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

[Joseph_McBride]

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.

They also talk about Stipe, Cody, JDS etc

 

[BVG]

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 behavior (as the article and you seem to insist) that behavior already existed beforehand.

The 4 billion dollar price tag offers leverage and a starting point that otherwise wasn't there before.

That's it. That's the fucking point. I'm not gonna say it again.

The rest of your post was kinda junk...I mean debating Woodley's power play doesn't dispute that he's decided to play his hand by sitting instead of just fighting without question, any person the UFC put in front of him as all other champs did before...

 

[Europe_MMA]

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.

It was claimed that Alvarez made a "measly 70 & 70". This is completely disingenuous considering that Eddie Alvarez is probably one of the highest paid guys in MMA history, and with PPV points guaranteed it means that 70 & 70 is much more like $300,000 guaranteed.

The article was not wrong, however this information was either not researched properly, or the information was deliberately left out in an attempt to mislead the reader towards a specific conclusion.

 

[Joseph_McBride]

Good article. UFC only fans letting the salt overwhelm them on this thread haha

 

[BVG]

It was claimed that Alvarez made a "measly 70 & 70". This is completely disingenuous considering that Eddie Alvarez is probably one of the highest paid guys in MMA history, and with PPV points guaranteed it means that 70 & 70 is much more like $300,000 guaranteed.

The article was not wrong, however this information was either not researched properly, or the information was deliberately left out in an attempt to mislead the reader towards a specific conclusion.

IT'S ALL RELATIVE TO THE INCOME THE UFC GENERATES.

The UFC was obviously downplaying how much revenue they made per card, if someone was willing to offer 4 billion dollars to buy the company.

So 70/70 suddenly doesn't sound all that great. Even with PPV points. The article was not wrong about 10/10 or 20/20 was it? People dancing around trying to find a smidgen of detail the article left out seem to miss the entire point of the article which can't be refuted.

The UFC has never released actual buy rate numbers...or revenue. Sure it lists it's gate income. We get PPV buy rates from Meltzer and that's more of a guide. It says nothing to what the actual numbers are. The UFC never released that shit ever. Because it was a private company.

But when you get sold for 4 billion. That's a number that can't be disputed or swept under the rug. And it's absolutely going to be used as a talking point for contractual negotiations going forward.

 

[Europe_MMA]

Good article. UFC only fans letting the salt overwhelm them on this thread haha

I don't see why someone wouldn't be a UFC fan if they are an MMA fan. It has the best collection of fighters, the best collection of fights and probably the best production (well definitely but some people enjoy the spectacle of RIZIN).

Fight Pass is also one of the greatest assets for mixed martial arts fans to watch multiple promotions in one place, along with easily the greatest back catalogue of MMA ever.

For some people, they are stupid and hate everything non UFC for some odd reason. But there is no reason for an MMA fan to dislike the actual events and action which happen underneath the UFC banner because there isn't better out there.

 

[Pakman]

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.

you know the UFC was popular before Ronda and Conor right? Those two came, they brought a new wave of casuals, but, it's not like it's that much more popular now. It's still a niche sport.

 

[Jawth]

The thing is, WME said they wanted to focus on quality over quantity but weak cards and unworthy PPVs are worse than ever.

We have 2017 fucking Yushin Okami headlining a card on Saturday, and 215 was pretty crappy even before JDS and Borg fucked up their matches.

 

[Europe_MMA]

IT'S ALL RELATIVE TO THE INCOME THE UFC GENERATES.

It has absolutely nothing to do with your perception as to how entertaining you find his fights to be.

The UFC was obviously downplaying how much revenue they made per card, if someone was willing to offer 4 billion dollars to buy the company.

So 70/70 suddenly doesn't sound all that great. Even with PPV points.

You don't have to be so bitchy with your "lol" comments and pictures. You can have discussion on mixed martial arts without having to act like you just migrated over from a CS:GO discord.

I never even commented what so ever on how entertaining I find his fights to be. Completely irrelevant addition.

You also don't really address my post at all. I was claiming that the article misled the reader by claiming Alvarez made a "measly 70 & 70" when in actuality he made almost 6 times that amount, win or lose.

