DING DONG THE REEBOK'S DEAD!

Holding out for Venum to get the sponsorship deal. I think they're most likely to have fighters pursue other sponsors as well. Their equipment is good and very easy on the eyes.

I honestly wouldn't mind Nike or UA either as long as they make their kits unique somehow. The national kits schtick is fucking old. It would take actual effort to fuck it up like Reebok did.
 
No problem, I’m sure the UFC will cut another deal that is in the best interests of the fighters..
 
As long as the guys punch, kick and choke each other, I don't care
 
TheBrownRanger said:
Holding out for Venum to get the sponsorship deal. I think they're most likely to have fighters pursue other sponsors as well. Their equipment is good and very easy on the eyes.

I honestly wouldn't mind Nike or UA either as long as they make their kits unique somehow. The national kits schtick is fucking old. It would take actual effort to fuck it up like Reebok did.
Click to expand...
ByeBye-Reebok.jpg
 
KillerIsBack V2 said:
However, the suited douchnozzles above are still gonna restrict sponsers inside the the cage. but atleast they get to have other sponsers now. Wait .. did they before? Yo one of u lifeless wiki surfing souls say something.
Click to expand...

Fighters use to make a ton of money off octagon sponsorship to a point where they could afford to sit out. Well this didn't make Dana White and his bros happy so they created the Reebok deal to stomp out these revenue streams and to keep all sponsorship money.

Reebok deal was shitty on purpose. Dana White isn't trying to make the average fighter rich.
 
Streeter said:
Dams needs to just let fighters get their own sponsors like before to supplement their income.
Click to expand...
Not going to happen. The networks they broadcast on would not be cool at all with random brands appearing on their feeds that they didn't give the ok to appear there. Example being say ESPN has an advertising deal with Coke, but someone shows up on their broadcast with a pepsi logo on their shorts. Coke ain't going to be happy they're paying money to be advertised on a network that pepsi is also showing up on for free. It'd be unlikely to have an egregious cross over like that situation, but they're not going to take the risk of not screening what shows up on their shorts with how much that add space is being charged for. They also just don't want people making money off the broadcast they're paying to produce if they're not getting something for it.
 
I would love to know how much Reebok lost on this deal
 
Tweak896 said:
Am I the only one who doesn't miss the embarrassing "Condom Depot" sponsors and stuff on fighters clothing? Boxing and all other sports don't allow sponsors on shorts like UFC used to.
Click to expand...

It made the sport look like some second-rate regional bs. The current kits look WAY cleaner for TV and are more professional overall.

There is room for improvement, however. Whoever is the new UFC partner needs to go the extra mile and let fighters personalize their kits within the confines of whatever design is chosen by the new thread bearer. Reebok dropped the ball massively with that one. It helps differentiate fighters and their personalities more. Better for marketing purposes.
 
Fight Professor said:
UFC does not stop fighters from having sponsors on social media or TV outside the fights. ESPN makes over $5 billion in revenue from TV ads a year. They are not going to allow sponsors to advertise for free.
Click to expand...

Because whoever thought of this Reebok crap is an idiot.

They could take 50% of whatever the fighter is making or whatever percentage. It would still be much higher than what Reebok was paying lol.
 
Don't expect a better deal.

With the ESPN deal and the UFC needing to fill a quota, they need the lower tier fighters to be more active than ever. There's no way in hell they're gonna get any sponsorship deal that's going to help them, the UFC wants them poor and desperate for money so they keep fighting for pennies.
 
Ufc will still keep the lionshare of any sponser money, even when the fighters had there old sponsers the sponser would have to pay the ufc first before they can even pay the fighter..this wasnt reebok at fault here...it was the ufc getting a bigger piece of the pie actually all the fighters pay added together dont equal what the ufc is getting..
 
Tweak896 said:
Am I the only one who doesn't miss the embarrassing "Condom Depot" sponsors and stuff on fighters clothing? Boxing and all other sports don't allow sponsors on shorts like UFC used to.
Click to expand...

Well everyone uses condoms.
Second, the UFC could just choose not to allow some sponsors. You don't have to outright ban every single sponsor because one of them might be a condom logo.

