if you can't draw PPVs why should you get paid?

The owners take all the risks? In a sport where people punch and kick each other in the face?

The concept of being in a sport is that the pay is going to be enough to help circumvent the short shelf life of the fighters, if you can't pay them a living wage, then people are never going to become invested. It's actually in the organizations best long term interest if you pay the fighters better, as it's worked in every other sport.
Fertittas put millions of dollars on the line and in play, some knucklehead risking a concussion pales in comparison
 
They bought the UFC for like a million dollars. Zuffa is an LLC, which means that the Fertitta's personal assets could not be taken by the debts of the company. But if the UFC had made no money they would still have lost all of their initial investment.

And even if they don't risk their own personal wealth they are still the ones procuring investors and negotiating contracts with sponsors.

The revenue is generated by people who pay to watch fights, not necessarily certain fighters. There are hundreds of talented fighters outside the UFC who could take the place of current UFC fighters.

Why do you think franchises like Star Wars hire unknown actors? Because they can do the same job for much cheaper. Sure, they may not be able to act as well as a big, well known star, but people pay to watch Star Wars, not to watch a big star. In other words people will watch even if you don't have the best.

I know this argument only holds up to a certain point. You are right that fighters like Mighty Mouse bring legitimacy that makes the UFC sustainable in the long run. But the UFC has proven that it DOESN'T need ALL the best fighters in the world in order to get viewers. They never had the best heavyweight in the world, Fedor. They don't currently have two top fighters in Rory Macdonald or Benson Henderson. It is a balancing act that the UFC knows how to play between having top fighters and having money making fighters.

Fair enough, I can buy some of your points, however I think the statement that CM Punk could replace Mighty Mouse and things would still sell is a bit off. It might work for one fight where people tune in to see the spectacle, but I think it hurts them after that.

But again, I don't think we are too far off. Good post.
 
Well, maybe the PPV model is not the only way for the company to make money.

NFL, NBA, MLB & NHL players combined don't sell a single PPV, and are getting paid.
Because the TV networks buy all the games outright, get a fucking clue moron.

And as for the question, here's the answer:


You shouldn't.
 
Fertittas put millions of dollars on the line and in play, some knucklehead risking a concussion pales in comparison

That was over a decade ago. The risk is over. We can now adjust how much they are being paid.

I'm not saying that it should be 50/50, but you can't pretend that circumstances can't change. That'd be like saying Apple shouldn't pay their workers well because they almost went bankrupt one time.
 
US National Swimmers get a $3,000 a month stipend, as well as the fact that they are able to make money off sponsors.

Just because you don't think they are making a living, doesn't mean it's true.

Do they get this stipend until they retire like you suggested? I highly doubt that these swimmers make enough with these stipends to live out the rest of their lives. It's just enough so that they don't have to take up another job while they represent the country.

$3000 a month is like $36,000 a year for probably very few swimmers compared to the number of paid fighters the UFC has on its roster.

And the UFC allows sponsors too. They just can't wear it while walking out to the octagon. Have you seen MetroPCS commercials with Ronda Rousey?
 
Fertittas put millions of dollars on the line and in play, some knucklehead risking a concussion pales in comparison

Risk is relative. A million dollars, if you are a billionaire, is not the same as a million dollars if you only have a million dollars.

Comparing that to someone's health/potential death is stupid. Money can be replaced, your body/life can't.
 
Risk is relative. A million dollars, if you are a billionaire, is not the same as a million dollars if you only have a million dollars.

Comparing that to someone's health/potential death is stupid. Money can be replaced, your body/life can't.
ask an actuary how much a life is worth, surprisingly little man
 
you shouldnt, they dont - unless you have been loyal to the company, in which case you may get hooked up more than necessary

the truth is that those commodity spots have a ton of fighters dying to have that opportunity to fight in the ufc - im sure they could even fill the cards for free if they wanted to
 
That was over a decade ago. The risk is over. We can now adjust how much they are being paid.

I'm not saying that it should be 50/50, but you can't pretend that circumstances can't change. That'd be like saying Apple shouldn't pay their workers well because they almost went bankrupt one time.
I'm just saying in real life, not just MMA, wages aren't determined by fairness
 
Do they get this stipend until they retire like you suggested? I highly doubt that these swimmers make enough with these stipends to live out the rest of their lives. It's just enough so that they don't have to take up another job while they represent the country.

