioned on the card. i find myself disagreeing with their choices from time to time as well, but usually i am satisfied.

regarding bonuses. in the “real world,” we work for an amount we agree upon. if a fighter agrees to a contract, they will be paid according to that contract. if the contract does not provide enough income, the fighter doesn’t have to sign it. the bonuses are directly related to the fighters performance. the fighters who bonus earn them. it’s not a question of whether they “might” or “might not” get one. it’s whether they performed their job well enough to get one.

i don’t take issue with my boss when he offers me a bonus that I was never guaranteed and that I knew was dependent upon how i performed.

People need to stop acting like the only way the UFC pays people is reported fight purses and completely discretionary bonuses. I’m pretty sure Randy Couture 5 years ago isn’t the only guy in company history to get a signing bonus.

If they keep the backstage bonus money private, it’s tax-exempt if I’m not mistaken. If this becomes public records they won’t be able to get away with giving away so much.

The only reason public salaries are disclosed is to appease the masses. And it has an opposite effect because people think that that’s ALL a fighter is getting.

They are definitely reporting that money to the IRS. If they don’t report it to the IRS as expenses, then the UFC has to pay taxes on it. That only makes sense if they are acquiring the money illegally, which would be a hell of a risk for people that run companies in two heavily regulated industries such as casinos and combat sports.

There is a huge difference between not reporting it to the AC and not reporting it to the IRS.

The AC requires that the guaranteed amounts be provided to them, and they release the info

If the AC required that any other bonuses were also reported, then the UFC would probably give that info as well.

That's what I was always under the impression of.

And because of that, the fighters who received unofficial bonuses didn’t need to turn it in to the IRS. I’m confused now that Phildo seems to dispute it.

People are confused because Dana said Shoguns money after his first fight with Machida was going to be “tax free” or something to that effect. They were just saying that they were going to give him enough to take home 155k after taxes.

Giving someone 155k on YouTube and not reporting it to the IRS is a great way to get everyone audited, and even if you are doing your taxes properly, being audited is a pain in the ass. You are supposed to report every cent you earn into the IRS, whether it’s salary, bonus, off the books, on the books, earned from legal activities, illegal activities, etc, etc. non-fight purse money from the UFC has been so well publicized that it’s impossible for Uncle Sam to not know and do something by now.

http://www.mmamania.com/2007/08/27/ufc-74-fighter-paydays-and-salaries/

the AC only cares about guaranteed “fight purses.”

At UFC 74, Randy couture received 250k fight purse, 250k from his signing bonus, plus whatever from the PPV. 500k of that was contractually obligated, here are the payouts reported to the commission

You mean the bonuses go to those that deserve them rather than those who added minimal value, right? This is probably the first thing we can agree on

They don’t have to show shit if they don’t want to, and they don’t get mad when people speculate or ask questions, they get mad when people present bullshit as fact.

There is a benefit to not letting people know what you are doing, if Afflliction would have known that they could have Ben Rothwell for more than 50k (his UFC 104 salary) they probably wouldn’t have given him 250k, and they might not have died.

Yep

Just like how if you’ve got nothing to hide you should be fine with the government being able to monitor your phone conversations and access your computer at will.

You should be fine with it? You have no choice, man. They are going to do it regardless.

uh

He forgot the sarcasm font. Sorry.

Yep

My bad!

Just don't do it when R. Wade is around.

Do it and I'll ban you into the land of Wind and Ghosts

Damon O. - January 13, 2012 reply

Dawnstar?

/RandomSkyrimReference

Mr. Sparkle

Damon O. - January 14, 2012 reply

also they're tournaments

I can point you to pro Magic: the Gathering players with more lifetime winnings than many mma fighters. There are hundreds of competitors who got zero dollars each and every outing

Please show me...

Where Magic players have paid thousands to train or have received legitimate injuries (and keep in mind that a paper-cut is not a legitimate injury)

Carpal tunnel.

MTG players have pretty high travel costs

And again, if it’s so bad, people will stop fighting and become math teachers. The market will determine it.

Private school and good education help :P

Probably a few hundred k there. Also they were all picked on and bullied as fat kids.

Mainly what does that have to do with the price of tea in china?

Yeah, but they probably got really drunk and touched a booby.

i know i have

do moobys count?

I love Mooby's

Especially when they do the donkey show.

That's not relevant.

What IS relevant is that golf and tennis are far bigger, truly global sports and the money contributed by sponsors, broadcast partners, and the paying public is far bigger than that of the UFC. Therefore the market value of the top, say 100 golf players (driven by supply and demand) is going to be higher than the average for the top 100 MMA fighters.

It's a typical Josh Gross hack job.

The guy is clearly, heavily anti-Zuffa. It’s just a pity that he’s been given this voice by ESPN. I mean shit, look at the garbage fucking Lindland documentary he was involved with. The idiotic article on Sherdog a year or so back about Dana cleaning up steroids in the sport and stuff. The guy is a fucking retard.

Newman24 - January 13, 2012 reply

It's good to see so-called fans of MMA...

…shilling for the company instead of standing up for the fighters who, you know, actually fight. But Josh Gross interviewed a no-namer who cited the wrong numbers, so let’s focus on that and not hte larger issue at hand.