What's the issue?
 
phillysmoker said:
Ufc will still keep the lionshare of any sponser money, even when the fighters had there old sponsers the sponser would have to pay the ufc first before they can even pay the fighter..this wasnt reebok at fault here...it was the ufc getting a bigger piece of the pie actually all the fighters pay added together dont equal what the ufc is getting..
Click to expand...
DECEMBER 2014 Dana White interview with Helwani (about the new Reebok deal) :


Dana White quotes (transcribed) from that 7minute+ interview above (with timestamps for each quote).
t=2m02s: " The UFC won't make a dime off this. Not one penny."
t=2m19s : "We're giving all the money to the fighters".
t=3m28s : "And they get 20% on the back-end. Anything that sells with their name on it they're getting 20% of. "
t=2m58s : "I'm all about fair. I want what is fair for everybody."

So ....one thing for an absolute fact is Dana said, on camera "20% of the money to all fighters for anything that sells with their name on it".
Well, O'Malley is saying "15%" so there's a disparity, PLUS O'Malley is alleging he's getting 3000USD on 1,000,000USD (Approx) and that = 0.3% of the money.

So someone was either exaggerating massively 5.5years ago (Mr White) OR Sean O'Malley has his numbers wrong, OR the final percentages for the fighters are nowhere near, not even close to the stated "20%" that Dana said in that interview. Either way, the Reebok deal stinks.

final thing: Dana sure was a whole lot less purple back then compared to now. His blood pressure is probably double now what it was then.
 
Fight Professor said:
UFC does not stop fighters from having sponsors on social media or TV outside the fights. ESPN makes over $5 billion in revenue from TV ads a year. They are not going to allow sponsors to advertise for free.
Click to expand...


Sponsorships are worthless without the ability to advertise the brands inside of the cage when the athlete is most visible. The majority of sponsors left the sport after the UFC signed the Reebok deal and banned fighters from repping then in the cage. Most were willing to pay the UFC a sponsorship fee beforehand.

No other combat sports promoter in the world pulls the crap that the UFC does RE fighter apparel and sponsorship, and in stick and ball sports leagues where there are uniforms with set sponsorhip, the athletes get a 50% split with ownership on the revenue.

The UFC's model is highway robbery.
 
If the new deal is with Under Armour I will laugh
 
Tweak896 said:
Am I the only one who doesn't miss the embarrassing "Condom Depot" sponsors and stuff on fighters clothing? Boxing and all other sports don't allow sponsors on shorts like UFC used to.
Click to expand...

Yea the UFC is not going back to that. It makes the fighters look less professional.

It's what I hate about NASCAR driver outfits. They look like a walking billboard. Sports like the NFL, NBA, and MLB have uniforms that are far cleaner. I'm even OK with limited sponsorship like on the jerseys of English Premier League.

All that said, I hope the fighters get a meaningful cut of sales in the future. Reebok deal was just insulting.
 
Tweak896 said:
Am I the only one who doesn't miss the embarrassing "Condom Depot" sponsors and stuff on fighters clothing? Boxing and all other sports don't allow sponsors on shorts like UFC used to.
Click to expand...
it was just the nature of the sport at the time.
UFC's official sponsors were just as cringy.
Corn Nuts - The Only Corn Snack worthy of being in the Octagon
Corn Nuts - Corn to the Core
Corn Nuts - Tough like you

jesus that was bad. I would say any decent fighters could now attract reasonable sponsors much as the UFC gets major alcohol brands, car shit, government sponsors like the armed forces, etc.
 
Reebok has wanted out since the major backlash, I believe due to Stitch's firing when he phoned Dana the UFC and asked for some of the money since he can no longer wear indie brands.

Reebok released an official statement saying that Reebok was not responsible for the UFC's decision.

It's not been a pleasant partnership. No one who signs with the UFC, is happy, nor wants to extend.

Fox wanted out, they ended up choosing over WWE over UFC. Reebok wants no part of this either.

Dana will eventually have to stop being a micromanaging control freak, and hire actual capable businessmen to run the organization.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,618
Messages
55,430,780
Members
174,776
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top