Reebok deal improvment......main & co main event fighters get more $$

None of this means that the Reebok deal is not a dog shit deal. The Reebok deal is utter dog shit for the fighters. Just terrible. And it's real easy math.

Is what fighters were making from their own sponsors during the fight week/fight before the Reebok deal more or less than what they are getting from Reebok now? And by how much. It is a yes or no question, followed up with a dollar figure that has a + or - beside it. It's pretty clear that most fighters have a - next to their number.

The UFC should have never done a deal that would make their fighters worse off financially than they already were. Especially one that 'allegedly' they are not making a dime from.

A hilariously bad deal for everyone. Reebok pays 70 million over 6 or 7 years to get flayed alive in the press for colluding to assfuck fighters. The UFC gets dogshit press in exchange for almost no money. And the fighters get fucked in the ass sans lube.

In 20 years, this deal will be a case study in business fuckuppery at universities across the nation.


I would think that 95% of MMA fans don't give a shit about the Rebok deal or know anything about it. You act like everyone who watches the UFC is a hardcore nerd who goes on Sherdog.
 
I would think that 95% of MMA fans don't give a shit about the Rebok deal or know anything about it. You act like everyone who watches the UFC is a hardcore nerd who goes on Sherdog.

Overreaction is the word best used to describe the Sherdog community's general reaction to the deal. Most people here don't understand it, they don't get the long term strategy of corporate sponsorship and the inherent benefit both directly and indirectly to the fighters, and they don't understand how the numbers were worked on (views). There is massive rumor and innuendo and trolling going on the forums, people having a laugh and working fans up about a deal that is actually good for the ufc. You don't have to like the look of the kits, but you should realize that this is a HUGE step in the right direction for the legitimization and growth of the UFC. It's sad to come on day and after and see the misinformed and the trolls cry about the Reebok deal. It's almost like they want the UFC to fail and by proxy MMA to fail. Buy a shirt, don't buy a shirt, buy a ppv or be a shitbag thief and stream it, but don't cry about fighter pay and the deal if you aren't willing to support the UFC and and at least be patient enough to see the long term vision of the company.
 
they won't ever do that, because if they do, it will prove to everyone that the deal was bad to begin with. neither reebok, nor the ufc, want to prove everyone right. though if there continues to be bad press, they might be forced to admit guilt.

Yes, because that is how billion dollar companies are run. OR NOT! Shower, gym, clue.
 
I would think that 95% of MMA fans don't give a shit about the Rebok deal or know anything about it. You act like everyone who watches the UFC is a hardcore nerd who goes on Sherdog.

You would think wrong. More than enough of the people who watch care.

MMA is still far from a main stream sport. People talk about 'casual fans' a lot, but in MMA, there is still a reasonably decent ratio of die hard MMA fans who are educated about the sport and would care about this, compared to uneducated casual fans who might not care. I would not go so far as to say 50/50, but certainly a big chunk.

To put it in perspective, 114 million people watched the Superbowl. Over 1 billion tuned in to watch the India Pakistan cricket match. A fucking Cricket match!!

A UFC PPV event that does really well gets a million buys. 1 million PPV buys is propably enough to still get you inside the 10 biggest UFC PPV's of all time. 1 million is not a big number. PLENTY of those fans are educated die hard fans.

And that is saying nothing about the dozens and dozens of other events. Do you honeslty think the 146,000 people buying the Mighty mouse PPV are casual fans? Please :rolleyes: Most casual fans do not even know who Mighty Mouse is.

Regardless, I am one of the hardcore fans that does care. An presumably people on an MMA forum would be peers that cared.
 
I would think that 95% of MMA fans don't give a shit about the Rebok deal or know anything about it. You act like everyone who watches the UFC is a hardcore nerd who goes on Sherdog.

Of course
Ask a casual fan what they think about the reebok deal & they don't care
ask a casual fan who "Stitch' is & they won't know.

That doesn't make the deal a good one, but anybody thinking this is a sign of a downfall is crazy

The first two PPV's in the 'Reebok Era' was their biggest in a bit & the last FN over-performed as well.

There is very little backlash in reality ... it is just magnified on here due to two reasons:
1. Hardcores post here
2. SD is a notoriously anti-Zuffa board
 
Overreaction is the word best used to describe the Sherdog community's general reaction to the deal. Most people here don't understand it, they don't get the long term strategy of corporate sponsorship and the inherent benefit both directly and indirectly to the fighters, and they don't understand how the numbers were worked on (views). There is massive rumor and innuendo and trolling going on the forums, people having a laugh and working fans up about a deal that is actually good for the ufc. You don't have to like the look of the kits, but you should realize that this is a HUGE step in the right direction for the legitimization and growth of the UFC. It's sad to come on day and after and see the misinformed and the trolls cry about the Reebok deal. It's almost like they want the UFC to fail and by proxy MMA to fail. Buy a shirt, don't buy a shirt, buy a ppv or be a shitbag thief and stream it, but don't cry about fighter pay and the deal if you aren't willing to support the UFC and and at least be patient enough to see the long term vision of the company.