How about both?

Calling people for their agendas doesn’t mean we don’t want to see fighters get paid more.

Nobody knows the facts. So throwing around a bunch of assumed information isn’t going to be any more productive. Please, enlighten me with the real logistics of the private company Zuffa’s financial structure.

Here's the logistics:

Nobody knows because they’re privately owned and don’t release financial information.. And Zuffa is going to keep it that way so they have a plausible reason for underpaying fighters.

So… your solution is to use information that isn’t accurate to expose something that can’t even be proven? Huh.

As long as we're building and burning down straw men:

Your solution is to just keep feeding the Fertitta machine money and relying upon their assurances and largesse to ensure fighters are paid well.

I’m leaving it up to the responsibility of those affected by it. If the fighters are being treated so unfairly, they wouldn’t be so hesitant to open their mouths up and lose their job.

Quoted for hilarity.

If the fighters are being treated so unfairly, they wouldn’t be so hesitant to open their mouths up and lose their job.

I suspect there’s a lack of real-world experience staring out from behind your absurd rhetoric.

Ok, well I said somewhere else in here that there are plenty of other jobs, these people are doing this because they love it, with a few exceptions. I just think maybe they should re-evaluate their priorities, and I’m specifically talking about the dudes who are making their debuts, and not much is expected from them talent-wise. They get paid the least, and rightfully so.

What would need to happen is another MMA organization to step up with some money to work with… If they were able to procure these fighters who felt they weren’t being paid enough, by paying them a little more, than great. Once real competition exists, then Zuffa has a legitimate reason to pay more.

But the history of MMA shows that only one organization was able to thrive and continue to grow into a premier organization, the UFC. Is part of the reason their payscale? Absolutely. But look at the other organizations who have tried to compete and failed. EliteXC had broadcast television. Affliction paid their fighters ridiculous amounts. They both fell. The only exceptions really are Strikeforce and Pride which were bought by Zuffa when they were struggling. And Bellator. Bellator is really the only hope of competition in any sense, and it’s a long-shot at best.

I was kinda being a dick to you, and it wasn’t anything personal… Just get tired of people complaining about it when they have no proposed solutions of their own. It’s like we’re all barking up a tree that’s coated with Murphy’s Oil Soap. We can try as hard as we’d like, but we’re still always going to end up at square one unless something beyond the capabilities of fans and journalists can change things.

In fact, if someone making their UFC debut...

Is sad about only making 10K, maybe cage fighting isn’t for them. There’s a world of jobs out there. Not that many people get to do a job they love.

This.

Nobody’s saying UFC shouldn’t make a good profit. And nobody’s hating on DW or the Fertitas for their money. Great for them. But dudes getting paid less than 10k for a fight? and taking the physical risks they’re taking? That’s just pathetic.

Can’t understand this blind devotion to UFC suits from these so-called fans. Paying the fighters better only makes the content that much better and also to attract top talent.

Kid Kimura - January 13, 2012 reply

So...

All MMA orgs that can’t afford to pay fighters at least 10k should go out of business? Cause the risks are just the same. Where would the sport be then?

People fight professionally every day for less than 10k a fight.

Name 1 fighter who fights every day

Farthammer - January 13, 2012 reply

No one fights every day, but every day someone, somewhere, is fighting for peanuts, they take the same risks as the UFC guys, I understand that it’s a nice round number, but there’s no logic to saying the UFC should pay that per fight, especially when there are tons of people willing to fight for less.

It was a joke

I got jokes here. I make 1 serious post for every 200 shitty jokes.

Farthammer - January 13, 2012 reply

i can’t tell with you, the boosh throws me off.

But dudes getting paid less than 10k for a fight? and taking the physical risks they’re taking? That’s just pathetic.

I just want to clarify to other people, because of the way you wrote that, that Zuffa covers any injuries sustained in training or competition. Not that that makes rainbows and unicorns suddenly appear, but the way you wrote that is misleading.

Also, if I fall under the “blindly devoted UFC fan” stereotype, it’s because they’ve done 80% of the work at least for bringing the sport where it is today, and the way they pay their fighters has a lot to do with it.

The UFC has done more to legitimize MMA than any other organization, and the fact is, it costs money. Other sports don’t have to deal with the issues that MMA does; they’re already established. I still meet people who don’t know what MMA is. The NFL isn’t fighting legal battles to make football legal in certain states.

So yes, the UFC will be spending more money than other sports to re-invest into their own company and push the image of the sport. I’m fine with that. The athletes are still doing what they love and are happy enough with their pay that they haven’t left for better paying jobs. A decent number of those guys have college degrees; they can get out and do something else. But they choose not to.

And we’re not standing up for the guys actually fighting? When have you ever heard of a UFC fighter waiting a year to get paid? What UFC fighter had to go through what the Affliction guys did in the days before they folded? While the dollar amount is not the highest, the UFC is the most consistent source of income for these guys, and they got that way by NOT paying their fighters all that they could, and instead put that money towards stabilizing their company and the sport as a whole.

When every party works their hardest to maximize profits, the industry as a whole grows. If one party decides not to try to maximize their profits, then they are giving charity, and that is NOT mandatory.

