Media Championhip's clause, Antitrust Lawsuit & Ngannou

[Mark McMichael]

Ddffsy**6"$_$

The lead plaintiffs (or class representatives) definitely don't get 25% of the entire award in a class action.

The lawyers generally get a large chunk of the entire award but the class representatives either get the same thing as the rest of the class or they might get a small bonus (like $100k or less) for the extra work they put in. The entire award before being divided up between the lawyers and potentially thousands and thousands of class members could be hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://www.freeadvice.com/legal/how-much-do-lead-plaintiffs-get-in-class-action-lawsuits/

Interesting. Thx.

I think I may have thought that was what was represented in some legal movie talk but obviously I am off on that one.

I am surprised the lead Plaintiffs don't get more because again, many of these Class Actions end up being over contract oversights such as the type Cell Phone companies might do that effect millions.

I got one years back that I opted in on, and each participant got a cool $15 each when it was done. It cost the company millions. I am sure the lawfirm made huge bank, as they are big cases. And thus why I think there should be some financial motivation for those willing to certify the class, especially as the lawyers are not always on contingency so the risk/reward has to skew to reward or the corporations will just get away with it.

I mean. even the lawyers came to me and said, 'we found this flaw in the contracts, it is a slam dunk we will get $15 per person, and you as a lead litigant could get that and a little more' I would say, nah not worth the time I have to vest to participate even minimally. Let them keep the $15

 

[ExxA]

Inb4 the UFC shills come in here to shit on Francis

i’ll just leave this here
View attachment 905751

That doesnt seem low enough.. we can go lower! Random UFC worker.

 

[Law Talkin’ Guy]

@Iroh

I would agree that if the UFC cannot get this dismissed they will likely move to settle it for some number and not risk the full $5B loss or to have a ruling further dictate rules re payment in their sport.

Such a settlement will likely make jon Fitch and the small group of fighters who brought the complaint as 'Lead Plaintiffs' really rich.

I think Lead Plaintiffs often get up to 25% of the award before the rest is divided up amongst everyone named.

That is why you often see Cell phone companies Class Actioned sued for something in the contract that might get millions of users $25 each back. It is not because all the users care about the $25 enough to sue. It is usually a law firm who discovered it and then 'seeks' Lead Plaintiffs to sue on behalf of, where the lead Plaintiffs then can get millions while everyone else gets $25 and the law firm gets a huge fee.

@Law Talkin’ Guy , might clarify what Lead Plaintiffs can get?

I’m honestly not sure how much lead plaintiffs get in class action suits as I’ve never done one, but my understanding is that while it is substantially more than the rest of the class it’s still nowhere near the amount the lawyers would get which is usually 20-50% depending. After all it’s the lawyers doing all the work and incurring all the expenses (expert reports, litigation costs etc) while lead plaintiffs do a bit of PR and maybe, maybe get subjected to a deposition or two. If I had to pull a number out of my ass I would guess 1-5% maybe less, but I don’t know. I could ask a friend who used to work for Tony Merchant, the so called “King of Canadian Class Actions” and all around scoundrel.

https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/r...ty-suspension-for-lawyer-tony-merchant/363087

 

[Sticko]

Interesting. Thx.

I think I may have thought that was what was represented in some legal movie talk but obviously I am off on that one.

I am surprised the lead Plaintiffs don't get more because again, many of these Class Actions end up being over contract oversights such as the type Cell Phone companies might do that effect millions.

I got one years back that I opted in on, and each participant got a cool $15 each when it was done. It cost the company millions. I am sure the lawfirm made huge bank, as they are big cases. And thus why I think there should be some financial motivation for those willing to certify the class, especially as the lawyers are not always on contingency so the risk/reward has to skew to reward or the corporations will just get away with it.

I mean. even the lawyers came to me and said, 'we found this flaw in the contracts, it is a slam dunk we will get $15 per person, and you as a lead litigant could get that and a little more' I would say, nah not worth the time I have to vest to participate even minimally. Let them keep the $15

The named plaintiffs' involvement is usually pretty minimal I would think, particularly in a "slam dunk" class action like your example.

Giving a giant cut to the named plaintiffs would actually be pretty unfair to the other members of the class. So obviously the point of a class action is to aggregate a bunch of small claims that individually might not be worth suing over, but the other side of that is that you're representing the legal interests of people who aren't there in court with you and may not even know the lawsuit is happening. That's why there are all these rules about fairness, opt-ins and opt-outs, making sure the named plaintiffs are representative of the class, etc. that go into certifying the class.

