Should we be looking at the fairness of fighter compensation from a different angle?

[StupidityKills]

I just think the post fight performance bonuses should be FAT STACKS.

Fat enough to inspire fighters to go for broke.
KO of the Night, Sub of the Night, Performance of the Night... each one should pay out like 200 grand.
Then the up and comer making 8k/8k and on his way to a boring decision loss has incentive to go all out and possibly make a massive pay day, and if not, the fans will love it and therefore that fighters stock will rise.

Way too much playing it safe on the past cards, even when guys were obviously cruising to a loss from the judges.

Except the decision is still up to Dana White, which means he just plays favourites and gives Rousey all the bonuses.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

If they pay too much, the UFC will go broke and the fighters will be scattered amongst competing organizations and the best will no longer fight the best.

If they pay too little, the talent pool will shrink. Fighters will suffer through training camps, working day jobs. Many will retire, or never even pursue the sport because the risk and the struggle outweighs the reward. Fans will also be turned off by the sport, perhaps that's where the perception of fairness comes into play.

Sure, and in order to determine what's too much or too little requires an examination of all expenditures. It's possible most of the money is getting sucked out the top to support the lavish lifestyles of executives. It's possible they are bogged down in legal/tax fees and insurances. I'd love to see their financials.

I just think the post fight performance bonuses should be FAT STACKS.

Fat enough to inspire fighters to go for broke.
KO of the Night, Sub of the Night, Performance of the Night... each one should pay out like 200 grand.
Then the up and comer making 8k/8k and on his way to a boring decision loss has incentive to go all out and possibly make a massive pay day, and if not, the fans will love it and therefore that fighters stock will rise.

Way too much playing it safe on the past cards, even when guys were obviously cruising to a loss from the judges.

Not sure exactly what the right number is and I agree that bumping it up to something more eye-catching could be beneficial to the quality of the fights.

 

[jenst]

Why do the fighters get on in on this revenue sharing but not the sound and video guys, logistics staff, finance staff, and all the other gears that are just as essential to this machine?

- people pay to see the fighters
- short career span
- months of training before a fight, so they're not being paid for a day's work
- risking health on short and on longterm

 

[Inverse]

Probably around 10% is paid to fighters.

 

[Inverse]

Why do the fighters get on in on this revenue sharing but not the sound and video guys, logistics staff, finance staff, and all the other gears that are just as essential to this machine?

Can't tell if this is serious but oh god.

 

[Jackonflame]

Thats an extra 30 million dollars a year, pretty substantial for a company the size of the UFC.

I believe the latest UFC worth was upwards of a Billion.

30 million a year is barely a drop in the bucket.

 

[Ah Man]

- people pay to see the fighters

Which they can't very well do without that support staff.

- short career span
- risking health on short and on longterm

I would treat these two as one point, since the first isn't really true unless the second becomes a problem (many fighters will continue to leverage their skills as coaches, and the others still have plenty of career transition options). Their pay should certainly reflect these risks.

- months of training before a fight, so they're not being paid for a day's work

Well, I'm certainly not suggesting that it's not righteous to complain about fighters making 10/10 unless you're also going to complain the sound guy doesn't get 20 grand for that one night's work. I would imagine it varies from role to role which support staff are full time UFC employees versus ad hoc contractors (of various types - though fighters are also contractors who often have other sources of income), but if we're looking at income over the course of the year, work put in over the course of the year, overall contribution to the end product I think it's pretty unlikely the fighters are the most under-compensated guys in the business.

And that's not even necessarily to say I think fighters are fairly compensated. I just don't seem the value of breaking them out and treating them differently if we want to critically examine whether the distribution of the revenue within the organization is commensurate to contribution, which I'm sure it's not, since that's not really the model used in the US economy, whether or not it should be.

 

[K1HerosNakamura]

Not a new angle at all.

 

[VulcanNervPinch]

Major American pro sports share revenues somewhere around 50/50 between players and owners. To determine whether the UFC fairly compensates their fighters, we need to know the revenue split between fighters and the UFC. What is that split?

Google that shit. Is it even a shared figure? I'm guessing like 20% at best, but hey what do I know.

If you search and compute a little, you can figure it. You'll probably get an average of around 90/10, 80/20 at best. Certainly not even remotely close to 50/50.

 

[fzoid4454]

Which they can't very well do without that support staff.

Except that the fighters are the actual product, which means it matters who fights, whereas changing who does the support staff work would have zero impact on whether consumers purchase the product.

 

[stin4tw]

I just think the post fight performance bonuses should be FAT STACKS.

Fat enough to inspire fighters to go for broke.
KO of the Night, Sub of the Night, Performance of the Night... each one should pay out like 200 grand.
Then the up and comer making 8k/8k and on his way to a boring decision loss has incentive to go all out and possibly make a massive pay day, and if not, the fans will love it and therefore that fighters stock will rise.