How dare you bring up rarely-mentioned reasoning to why they pay their fighters the amount they do!

The people not getting paid at all thing pisses me off more than anything business-wise in MMA. It’s amazing how everyone acts like the UFC is so shady for this recent news story, yet they fail to realize that 9/10 other MMA organizations AT LEAST are way more corrupt and incompetent.

When every party works their hardest to maximize profits, the industry as a whole grows. If one party decides not to try to maximize their profits, then they are giving charity, and that is NOT mandatory.

I think Zuffa makes it their goal, at least to some extent, to sabotage the fighters’ ability to maximize their profits.

Bolshevik - January 13, 2012 reply

"sabotage" in your terminology

Is simply capitalistic behaviour in mine

I wish I didn’t miss this post. He didn’t even know what I was referring to!

Bolshevik - January 16, 2012 reply

Why should someone who makes the UFC no money

Get paid a lot of money?

I think the only underpaid athletes in MMA are the guys that main or co-main a card.

I'm sure Brock was sitting pretty after every fight.

Dude was a cash cow.

You could argue that Brock is underpaid

Considering how many asses he put in seats.

That's pretty hard to argue, since whe have little to no indication on what his take home pay is.

There’s the amount declared to the commission, but that’s pretty much useless since it doesn’t include his PPV points. And, as far as I know, his percentage of the PPV’s has never been released.

Chris Hall - January 13, 2012 reply

For all intents and purposes, he should be making Mayweather or Pacquiao money.

discoandherpes - January 14, 2012 reply

We're not "shilling" for the UFC

What you seem not to realise is that the UFC has been a key driver of quickly increasing fighter salaries. Compare today’s pay rates with 10 and 15 years ago.

I for one am right behind the UFC as well as the fighters that choose to support it by signing up, because:
1) Availability of the sport to viewers has increased
2) Skill levels have increased
3) Ability to attract talent has increased
4) Pay rates have increased
5) Production quality has increased (go check out UFC 1-5 if you don’t understand what I mean)
6) Broadly speaking, the best in the world are fighting each other now

Overall, the sport of MMA has got better over time (some will argue “Pride Never Die” and I have a soft spot for it but I prefer today’s state where you have most of the best fighters in one organisation). And I credit the UFC with most of the improvement in MMA, but any fighter that support the UFC deserves credit as well. And those fighters that support the UFC and perform, will ultimately earn $ which is, as I said, increasing strongly over time.

The argument that the UFC “can” pay more, or should pay a certain % of its revenue to fighters is irrelevant. They will pay what they “have to” in the market, and honestly I think they are paying more than they “have to”. “Have to” of course is a non-technical term used here for people who don’t understand economics.

There might be 300 fighters on the payroll. Probably 200 of them are almost totally unknown and bring in no PPV buys except for their immediate family and friends. You get paid based on how much value you generate for the company.

Given the advertising/promotional revenue, as well as the bump in their ability to sell lessons/coach people either now or later on, I don’t think it’s a bad deal especially now that they have UFC provided health insurance. They get to live their dream, built their resume for later jobs, and make ok money. I don’t think it sounds so terrible myself. The UFC isn’t football. They can’t fill 60000 person stadiums all over the country for 5 months. The entire sport is apparently the equivalent of the Kansas City chiefs. Of course the pay isn’t as good.

toxic - January 13, 2012 reply

I would imagine

that UFC’s costs are higher as a percentage of revenue than the other sports too, so although 50% seems to be the norm for other sports I don’t think that’s reasonable in the UFC with the costs of marketing, setting up events, etc etc.

The UFC I think is pretty smart though, they don’t pay the fighters as much as they could, but do a lot of things on the side to make them feel good, fly them out to events they’re not fighting at, getting insurance, getting them on TV, flying them on Dana’s jet, etc etc.

closetasfan - January 13, 2012 reply

My personal issue has always been that fighters at the top of the card are deeply undervalued compared to the amount of money they bring in. But that’s not a sexy story. No one’s going to stump for fighters making $3-5 million dollars who should be making $12-20 million. And so we get nonsense about how club fighters that no one watches should make $100K a year with guaranteed contracts and lots of bad posts and opinions on the internet about this.

To add, consumers don’t care about the fighter pay issue at all.

They probably don’t. If these guys got pumped with roids by Dana himself on the walk out and then were literally paid in peanuts, it wouldn’t change the buyrates one bit. Might even increase them.

It would probably increase them.

Edward Falololol should get a yearly salary like they had in IFL, plus a Zuffa company car

Gross' piece is out-and-out intellectual fraud.

Oh, and those who think calling Gross out for being a hack = being a Zuffa whore need to grow up. We all want to see the fighters get paid more. No one is debating that.

pud333 - January 13, 2012 reply

This

And the best (available) path to the fighters getting paid more and more and more over time is the UFC model

i kinda think that dana knows how to run his business better then us internet warriors

and gross’ piece was seriously terrible, i’m stunned ESPN let him publish it, frontpaged it, and attached OTL to it.

I think we should all mind our fucking business...

So looking at the initial numbers, Zuffa has more in common financially with an NFL team than the NFL which brings in $9 billion in revenue annually. However, Zuffa has 300 fighters under contract instead of the 46 players that are on the active roster of an NFL team.

