"The UFC has ruined itself for $4 billion dollars." - The NY Post

[Zeroinnes]

The roster is too big. There are more UFC fighters (If 500 is still acurate) than there are players in the NBA.

Cut that shit down and keep only the best they can sign. Fighters will become more memorable.

 

[TheWobbler]

They have to keep the PPV model as I dont think they will get a tv big enough to get away from it.

 

[Mr. Keenan]

It seems casually written. There's discussions about Conor McGregor and Ronda Rousey, but what the UFC is at it's core is the fighting. It's not the star names and cross over appeal. It's Olivier Aubin-Mercier Vs Tony Martin. You see more articles on Sylverster Stallone discussing Conor McGregor Vs Floyd Mayweather because popularity equates in clicks which in turn results in money. Also everyone enjoys discussing the big show. But UFC is a mixed martial arts promotion, and what drives the company is fighting.

If fighting is what the company is about...we would see legitimate fights....champions defending against the 1-3 ranked guys in their divisions. UFC is about who is the best fighter to make money....not who is the best fighter.

 

[Skarr]

youre being quite the pompous little ass in this thread and Im confused as to what exactly is your personal stake in this that you would go on like you have...((rhetorical, i dont give a shit))

Again, it's all relative to the value of the company. Nobody knew the value of the company until the company sold.

You and I don't know how much Eddie's brand contributed to the UFC coffers. But the article says that once the UFC sold for 4 billion, that helped fighters...especially belt holders...put a value on their stock regardless of what you may think of their fighting style.

The article isn't wrong here.

its not relative to the value of the company at all, its relative to what the Company is willing to pay someone...fighters can demand whatever they want, while they are under contract they will fight or they will sit...if the UFC doesnt want to pay a fighter what the fighter wants, they wont....there are plenty of examples of that

None of that was the point the article was trying to make.

The point was that until their was a price value attached to the UFC, nobody knew what kind of money they could start asking for.

It's all relative to the value of the company which they didn't know until the UFC sold.

The article is not wrong here. And lol at you trying to suggest otherwise.

so Eddie knew how much the UFC was going to sell for before WMG bought it? is that the point the article was trying to make or is that your weak shit attempt at making a point?

I think fighter pay could be higher all around, the UFC sale opened eyes for sure...but if you think that gives fighers any sort of leverage...youre just wrong....

Walmart sells tomorrow for 10 billion, do you think that gives the stockboy room to demand a raise or he walks out?

 

[SubmarinerX]

Article written by a casual as per

Meritocracy was the bedrock principle from which the UFC built its hardcore fan base. Making the best fight the best was also how the UFC became a star-making machine because, unlike in boxing, the kings and queens of the organization were constantly under siege by up and comers. Therefore, anyone who could hold onto a belt for a long time was unquestionably great, and greatness is one path to stardom.

The old UFC hit its pinnacle with Ronda Rousey, whose reign of unprecedented dominance

 

[superpunch]

I too would ruin myself for $4 billion. I would do a lot of dirty, degrading things to myself for that money.

 

[superpunch]

Article written by a casual as per

Meritocracy was the bedrock principle from which the UFC built its hardcore fan base. Making the best fight the best was also how the UFC became a star-making machine because, unlike in boxing, the kings and queens of the organization were constantly under siege by up and comers. Therefore, anyone who could hold onto a belt for a long time was unquestionably great, and greatness is one path to stardom.

The old UFC hit its pinnacle with Ronda Rousey, whose reign of unprecedented dominance

 

[ClosetVitorFan]

USADA ruined the UFC

 

[ChefC]

None of that was the point the article was trying to make.

The point was that until their was a price value attached to the UFC, nobody knew what kind of money they could start asking for.

It's all relative to the value of the company which they didn't know until the UFC sold.

The article is not wrong here. And lol at you trying to suggest otherwise.

McGregor was already pushing the pay scale before the sale.

UFC was putting on 'super fights' and ignoring the rankings before McGregor.

The article cites Tyron as evidence that fighters only care about money fights now, but look how 'going easy' turned out for him. He didn't get the GSP superfight, in fact I question the validity of that statement completely, why would going easy and not putting on a good show make the UFC want to reward him with a super fight? It wouldn't, and they didn't.

