Discussion in 'UFC Discussion' started by Coffee79, Aug 12, 2015.
I dont think reebok only was ufcs call.
its not free when you pay sponsor tax to the ufc
did i really
That sponsor tax was what, 50k? That's practically free for the exposure they were getting.
The UFC isn't prohibiting any fighter from getting any sponsors outside of fight week Reebok obligations. If fighters can't secure sponsors under these conditions, it's 100% their fault. Rousey has to wear Reebok, but you don't see her having any problem with outside sponsors.
That rotten Reebok deal...
Bellator et al. is going to start becoming more competitive, real soon, due to this garbage deal. "Sponsor friendly" is going to become a big selling point on luring quality fighters away from UFC.
What the hell are you lookin' for? Can't a young man get money anymore?
you know that ronda is sponsored by reebok, right
and ronda is huge, so
Kind of. There's a huge difference between tens (or maybe hundreds during prime time) of thousands of dollars for a 30 second spot on a major network and the piddly sponsor tax for 30 minutes of exposure through the UFC.
At least that's what the Bad Boy CEO meant.
So raise the sponsor tax so the companies pay more for the exposure they get. Then they might pay the fighters less but it will still be better than the Rebox monies.
But that defeats the purpose of the Reebok deal lol
I'm not talking about her exclusive Reebok sponsorship. I'm talking about all her outside sponsors that she has no problem securing. In fact, she had to remove the sponsorship contact email on her official website due to "overwhelming requests".
If your old sponsors are dropping you only because you have to wear Reebok uniform in fewer than 10 out of 365 days, then it's not the UFC's problem, it's YOUR problem. It means that you're only getting sponsored originally for the exposure you were getting in the UFC octagon, not for your general star power, so it stands to reason that any revenue generated by UFC octagon exposure should be controlled by the UFC, not you.
It's a good deal for Bellator. They can continue to pay their fighters smaller show/win money and let the fighters do the leg work getting sponsors. Bellator gets fighters for cheap, fighters get paid anyway, sponsors get exposure. Win-win-win.
For real they got a heal of a deal. Considering a 30 sec. spot can go for on the low end $30,000 per spot to high end of over $600,000 for 30 sec. spot. depending on time and show ratings. So yeah id say they got a free ride. So most sponsors got a free ride to the tune of over 2 million on the conservative side each time.
What purpose? UFC can make as much money by raising the sponsor tax (since all the Rebox money is going to the fighters anyway), sponsors get exposure, fighters get paid better. The only loser is Rebox and they're going to lose anyway because of all the negative publicity of doing business with scumbags.
Plus, their fighters get to wear what they want, and not those bowling shoe ugly Reebok "fight kits".
Stick it to the baldfather!
Great first post.
A free ride? They sponsored the fighters who made the UFC what it is today. It was a symbiotic relationship. That's why Tapout was so big, because people respected them for being there in the early days of MMA and supporting the fighters and paying the bills so they could train.
Separate names with a comma.