Apparently the appropriate response to disembodied statistics is more disembodied statistics

So a league with 300 fighters valued the same as a single NFL team

is crazy? The NFL makes $9billion annually.

First of all, Zuffa has those fighters spread across two teams: UFC and Strikeforce. Secondly, what does the number of athletes per franchise have to do with anything? That NFL team play 16 games per year. Zuffa has to get each of those 300 fighters 2-4 fights per year. Now try and figure out if those numbers support or hurt your analogy so we can argue about this some more.

This doesn't make sense.

Who gives a rat’s ass how many games each NFL team plays?

The NFL has what, 15-16 games each week? At least half the contract 53 man roster talent performs in those games. 150 UFC fighters don’t fight at each event.

Perhaps the the problem isn't that the UFC underpays

but that the MLB, NBA, NHL and NFL overpay.

sklart - January 13, 2012 reply

Well that's a bingo.

that is also completely correct

exactly

thank you. no one is talking about this.

jamarcus russel deserved those 80 million bucks god dammit

attsa lotta donuts

and codeine

They pay accordingly to what the unions of athletes there were able to get in negotiating with their employer. If anything, top stars in stick and ball sports are underpaid and role players overpaid.

When the NBA lockout was going on...

I always described it as a confrontation between millionaires and billionaires. How could anyone actually justify one side?

Derek Suboticki - January 13, 2012 reply

Then get a union.

I’m all for that.

And Lorenzo said he would be supportive of a Fighters Union

this is on the fighters, not the on the UFC

sklart - January 14, 2012 reply

Supportive?

I doubt it. Tolerating of? Maybe.

discoandherpes - January 14, 2012 reply

Matthew Roth

It appears there are people trying to ruin MMA as much as you.

Brent Ducharme - January 13, 2012 reply

I'm the savior of the MMA world

without me the game would be dead.

or at least waking up in train yards

Your math skills are worse than Gross's

John Nash - January 13, 2012 reply

You and Subo are both selling a really annoying false dichotomy

If Gross’s article is bombastic and contains poor sourcing and likely factual inaccuracies (all of which is probably true), it does NOT immediately follow that everything is hunky dory over at the old UFC payroll office, and that everyone should just shut up about it.

I personally find Lorenzo’s statement (in the video) that the UFC revenue split is about the same as that of other major sports (in most cases right around 50-50) completely non-credible.

Whether or not it is a true monopoly, the UFC does exert massive market power over MMA, and with that market power comes the ability, and I think a willingness, to artificially surpress the growth of salaries for fighters. If you’re the UFC brass, and you exert significant resources and energy to buying out or crushing all the viable competition for top-level guys, you become the sole determiner of what those guys get paid, and of course you set that number at a level that is extremely comfortable and profitable for you.

Now whether or not the UFC artificially manipulating fighter pay to their own benefit offends you is a matter of personal preference. In some cases it may actually be “good” for fans, in that it allows the UFC to exert a great deal of coercive power over fighters to make the fights that fans want, when fans want them. But over the long haul, I think it will stunt the growth of MMA by limiting the depth and size of the talent pool from which they draw.

Gross might not have done journalism much of a service with his article, but that doesn’t make him wrong.

Dave Strummer - January 13, 2012 reply

Um...

I’ve spoken to Roth about this, and he’s actually very much on the side of fighters getting higher pay and IIRC likes the idea of a fighters union. Where did he say everyone should shut up about it and everything is hunky dory?

In the last paragraph

where he basically proposes that nobody look under the hood of the UFC’s business model until “the UFC’s yearly revenue is that of the other major sports.”

Fighter pay and the UFC’s closed door, anticompetitive business model are valid topics now.

Dave Strummer - January 13, 2012 reply

No,

as we discussed on the other thread, approvingly citing false information makes him wrong.

A lie in a good cause is still a lie.

Not that he "lied" necessarily,

but he was wrong.

Derek Suboticki - January 13, 2012 reply

Monte

At what point did I say I was happy with the revenue split between Zuffa and the fighters?

I'm sorry if I misstated your position

you must admit you tend to come down pretty heavily on the Zuffa side of these arguments. I agree the Gross article was crappy, but I think the underlying issues are real. I feel like your and Roth’s article seem to underplay the significance of the issue.

Dave Strummer - January 13, 2012 reply

it also seriously bothers me that this is about all the coverage ESPN devotes to MMA

that channel is fucking brutal at this point, its becoming seriously unwatchable with all the tebow bullshit, people like skip bayless and stephen a smith, and the multitude of shitty nfl analyists they have.

ESPN stands for

All Tebow. All day.

Later this year it will be the Lebron channel again.

then the shitty baseball highlight channel

where broadcasters try to out-retard each other with things to inexplicably scream as someone hits a baseball a relatively far distance

nope

that’s ATAD

no that's bloody elbow

didn’t you see the post yesterday?

Touche

and ATAD’s programing has gotten a bit repetitive lately. i’m pulling them from my cable line-up asap.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7455857
http://espn.go.com/mma/

(Disclaimer: Yes, I’ve done some work for ESPN. But I think it’s pretty easy to see those links and verify that ESPN does a good bit more than an investigative story or two every couple of years.)