$3000 a month is like $36,000 a year for probably very few swimmers compared to the number of paid fighters the UFC has on its roster.

And the UFC allows sponsors too. They just can't wear it while walking out to the octagon. Have you seen MetroPCS commercials with Ronda Rousey?

When did I suggest a stipend until they retire? I suggested a raise.

And I'm not even going to address your assanine response about sponsers
 
We are talking about it's relative worth to the individual who is taking the risk -
but you are not getting paid over how much your life is worth to YOU, you are getting paid what the market values your life at. I'm not saying it's right but this is a capitalist society we living in mang
 
That was over a decade ago. The risk is over. We can now adjust how much they are being paid.

I'm not saying that it should be 50/50, but you can't pretend that circumstances can't change. That'd be like saying Apple shouldn't pay their workers well because they almost went bankrupt one time.

Except that WME-IMG bought the UFC and now THEY took on the risk. I do not have time to explain very simple business concepts to you.

If you are unwilling or unable to understand then just keep believing that the owners are greedy and evil but I guarantee you that every successful business is exactly the same.
 
I'm just saying in real life, not just MMA, wages aren't determined by fairness

And how do you think that gets changed?

I understand how the real world works, people will keep doing selfish, manipulative things until they get called out on them. The UFC got to make its profits off the backs of the fighters, now it's up to us to try and make sure everyone knows they are being screwed.

I'm looking for a realistic change to wages, which is well overdue, especially given the Reebok deal
 
Cause it makes the sport look poor and Dana White used to always go on about how great the pay is. Now that we know the percentage they were giving the fighters, it makes the UFC look even worse. I know someone will bring up boxing as an example for low pay but they aren't even comparable considering how organizations and promoters work in boxing.
 
If you can't draw PPV just start imitating Gorgeous George.
Worked for Ali, Mayweather, Conor etc etc
 
And how do you think that gets changed?

I understand how the real world works, people will keep doing selfish, manipulative things until they get called out on them. The UFC got to make its profits off the backs of the fighters, now it's up to us to try and make sure everyone knows they are being screwed.

I'm looking for a realistic change to wages, which is well overdue, especially given the Reebok deal

Except fighters CHOOSE to put their health and lives at risk. They CHOOSE to get punched and kicked in the head for a living. They can bag groceries for a living and never put their health at risk. Or better yet, they can become rival promoters to the UFC and keep 100% of the profits IF they can actually run a business successfully.

Pay isn't based on how dangerous a job is. It's based on how much money the good that you are providing is going to make. For example, if I work in a fishing boat, yes it's a dangerous job, but I'm not getting paid for the danger (well somewhat but I am simplifying things for you), I am getting paid for the fish I catch, which people will purchase and consume. Because fishing is dangerous I, as a fisherman, can choose to increase the price of the fish that I catch in the marketplace to make up for putting my life at risk. And the buyers can choose whether or not to pay this increased price or just buy some other type of food or to buy fish from another fisherman who is selling his fish for less.

If I wanted to be a professional skydiver that would be even more dangerous than working on a fishing boat, but I'm not catching any fish or any other good or service, so I will make zero dollars, even though I am taking a HUGE risk with my life and health.

Fighters don't get paid just because they get punched and kicked. They get paid because people are entertained by watching them get punched and kicked. If very few people pay for this, then they will not get paid much. No one is forcing them to do this for a living.

There are of course other concepts such as hazard pay and medical benefits but generally speaking it's about supply and demand.
 
Last edited:
that's cause there's competition between teams, so there's a market wage. Market wage in MMA is low, if UFC doesn't pay their fighters, no one will step in and outbid them
You need to study harder in your high school economics class.
 
You get paid by what you're worth to a company money wise. If they can replace you and not miss anything $$ wise, you're replaceable, therefore you can't justify a raise.

Make yourself more valuable somehow.
 
all the fighter negotiation/contract talk has me asking that question. In capitalist society marginal benefit = marginal wage. It's unclear why some guy who draws nothing should really get compensated all that much

Because they need a full card and nobody wants to pay $60 for 1 or 2 fights that draw or $200 to $15,000 for tickets to a fight with 1 or 2 fights.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,234,841
Messages
55,311,599
Members
174,734
Latest member
Bob Gnuheart
Back
Top