Report: Bellator 120 PPV buys estimated at 65,000 for 'Rampage vs. King Mo'

Bellator MMA finally made its pay-per-view (PPV) debut with "Rampage vs. King Mo," which took place back on May 17, 2014, inside Landers Center in Southaven, Mississippi (results). It was a card the promotion asked you to pay anywhere from $35-$50 for, depending on your location and PPV provider.

So, how many fight fans opened their wallets?

According to Dave Meltzer (via Fight Opinion), Bellator pulled in roughly 65,000 PPV buys, which is above the 50,000 number thought to be the "break even" mark. Keep in mind this is also a card that lost the Eddie Alvarez vs. Michael Chandler trilogy when Alvarez got hurt and was forced to withdraw.

That left the light heavyweight contest between Quinton Jackson and Muhammed Lawal -- as well as the freak show fight pitting Tito Ortiz against Alexander Villechaize Shlemenko -- to carry the card, which had a strong lead-in from its Spike TV "Prelims," featuring Cheick Kongo and Marcin Held, among others.


http://www.f4wonline.com/component/...t-new-japan-next-ippv-your-questions-and-more

 

I bet Rampage vs Tito will be the main event if they do another PPV. Alvarez- Brooks as Co main.

 

That's about 2.6m in total PPV revenue (average $40 buy rate), an assumed 1.3m going to Bellator (likely higher as Viacom probably has good pull on PPV stuff)...

I assume the Bellator Prelims are able to be covered by the show money Spike TV gives them...

Rampage is estimated to have earned 500k from various in the community, and I would have to assume Tito earned around the same... This is pure speculation though, as we don't know the PPV buy cut-off or anyting...

So generally speaking, Bellator likely had an additional $300k+ in PPV revenue, as well as the site fee and sponsorships, to pay out the remaining PPV fighters...

I have a feeling they didn't lose any money

Next PPV:
Rampage vs Newton
Alvarez vs Brooks
Dantas vs Warren
Minakov vs Volkov or Curran vs PitBull
Tito vs King Mo

^This would do more buys and have roughly the same payout. If Alvarez were also making $500k it would need ~20k more to pay for him being back on the card, which I think it could get, and I don't think Alvarez is making $500k anyways.

 

not very good to me. after what they probably paid tito, plus wasnt it only $35? they couldnt have made hardly any money, i also heard the gate struggled?

 

If 50 was really the break even mark they did good. I heard 75 before though.

 

65K lol, I wonder if Tito and Rampage still think they are worth as much money as they whine for over and over.

 

Meltzer is saying that number isnt correct, that was the early estimate, said wouldnt trust any number this early.

Also nobody knows the break even number, some say 50, some say 75, some say 60k.

 

Most people who bought this card only knew the ex UFC fighters

 

Obviously this is all theoretical but I have no reason to believe Viacom got a sweet heart deal with PPV providers if a bigger product in the UFC couldn't get one under the Spike banner.


Also there's no way Spike pays them enough to cover the production costs of PPV which vary anywhere from 1 mil to 1.2 mil depending on which org you go by (Affliction was 1 mil, UFC is known to be 1.2 mil). Mike Chandler and King Mo both make $100,000 (if their reported payouts for Bellator 106) as well and Cheick Kongo makes 50K.


So depending on if you're an optimistic or a pessimist, they either BARELY turned a profit if you're overly generous on sponsorships or they lost money.

 

They have to do another one regardless of the buys because of Eddie.

 

Not going to really get into it, way too early for real numbers. That break even number gets lower every time I see it though.

 

Dat salami sandwich PPV buy money.

 

I find it funny that Dave is backpedalling a little bit on that 65K number when I heard him say clear as day on his podcast, "about 65K" and then go on to discuss the pros and cons of that number, without using the disclaimer that it was early.

Probably a by-product of doing a podcast at midnight after having your mind numbed by watching 3 hours of Monday Night RAW, tbh.

That said, the 70K number was out before and after the show as a number that they would be okay with so 65K is not that bad. Obviously it could've been better, and I thought it would be, but it's a good base to start from. If they do another show with a similar cast of characters but having Alvarez instead of Shlemenko in one of the key fights, they should be okay. In a perfect world:
Chandler headlines the prelims in a showcase fight
PPV:
Michael Page against it doesn't really matter
Kongo vs Ivanov
Tito vs M'Pumbo
Alvarez vs Brooks
Newton vs Rampage

Could have Mo on the prelims as well and make his fight and the Tito fight a BS tourney where the winners face each other for a shot at Newton-Rampage winner.