Beau Dure - January 13, 2012 reply

ESPN does quite a bit for the UFC

I truly don't understand

When people believe that fighters who go 0-1, 0-2 or 1-2 and end up out of the UFC are entitled to some kind of awesome compensation. 40K/40K plus health insurance and a pension for every fighter!

How does that make a shred of sense?

What is the minimum amount a fighter should be paid for in a single fight in the UFC? is there a number anyone can agree upon?

terzergoss - January 13, 2012 reply

10k

That's really not that far off from the way it typically is.

At least when we’re considering ONLY disclosed salaries to the commissions without sponsorships or back room bonuses or anything.

While conveniently forgetting costs...

such as training and many other necessary expenses that run in to the thousands for every fight.

See how convoluted it gets?

Does every fighter have to pay to participate at their gym? Or are there some who contribute in other ways, such as coaching wrestling?

Doesn’t UFC pay for travel expenses and hotel fees, etc? I would assume so, otherwise Zhang would have had a hefty bill for the flight from China.

Food and diet materials? Who knows, that would vary from fighter to fighter.

I’m not saying I have the answers to whether they’re paid adequately for their services. I’m saying none of us do.

Why not just make this 10k the minimum fight salary then.

Will Zuffa really be that much more in debt if they decided anyone who fights in the UFC gets a minimum 10 grand no matter what?

i mean didnt Dana give 10 grand to bisping for winning air hockey?

terzergoss - January 13, 2012 reply

Whatever Spike paid for that season was probably worth it.

Plus we got to see Bisping fall on his ass.

One hundred million dollars.

YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND! THEY ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES!

9001

Way way too low

That’s slave labor.

but its over 9000!!!!!!!!!!!

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

don't worry

i can ruin mma as much as you

...

Sugel Mendoza - January 13, 2012 reply

if they agree to fight for 3.50 they should have to fight for 3.50

noone is pointing a gun to these guys heads and forcing them to fight in the UFC

Are you sure about that?

I heard Dana has been hanging out with Suge Knight lately.

luca brasi pointed a gun to his head and my father assured jason reinhardt that either his signature or his brains would be on the contract

The correct answer is whatever the market dictates, which as of New Year’s eve was 8k/8k

Occupy UFC Street. I mean I know that GSP gets millions, and yeah he worked hard for it, but The Brazillian Assassin Pitbull with 5 fights deserves more! Tax GSP!

DayGeaux - January 13, 2012 reply

They are expanding to Japan, Sweden, Australia & Brazil this year. They are producing international reality shows, and just in general pouring money into growing the pot for everyone, instead of just giving the fighters a short term reward. I really commend the UFC for truly thinking long term and trying to put the money in to expansion so that 10 years from now more fighters can make good money fighting. I’d rather see 1000 fighters make 100K a year than 10 fighters making 10 million a year

Disco1Stu - January 13, 2012 reply

Any discussion of fighter equity always ignores “would the fighters be better off with collective bargaining” and just devolves into “is Joe Blow on the prelims underpaid?”

That’s because "would the fighters be better off with collective bargaining" isn’t really a question. Of course they would.

Some would,

some wouldn’t.

Whether the consumer would be better off, or the sport as a whole would be better off are both debatable propositions as well.

The UFC is a privately-owned company, the owners shouldn’t bother to comment on their company’s pay roll, they don’t owe us any justification. The UFC should do like 99.9% of business do and say: “no comment”.

Kenya_MMA - January 13, 2012 reply

Everyone complaining the fighters don’t get paid enough should pick a fighter and start sending them checks. It’s easy to be generous with someone else’s money. (This is painting with a broad brush but I suspect many of the people complaining the fighters don’t get paid enough are the same people watching the PPV on an illegal stream.)

jrobb20 - January 13, 2012 reply

I’m glad someone brought this up. As with MMA fans everywhere, there’s a significant portion on here who obtain UFC events in not-so-legal ways.

Sour Grapes or Just Sour?

We all know that these two have been whizzing and whining for years.
One seems to want to make his name by being “Anti-UFC” as in the concept that anyone or anything hugle sucdessful must be bad in some way.
the other seems to be looking for a lifetime job “representing the fighters”, as in they fight, he gets a cut of their pay for “standing up for them” against the people that pay their wages.
While both have axes to grind and feeble points to be badly made, they have both shown to use shaky logic, faulty facts and worse often.
As a former “VFW-level” quote/unquote pro boxer & wrestler that was lucky to beat minimum wage 40 years ago when it was one dollar an hour
I feel that the UFC wages are pretty decnet and apparently so do most of the winning fighters.
Anonymous critics’ opinions are worthless in the real world
If they are too afraid to put their name to their words then the words are not worth one cent.
Also as a former labor organizer I will assure you that any worker who is afraid to name his name and show his face is not someone that will ever, EVER stand up to his employer.
In the world of fighting the key to a healthy bank account is putting “Wins” on your record.
No one, not managers, not trainers, not coaches not “representatives”, not anyone from the media can assure a loser that he will be paid handsomely for losing.
Should there be a baseline similar to the $6K to show & $6K to win established and stuck to?
sure that is only fair and fair is the true American way.
Are thse two going to make that happen?
Not likely for neither has the savvy or the clout or the finesse or the heart to do so.
they are like the one & outers mentioned in the article.
To establish a real fighters organization or union you need a skill set that neither of these guys has.
To be able to do so a person has to not benefit personally from the effort. You cannot tie your own income to their theirs or you will be tainted and cripple your own effort.
You cannot be the “enemy” of the very ones you are trying to get more money from.
You cannot be helpless against them.
You cannot deal in heavyhanded ways in every negotiation.
You cannot just work on their behalf when it suits you or benfits you.
and you can’t just slink off to whine around the corner every time you are rebuffed or fail.
You have to keep looking for the KO or Sub that will give you the win.

