Should all UFC fighters make $30000/year + their fight money?

It should of course be put in relation to how often they fight. All fighters that aren't injured should fight at least 3 times per year. If you fight 3 times per year, your minimum income would be something like 3 x $8,000 = $24,000. Increase the min show money to $10,000 and they are covered (excl. sponsorship money and locker room bonuses).

I agree that a professional MMA fighter in the biggest and most elite organization, should not earn less than $30K. However, if you are injured or if you decide not to fight that often, then I don't see why the fighter should have a base salary of $30K.

It's a bit tricky as you can't know how many fighters that only fight once or twice would like to fight three times or more often. Sometimes it feels like the UFC has too many fighters - if they cut 100 fighters or so, fighters could fight more frequently. If it's not an issue and most fighters do indeed fight 3+ times a year, then there is no issue.

If you fight frequently then you will earn at least $30K per year so I don't really see an issue here. If you get injured, well, get another job while you're rehabilitating your injury. Some fighters sound a bit lazy when they whine that they don't earn enough. Fight more and you'll earn more. Win more and you'll earn more. As in previous example, if you're healthy you should fight at least 3 times per year and then you will probably earn more than $30K per year. If you're injured then you can just get another job. I would however like to see an increase in the min show money that the UFC offers but I have no sympathy for the guys that fight less than 3 times per year if they complain about money.
 
Hinedog said:
^^^^^this. The roster would shrink from 600 to 300 or less. Pay per view prices would double. Tickets to events would double.

Would I like to see fighters make more money? Absolutely. I think the UFC brass is more concerned with their own lifestyle than the struggles of most UFC fighters at this point.

A base salary would never work. What if you get hurt? What if you don't fight for a year or longer? Does UFC making them clock in and out of a training facility? Too many variables.
Click to expand...

Do you always just pull random figures out of your ass when you debate, or is this a one time thing?
 
Personally, I would consider 30k the minimum to show for a UFC level MMA fight. Below that it is not even worth considering from a financial perspective with the Reebok deal in place if you have an alternative for a career.
 
Sounds reasonable. I always just considered a minimum of $36,000 per year for every fighter on the roster. But a base salary would work just as well.

Perhaps closer to $24,000 or $2,000 per month would work better. If the UFC doesn't want to pay it then all they need to do is cut the fighter from the roster and allow them to work elsewhere. This kind of thing would be in the contracts if there were a fighter union. It's ridiculous that the UFC can prevent fighters from fighting at say Bellator or WSOF even when the UFC refuses to give them a fight.

A possible issue with this as probably pointed out already is that it more makes the fighters employees as opposed to independent contractors. However it's BS in the first place that the fighters aren't considered employees. It's just a loophole in the US laws which persists because GOP philosophy and power prevents it from being changed.
 
Oblivian said:
You didn't address my points at all. What is the incentive to change from performance based to a salary base? It causes a lot of potential issues as I mentioned. Here is another issue. They sign fighters simply as fill ins when someone is injured. These fighters would likely never get another chance. Do these fighters get the $30k? I just don't see MMA wanting to stray from a performance based prizefighting model. The only org that I'm aware that has done this is IFL.
Click to expand...

The incentive is legitimacy. Making full time training a more viable financial option is a good thing to do, in the interests of improving the overall quality of the sport. More fighters would be competing long term, and able to train with the best (re: safest and most effective) techniques, equipment, trainers, and gyms. Improving the quality of the athletes and the fights they put on. That also puts more money in the hands of, and more athletes in the employ of, the coaches, managers, owners of other promotions, and everyone else in the sport.

Raising fighter pay is an investment that should be explored (at the very least, realistically it should just be done immediately) and if a salary is the most effective way of doing that (it might be) then it should be done.

And there's nothing stopping a guy from still being brought in on a one-night deal. "Hey pal, so and so pulled out, we'll cut you X to fight his opponent. If you win, we'll talk about a contract with salary options"
 
To be honest, I could give a shit what they are paid since they, most likely, do not care what I am making...it does not effect me one bit.
 