I don't believe the UFC ever even stated how much they make per card. But regardless, if you are making $800,000 on average per fight, and you made $150,000 per fight previously despite being a pivotal part of the company, there isn't a single thing viable to complain about (which I don't believe Alvarez ever has).

There is a market value for the fighters. If one fighter can headline a UFC PPV and sell 500,000 buys, but can't get 3000 people into a venue to watch Alaska Fighting Championships, then you have to wonder what the difference in the situation is. The literal only difference are the names of the companies. Simply put, most people buying PPVs are doing so to watch UFC, not specific fighters.The name value and branding makes all the difference.

 

[BryanTheFighter]

I recommend the link rather than my cut/pastes. The NY Post is spot on. The UFC has indeed jumped the shark and have nothing to show for it. Their big names are gone and there is just no spark to the company anymore.

Conor is a snake oil salesman and he will not be enough to carry the company.
Instead of 15 weight classes and WMMA that no one gives a damn about, the UFC needs to go back to the old format of mens only, 155 + divisions.

Conor minds his own fucking buisness.
Why should Conor "carry the company"? And why would UFC demand that or wish for it?
If it is worth billion of dollars there are money and people involved to make stuff happen that ultimatley generates PPV sales and large audiences.

Just because there are many weight classes and WMMA doesn't mean it is worse for the fans or diminishes UFC's probability to create something good for the fans and earn money. Anderson Silva really became a star after Chael Sonnen called him out and fought him. If a "Chael Sonnen" pops up in 125 male division Mighty mouse might become more famous and can sell a couple of PPV's.

You have no clue how to solve this company's problems at all.

And written between the lines in the article is: "it was a pump and dump" from the earlier owners of the UFC.

 

[cooks1]

The UFC is not the Fertittas.

Is it?

The UFC is not a person you idiotic huckleberry. The UFC is a business entity and it can't ruin itself any more than a desk or chair could ruin itself. It can only be ruined by those that own and/or run it.

If you want to say, 'The Fertittas ruined the UFC for $4 Billion' that would be fine. And to that I would say so fucking what. $4 Billion is a damn good reason to ruin something in my book.

Or....If you say that WME paid $4 Billion to ruin the UFC, while I might disagree, at least that would be a somewhat lucid statement that had the potential to be accurate.

The fact of the matter is that the UFC is far from ruined. Their US deal with Fox expires in 2018 and will likely be replaced with a deal in the $400 million a year range. And if you have been paying attention you would have noticed the media deals the UFC has inked all over the fucking globe both shortly before and during WME's taking over.

This time next year, The UFC will be making nearly $1 billion a year, and maybe even more, in media rights alone. They will be just fine.

 

[BVG]

You don't have to be so bitchy with your "lol" comments and pictures. You can have discussion on mixed martial arts without having to act like you just migrated over from a CS:GO discord.

I never even commented what so ever on how entertaining I find his fights to be. Completely irrelevant addition.

You also don't really address my post at all. I was claiming that the article misled the reader by claiming Alvarez made a "measly 70 & 70" when in actuality he made almost 6 times that amount, win or lose.

I don't believe the UFC ever even stated how much they make per card. But regardless, if you are making $800,000 on average per fight, and you made $150,000 per fight previously despite being a pivotal part of the company, there isn't a single thing viable to complain about (which I don't believe Alvarez ever has).

There is a market value for the fighters. If one fighter can headline a UFC PPV and sell 500,000 buys, but can't get 3000 people into a venue to watch Alaska Fighting Championships, then you have to wonder what the difference in the situation is. The literal only difference are the names of the companies. Simply put, most people buying PPVs are doing so to watch UFC, not specific fighters.The name value and branding makes all the difference.

I really can't say the same thing over and over again if it's not going to sink in.

It then becomes a waste of time.

 

[Toner]

The Ferttitas conned WME

 

[Europe_MMA]

I really can't say the same thing over and over again if it's not going to sink in.

It then becomes a waste of time.

No problem. If you feel the need to respond to my comment for the first time (as opposed to making up a counter argument and then fighting against it) then feel free. I'll be around.

 

[BVG]

The UFC is not a person you idiotic huckleberry. The UFC is a business entity and it can't ruin itself any more than a desk or chair could ruin itself. It can only be ruined by those that own and/or run it.

