- Joined
- Mar 1, 2022
- Messages
- 423
- Reaction score
- 336
Can we have a genuine discussion on fighter pay that doesn’t end up with the same generic “bootlicker” versus “idiot who doesn’t understand business/economics” arguments.
I believe fighter pay is fair because:
1) Based on reviewing the numbers, the top 4-6 fighters on a card simply bring in all of the revenue and viewership. Rani Yahya or Sodiq Yusuff on the prelims just do not bring in enough money to justify paying more than 15/15 or 25/25.
2) Comparing percentages to other sports is a big argument. One that doesn’t make sense to me. Firstly, they are team sports. Secondly, they are far better athletes usually with more competition. Thirdly, NBA players a like are OVERPAID. They should be paid less, we shouldn’t require the UFC to give their money away to people who no one knows. Plus, ufc fighters only provide like 40 min max of fight content a year - some only 10 minutes. They simply don’t produce the output to get paid well.
Bellator and PFL have different percentages as their scale of business is so much smaller that salaries naturally take up a higher share.
3) The ufc is the only reason these guys are known. The UFC markets them and promotes them. Francis Ngannou is only known because of the UFC and its brand for instance. I think that needs to be understood when people argue what “fighters deserve” - it’s the ufc who made them famous.
4. arguments of deserve are weird. I can think of 50 jobs where people are paid less than mma fighters and whom are more important to society.
I do feel like guys who are half stars but not fully stars yet - like Ortega, Yair, Gamrot etc are probably the category of fighters that might be underpaid. The ngannou’s and Conor’s get enough and so do the prelim nobodies.
Anyway I’m interested in genuinely hearing arguments for why people want to boost fighter pay. To me it just seems like underdog mentality and a bit of “fuck Dana” and fuck the man go the little guy arguments which aren’t logical.
I believe fighter pay is fair because:
1) Based on reviewing the numbers, the top 4-6 fighters on a card simply bring in all of the revenue and viewership. Rani Yahya or Sodiq Yusuff on the prelims just do not bring in enough money to justify paying more than 15/15 or 25/25.
2) Comparing percentages to other sports is a big argument. One that doesn’t make sense to me. Firstly, they are team sports. Secondly, they are far better athletes usually with more competition. Thirdly, NBA players a like are OVERPAID. They should be paid less, we shouldn’t require the UFC to give their money away to people who no one knows. Plus, ufc fighters only provide like 40 min max of fight content a year - some only 10 minutes. They simply don’t produce the output to get paid well.
Bellator and PFL have different percentages as their scale of business is so much smaller that salaries naturally take up a higher share.
3) The ufc is the only reason these guys are known. The UFC markets them and promotes them. Francis Ngannou is only known because of the UFC and its brand for instance. I think that needs to be understood when people argue what “fighters deserve” - it’s the ufc who made them famous.
4. arguments of deserve are weird. I can think of 50 jobs where people are paid less than mma fighters and whom are more important to society.
I do feel like guys who are half stars but not fully stars yet - like Ortega, Yair, Gamrot etc are probably the category of fighters that might be underpaid. The ngannou’s and Conor’s get enough and so do the prelim nobodies.
Anyway I’m interested in genuinely hearing arguments for why people want to boost fighter pay. To me it just seems like underdog mentality and a bit of “fuck Dana” and fuck the man go the little guy arguments which aren’t logical.
