Why the Fighters Union won't have success with the UFC

[OneGloveGracie]

EDIT: Lucas Middlebrook from the PFA was asked about this thread on MMA insiders Podcast
timestamp: 44:30
http://radioinfluence.com/2016/09/13/the-mma-insiders-episode-103/


People don't realize why the NFL, NBA and NHL have a union. Those unions were created by the NHL, NFL and NBA THEMSELVES. Why? Because they wanted to have a salary cap. And by law competing businesses cannot agree together on capping salaries. That is called collusion, and collusion is against the law. And the only way to make that work is for there to be a union that agrees to a CBA for a salary cap. In other words, the players have to get together with the owners and agree on a collective salary cap. Owners can't just create one on their own.

In this case, the UFC doesn't need a cap so they don't need to negotiate with a union. The UFC has the overwhelming power in this case and they dont' have to agree to anything the PFA asks for. What are the fighters going to do? sit out? Thats ok because the UFC doesn't own a stadium that they have to maintain. Whenever there is a lockout, the rich teams don't have a problem with it as much as the low revenue teams because they can't afford the maintenance costs of no incoming revenue. But the UFC doesn't have that much maintenance to keep up while there aren't any events going on, so they can afford to be in a tiny net loss if fighters sit out. Only the fighters will be losing money by not getting paid to fight. And the UFC won't lock them out the way the NHL, NBA and NFL did, because they don't need to force the Union to sign any CBA.

PFA isn't gonna have much luck against the UFC. The UFC is a single entity. It isn't a collection of teams.

 

[Get_that_yayo]

Anyone that looks at that UFC sale price and compares it to what the fighters are making, and doesn't come to the conclusion that the fighters need a union.....they probably have a Dana crush.

 

[OneGloveGracie]

Anyone that looks at that UFC sale price and compares it to what the fighters are making, and doesn't come to the conclusion that the fighters need a union.....they probably have a Dana crush.

this thread isn't about "fighters 'needing' the union" it's about "the PFA not having success with the UFC".

 

[Kyler Ruxin]

How much does the UFC bring in a year? A few hundred million? If every fighter sat out for 6 months, they'd be losing $150 million or so. I know it's not technically a loss, but it's money they could have earned but didn't. If they could actually organize the whole roster of UFC fighters to strike, they could absolutely get shit done.

 

[original doom]

How would this union work in the ufc ?

 

[Darwinambrosius]

How much does the UFC bring in a year? A few hundred million? If every fighter sat out for 6 months, they'd be losing $150 million or so. I know it's not technically a loss, but it's money they could have earned but didn't. If they could actually organize the whole roster of UFC fighters to strike, they could absolutely get shit done.

That works if everybody is willing to sit out. In theory, that's great, but you wouldn't see that in practice here. The higher up the fighter is, which would generally mean the more important the fighter is, the less he/she benefits from this; the people who do benefit are people who can be pretty easily replaced.

 

[Kyler Ruxin]

That works if everybody is willing to sit out. In theory, that's great, but you wouldn't see that in practice here. The higher up the fighter is, which would generally mean the more important the fighter is, the less he/she benefits from this; the people who do benefit are people who can be pretty easily replaced.

Possibly. But I think there are plenty of guys that would sit out even if they are high paid. They wan their teammates and training partners to get better pay as well, and if they thought that sitting out for only a few months could actually make a big difference, I think they would. This is all in theory of course. I'm in now way saying that a Union is definitely gonna work, but I'm trying to be optimistic about it.

 

[LouisBolanos]

Forget about Fighter's Union. Sherdog members need to band together and form a union. This mistreatment from the blue names has gone on long enough!

 

[TheHermit]

you forget that if fighters declare a lockout they can pursue other avenues of income such as teaching mma, training seminars, other invitational fights, etc. the income might not be as big but it can get steady. meanwhile, while it is true that ufc has no stadium to maintain, it has the entire ufc machine to upkeep. its maintenance costs money and big money comes from the fights they organize. without fighters, there are no fights; without fights there would not be any income to run the business.

 

[RetiredSlave]

They lose the most precious and expensive resource in the midst of any strike. Time.

 

[Metal_Daze]

With the sale and new owners, now is the best time to sit out: the UFC might not have infrastructure to maintain but the new oners are already 4b "in the hole" and contrary to the Fertittas, they have investors to answer to.

You have a point that the biggest names might be unwilling to sit out. Especially the big names who are on their way out and looking for 1-2 last paydays.

 

[Darwinambrosius]

Possibly. But I think there are plenty of guys that would sit out even if they are high paid. They wan their teammates and training partners to get better pay as well, and if they thought that sitting out for only a few months could actually make a big difference, I think they would. This is all in theory of course. I'm in now way saying that a Union is definitely gonna work, but I'm trying to be optimistic about it.