Its roster should be trimmed!! Your pulling in guys that have no business being in the big league just to fill out watered down cards. Guys that were working days going to the gym at night and fighting at local shows a few times a year. Your giving them a contract knowing full well they are never going to make it. Quit the job to train full time. They think its really happening for them. The make a pittance, wash out and are left with nothing but training bills they cant pay. Cant even pay the gym by promoting them like before this shoe deal. It needs fixed. The fighters have no voice. They need to unionize like the rest of the big sports.
 
why do people care so much what other grown men and women make in their chosen profession?

ffs.
 
daniel san said:
I agree that a professional MMA fighter in the biggest and most elite organization, should not earn less than $30K. However, if you are injured or if you decide not to fight that often, then I don't see why the fighter should have a base salary of $30K.
Click to expand...

I see a BIG reason why an injured fighter should still get paid:

Usually it's a JOB RELATED injury. For example training or from a previous fight. In most jobs the employer even has to pay the worker during this time. That the UFC doesn't goes back to the whole employee versus IC fiasco. That people think the UFC shouldn't have to pay anything when a fighter gets injured while training to do their job just shows how ridiculous things have become. It's almost to the point where we are watching slaves fight.
 
I think there should be a requirement of no more than a year and a half absence (injuries do happen, but excessive time off would hold this down like some have said)... and they could actually lower the regular payouts slightly in order to compensate if it was really that much of a thing (go back to 8/8 for a while or something)... but it's really not a bad idea.
 
Oblivian said:
You didn't address my points at all. What is the incentive to change from performance based to a salary base? It causes a lot of potential issues as I mentioned. Here is another issue. They sign fighters simply as fill ins when someone is injured. These fighters would likely never get another chance. Do these fighters get the $30k? I just don't see MMA wanting to stray from a performance based prizefighting model. The only org that I'm aware that has done this is IFL.
Click to expand...

Don't you think the Reebok deal sort of kills the argument of not paying these guys in a conventional way? I mean they are basically wearing uniforms now and don't have the ability to get sponsors like a conventional prize fighter. 30k a year sounds like a ton when you do the math but if you pay it out as an employee draw i don't think it would be that difficult. This would also allow the fighters to focus only on fighting (especially the lower ranked guys) and most likely help lower the injury rate because guys wouldn't necessarily have to take on a 2nd job
 
Forever Young said:
The incentive is legitimacy. Making full time training a more viable financial option is a good thing to do, in the interests of improving the overall quality of the sport. More fighters would be competing long term, and able to train with the best (re: safest and most effective) techniques, equipment, trainers, and gyms. Improving the quality of the athletes and the fights they put on. That also puts more money in the hands of, and more athletes in the employ of, the coaches, managers, owners of other promotions, and everyone else in the sport.

Raising fighter pay is an investment that should be explored (at the very least, realistically it should just be done immediately) and if a salary is the most effective way of doing that (it might be) then it should be done.

And there's nothing stopping a guy from still being brought in on a one-night deal. "Hey pal, so and so pulled out, we'll cut you X to fight his opponent. If you win, we'll talk about a contract with salary options"
Click to expand...

The conversation that I am trying to have is not about upping fighter pay, but would salary be the most effective way rather than just up the show + win bonus. In your last paragraph, you are talking about "salary options". Isn't the idea that ALL FIGHTERS UNDER CONTRACT would make the $30k annually? Once they sign and fight in the UFC, they would be obligated to the $30k. You see where I'm going with this.

It's a logistic nightmare that brings in a lot more maintenance for Zuffa. They would need to monitor far more closely at who is inactive and where they can trim the fat. Boxing and MMA have been based under a prizefighting concept for a reason. It's designed that you are actually paid for your performances. I don't see the incentive for the organization to switch that. If both sides agree more money needs to be paid, they can just up show money/bonus money and leave it up to the fighters to manage their own money.

This reminds me of people who spend a shitload on health insurance because they can't save money on their own to pay out of pocket when a bill comes. They'd rather throw money to an insurance carrier to manage it for them rather than manage their own money responsibly.
 
