I'm not knocking streamers but you're crazy if you don't think you're hurting the sport and the figh

Why would I justify it? I just don't like spending money.
 
"Who cares, Dana takes all the money Anway."

"If they paid the fighters more maybe I would consider buying."

"You can't stop streams, welcome to the internet."

"UFC should be free anyway, just put it on network TV and collect ad dollars."

"PPV is dead. UFC should find a new model."
Click to expand...

I mean...when you take a whole list of facts and good reasons and call them "cop outs" I mean...whats there to argue?
 
mmamxfan said:
Getting rid of wmma, bring in Pride rules, and get more than 5 fighters the general public knows. Then maybe you have a case. Outside of Hall I literally don't know anyone on the card. I'm not nearly into it as I used to be, but back in the day guys had personalities and could wear their own gear and sponsors. Now it's everybody in matching venom gear, no individual sponsors, manlets, and wmma. I have no desire to see chicks have a sloppy fight, or guys the size of 8th graders fight. Bring back the individual personalities of a fighter. Shit's bland and watered down. Oh well at least football starts soon..
Click to expand...
I was with you till the smaller weight class bashing. Those “manlets” would feed u their cock and u would take it.
 
DOMMA said:
OP is spot on.

"Who cares, Dana takes all the money Anway."

"If they paid the fighters more maybe I would consider buying."

"You can't stop streams, welcome to the internet."

"UFC should be free anyway, just put it on network TV and collect ad dollars."

"PPV is dead. UFC should find a new model."

These are clearly excuses Sherdoggers use to justify their poor behavior. Almost every other post in this thread is more excuses to justify why it is OK to steal. This mindset is rampant and explains many of the problems in society. Hard to imagine we have come to a time when folks will not accept that stealing is wrong.
Click to expand...
Imagine thinking people streaming is a better explanation of the problems with society then a company using political sway and anti competitive tactics to corner a market in order to exploit a workforce. But yeah, the guy who makes $30k a year streaming a fight is the bigger problem.
 
This is based on the assumptions that those who stream would pay for PPV if they couldn't.

Some people just aren't that into it. It was the same back in the days of vinyl. Some people never bought albums. They taped friends' albums or were without.

Or take a basically opposite example, also involving music. File sharing used to be a big worry for the music industry. File sharing is barely a thing today thanks to the likes of Spotify. File sharing became huge because people had no alternative other than buying CDs, and people didn't want CDs. File sharing is more convenient than CDs. Spotify is more convenient than file sharing.

Give the customers what they want and they will pay for it. Except for that segment that just isn't that into it and never were. Smart companies ignore the latter segment and focus on potential customers.

Not wanting to fund the likes of Dana is a valid argument. I would never buy from Amazon or subscribe to Prime. Nor do I send funds to ISIS. (Isn't it enough that the US, Britain and the Saudis arm ISIS?) Why should I have to justify any of that?
 
jimmy dakine said:
I often watch in a bar and pay a minimal cover charge and get food and booze for my money. Better than 70 bucks and paying for beer on top of that.
Click to expand...

This is what a lot of people around me do. We go to the bar to watch and put our money into the local economy and help keep the staff employed.
 
SokoudjouFanboy said:
Imagine thinking people streaming is a better explanation of the problems with society then a company using political sway and anti competitive tactics to corner a market in order to exploit a workforce. But yeah, the guy who makes $30k a year streaming a fight is the bigger problem.
Click to expand...

If you do not like the UFC's policies, don't watch. I suspect that regardless of how the UFC was structured, even if 99% of all proceeds went to the fighters and PPV was $25 most of the folks would still find justification for streaming, which is stealing....which is wrong, right?
 
This is based on the (incredibly incorrect) assumption that if someone is going to buy the card if they can't stream it.

If you aren't going to buy the card, whether you stream it or not isn't going to affect the fighters or how much money they make.

Additionally, if people don't stream the event, less people will see sponsors, so sponsors will pay less. Therefore, streamers are truly upstanding members of society and should be rewarded.
 
They have too many cards where the quality simply isn't there. Especially if they have a "big" main event, they tend to skimp on the rest. And now they're behind another paywall with ESPN+. AND as I've said a million times, UFC is the worst paced sporting display aside from horse racing.
 
DOMMA said:
If you do not like the UFC's policies, don't watch. I suspect that regardless of how the UFC was structured, even if 99% of all proceeds went to the fighters and PPV was $25 most of the folks would still find justification for streaming, which is stealing....which is wrong, right?
Click to expand...
If you don't like walmart don't steal from them. Great lol. Stealing the UFC's content is a hell of a lot more ethical then the UFC existing in it's current state.
 
I have purchased VHS tapes.. Countless PPV’s.. Video games.. If I decide in 2021 to watch an event through other means, that is my decision.
 
SokoudjouFanboy said:
If you don't like walmart don't steal from them. Great lol. Stealing the UFC's content is a hell of a lot more ethical then the UFC existing in it's current state.
Click to expand...
200.gif
 
They sign for a specific purse in advance...having "win" money and no sponsors takes money from the fighters, in a PPV the only ones making more money with more buys are the stars that get PPV points, those rarely complain about money.
 
DOMMA said:
200.gif
Click to expand...
Very. The UFC is a monopoly that uses that monopoly power to exploit athletes to make shareholders richer then they already are. How is that any more ethical then stealing from them?
 
I don’t even know where to find these illegal streams so I’m just sat here twiddling my thumbs waiting for results.
 
Your money → ESPN → UFC → The Fighter

You see you're mostly giving to corporate stooges and pennies trickle down to the fighter themselves. This isn't noble and you're doing it wrong. I give directly to the fighters themselves.

My money → The Fighter (though OnlyFans)

Cutting out the middle man and supporting these THOTS directly is a classy move. We all win.
 
SokoudjouFanboy said:
Very. The UFC is a monopoly that uses that monopoly power to exploit athletes to make shareholders richer then they already are. How is that any more ethical then stealing from them?
Click to expand...

How is the UFC different than Amazon and Apple and dozens of other companies? The system is not perfect but there is a reason that the best companies in the world are in the US.

To answer your question specifically, the UFC is not a monopoly. The fighters enter into negotiated, legal contracts on their own free-will. I understand from your posts that because you do not like the business model, it is ok steal from them. We can agree to disagree, enjoy your day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,904
Messages
55,454,053
Members
174,785
Latest member
ljae89

Share this page

Back
Top