You are correct that most don't get the 'long term strategy of corporate sponsorship' the UFC is employing. And there is a very good reason for that. There is absolutely no reason to think it's a good strategy. There is no roadmap or timeline to when the fighters will eventually be better off financially, or even when the UFC and Reebok will be pulling their dicks out of their ass. We KNOW that won't be in the next 6 years though. But there is plenty of data to back up the fact that fighters are worse off now, and that neither the UFC or Reebok is better off.

People love to talk about the NBA model or the NFL model when discussing the merits of this deal. But using those sports as a comparison shows a great deal of ignorance and naivety. UFC fighters are not even employees for fuck sakes. They don't get huge salaries. Or even small salaries. They are not guaranteed nearly 1 out of every 2 dollars the UFC makes-on everything-right down to the fucking Coke sales. They don't get pensions. They don't even get paid when they are injured in training for crying out loud. When your average NBA player is injured in practice and is on the shelf for 6 months, they will still making a couple million dollars that year.

If you want to use another sport to compare to MMA in analyzing this, at least have the sense to use a sport where the athletes are also independent contractors, like boxing, tennis or golf. MUCH MORE applicable. In all those sports, the IC athletes can compete in whatever brand they choose. And wearing a specific brand while competing enables many of them to get sponsorships and endorsements that can be as lucrative, or even more lucrative, than their pay as an athlete. MMA had been heading in this direction, but once again (the first time was the sponsorship tax) the UFC is doing their dead level best to fuck that up.
 
Last edited:
Of course
Ask a casual fan what they think about the reebok deal & they don't care
ask a casual fan who "Stitch' is & they won't know.

That doesn't make the deal a good one, but anybody thinking this is a sign of a downfall is crazy

The first two PPV's in the 'Reebok Era' was their biggest in a bit & the last FN over-performed as well.

There is very little backlash in reality ... it is just magnified on here due to two reasons:
1. Hardcores post here
2. SD is a notoriously anti-Zuffa board

This is all more or less true. Despite the fact that is a hilariously shitty arrangement that is fucking the fighters, this will not be bankrupting the UFC. They will lose some fighters over it, but probably not their biggest earners. Maybe this will push the fighter closer to organizing, maybe it won't. But Lordy, this is one shitty business deal.
 
Easy. Because most fighters are making much less than before the Reebok deal.

You have a list of every UFC fighter on contract and how much they are making annually in sponsorship money pre and post Reebok deal? Hot damn, post that up. Can't wait to see it.
 
Why do so many posters think it was a fighters' right to use UFC screen time to collect outside advertising endorsements. Are these angry ex-mcdonalds employees who don't understand why they were fired for wearing burger king hats in exchange for $2 vouchers?
 
Look, Tim Kennedy, not exactly the most known name in MMA said he was making over 100k per fight in sponsorship money in StrikeForce.

Compare that to what the UFC fighters are getting today and recognize that the Reebok deal is a HUGE pay cut for most of them.

Bellator is going to get a slew of disgruntled UFC fighters as their contracts play out.
 
Why do so many posters think it was a fighters' right to use UFC screen time to collect outside advertising endorsements. Are these angry ex-mcdonalds employees who don't understand why they were fired for wearing burger king hats in exchange for $2 vouchers?

Because until quite recently, it was their right. And UFC fighters are not employees, they are independent contractors that do not get paid to train, and do not get paid when they get injured before a fight.

Find me one other sport on the globe where the athletes are not employees but independent contractors, but do not get to choose the brand of apparel they wear when they perform. It's a huge deal for them.

76_muz_1539494a.jpg


This is Andy Murray. He is the #3 ranked male tennis player in the world.

You will notice he is wearing an Adidas shirt. He represented the Adidas brand both on and off the tennis court. Adidas paid him $15 million over 5 years to do that. During the 5 years of that deal, he made 24 million on the tennis courts in winnings. Adidas increased his total earnings by 62%. By themselves.

But Wait!!!!!! Now you will notice Andy wearing Under Armour

245C850B00000578-2897061-image-a-68_1420460608826.jpg


Why is he wearing Under Armour now? Because Under Armour agreed to pay him $15 million over 4 years, as opposed to $15 million over 5 years. So when his Adidas contract was up, he switched.

If the UFC wanted to keep their fighters as IC's, but have a cleaner, more streamlined and consistent in cage image, they could have done that without removing a MAJOR source of fighter revenue.

