UFC's contracts....Bad ethics?

MMAPlayground.com » MMA General » UFC Forum » UFC's contracts....Bad ethics?
Next Page »
cmill21
4/12/09 4:05:14PM
Taken from

Just wanted to put this out there, since the UFC seems to be getting off with all sorts of **** lately.

Most people would probably have heard of how the UFC treats their fighters, and many people have probably heard Dana going on and out about how "they(the fighters) all just want more money".

Well, I want to shed a bit of light on this topic, so I went and googled a few articles to find out about the UFC and their less than ethical practices. I remember reading the contract and some lawyer saying how the UFC contracts are just downright ridiculous and one sided, but I can't find it right now, if anyone would point it out I would appreciate it.

Here are the fighter's I've found who have complained about the UFC and their unethical behaviour.

Fedor on the UFC
http://www.fightopinion.com/2007/12/26/ ... contracts/ SOURCE
“I never met Dana White, never spoke to him on the phone, never exchanged e-mails,” Fedor said. “However, I did read a lot on the Internet about what he said in regard to me and Vadim []. I also read e-mails that he sent to Vadim; all of his correspondence was very upsetting. The contract that we were presented with by the UFC was simply impossible, couldn’t be signed — I couldn’t leave. If I won, I had to fight eight times in two years. If I lost one fight, then the UFC had the right to rip up the contract. At the conclusion of the contract, if I am undefeated, then it automatically extends for an as yet unspecified period of time, though for the same compensation.

“Basically I can’t leave undefeated. I can’t give interviews, appear in films or advertising. I don’t have the right to do anything without the UFC’s agreement. I could do nothing without the OK from the UFC. I didn’t have the right to compete in combat sambo competition. It’s my national sport. It’s the Russian sport, which in his time our president competed in, and I no longer have the right to do so. There were many such clauses; the contract was 18 pages in length. It was written in such a way that I had absolutely no rights while the UFC could at any moment, if something didn’t suit them, tear up the agreement. We worked with lawyers who told us that it was patently impossible to sign such a document.”

Matt Lindland on the UFC
The UFC contracts are illegal. Based on the Muhammad Ali (Safety) Act, you cannot be the promoter and the manager at the same time,” Lindland said, “If they are telling you who and when you are going to fight, they are the manager as well as the promoter.”



The UFC and their sponsorship
http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewr ... mma,137108
As the system stands now, fighters can be sponsored by whoever they want, though the sponsors need to approved by the UFC.
The UFC reserves the right to rebutt any sponsorship a fighter could have, this was the reason affliction(originally a clothing brand), started their own show and named it BANNED. The UFC can reject a fighters sponsorship, thereby depriving the fighter of his sponsorship.

The UFC seeks more control over sponsorship
http://mmajunkie.com/news/13828/mmajunk ... rships.mma
In an attempt to exert even more influence over the flow of marketing dollars into the promotion, the UFC is exploring new ways of controlling the fighter-sponsor relationship.

Traditionally, UFC fighters have been able to cut their own sponsorship deals with companies for the rights to their fight shorts, T-shirts and caps they wear before and after bouts. These agreements, which can often land regional and local companies on fight gear, provide an additional source of revenue to supplement fighters' UFC contracts. The UFC has policed this practice, preventing some sponsorships from happening, but it has not owned the deal-flow process.

However, the days of fighters' managers cutting those deals appear to be ending.

MMAjunkie.com (http://www.mmajunkie.com) has learned through an industry source that the UFC is considering a new sponsorship business model, which would require any company interested in sponsoring a fighter to work directly with the UFC. The UFC would negotiate the deal for the fighter and charge the sponsoring company a promotional fee for the right to have its brand on display on fighters in the octagon.

In theory, that new fee could reduce the value of the deal for the fighter, especially since sponsor dollars are going to be in shorter supply in the foreseeable future due to the economic downturn. Hypothetically, if the UFC charges a 15 percent promotional fee, that's 15 percent less revenue from the deal earned by the fighter.