 

UFC =/= Owned by Viacom. They were just on Spike TV. No broadcaster had any reason to give them a better rate. PPV companies have no interest in UFC outside of making money off of their events, so no rate discounts.

Bellator = Partially owned by Viacom, a division of CBS, who also owns Showtime. CBS is a huge broadcasting company with lots of control that runs regular PPVs with Boxing and more, and because of Viacoms interest they would have a reason to give Bellator better rates than someone like the UFC gets.

But that isn't the likeliest. They likely paid a normal rate, and my guestimation reflects normal rate numbers.

----------

Now... what do you mean "PPV Production costs"?

I think its safe to assume that Spike TV gave enough for the prelim fighters (including Kongo), as I said. I would also say its safe to assume that most all Bellator's production staff is salaried, and the fact that they set up 20+ events a year with the same equipment would mean they don't have a ton of unique 'production' costs from event to event. Also, when an Arena pays a 'site fee' for an event, most of the time they also have to provide the staffing for concessions, some venue setup, some security, etc, all as part of the 'fee' bid, so its unlikely Bellator had much in the way of production costs there..

What are you referring to when you say 'the production costs'? How did you get those Affliction and UFC 1m and 1.2m numbers?

 

Is this guy serious? Yeah they are giving Bellator better rates than the UFC? Get real.

 

Viacom/CBS have a LOT more pull with cable companies and PPV broadcasters than the UFC does.

No? Good point...

 

i just hope they made a profit

 

Viacom split with CBS/Showtime almost 10 years ago. You'd think an industry insider such as yourself would at least be aware of that fact.

Even though as we established they're not, I'm not sure why being part of CBS would have provided Bellator with a better rate anyway. What does CBS do for PPV stations? UFC does a lot because they have regular ppv's that do well, generating so much revenue for those stations, that eventually they should have gotten a cushier rate than the average player.

 

65 would be ok financially for them I'm guessing. good for them. it must be fuckin difficult to market a non-ufc, non-yamma PPV.

 

FYI, Viacom/CBS split was a business move to separate assets, not separate the companies... MOST of who ran Viacom/CBS before the split, still run Viacom AND CBS today... Same people, just separated assets and liabilities and contracts and other business stuff... Almost every business in the US (and hell, even the world) operates under multiple businesses where they can separate things like this, its part of 'playing the system' that are business laws... Go do some homework.

----------

The previous board of directors of Viacom (before Split) were:
Shari Redstone (non-executive Vice-Chair), Sumner Redstone (Chairman), George S. Abrams, David Andelman, Joseph Califano, William Cohen, Philippe Dauman, Alan C. Greenberg, Charles Phillips, Frederic Salerno, William Schwartz, and Robert D. Walter.

Following the Viacom/CBS split, the Viacom board consisted of:
Shari Redstone (non-executive Vice-Chair), Sumner Redstone (Chairman), George S. Abrams, Philippe Dauman, Thomas E. Dooley, Ellen V. Futter, Robert Kraft, Alan Greenberg, Charles Phillips, Frederic Salerno, and William Schwartz.

As of 2010, the Viacom Board consists of:
Shari Redstone (non-executive Vice-Chair), Sumner Redstone (Chairman), George Abrams, Philippe Dauman, Thomas E. Dooley, Alan Greenberg, Robert Kraft, Blythe McGarvie, Charles Phillips, Frederic Salerno, and William Schwartz.

The board of directors of CBS Corp. include:
Shari Redstone (non-executive Vice-Chair), Sumner Redstone (Chairman), David R. Andelman, Joseph A. Califano, William S. Cohen, Gary L. Countryman, Charles K. Gifford, Leonard Goldberg, Bruce S. Gordon ,Linda M. Griego, Arnold Kopelson, Leslie Moonves, Doug Morris, Frederic V. Salerno

(Bold went Viacom, Underline went CBS, both stayed in both)

-----------

AND the same organization, National Amusements, Inc, has voting control of both.

But sure, act like they no longer share interests, mr insider...

Also, you do know CBS/Showtime have been around a LOT longer than the UFC, running boxing PPVs and more, don't you?... They have worked with the Cable companies and the PPV broadcasting companies a LOT longer than the UFC has, those companies have made a LOT more off of their relationship with CBS/Viacom, and CBS/Viacom have a lot more pull in the industry as a whole.

But yeah, compare the UFCs broadcasting pull power to that of Viacom/CBS. lol.