The company getting sued is going to want settling the class action to resolve all the other potential claims people might have against them. If somebody else sues them for the same thing (not knowing there was a class action or not having wanted to participate) the company is gonna try to say, hey, we did this already.

 

[Mark McMichael]

I’m honestly not sure how much lead plaintiffs get in class action suits as I’ve never done one, but my understanding is that while it is substantially more than the rest of the class it’s still nowhere near the amount the lawyers would get which is usually 20-50% depending. After all it’s the lawyers doing all the work and incurring all the expenses (expert reports, litigation costs etc) while lead plaintiffs do a bit of PR and maybe, maybe get subjected to a deposition or two. If I had to pull a number out of my ass I would guess 1-5% maybe less, but I don’t know. I could ask a friend who used to work for Tony Merchant, the so called “King of Canadian Class Actions” and all around scoundrel.

https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/r...ty-suspension-for-lawyer-tony-merchant/363087

Ya I think I am mistaken based on the link above. They might get a $100k or less in the US.

That seems to me to be something corporations likely lobbied for to try and make it not worth while for any Lead Plaintiff to take on the hassle.

The named plaintiffs' involvement is usually pretty minimal I would think, particularly in a "slam dunk" class action like your example.

Giving a giant cut to the named plaintiffs would actually be pretty unfair to the other members of the class. So obviously the point of a class action is to aggregate a bunch of small claims that individually might not be worth suing over, but the other side of that is that you're representing the legal interests of people who aren't there in court with you and may not even know the lawsuit is happening. That's why there are all these rules about fairness, opt-ins and opt-outs, making sure the named plaintiffs are representative of the class, etc. that go into certifying the class.

The company getting sued is going to want settling the class action to resolve all the other potential claims people might have against them. If somebody else sues them for the same thing (not knowing there was a class action or not having wanted to participate) the company is gonna try to say, hey, we did this already.

I hear ya but I would not want to be a Lead Plaintiff for a suit against a Cell phone company for $25 or a few multiples on that. Not worth the time and it is still time.

Sure the lawyers do the heavy lifting but you are required to act as the Plaintiff and be in court and be versed on YOUR action as it is your action, not the lawyers.

These actions some time drag on years and you would have to stay involved.

I suspect if Lead Plaintiffs get little that is due to corporate lobbying. Make it less likely anyone will step up and be the lead plaintiff.

I do not agree with your view that it would be unfair to the others in the class. Just as the lawyers get the biggest chunk for their work, the Lead Plaintiffs should get a decent chunk (at least (10% imo) as there would be nothing for anybody without them. So in a class action where 10 Million people gets $25 maybe the Lead Plaintiffs share a million for bringing the action and that would have added an additional $0.10 to each member of the class if they did not get that $1MM. It does not move the needle for the Class but it does provide good motivation and reward for the Lead Plaintiff.

 

[rjmbrd]

@Iroh
I would agree that if the UFC cannot get this dismissed they will likely move to settle it for some number and not risk the full $5B loss or to have a ruling further dictate rules re payment in their sport.

We are way past dismissal and this case has wide reaching implications outside of the UFC. It would be considered shocking for a dismissal at this point.

Such a settlement will likely make jon Fitch and the small group of fighters who brought the complaint as 'Lead Plaintiffs' really rich.
I think Lead Plaintiffs often get up to 25% of the award before the rest is divided up amongst everyone named.

This is categorically incorrect.

It is usually a law firm who discovered it and then 'seeks' Lead Plaintiffs to sue on behalf of, where the lead Plaintiffs then can get millions while everyone else gets $25 and the law firm gets a huge fee.

The lawyers have to spend a lot of time and money with the risk of no return on that investment. They are only paid from recovery obtained for the benefit of the class. Its an important distinction that the court will approve the payment.

 

[KAZSoliloquy]

U must not be smart

No. No it's not

great contributions from a highly intelligent expert economist

 

[Iroh]

Thank you for posting this Sherbro, getting edumicated and my TTH fix simultaneously

“Let’s do this shit”....

Thanks for the link OP. It certainly sounds like the fighters have a good case that the UFC engaged in anti-competitive practices and had a monopsony on elite MMA talent thereby artificially keeping wages low.