Other Sports where athletes are IC's:

jimmie-johnson.jpg


320x486.jpg


Noticing any trends?????????? I will now wait patienly for someone to bring up pro wrestling, so I can shred them.
 
Last edited:
Ronda Rousey just sold around 33,500 DNB T-shirts over the last 3 days for $25 a pop: https://represent.com/ronda

33,500 x $25 = $837,500

She never wore it during fight week and it has absolutely nothing to do with Reebok. The UFC doesn't stop fighters from doing appearances, selling T-shirts or representing non-UFC approved sponsors for most of the year. If you're a fighter who can't get sponsor opportunities outside of those 3 days per year the UFC has all their cameras trained on you, guess what, it's YOUR problem, it means you have little to no value outside of the UFC platform, and it's a problem you need to figure out for yourself.

The Reebok deal is a fixed amount, they're not going to magically increase main and co-main event sponsor $$ for no reason.

Ronda can sell just about anything now. She has also had the luxury of the UFC marketing machine plastering her name and face everywhere they can.

I don't see Glover ever getting that much of a push. The one main marketing avenue that the nameless fighters could leverage has been stripped away in place of the Reebok deal. Under the old system, all fighters had an opportunity to make money off of sponsorship, regardless of their personality, looks, marketability, and even skills to some extent.

Sure they can represent the sponsors outside of fight week and such, but honestly how the hell would Glover pull that off? He might make a few bucks selling shirts out of the trunk of his car, but they wouldn't be his shirts.....no one outside of the MMA fan base knows who the hell he is.
 
Ronda Rousey just sold around 33,500 DNB T-shirts over the last 3 days for $25 a pop: https://represent.com/ronda

33,500 x $25 = $837,500

She never wore it during fight week and it has absolutely nothing to do with Reebok. The UFC doesn't stop fighters from doing appearances, selling T-shirts or representing non-UFC approved sponsors for most of the year. If you're a fighter who can't get sponsor opportunities outside of those 3 days per year the UFC has all their cameras trained on you, guess what, it's YOUR problem, it means you have little to no value outside of the UFC platform, and it's a problem you need to figure out for yourself.

The Reebok deal is a fixed amount, they're not going to magically increase main and co-main event sponsor $$ for no reason.

Fuck off shill. You think UFC has all cameras on every fighter? They don't. Ronda has the market on women. You think Alexis Davis would sell the same? Ronda is at the spotlight.
 
Because until quite recently, it was their right. And UFC fighters are not employees, they are independent contractors that do not get paid to train, and do not get paid when they get injured before a fight.

Find me one other sport on the globe where the athletes are not employees but independent contractors, but do not get to chose the brand of apparel they wear when they perform. It's a huge deal for them.

76_muz_1539494a.jpg


This is Andy Murray. He is the #3 ranked male tennis player in the world.

You will notice he is wearing an Adidas shirt. He represented the Adidas brand both on and off the tennis court. Adidas paid him $15 million over 5 years to do that. During the 5 years of that deal, he made 24 million on the tennis courts in winnings. Adidas increased his total earnings by 62%. By themselves.

But Wait!!!!!! Now you will notice Andy wearing Under Armour

245C850B00000578-2897061-image-a-68_1420460608826.jpg


Why is he wearing Under Armour now? Because Under Armour agreed to pay him $15 million over 4 years, as opposed to $15 million over 5 years. So when his Adidas contract was up, he switched.

If the UFC wanted to keep their fighters as IC's, but have a cleaner, more streamlined and consistent in cage image, they could have done that without removing a MAJOR source of fighter revenue.

Other Sports where athletes are IC's:

jimmie-johnson.jpg


320x486.jpg


Noticing any trends??????????

Not to mention that, legally speaking, making people wear your uniform is a sign that you are treating them as employees, not independent contractors. Something FedEx found out the hard way.

So, even if people want to argue that the fighters are supposed to wear uniforms then they need to treat the fighters as employees. And that means the fighters are getting screwed on benefits. No matter how you slice it, this deal screws the fighters over. Either they're screwed out of sponsorship dollars or they're screwed out of federally mandated employee benefits.
 
why is $40k of money to the fighters a joke?

Unless champs fight 3-5 times they they can be semi-ballin'. But extensive training, diet, gym costs, trainers, nutritionists, coaches eats a huge piece of your pie...injuries,and not to forget the taxes & of course, health insurance (often overlooked) but I'm guessing it's high as well because of job related risks...it is laughable...
 
You have a list of every UFC fighter on contract and how much they are making annually in sponsorship money pre and post Reebok deal? Hot damn, post that up. Can't wait to see it.

I don't need that list...and I don't need to see another fighter gets cut because of bitching about it either...deal is bad but UFC ball-gagged everybody before this deal came down...
 
Back
Top