kah - January 13, 2012 reply

Yea it proabably sucks to be one of those guys making 8/8 or 6/6 but ya know what people in SF and Bellator are making 3/3 or there abouts

You get your first contract yea its maybe 8/8 but DW and the Ferrittas do the backstage bonus thing to keep you happy and what are you going to do turning down a extra couple of grand with no paper trail

If you last in the UFC you will make money get to that second or third contract you could be getting 15 or 20 a fight. Stay around longer and you get more.

If anything the UFC is really over paying a lot of guys they just A don’t publicly admit it because its easier to negotiate with guys when they don’t know how much their contemporaneous are making and B it makes fighters way more loyal if you give them a extra 5 grand when you don’t have to.

MaZZacare - January 13, 2012 reply

Great Article

This is a great article and expresses the issues I have with Gross’ article. It really made some crazy stretches in its logic.

b_radical - January 13, 2012 reply

good job

The UFC model is working well enough to grow the sport at a faster rate than I would have ever imagined it could. These athletes have a vehicle to promote themselves and a place to work their craft. MMA seems to be healthy and growing exponentially with the UFC as the flagship.
This story was co-written byJosh Gross using Ken Shamrock and unnamed UFC fighters as the source … (face palm) You could take it with a grain of salt but why waste salt!

Breaking News!

Loretta Hunt confirms the entire ESPN article to be “Like totally true!”

Loretta hasn’t said a word. Leave her out of this.

Beau Dure - January 13, 2012 reply

In more news ...

Bob Arum has his first erection since the Korean war.

I see you’re so impressed with this that you’re putting it on more than one site.

Beau Dure - January 13, 2012 reply

Awaiting word from Vadim Finkelstein on 2 points;

Is the UFC really a monopoly?
If you had to do one in order to save the world, between Loretta and Cyborg who gets the nod?

Luckily for him this site doesn't allow voting down.

I have a question

Every time fighter pay comes up people talk about how expensive it is to bring in sparring partners, if it’s so expensive, why doesn’t everyone become professional sparring partners?

I’d imagine we’re talking about transport & living costs.

wonderfulspam - January 13, 2012 reply

I’d imagine I’m not serious.

MMA camps were designed to specifically combat this problem.

Who wrote this story?

Holy biased point of view.

Journalism 101 – remain objective. Sounds like a UFC butt kissing like never before courtesy of the author.

Note: it’s OK to be critical of the UFC when warranted. Lame rebuttal.

duoglide - January 13, 2012 reply

Objective journalism is kind of bullshit

I’m in the Hunter S. Thompson camp myself.

It’s definitely ok to be critical, but get out of here with that objectivity stuff. This is commentary, not news, and this piece in particular is in response to something that attempts to be news, but is nowhere near objective.

Who wrote this story?

My name is at the top. I’m Matthew Roth.

In no way am I passing this off as a straight news piece. I’m responding to a piece run by ESPN which tried to play the news card but in fact was incredibly bias. Bias is only apparent when you don’t share it I guess?

Yeah, Roth needs to be more like Mr. Gross, amirite?

speaking of journalism 101, the article was changed so that median statement now reads "Yet the median per fight income for fighters remains low, between $17,000 and $23,000, figures he said he obtained from his many conversations with current fighters,’ no mention that the article was changed anywhere on the page, or on espn.com “corrections” page. The New York Times published a correction because RA Dickey screwed up the reasoning behind naming his bat after a mythical sword, you would think the “worldwide leader” would make a note of correcting a pretty serious error.

the sad part about this is that the median for reported income (per fight) for the UFC in 2011 was probably less than the number quoted. I don’t think this number is that worthwhile since it’s only reported salaries, lots of fights are not reported, and the number is dragged down TUF finales, but a little research and more careful wording would have made a world of difference in the piece.

Derek Suboticki - January 13, 2012 reply

I don't see a single quote from a MMA manager in the Gross story.

You’d think that would be someone you’d interview in a piece about fighter pay scales.

Also, remember that Zuffa doesn’t reveal "locker room" bonuses- only the show, win, and performance bonuses. They potentially make much more than the fight purse. Add in sponsors, appearance fees, etc. the yearly payout could be twice the ‘revealed’ pay. I’m not saying lower tier fighters are making grand amounts (or are even paid enough), but surely they’re on par with boxers or other combat sports athletes of the same level.

tigerlee - January 13, 2012 reply

Good article

I agree with a lot of points made in the article on pay. Although the UFC brings in a lot of revenue, you can’t really compare it to an organization like the NFL. Comparing the UFC to an NFL team makes much more sense. I’ve collected 2 years worth of pay data and analyzed it in depth here. http://fightbonus.blogspot.com/

Excel Slave - January 13, 2012 reply

Put those up as FanPosts.