Seriously, the same people who is saying that paying $30,000 to each UFC fighter is impossible and would sink the business were the same people saying it's impossible for the UFC to pay for fighter's health insurance because they are contractors.

It's amazing (correction, it's not really) how simple minded many people are and how they can't imagine a situation that hasn't happened, well, until it happens, then their response flips 180 and it's like, of course it would.

Probably the same people who said women would never fight in the UFC, that Rousey would never sell a PPV, that nobody wants to watch sub 155 pounders, or non title fights would ever be 5 rounds. Until it happens.
 
Yes, 30-40k base/yr as long as you are part of the UFC roster. This allows them to be able to eat and train healthily and not be forced to work as a security guard at Target for 12 dollars/hr or mopping floors at warehouses. Some fighters only do 8k/8k so may make as little as 16k a year if the fight twice and lose. That means they probably gonna have to eat at soup kitchens and water down all their soups with Campbells chicken broth and eat their generic brand cereal with sink water. 30k isn't alot of money but it's a living wage so these "professional" athletes can concentrate on being that.
 
That's why fighters should have a career besides mma to have stable income. If a fighter needs to train full time to prove himself, then maybe he's nkt good enough. Weed out the untalented ones.
 
Davelh said:
Don't you think the Reebok deal sort of kills the argument of not paying these guys in a conventional way? I mean they are basically wearing uniforms now and don't have the ability to get sponsors like a conventional prize fighter. 30k a year sounds like a ton when you do the math but if you pay it out as an employee draw i don't think it would be that difficult. This would also allow the fighters to focus only on fighting (especially the lower ranked guys) and most likely help lower the injury rate because guys wouldn't necessarily have to take on a 2nd job
Click to expand...

Again, you are just giving an argument for higher pay and not really saying why salary would be attractive to Zuffa. Zuffa is now responsible for sending out payroll weekly or monthly? Expense. If the idea is that you want the minimum pay to be X, why not just raise the show money to be 1/3 of X? Basically, a fighter who gets in 3 fights a year will make the minimum. The money is still there and it's up to the fighter to manage it.
 
Oblivian said:
Boxing and MMA have been based under a prizefighting concept for a reason. It's designed that you are actually paid for your performances.
.
Click to expand...

Didn't read the rest of your post, but just want you to know that many boxers get paid yearly stipends as well. They can and do have that written into contracts.

Just saying, you don't know what you're talking about.
 
Oblivian said:
The conversation that I am trying to have is not about upping fighter pay, but would salary be the most effective way rather than just up the show + win bonus. In your last paragraph, you are talking about "salary options". Isn't the idea that ALL FIGHTERS UNDER CONTRACT would make the $30k annually? Once they sign and fight in the UFC, they would be obligated to the $30k. You see where I'm going with this.

It's a logistic nightmare that brings in a lot more maintenance for Zuffa. They would need to monitor far more closely at who is inactive and where they can trim the fat. Boxing and MMA have been based under a prizefighting concept for a reason. It's designed that you are actually paid for your performances. I don't see the incentive for the organization to switch that. If both sides agree more money needs to be paid, they can just up show money/bonus money and leave it up to the fighters to manage their own money.

This reminds me of people who spend a shitload on health insurance because they can't save money on their own to pay out of pocket when a bill comes. They'd rather throw money to an insurance carrier to manage it for them rather than manage their own money responsibly.
Click to expand...

Well then see, we have a problem. I don't want to have that conversation beyond "Yeah I think that a form of regular salary would/could be a good and effective way of increasing the fighter pay." I don't really know if it is, and if so how and why.

The conversation I want to have thereafter is "Man, fuckin fighter pay kneads to go up."
 
imo there should be a very small base salary like $10,000 or $15,000 to cover training/ cornering while still upholding show/win money. they could set up in tiers where maybe at the lowest rungs you get $5000 annual salary plus show/win/reebok and bump it 5g's every couple fights til it maxes out. maybe a 10/15 fight vet or top 5 guy could get $30,000 or even $50,000 base salary/ yr. would a top 5 guy or 15 fight vet really need it? no but i bet they wouldn't refuse either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,062
Messages
55,464,425
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top