Try to look at it realistically though. Let's just say a few big names did what you described. Cool, a few other people move up to take their places and Dana brings in regional call-ups to replace their teammates.

The odds of getting enough people who matter to actually commit to that in a way that make a difference is stupidly low.

 

[Kyler Ruxin]

Try to look at it realistically though. Let's just say a few big names did what you described. Cool, a few other people move up to take their places and Dana brings in regional call-ups to replace their teammates.

The odds of getting enough people who matter to actually commit to that in a way that make a difference is stupidly low.

Well, that's the point of the Union. It's an all or nothing kind of thing. The Union votes to all sit, or to all keep fighting, and everyone goes along with it one way or the other.

 

[Darwinambrosius]

Well, that's the point of the Union. It's an all or nothing kind of thing. The Union votes to all sit, or to all keep fighting, and everyone goes along with it one way or the other.

Which brings my back to my original point of me doubting that enough people would willingly sit out.

 

[Metal_Daze]

Well, that's the point of the Union. It's an all or nothing kind of thing. The Union votes to all sit, or to all keep fighting, and everyone goes along with it one way or the other.

You're thinking in circles. UFC fighters would need to sit out just to have the union talks acknowledged by the UFC.

 

[Kyler Ruxin]

You're thinking in circles. UFC fighters would need to sit out just to have the union talks acknowledged by the UFC.

Well there are new owners, and all of the sudden there is a union for the first time. If all the fighters, or at least most of them, sign on to be part of it, and then the union leaders go and sit down with the owners and say "this is what we want," as long as they are being reasonable, and the owners find it reasonable, fighter pay could be increased without a strike. At the very least, they might be able to get out of the Reebok deal. I have no idea how that works with a transfer of ownership, if there is any leeway to get out of old contracts, or if you have to completely see them through.

 

[DaGenius]

The nba, for example, absolutely did NOT create the players union. Players stayed in the lockeroom during the all star game years ago and would not come out until the league agreed to good faith negotiations with what they were creating..a formalized players association.

If the owners could do away with them right now, all major sports leagues would not have player collective associations.

The difficulty of a fighters association comes down to one simple thing..can they get all or almost all the fighters to sit out for a meaningful period of time. If they could do that the UFC would hold out for a while but eventually they would have to deal.

 

[Kinniku]

Cool, a few other people move up to take their places and Dana brings in regional call-ups to replace their teammates.

If they can barely sell a PPV with Demetrious Johnson, do you think they could be able to sell a PPV with regional talent?

 

[Darwinambrosius]

If they can barely sell a PPV with Demetrious Johnson, do you think they could be able to sell a PPV with regional talent?

In the outlined scenario, the whole roster isn't on strike. Did you read my whole post?

 

[OneGloveGracie]

That works if everybody is willing to sit out. In theory, that's great, but you wouldn't see that in practice here. The higher up the fighter is, which would generally mean the more important the fighter is, the less he/she benefits from this; the people who do benefit are people who can be pretty easily replaced.

the thing is, the high paid fighters can afford to sit out but they won't feel as much benefit from a Union. And the lower fighters would benefit the most out of a Union but they can't afford to sit out. It will be a dilemma when this heads to a vote to strike. I doubt all the fighters will agree to sit.

you forget that if fighters declare a lockout they can pursue other avenues of income such as teaching mma, training seminars, other invitational fights, etc. the income might not be as big but it can get steady. meanwhile, while it is true that ufc has no stadium to maintain, it has the entire ufc machine to upkeep. its maintenance costs money and big money comes from the fights they organize. without fighters, there are no fights; without fights there would not be any income to run the business.

Fighters wouldn't be declaring a lockout, only the owners can do that. Fighters would be "striking". And yeah, they won't receive income even close to if they were fighting. Contrary to popular belief, the UFC pays well.

They lose the most precious and expensive resource in the midst of any strike. Time.

Which the owners can afford to lose..... the fighters can't. They will only be getting older and paying bills without receiving any income.

With the sale and new owners, now is the best time to sit out: the UFC might not have infrastructure to maintain but the new oners are already 4b "in the hole" and contrary to the Fertittas, they have investors to answer to.

You have a point that the biggest names might be unwilling to sit out. Especially the big names who are on their way out and looking for 1-2 last paydays.

They will call in fighters from other orgs to replace them. Just like the NFL did in the 80's. They won't make as much money but they will surely make millions just off of the UFC name. And if there is a personality among the replacements, that will sell big regardless of fighting talent.

If they can barely sell a PPV with Demetrious Johnson, do you think they could be able to sell a PPV with regional talent?

Yes. Even though Demetrious is the least known current champion, he still brings in 125k ppv buys. Thats still a lot of money. If fighters sit out, the UFC can afford to put on shows with replacement fighters. Hell, the UFC can afford to even sit out and do nothing. WME-IMG is already a billion dollar company making income regardless of the UFC.