ufc gets $70MM from reebok over 6 yrs... my thoughts on this fiasco...

[Phisher]

They never stole money. The fighters were never entitled to that money in the first place. The UFC was kind enough to ALLOW them to profit from their content and distribution for a while. They then said no more, which they have every right to. Stealing implies something illegal happened they simply stop allowing them free advertising.

The fact that you have a right to do something does not mean that it is necessarily a sound business practice.

This whole thing has been a net negative. Reebok is a joke brand that hasn't transferred any prestige to the UFC. The amount of money received by the UFC wasn't particularly impressive. The payouts to the fights are comical. "Fight kit" sales are non-existent.

In the end, the deal killed a primary source of supplementary income for fighters and actually hurt the amount of exposure that the sport gets by reducing the number of brands involved.

There's also the fact that standardizing the attire for professional combat athletes is just absurd on its face. This isn't a team sport. It's an individual sport where personalities sell. Killing personalized attire made it that much harder to market the fighters.

 

[007]

not to highjack the threaad, but whats the deal with monster? Do they sponsor the ufc? indivudla fighters? Why is that allowed?

It's approved sponsor who can pick who they want to sponsor I believe.

 

[Gratis]

Not even $12 mil/year lmao

The UFC is such a small time operation

 

[leto1776]

Some of the UFC fighters don't even have their own apparel. It was a few events back I'm pretty sure I remember someone wearing someone else's shorts.

I think the UFC is going to have a hard time when it comes to renegotiating the TV deal, and I don't think they get anywhere near the $450m per year asking price. You'd even hard pressed to call a pair of shorts or spandex a uniform, because 98% of the time the fighters are on the air that's all they're wearing, and it certainly isn't going to have an impact on the TV deals.

Pretty sure you remember? How about some proof? lol it a good way to present an argument.

If you can't see why a network would rather not give away advertising to these sponsors who aren't paying them, well, why are you even in a thread arguing business points?

As for what kind of deal the UFC will get when their current contract runs out? It's all about the ratings. Ratings=advertising $$$

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

70 million. No wonder they cant afford designers to make decent gear.

 

[Trojanlegal]

The fact that you have a right to do something does not mean that it is necessarily a sound business practice.

This whole thing has been a net negative. Reebok is a joke brand that hasn't transferred any prestige to the UFC. The amount of money received by the UFC wasn't particularly impressive. The payouts to the fights are comical. "Fight kit" sales are non-existent.

In the end, the deal killed a primary source of supplementary income for fighters and actually hurt the amount of exposure that the sport gets by reducing the number of brands involved.

There's also the fact that standardizing the attire for professional combat athletes is just absurd on its face. This isn't a team sport. It's an individual sport where personalities sell. Killing personalized attire made it that much harder to market the fighters.

I understand you and others passion on this topic, but look at the long term perspective. The UFC entered into the Reebok deal, in part, to create a baseline for future league-wide sponsorship deals that will be more lucrative for the UFC and the fighters. Before the Reebok deal there was no comparisons because there had never been a MMA league-wide apparel sponsorship. The UFC is looking to capture, long-term, larger national and international sponsorships like the 15-year, $169-million contract that University of Michigan signed with Nike or the $90 million that Under Armour paid Notre Dame in 2014. Michigan and Notre Dame are proven brands with a strong fanbase.

So the UFC has to compile various data points, including fan data, social media reach of teams and fighters, etc., to show potential sponsors of the value to signing large sponsorship deals with the league. Fighter and fan negativity is actually hurting the fighters long-term because it will make potential sponsors hesitate to commit to MMA. What would you as a mid-tier UFC fighter rather have—a collection of $500 to $5,000 Condon Depot-like sponsors or the potential to share a slice of multi-million dollar UFC-wide sponsorships (like athletes from other high profile leagues do now). Remember the NFL, NBA and the colleges did not start off with lucrative sponsorships—they had to prove to the potential sponsors over time that spending that type of money was a wise investment. MMA is still a very young sport.

 

[Draxton]

not to highjack the threaad, but whats the deal with monster? Do they sponsor the ufc? indivudla fighters? Why is that allowed?

Similar to the Reebok deal but slightly different. They sponsor the UFC and have a choice to sponsor individual fighters. That's why some fighters have a monster logo on their gear and some do not.

They are an "approved sponsor".

 

[gstomp06]

I know I'm in the minority on this...but I kind of like how it's cleaned up the uniforms and it does appear a little more professional to me. I didn't like the monotony at first, but they've slowly added more style.

I do think the fighters deserve double what they're currently getting.

 

[Emjay]

It's not a determining factor, but one's of many contributing ones.

...and how the fuck is it "hyperbole" to reference a complaint that has been explicitly registered by fighters who've either left the promotion or expressed the desire to leave recently?

Your previous comment made it seem like you were putting all of the blame for fighter discontent solely on the Reebok deal

 

[aokimasaru]

Reebok deal was only made because Fertittas want the UFC to look nice to potential buyers and it worked. WME-IMG just bought a volatile company for $4.2 billion.

 

[PeterGriffin]

Pretty sure you remember? How about some proof? lol it a good way to present an argument.

If you can't see why a network would rather not give away advertising to these sponsors who aren't paying them, well, why are you even in a thread arguing business points?