The article reads like it was written by a sherdogger. l'm not sure how the UFC doing things that boost PPV's is an example of them failing, I also don't think the reason the UFC got so popular was because of 'Meritocracy'. The UFC got popular originally because of car-crash curiosity, it then got mainstream because of fights and fighters, the two most commercially popular being Rousey and McGregor. Which is ironic because the two fighters that have put the most bums in seats for the UFC are also the two most hated on these forums.

 

[BVG]

youre being quite the pompous little ass in this thread and Im confused as to what exactly is your personal stake in this that you would go on like you have...((rhetorical, i dont give a shit))

libtards skoff at something without digging into the facts and try to misdirect by attacking something else.

I'm not a fan of NY times but in this case, their article is fairly accurate in what they are trying to say. And simply dismissing it because it's nytimes, is again...something a liberal sjw retard would do.

And that annoys the shit out of me.

its not relative to the value of the company at all, its relative to what the Company is willing to pay someone...fighters can demand whatever they want, while they are under contract they will fight or they will sit...if the UFC doesnt want to pay a fighter what the fighter wants, they wont....there are plenty of examples of that

it ABSOLUTELY is relative to the value of the company. Once you find out the value of the company it gives you a starting point to what you might feel your value is. Rather that simply going by what the UFC says your value is. And as pointed out in the article, you are seeing first hand this cascade effect of fighters demanding more. Starting with Conor.

Conor can ask for a ridiculous amount and he can absolutely reference the 4 billion dollar value of the UFC.
Thinking he can't is absolutely asinine.

so Eddie knew how much the UFC was going to sell for before WMG bought it? is that the point the article was trying to make or is that your weak shit attempt at making a point?

No...dumb fuck. That was not the point of the article.

I think fighter pay could be higher all around, the UFC sale opened eyes for sure...but if you think that gives fighers any sort of leverage...youre just wrong....

As pointed out in the article, you are seeing first hand how it's given fighters leverage based off of the actions of the current champions.

Walmart sells tomorrow for 10 billion, do you think that gives the stockboy room to demand a raise or he walks out?

Alverez is not a stock boy...he is directly related to a certain amount of income the UFC generates. Whatever that amount is, is certainly debatable but now it's within context of a 4 billion dollar pot.

Come at me when you understand what the fucking article is saying.

 

[leto1776]

*Citation needed

Yeah,mid love to hear evidence to back up that claim. Chuck's first title defense was against Jeremy Horn. Pure revenge match.

 

[BVG]

McGregor was already pushing the pay scale before the sale.

UFC was putting on 'super fights' and ignoring the rankings before McGregor.

The article cites Tyron as evidence that fighters only care about money fights now, but look how 'going easy' turned out for him. He didn't get the GSP superfight, in fact I question the validity of that statement completely, why would going easy and not putting on a good show make the UFC want to reward him with a super fight? It wouldn't, and they didn't.

The article reads like it was written by a sherdogger. l'm not sure how the UFC doing things that boost PPV's is an example of them failing, I also don't think the reason the UFC got so popular was because of 'Meritocracy'. The UFC got popular originally because of car-crash curiosity, it then got mainstream because of fights and fighters, the two most commercially popular being Rousey and McGregor. Which is ironic because the two fighters that have put the most bums in seats for the UFC are also the two most hated on these forums.

The sale helped put a price tag to what he now feels he's worth. If you don't think he didn't bring up the 4 billion dollar value at his next contract negotiation after the sale...you would almost be a bigger idiot than he would have been had he not.

As for Woodley. He's also not fighting any time soon, is he? He's holding out. He's going to hold out because he feels he has power.

He's directly come out and said that he's not gonna fight until their is a fighter worthy of a title defense. Which actually means he's not going to risk a title defense until a name builds up in the ww division to make it worth his time/risk money wise.

This kind of behavior actually didn't happen so blatantly before the sale. Champs generally fought whomever the UFC put in front of them and that's what made the UFC popular. This is true and this is partly what the article is saying.