Pretty good shit in there.

don't get why they would want to do this too us

we are going to lose a lot of fighters if they go ahead and do this. In my opinion the UFC will end up cutting a lot of prospects at the lower pay rate if the minimum is now say 20k per fight. which means less fights for us. I think you have to make a name for yourself by winning fights to start getting payed what you are worth.

jgye2002 - January 13, 2012 reply

That’s something people should think about. UFC isn’t going to just take less revenue that could expand their corporation by paying their fighters more. They’d have to cut costs somewhere else. So how about we go back to only like 12 events a year, or 8 fights a card? I sure as hell wouldn’t want to.

Oh, you americans and your religious belief in the free market…

Horselover Fat - January 13, 2012 reply

Ha. I’m American and don’t believe in religion or free market structure. Any room in Sweden or wherever the hell you live?

Not for you, no. I just felt like writing that instead of any intelligent contribution to the discussion. Deal with it!

Horselover Fat - January 14, 2012 reply

Oh go occupy your local park, you commie.

:) wuv you foreign types.

MicahtheCynic - January 13, 2012 reply

Lucky for me, I live right next door to it! So I think I’ll just stay at home. Also it’s freezing outside and I need to conserve my energy.

Horselover Fat - January 14, 2012 reply

Zuffa is a private company in

a free market economy. Zuffa fighters choose to fight on their own free will. This is not a slave labor camp where the fighters are forced into the profession. The amount of pay, high or low is totally irregardless. Anyone in America working a normal job whether it be at Mcdonalds or for a high paying law firm is paid totally at the discretion of the employer. If they want to make more and feel they could, their free to leave for another position. The other ridiculous part of this whole argument is that Zuffa runs everybody else out of the business in some sort of gangster or mafia fashion. As far as I know Dana White has never gone to a rival promotion with a gun and a group of thugs and said sell me your company. These businesses entered into the MMA market on their own free will, couldn’t make the business work, and folded. Zuffa actually did them a favor by purchasing the left overs. These companies could have walked away with nothing. Every business in the world has to stand on their own two feet and deal with competition. The idea that Zuffa should make poor business decisions in order to try and help the competition is insane. Instead of criticizing the UFC people who work and follow MMA should be singing their praises. They are the only company to date who has been able to keep the doors open and paychecks in their employees hands. Had they done things differently there is a good chance MMA wouldn’t even exist, thus fighters would have no jobs at all. Zuffa has single handedly taken MMA from being an illegal sport to being regulated around the world. This article doesn’t take into account the millions and millions of dollars the UFC has spent to get the sport legalized around the country and world. The NFL didn’t have to take it upon themselves to go state to state fighting to get the sport of football legalized. MMA is an infant sport, the UFC is an infant company and they are paying plenty of their fighters huge amounts of money. The pay scale is totally determined by the amount of revenue the individual fighter brings in. The fighters who draw eyeballs and revenue to the company are paid accordingly. Fighters who don’t are also paid accordingly. The UFC gives these fighters the spotlight to fight under. What the fighters do with that spotlight is up to them. That is what fight promotion is all about. They promote the fight and it’s up to the fighter to run with the opportunity by winning fights in exciting fashion. This is a witch hunt based on inaccurate information and little to no understanding of how business works.

CRWHITLOCK - January 13, 2012 reply

For the love of fucking Christ

irregardless

This is not a fucking word! Whatever else the free market might be good for it apparently doesn’t do much for education.

A carriage return now and again wouldn’t hurt, either.

VenusBlue - January 14, 2012 reply

As an example: Matt Mitrione

He said in an interview he makes 9k to show, 9k to win (ultimate fighter contract). So by that, he’s making at most 72k a year, minus expenses plus endorsements. Judging by the other things he’s doing like opening a gym, I think he makes a LOT more than 72k. I would think he makes between 150-250.

closetasfan - January 13, 2012 reply

Where did you get that number?

If he’s opening a gym, he’s probably taking a bath on it unless he has partners. Gyms are notoriously unprofitable, especially in the first years.

Pantherhare - January 14, 2012 reply

This article

prompts thought
isn’t transparently biased
isn’t purposely trying to garner attention

But

It has gained a huge readership and is discussion worthy

It’s the best piece I have ever read on Bloodyelbow

Daveyboy - January 13, 2012 reply

Shhh, we don't want Roth to know what he's capable of...

The UFC should get rid of the sponsorship tax

to start off with. And having shows virtually every weekend (seeming what will happen in the short term) is killing them. People can’t afford to buy that many PPVs.

Oh, and Dana is worth $150 mil, the Fertita bros at about $1 bil a piece.

They still have their loans and all to pay off though. Plus, the bigger they get, likely that fighters will get paid more and a larger roster. Plus they can cut people like Anthony “Jumbo” Johnson who don’t seem to take their jobs seriously.

rockyman500 - January 14, 2012 reply

"Until the UFC's yearly revenue is that of the other major sports, fighter pay will continue to grow slowly."

