Provide an argument for increasing fighter pay

SL1200 said:
Oh stop it they don't do it "to entertain us". That's one of the dumbest things people say here.
Click to expand...
That may not be what motivates the fighters but that's the purpose of it. MMA is sports entertainment.
 
Southpoor97 said:
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.
Click to expand...
1. The headliners might generate most of the interest, but they can't put on a card with just headliners. Also, where do next year's headliners come from. You gotta have card fillers, too.
2. "NBA players are overpaid." Source? By what objective metric are they overpaid? Because you think they make too much? The revenue is there, who should get it? The players, who generate that revenue, or the owners, who sit in luxury boxes and watch? The fact that the UFC is an individual sport is completely irrelevant. The percentage argument concerns the pay of the entire roster, not individual fighters. We SHOULD expect the UFC to "give away their money" to the fighters who actually generate that revenue. Aside from the concept of fairness, that's how you improve the product. Remember Cole Konrad? Undefeated heavyweight who left MMA because he could make more as an engineer. For every Cole Konrad, there are likely hundreds of prospects who do the math and opt to never start an MMA career.
3. The fighters are the only reason the UFC exists. Full stop.
4. If you generate revenue for your employer, you deserve a substantial portion of that revenue in compensation. Just because the corporate model is to underpay employees whenever possible doesn't mean that discussions of what employees deserve aren't relevant and even needed.
 
Kb7 said:
Champions are already making over a million in fact they're making "millions". People are still believing UFC fighters aren't making money, these fighters are making significantly more money than what is perceived. Adesanya is supposedly making upwards to 7mil and Khabib was making towards 10. They just offered Ngannou 8. But still believe fighters make shit.

Half the time, fighters complaining about fighter pay are not good to begin with but they want to get paid close to millions for being mediocre. You had fighters like Kajan Johnson criticizing Kobe Bryant because he believes Kobe Bryant can't relate to a fighters life, but Kajan failed to understand that Kobe had to prove and be great at his job to get the endorsements & pay to get where he's at. While Kajan is not great or good at his job in the fucking first place. Most fighters get paid accordingly to what they offer.

I never understood why people are so concerned & obsessed with what UFC fighters earn, yet they're the same ones who illegally stream fights, doesn't purchase or support any sponsors from fighters and belittle and shit on them everychance they get.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the response and time it took to write..


However Khabib and Izzy are hardly the examples to use.. how about Moreno? Or DJ ...Amanda Nunes? ...Volk? ...what about stipe? ...jamahal hill? glover?..Jiri?

My comment wasnt that champions dont make millions...my comment was ALL champions should be making 1mill a fight Minimum...

Its a better look for the sport and it encourages others to want to be champions thus athlete cross over is higher ...

Also some of us who care about fighter pay are martial artist ourselves or know people who are ...and understand first hand what it takes to make it there or what goes into fight prep...and for those who dont buy streams or merch...the current Revenue spilt is like 18% if that ...so what exactly are they giving to the fighters exactly? ...how much of that 18% is trickling down to guys on the undercard vs paying Izzy's check?...
 
Last edited:
Sticko said:
That's why I said it's a monopsony, not a monopoly. I think the UFC has like 85% of market share or something crazy. Like if you play American football, you might have opportunities in Canadian football, arena league, XFL or USFL but basically the NFL is your best option by far.

Top fighters can go elsewhere but for most fighters the UFC is the best option by far.
Click to expand...

A monopsony would mean that the UFC is the only buyer of a service/product. They are not that either.

monopsony.png

Being the best option is totally fine. It's preferable to be better than one's competition.
 
NikLuk said:
A monopsony would mean that the UFC is the only buyer of a service/product. They are not that either.

View attachment 980677

Being the best option is totally fine. It's preferable to be better than one's competition.
Click to expand...
Look I'm not saying the UFC is literally the only buyer on the MMA fighter labor market, I'm saying they are so much bigger than their competitors that they control the market. The legal definition is not the same as the dictionary definition.