If you want to say, 'The Fertittas ruined the UFC for $4 Billion' that would be fine. And to that I would say so fucking what. $4 Billion is a damn good reason to ruin something in my book.

Or....If you say that WME paid $4 Billion to ruin the UFC, while I might disagree, at least that would be a somewhat lucid statement that had the potential to be accurate.

The fact of the matter is that the UFC is far from ruined. Their US deal with Fox expires in 2018 and will likely be replaced with a deal in the $400 million a year range. And if you have been paying attention you would have noticed the media deals the UFC has inked all over the fucking globe both shortly before and during WME's taking over.

This time next year, The UFC will be making nearly $1 billion a year, and maybe even more, in media rights alone. They will be just fine.

In this case the article is suggesting that by selling and putting a price tag on the brand, the UFC brand ruined itself so that the fertittas could make 4 billion.

And to that I agree...I would do the exact same thing if I were them.

As for the product itself...it has definitely gone down hill. The reasons for which it gained popularity are no longer present in this version of the UFC.

That was part of what the article was saying and I agree with that point.

 

[cooks1]

In this case the article is suggesting that by selling and putting a price tag on the brand, the UFC brand ruined itself so that the fertittas could make 4 billion.

And to that I agree...I would do the exact same thing if I were them.

As for the product itself...it has definitely gone down hill. The reasons for which it gained popularity are no longer present in this version of the UFC.

That was part of what the article was saying and I agree with that point.

Again---- the UFC Brand can't ruin itself any more than a chair could. A Brand can not make decisions. And even if it could, it didn't. The Fertittas made a decision to sell the UFC for $4 Billion. If they ruined the brand with that decision, I am sure the Fertittas and their $4 billion will be able to deal with it.

 

[eddymotto]

IMO the article creates this artificial dichotomy of an old "pure" UFC and the post WME version of the UFC.

The UFC was never pure. The org started out as a platform for the Gracie family and was constructed as such. PEDs were absoutely rampant. Hype has never been been subject to reality. The fighters have long been underpaid compared to other sports and it did not take a $4B sale to bring that to light.

I do agree that one of the great things about the "old UFC" was that - generally - a real effort was made to have the best fought the best. It was difficult to really avoid fighting other top contenders. Yeah - favored fighters got favored treatment but there was always a major push to get the top guys in the cage against each other.

The wheels came off that years ago. The single event that changed things for me was Sonnen fighting for the belt at 205. Drug cheat. Criminal. Not good enough at - you know - fighting. It didn't matter because Dana liked him & thought that it would sell. that was over 4 years ago. It turned out to be a sign of things to come.

The UFC does seem to have decided that spectacle > sport. Sure, spectacle was always a consideration but now it seems like the most important factor in making fights. I understand the dilemma for the UFC. You have stars like RR and Conor who are good but maybe not THAT good. You can have them fight the next best fighter available and see what happens. You might get GSP, Fedor or Silva. But they might also lose. And then lose again. And the extra fans that watch their fights are not MMA fans anyway. Easier to "give the fans what they want", crank up the hype machine, and kick everything down the road.

 

[Migdagen]

The sport is curently being cleaned up and that has a major cost (fighters being suspended, hurting themselves in training, not making weight...) I do not think Zuffa would have done much better under these circumstances. That said, the UFC will remain profitable nontheless and I will continue to watch it!

 

[BVG]

Again---- the UFC Brand can't ruin itself any more than a chair could. A Brand can not make decisions. And even if it could, it didn't. The Fertittas made a decision to sell the UFC for $4 Billion. If they ruined the brand with that decision, I am sure the Fertittas and their $4 billion will be able to deal with it.

Fine. If you want to argue wording now ill agree with that

 

[Roukas]

This is such a shitty article whoever wrote it is clueless some of the stuff the dude says is fucking hilarious like referencing cm punk losing being a big loss for the UFC I think saying him losing against "a relative nobody" that right there made me realize whoever is writing this is a complete dumb ass lol EVERY1 knew cm punk would lose to Gall who was a trained martial artist/brown belt Also saying Eddie Alvarez contract is the only contract ever released...... sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me n a bunch of shit no1 cares about whoever wrote this is a goofball