Understand this.

Bath in it.

And love it.

 

[snakeyes1022]

Whats interesting to me is that not just the NYT article but many others say that the fighters see their value after the company sold for 4 Billion. No the value is in the fact that they had cheap employees. If everyone demands raises it will diminish the value and ultimately the sport. I worked for TWC and when we sold for un-godly amounts of money i didnt think i was getting a raise. Infact i was worried i would have to take a pay cut.

 

[BVG]

Article written by a casual as per

Meritocracy was the bedrock principle from which the UFC built its hardcore fan base. Making the best fight the best was also how the UFC became a star-making machine because, unlike in boxing, the kings and queens of the organization were constantly under siege by up and comers. Therefore, anyone who could hold onto a belt for a long time was unquestionably great, and greatness is one path to stardom.

The old UFC hit its pinnacle with Ronda Rousey, whose reign of unprecedented dominance

The height of popularity versus fighter pay.

My peak is around UFC 100...but clearly Honda brought in waves of mainstream media and fans.

 

[DeathFist]

I don't know about anyone else, but the last few cards have been pretty entertaining if you leave out the Nunes fight. It's almost like Amanda doesn't want stardom or something. Weird, but other fighters have been upping their games.

Personally, I don't give a shit if Connor ever fights again. I'd rather watch Johnson fight.

 

[BVG]

Whats interesting to me is that not just the NYT article but many others say that the fighters see their value after the company sold for 4 Billion. No the value is in the fact that they had cheap employees. If everyone demands raises it will diminish the value and ultimately the sport. I worked for TWC and when we sold for un-godly amounts of money i didnt think i was getting a raise. Infact i was worried i would have to take a pay cut.

It's a completely different model of revenue generation. I don't disagree with the premise. It's every man for themselves and the individual will put forth a stronger argument than before regarding their worth.

 

[SnowBlynd]

Once they equated Ronda with the old ufc I stopped reading. I agree with the article in spirit, however.

 

[Myrddin Wild]

Sweeet... the weekly "UFC is dying" thread addz an un-expected twist.

 

[ChefC]

The sale helped put a price tag to what he now feels he's worth. If you don't think he didn't bring up the 4 billion dollar value at his next contract negotiation after the sale...you would almost be a bigger idiot than he would have been had he not.

As for Woodley. He's also not fighting any time soon, is he? He's holding out. He's going to hold out because he feels he has power.

He's directly come out and said that he's not gonna fight until their is a fighter worthy of a title defense. Which actually means he's not going to risk a title defense until a name builds up in the ww division to make it worth his time/risk money wise.

This kind of behavior actually didn't happen so blatantly before the sale. Champs generally fought whomever the UFC put in front of them and that's what made the UFC popular. This is true and this is partly what the article is saying.

Understand this.

Bath in it.

And love it.

Of course it helped put a price tag on what he was worth, the point is though that the sale isn't what started that behaviour (as the article and you seem to insist) that behaviour already existed beforehand.

Woodley can wait as long as he wants, he's not a big enough star to warrant it and he won't be treated well for doing it. Rockhold tried something similar and look at the superstar he ended up fighting recently.

The UFC made Toney vs Couture for goodness sake, to pretend they've always been some kind of upstanding 'only fights you have earned!' organisation is disingenuous to say the least. Also I'd argue McGregor is the one influencing the other fighters, not the sale, and he was already changing the game before the sale.

Like him or hate him, he's the one causing the stir. The UFC is simply going through a transformation, it's no longer the niche sport most of us started watching, it's becoming mainstream and with that come superstars and the kind of behaviour you're seeing. The sale was a symptom of the UFC's growth in popularity, just as the 'super fights' are.

The sale isn't the chicken or the egg. Understand this, bath in it, hate it all you want.

But accept it.

 

[BVG]

Once they equated Ronda with the old ufc I stopped reading. I agree with the article in spirit, however.

Was Honda a part of the UFC before the sale?

FFS you all can't be this god damn stupid or butt hurt that an article points out how the sale has negatively impacted the UFC...

"LEAVE MY UFC ALONE!"