Here is an article from John S. Nash, who probably knows more about the economics of the UFC than any other MMA journalist, calling it a monopsony.

https://bloodyelbow.com/2021/07/01/video-yes-the-ufc-is-a-monopsony/
 
Sticko said:
Look I'm not saying the UFC is literally the only buyer on the MMA fighter labor market, I'm saying they are so much bigger than their competitors that they control the market. The legal definition is not the same as the dictionary definition.

Here is an article from John S. Nash, who probably knows more about the economics of the UFC than any other MMA journalist, calling it a monopsony.

https://bloodyelbow.com/2021/07/01/video-yes-the-ufc-is-a-monopsony/
Click to expand...

Did you have any criticism of the first post of mine that you replied to?
 
Southpoor97 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I hear inflation went up this year. It's a factor when considering salary increase.
 
Shill OP left the thread when he got clobbered with logic and facts. you love to see it.
hey here's an idea - you dont have to pay the fighters more, but you DO have to allow them to have their own sponsors on their shorts and/or on a banner that they can display before the fight. UFC doesnt lose money because they still have their own sponsors that fighters have to wear, but fighters can pursue their own sponsors in addition to those. win/win. guarantee UFC wouldnt go for that because theyd be losing out on sponsor money, lmao
 
Without prelims fighters there aren't any big stars. Who do stars beat to become stars. How often is a main event lame and some undercard fight entertained everyone with a crazy finish
 
Better pay=more attractive=larger talent pool=better fighters
Also less fighters who need to work part time, so aren't fully pro.

The UFC is already missing out on huge talents like AJ McKee, Salahdine Parnasse, Mansour Barnaoui because they get paid more in other orgs .

Why would a super talented prospect go fight for 12+12k in the UFC when several other orgs have 1M$ tournaments?
 
Southpoor97 said:
But how does that create more money for them to be paid?

Do you understand? The only thing that generates more money is fighters being more popular and selling more tickets and garnering more brand engagement.


Them getting brain damage doesn’t create revenue lol so why would they get paid more due to it
Click to expand...

because UFC is dying and if they dont up pay like they do minimum wage UFC will continue to die at increased rate
 
Sasha said:
That's an interesting point. It's not wrong that, because they do so many events , they can't rely on a small roster, when some fighters fight once a year, sometimes less.
I also think MMA would be more interesting (and less dangerous for the fighters) without extreme weight cutting, but I think the UFC won't do anything about it.

I honestly don't know much about how efficient ONE's weight cutting prevention rules are ; from afar it does look like a decent idea. I'm maybe cynical but I'm under the impression that whatever rules are enforced, everyone is going to try, and eventually find a way to cheat the system.
Those tests would also have to be run by the UFC, I imagine that speculations about shady favoritism would go through the roof...

But I still agree with you, I just doubt anything will actually happen (unless, like it happened for ONE, someone in the UFC actually dies from cutting weight)
Click to expand...
I agree they won't do anything about it. I just don't get why? UFC/MMA viewership would be higher if fighters fought 4 times a year. Simple example of a system that I think is easy enough to enforce:

Weight classes are a 10 lb range.
I know Mighty Mouse weighed 142 lbs in the cage & Cejudo was 141 lbs for their fight
Source https://www.mmafighting.com/2018/8/...ut-six-fighters-come-in-over-csac-regulations

Fly W 136-145 fighters must weigh in 6 times. 3 scheduled and 3 random. 6 weeks out from the fight, 3 weeks out and on the way to the cage. Weigh outside the range gets a 10% fine each time. 3 random checks as well means up to 60% of your pay lost. Fighters will choose a weight class they fit when in fight shape. Can't dehydrate to make weight for scheduled checks unless they are willing to fight for 70% of their pay.

BW = 146-155
FW = 156-165
LW = 166-175
SLW = 176-185 Super LW
WW = 186-195
SWW = 196-205 Super WW
MW = 206-215
SMW 216-225 Super MW
LHW 226-240
HW 241 +

Names of classes don't matter and the variance in the upper levels can be debated but the general idea is choose a range you can keep within as a professional athlete when in shape.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,265,357
Messages
57,334,783
Members
175,648
Latest member
JollyCola

Share this page

Back
Top