Inb4 the UFC shills come in here to shit on Francis

i’ll just leave this here
View attachment 905751

I'm pro-capitalist, but I can't see how any fair person could be opposed to the lawsuit. It's already had positive results as discussed in the video. And if the fighters succeed, fighters in general will have more leverage. And since no matter what happens the UFC will not go out of business, I don't see any downside.

Competition is actually part of the bedrock of classic capitalism.

@Iroh

I would agree that if the UFC cannot get this dismissed they will likely move to settle it for some number and not risk the full $5B loss or to have a ruling further dictate rules re payment in their sport.

Such a settlement will likely make jon Fitch and the small group of fighters who brought the complaint as 'Lead Plaintiffs' really rich.

I think Lead Plaintiffs often get up to 25% of the award before the rest is divided up amongst everyone named.

That is why you often see Cell phone companies Class Actioned sued for something in the contract that might get millions of users $25 each back. It is not because all the users care about the $25 enough to sue. It is usually a law firm who discovered it and then 'seeks' Lead Plaintiffs to sue on behalf of, where the lead Plaintiffs then can get millions while everyone else gets $25 and the law firm gets a huge fee.

@Law Talkin’ Guy , might clarify what Lead Plaintiffs can get?

Ddffsy**6"$_$

The lead plaintiffs (or class representatives) definitely don't get 25% of the entire award in a class action.

The lawyers generally get a large chunk of the entire award but the class representatives either get the same thing as the rest of the class or they might get a small bonus (like $100k or less) for the extra work they put in. The entire award before being divided up between the lawyers and potentially thousands and thousands of class members could be hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://www.freeadvice.com/legal/how-much-do-lead-plaintiffs-get-in-class-action-lawsuits/

Thanks for the thread, sherdog needs this

I’m honestly not sure how much lead plaintiffs get in class action suits as I’ve never done one, but my understanding is that while it is substantially more than the rest of the class it’s still nowhere near the amount the lawyers would get which is usually 20-50% depending. After all it’s the lawyers doing all the work and incurring all the expenses (expert reports, litigation costs etc) while lead plaintiffs do a bit of PR and maybe, maybe get subjected to a deposition or two. If I had to pull a number out of my ass I would guess 1-5% maybe less, but I don’t know. I could ask a friend who used to work for Tony Merchant, the so called “King of Canadian Class Actions” and all around scoundrel.

https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/r...ty-suspension-for-lawyer-tony-merchant/363087

great contributions from a highly intelligent expert economist

Bump for update. Just quoting posters who seemed interested and might be interested in the addition and hopefully are willing to suffer through Luke Thoma (lol, though I doubt he'll be as bad in this interview)

 

[Iroh]

forgot to quote @rjmbrd ^

 

[Iroh]

I'll just tag the guys who liked my thread too. @Dacha @BenderIsGreat @TARTARA @giovanni_ss @G10

 

[Young Calf Kick]

Bump for update. Just quoting posters who seemed interested and might be interested in the addition and hopefully are willing to suffer through Luke Thoma (lol, though I doubt he'll be as bad in this interview)

I'll check later when I'm home from work

 

[abject]

I'm pro-capitalist, but I can't see how any fair person could be opposed to the lawsuit. It's already had positive results as discussed in the video. And if the fighters succeed, fighters in general will have more leverage. And since no matter what happens the UFC will not go out of business, I don't see any downside.

Competition is actually part of the bedrock of classic capitalism.

Capitalim ultimately results in duopoly's or monopoly. The ufc is the result of pure capitalism. Communism is bad, capitalism is bad. You need some inbetween ground, hence a union or lawsuit.

 

[Maori]

Someone change the channel

 

[mjfan23]

Inb4 the UFC shills come in here to shit on Francis

i’ll just leave this here
View attachment 905751

But ufc is bigger than even soccer if they give out more revenue every top 5 would be a billionaire

 

[Stan]

Inb4 the UFC shills come in here to shit on Francis

i’ll just leave this here
View attachment 905751

The chart is not correct with NBA, NFL and MLB. Those sports are closer to a 50-50 split. Not included on your chart Strikeforce fighters were getting 64% and currently Bellator pays its fighters 48% along with some other MMA orgs.
The UFC number is around 12-16% that is shared with fighters while UFC keeps a whopping 84-88% share. When UFC loses the anti-trust lawsuit they will have to change its business practice compatible with the others or the company will be hit with massive fines. When this happens the UFC will have to restructure fighter contracts as they will recieve 45-50% of total revenue meaning you can expect at least 1/2 of its fighters will be released.