How is the UFC worth more than the Cowboys, Yankees, Patriots, Manchester United, and FC Barcelona?

The Fertittas went to sign the deal with ski masks on.
 
View attachment 278125

UFC ratings and PPV buys have been horrible in 2017. Did UFC 215 even sell 80K PPVs?

Thoughts?
Can you stop saying PVP buys and ratings have been horrible? They're down from last year but last year was a huge year and they loaded the back end of the year.
 
Don't let that selling price fool you--WME got duped.
based on what? A PPV that does over 150k is still very profitable, they're getting a new TV deal, they don't have to pay their fighters much. You shouldn't measure the success of an investment a little over a year after it has happened, it just exposes your lack of business acumen.
 
Just trust us, it's worth it.
method=get&s=dana-white-fertitta-brock-lesnar.jpg
<{danayeah}>
 
Dont forget Star Wars. Star Wars franchise was sold for 4 billion
 
based on what? A PPV that does over 150k is still very profitable, they're getting a new TV deal, they don't have to pay their fighters much. You shouldn't measure the success of an investment a little over a year after it has happened, it just exposes your lack of business acumen.

"it just exposes your lack of business acumen"
LOL I'm just an lowly economics major with 20 years of business experience.
What do I know?

I do know that they paid 25 times the max profit the UFC ever made--they overpaid for a business that had peaked. They overpaid by at least double, in my uneducated, inexperienced opinion.
SMH.
 
It's hilarious to see so many people say that the UFC was actually not worth 4 billion dollars when numerous groups were willing to pay that for it, and the value has actually gone up since then.

If you don't believe that the UFC is worth 4 billion, despite it actually having sold that much, why would you believe any of these valuations that are completely speculative?
 
Just a thought: expenses vs profit; I'm guessing the players from those teams, on average, need to get paid more than UFC fighters, who aren't unionized. While Conor may get paid handsomely, many UFC fighters are not. And it's very debatable whether Conor was even getting paid what he was worth up until MayMac.

The expense of paying athletes more could mean less profit for the owner of those teams.
Fair but the UFC has a lot more fighters on their roster than Manchester United have players in their squad.
 
UFC generated like 450 million in revenue last year. 4 billion is not a bad investment at all.
 
Right now it's looking like the sale of the century
 
Fair but the UFC has a lot more fighters on their roster than Manchester United have players in their squad.
Manchester United have Old Trafford Stadium which seats 80k people with tickets for a match going for around £80 a pop. You do the maths
 
Manchester United have Old Trafford Stadium which seats 80k people with tickets for a match going for around £80 a pop. You do the maths
Yes I've lived in Manchester my entire life so thanks for the lesson. No idea what that has to do with my post though, I was responding to the issue of paying salaries to the squad/roster in the post I quoted...
 
The UFC wins every year.

It's like Donald Trump as president is 4 consecutive Superbowl victories.
 
Just a thought: expenses vs profit; I'm guessing the players from those teams, on average, need to get paid more than UFC fighters, who aren't unionized. While Conor may get paid handsomely, many UFC fighters are not. And it's very debatable whether Conor was even getting paid what he was worth up until MayMac.

The expense of paying athletes more could mean less profit for the owner of those teams.

You're thinking of it wrong. The UFC generally has a roster of between 300 and 500 fighters. They pay out more in player salaries than any of the big four American sports leagues other than the NFL.

An elite baseball player gets somewhere in the range of $100,000 per game. Most players are getting closer to $20,000 per game. Plenty get less than $10,000 per game and some get less than $5000 per game.

If you're the Yankees, you're making a pretty awesome gate at each of those games, and you have a great TV contract to boot... that's before even factoring merchandising.

There is no way in hell that the UFC is worth more that the Yankees.

However... it DOES have more growth potential. The Yankees will always be a single team in the league.

Personally, I'd still MUCH prefer to own the Yankees than the UFC (although I think you'd need to shell out a lot more than $4.2 billion to get them, regardless of what Forbes might say).
 
Yes I've lived in Manchester my entire life so thanks for the lesson. No idea what that has to do with my post though, I was responding to the issue of paying salaries to the squad/roster in the post I quoted...
The topic of the thread is "how is UFC worth more than Man Utd"
 
Well I replied to this graphic in another thread, but OP didn't respond. I'll leave a similar response here.

Comparing professional sports team ownership / valuation to the entire UFC brand/sport is complete apples to oranges. The revenue in the NFL/NBA/MLB and euro soccer clubs is likely much higher, but their costs are also significantly increased due to personnel and player salaries, venue ownership/taxes, profit sharing among teams.

Also, while the professional sports teams listed above are part of a global brand/image, they do not have the same reach (athlete-wise) as the UFC does. The UFC holds events in countries on at least 5 different continents and those cards always reflect locally recognized athletes.

The big advantage that UFC ownership has right now is fighter salaries. ~500 athletes on a roster and probably <5% consume a bulk of the total salaried wages for all 500 fighters. I don't think they'll budge on the salaries all that much unless it can either be justified (i.e. McGregor-like fan draw) and/or they renegotiate a multi-billion dollar cable network deal to move away from PPV for a long term.
 
Back
Top