This is completely wrong. Fighter pay has been increasing very quickly over the last several years in the UFC. And during this period, the annual revenue grew from a very small base to its current state. Fighter pay increased at a rate faster than the UFC’s revenue increased. I don’t have the analysis on me, but previous fanposts etc have proved this beyond doubt.

Sorry lemme explain

I meant that the entry level will grow slowly. We’re at 8/8 now I think? Once you hit the midtier and are fighting for 30/30 then that starts to shoot up quickly but at the bottom it’s growing slowly. But again, it’s all based on draw. If you aren’t a draw you aren’t paid like one.

Matthew Roth - January 14, 2012 reply

I reckon a big irony in all this...

Is that the guys earning 6/6 are probably not even unhappy about that deal, and don’t feel that they are entitled to more. It’s only keyboard warriors getting their soiled panties in a knot over this.

Fighter's we'd never see in the UFC without the 6/6

Paulo Thiago
Junior Dos Santos

Matthew Roth - January 14, 2012 reply

This is a very strong point

High minimum pay levels, either mandated by government/law or voluntarily imposed by the organisation, actually keep employment levels down. Unions have their place in some instances, but in some places like Australia where they had been strong historically, they drove minimum wages up too high, resulting in increased mechanisation and offshoring of work to cheaper countries e.g. in Asia.

If the UFC or MMA governing body sets a minimum 10/10 pay rate, the result is that anyone who isn’t worth that much to the UFC is just not going to get a fight. The low rates paid now mean that they can give lots of prospects a chance to show what they can do. Even lower rates at regional organisations give an even wider range of guys a chance to perform, log fight experience, create a video backlog, etc, which is actually very good for the industry’s development. It’s better to get 5 fights a year at 3/3 than no fights at all because the minimum is 10/10 and you aren’t worth that much yet.

Do you seriously believe JDS wouldn't have made it to the UFC under the existing pay structure?

Do you really think he wouldn’t have been tearing shit up in Brazil instead of the UFC and would have gotten noticed eventually?

Chromium - January 16, 2012 reply

Fighter union

Yes Unions can be good and bad, but as a member of a union who is a part time worker= low level fighter, I consistently see my union do things that only directly benefit the full time workers = high level fighter which has on more then one occasion negatively affected the part time workers, as someone mentioned earlier unions come with both good and bad

kieranski - January 14, 2012 reply

I actually think that the lower end fighter get their fair end esp compared to boxers, but on the top end… you will never see the top MMA fighters making close to Mayweather and Pacquiao type money.

People love to knock UFC alot, but they are a damn great company and when you think about MMA… you think of UFC. They can do whatever the fuck they want to do, and god bless them because they keep putting out a consistently good product.

Zocalo - January 14, 2012 reply

This and...

It cost to pay for legalization in NY, and grow the sport internationally.

AfroSamurai - January 14, 2012 reply

Now where have I heard that before? :)

Sorry to correct your math

This $175 million accounts for roughly 75% of the UFC’s net yearly revenue. The other 25% is comprised of TV licenses, site fees, gate revenue and merchandise meaning the UFC makes roughly $218 million in net revenue each year.

From what I can gather, you took 25% of 175 million (43.75 million) and added it to that number to get 218.75 million, rounded down to 218 million. You took 25% of the figure that was supposed to represent 75% of the number you are looking for. Try doing that with the number 75. You get 93.75, not 100.

Correct formula: 75% of X = $175 million | X = $175,000,000 / 0.75 = $233,333,333.33⅓ ≈ $233 million. Yes that is a significant difference. Also the percentage of gross revenue (you shouldn’t use the term “net revenue” since that’s supposed to be pure profit; it’s still gross revenue if the UFC doesn’t even see a dime of it before the PPV distributors take their share) that the UFC gets from PPV that I’d heard wasn’t 75%, it was lower than that, but I could be wrong. That would also raise the final figure here if true.

Chromium - January 14, 2012 reply

Net revenue is a confusing term which I personally avoid

“Gross” revenue is your total sales and other revenue coming in (this is often referred to as the top line). Normally you should be able to refer to this as “Revenue” or “Total Revenue” without being ambiguous (i.e. Gross and Net revenue should not be used, if you ask me). Now, if the PPV revenue all goes to the UFC, then they pay the broadcaster, then you include all the PPV revenue in UFC’s total revenue. If the broadcaster collects the money and pays the UFC their share, then only the UFC’s share is included in the UFC’s total revenue.

Net profit is also ambiguous because it can be Before or After tax. So I use the terms PBT (profit before tax) and PAT. Net profit is also referred to as the bottom line, but which one is the true bottom line? That’s up to you to decide for your business. I tend to use PBT as bottom line as you can’t control tax (well, you can, sort of but that’s a different job than mine).

GROSS profit is Revenue minus cost of goods sold. So, you deduct all the costs of putting on the show, including fighter pay – and you are left with Gross Profit.

Then you deduct all other costs not directly associated with the production of goods/services, to get to (Net) Profit Before Tax. That would include your office rent, Dana’s salary, admin staff, marketing, etc.
.