As for what kind of deal the UFC will get when their current contract runs out? It's all about the ratings. Ratings=advertising $$$

Reebok doesn't pay Fox, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make referencing the network broadcaster. Exactly what advertising is being given away by Fox?

Prior to the Reebok deal, fighter sponsors had to pay the UFC a royalty just to be able to be a sponsor, so there was never any "free advertising" at all. I know this because the company I work for had to stop sponsoring TJ Grant when he signed with the UFC because we simply couldn't afford to pay the mid five-figure pay off the UFC demanded... just so we could continue to sponsor him. The UFC has always gotten paid by fighter sponsors, but going with the Reebok deal gave them full control over it. It had more to do with power than it did money. The UFC is lining their pockets with money that was supposed to go to the fighters. That is of course, unless you actually believe DW.

And as far as the UFC TV renegotiation deal goes... the UFC is looking for a threefold hike compared to their current deal with no real justification for the steep increase while ratings are declining on the Fox network. They aren't going to land a deal with CBS and they're pricing themselves out of an ESPN deal. If the UFC wants more money, Fox won't give it up for nothing, and the UFC typically won't put the big fights on a Fox headliner. FS1 ratings are holding steady, but that doesn't guarantee the UFC enough negotiating leverage to get near their asking price.

 

[BEATDOWNS]

It's disgusting how little the fighters get especially when knowing how much is coming in.

 

[Whippy McGee]

This is EASILY FIXED!

Dear Dana,

Get Reebok to create shirts, pull overs, etc... that fans want to wear. Make one that looks like these:

.... and you won't sell shit!

But, if you make them regional, camp/team driven people will eat them up. I wouldn't mind wearing a shirt designed like the NFL, NBA, and MLB make them. What I mean is this, make the apparel long term relevant where you build a following. Pettis, Hendricks, and Barao are only popular so long, but if you had a shirts that had the following:

UFC Logo on the bottom left, Camp/Team in the middle, Fighter name / Camp on the back, Country Patch on the left sleeve, Reebok on the right sleeve.... you would win the clothing game.

I am from Huntington Beach, CA. Sell me a fucking King's MMA / Werdum shirt that has the King's MMA Logo prevalent.

Pay the fucking teams a cut. Everyone wins. You and Reebok sell a shit load, Kings can pay to train more fighters, and the fans get something that actually doesn't look like ass.

I am sure my Canadian friends would like a bad ass Tri-Star GSP hoody.

I could see all the teams going for this.

• Alliance
• AKA
• ATT
• Blackzillians
• Jackson / Wink
• Nova Uniao
• Serra-Longo
• Alpha Male (small size only)
  
• Xtreme Couture
• Roufa

It's time to get your marketing right and this will do it. Honestly, I would wear an MMA shirt of my favorite fighters, but I don't want to be embarrassed by the shit you guys are producing to do it.

This idea is for free Dana... no charge, but you want more advice... then I will have to charge you... just send tix when you are in SoCal.

 

[dissufc]

Why should you get free advertising for your company using the UFC's owned content using their distribution channels? No one gets free advertising on TV. NO ONE

Who said free?

 

[dissufc]

There's also the fact that standardizing the attire for professional combat athletes is just absurd on its face. This isn't a team sport. It's an individual sport where personalities sell. Killing personalized attire made it that much harder to market the fighters.

Imagine if all boxers shorts were the same. All the ufc fighters are really good nose pickers in their spare time ... cuz saying NO collectively is an exercise in futility.

 

[Phisher]

Your previous comment made it seem like you were putting all of the blame for fighter discontent solely on the Reebok deal

No, I was rebutting your assertion that the Reebok deal wasn't a relevant topic of discussion.

Even if it weren't a contributing to fighter discord, it would still be a better topic than any of the Floyd/Conor nonsense that's been polluting this forum for the past six months.

 

[Maori]

If you're a sponsor that doesn't compete with reebok, why the phuck won't ufc allow that for new and mid-career fighters? Why is there exclusivity?

reebok can be the exclusive gear company but why no other logos or sponsorships to augment the shitty salaries?

reebok is not the problem...good for them to get into the ufc as the official gear but it's the ufc who sets the payout structure and denies fighters from hustling and getting their own local or national sponsors.

It is indefensible by the ufc to have done that deal. Also, if it was not exclusive and with a cooler brand like under armor for example, maybe the fans would not boycott it. It's probably the worst sponsorship deal in the history of mma or combat sports.

This argument is best served when you hear it from a potential sponsor who can't support a local fighter...and that's beyond tragic, it's authoritarian/dictatorship/slavery.

""""""""""""""

So, you wanna be a ufc fighter huh?
Get ready to bend over to take one for the team, disguised as building your brand.

Pre reebok the image looked trashy and emo looking with iron maiden headbanger looking clothes(cue people who swear they loved the gear yet would call out anyone wearing a tapout dethrone t shirt etc)

As a potential investor aint no way i would tarnish my companies image with some of the shit they wore back then.

More to add but cant be fucked typing

 

[Abazzdeboom]

Fighters are virtually UFC's employes
Some have better poistion than other but none as a word to say about that
Its the like it or quite it mentality

 

[Head Movement]

Reebok really got screwed by the UFC

 

[TGArthur]

Because as it says in your title, they paid $70 million for the exclusivity