Way too much playing it safe on the past cards, even when guys were obviously cruising to a loss from the judges.

I don't know about you, but 15 mins of work for a 50k bonus isn't a bad deal.

 

[SeattleFightFan]

most sports are team sports, and pay is dictated by a Players Union.

but not boxing.

but boxing was turned on it's head 14 years ago by the Ali Act.

the UFC currently uses something colloquially called "Tournament Theory Economics". basically, your odds are low, but if you hit, you win big. this is why there are about a thousand (since TUF1) fighters in the UFC who made a few grand...and several (Dana says 20ish) who were made millionaires. .02%, how about that?

don't get me wrong; fighter pay will continue to go up; it has consistently since i started paying attention in 2002. minimum was $800/$800 back then; now it's $8k/$8k. i don't say this to support status quo; i say it because it's a fact.

but Zuffa has no reason to change this model. they will fight a union to the death, i have no doubt. and they will fight legislation as well. and young fighters love it; they get to make $10k in the UFC instead of $500 to $2k in a regional bout, with the "tournament economics" chance of making millions. notice it's only the guys creeping up on their 30's who didn't win the "tournament" who complain.

so complain all you want folks, but Zuffa found a winning combination of economic theory that entices young athletes, and lack of laws or unions that would force them to change. their mean pay is ridiculously low compared to their revenue (and/or gross, but when folks banter around "this sport pays their athletes 50%!" recognize they mean 50% of revenue, not gross), and most of their fighters relish the opportunity.

 

[MeatballMagnus]

Okay put it this way. It's simple... IF YOU'RE A GOOD FIGHTER YOU'LL MAKE GOD MONEY.

It's like in every other f--king sport in the world...if you're good you'll be paid for it.

I'm a football fan (soccer) my hometown Northampton are not very good... the players aren't high level players. They get paid less than 5% of what a guy like Wayne Rooney will earn...

 

[Lead]

The best perspective would be from the financial statements. Anything outside of that is people with holes in their argument

 

[Lead]

most sports are team sports, and pay is dictated by a Players Union.

but not boxing.

but boxing was turned on it's head 14 years ago by the Ali Act.

the UFC currently uses something colloquially called "Tournament Theory Economics". basically, your odds are low, but if you hit, you win big. this is why there are about a thousand (since TUF1) fighters in the UFC who made a few grand...and several (Dana says 20ish) who were made millionaires. .02%, how about that?

don't get me wrong; fighter pay will continue to go up; it has consistently since i started paying attention in 2002. minimum was $800/$800 back then; now it's $8k/$8k. i don't say this to support status quo; i say it because it's a fact.

but Zuffa has no reason to change this model. they will fight a union to the death, i have no doubt. and they will fight legislation as well. and young fighters love it; they get to make $10k in the UFC instead of $500 to $2k in a regional bout, with the "tournament economics" chance of making millions. notice it's only the guys creeping up on their 30's who didn't win the "tournament" who complain.

so complain all you want folks, but Zuffa found a winning combination of economic theory that entices young athletes, and lack of laws or unions that would force them to change. their mean pay is ridiculously low compared to their revenue (and/or gross, but when folks banter around "this sport pays their athletes 50%!" recognize they mean 50% of revenue, not gross), and most of their fighters relish the opportunity.

20/1000= 2%* Not .02%.

 

[Wayweary]

Google that shit. Is it even a shared figure? I'm guessing like 20% at best, but hey what do I know.

Apparently not enough to keep from speculating wildly.

 

[Wayweary]

Why do the fighters get on in on this revenue sharing but not the sound and video guys, logistics staff, finance staff, and all the other gears that are just as essential to this machine?

They feel guilty about someone getting their face punched in for their entertainment but aren't intellectually honest enough to admit it so they try to assuage their egos by whining on the internet. I think that about sums it up.

 

[Dionysian]

If they pay too little, the talent pool will shrink. Fighters will suffer through training camps, working day jobs. Many will retire, or never even pursue the sport because the risk and the struggle outweighs the reward. Fans will also be turned off by the sport, perhaps that's where the perception of fairness comes into play.

We're seeing the effects already I would argue. It isn't a coincidence that Travis Brownes are the "newbreed" and there isn't an influx of new talent. When an observer sees Carwin making more from his day job than title fights they ask... why the hell would I want that?


Compare the mid-2000s of the sport to today. Every year back then exciting new talent was introduced. Today there is new talent yeah but not at the same rate. The rate of new talent should be growing, not shrinking...

 

[SeattleFightFan]

20/1000= 2%* Not .02%.

lol apparently 4th grade math is not my strong suit. thanks.

 

[TheonGreyJoy**]

TS do you think the fighters that fight for money losing org's should share 50/50 the losses?

When Zuffa was losing 10's of millions per year should the fighters been FORCED to pay half?