The potential move makes good business sense for the UFC. The promotion wields even tighter control of what companies obtain access to its increasingly global marketing platform, protects its brand and generates additional revenue as a result. At minimum, the impact on fighters is loss of control over sponsors with which they associate. In addition, with the UFC calling the sponsorship shots, the role of fighters' managers is downsized significantly.

As another option, the UFC also is considering taking a page from the music industry by establishing "***-degree contracts" with its athletes. As first reported by MMAPayout.com, these contracts would give the UFC access to a portion of all dollars generated by fighters outside of the octagon.

Under this scenario, the UFC would not only dictate what sponsors appear on fighters' gear, but the promotion also would help fighters secure additional sponsorship revenue and take a sizeable percentage of the related dollars.

The industry source MMAjunkie.com spoke with said neither of these strategies has been officially put in place, but he believes it's only a matter of time before the UFC makes a move to further control what a fighter can and cannot do on his own to produce additional revenue.


The UFC and Jon Fitch
http://www.fighting-mma.com/articles/20 ... he-ufc.php
“I had two fights left on my contract, but they always put a clause in the contract that if you lose a fight, they’re able to release you at any time after a loss,” Fitch told “Sports Rage” host Garbriel Morency. “That’s pretty standard with any organization, but it’s pretty incredible that they’d go to those lengths for something like this, over a video game.”

Jon Fitch was let go from his UFC contract because he refused to sign an agreement that would have relinquished his likeness rights for the upcoming UFC video game by THQ. Fitch was quoted as saying “The video game agreement that they have that they wanted us to sign was basically we don‘t get anything for it”.

The UFC and Ken Shamrock
http://forums.mmanews.com/general-mma-f ... wsuit.html
Well, I’ll tell you what happened was one, I talked to Dana White when I was fighting with Tito Ortiz on the Ultimate Fighter show and let him know there was an opportunity to get some of the Lion’s Den fighters some fights on the team concept in the IFL. Dana kind’ve flipped out on that, saying he was gonna squash them and kill them, and that they’re nothing but scumbags and he was gonna crush ‘em. And it just kind of took me off guard, and he was very upset at them. And I guess he took them to court and lost a lawsuit to them, so he was pretty upset about that, because he thought that they had taken some things from him or whatever, but they were found innocent of all that. So, I told him, “You know, it’s not like I’m fighting and it’s not against my contract to coach my fighters on a show.” And he said, “Well, if you do that, even if it’s not in your contract, you will never work for us again.” Which I thought was kind of a threat - it had no bearing on my contract and that he was just trying to push me around. And at that point, I went ahead, and - because I didn’t want to cause a problem at that point in time - I went ahead and said, “Alright, I’ll just wait until I’m done with the fight with Ortiz.” So, I finished the fight with Ortiz and then I went ahead and coached in the IFL. At that point, Dana White decided that he was going to go ahead and breach my contract and cut me loose.


These are not the only fighters who have been screwed over by the UFC.
Think Tito Ortiz, Frank Shamrock, and probably many many other fighters.



Dana is a fat cat sitting in a big office, lying his way through and ripping off the fighters. Anyone who doesn't realize this ought to look it up. This is the information age, we have the Internet.
mkiv9secsupra
4/12/09 4:52:19PM
Yeah Dana White needs to come back down to Earth. I dont think he realizes he's not God. All in due time.....

As soon as someone/or something, like a union, can threaten Zuffa, inc. itself and not just Dana's personality and/or ethics, the company will either have to do a major overhaul on terms and conditions or just flush themselves down a toilet.

More and more fighters will give up on the UFC and more and more organizations will pop up. Its only a matter of time...... and i can't wait to see Dana at age 55 filing for a highly publicized bankruptcy
cmill21
4/12/09 6:51:55PM
If you put all of the different things together it looks terrible lol.
Franklinfan47
4/12/09 7:04:50PM
When it boils down to it, the ufc feels they can do whatever and pay whatever they want because they control the market right now. Basic supply and demand.

They have the supply of contracts, which everyfighter out there wants. Its why many companies outsource to asia; they can pay a fraction of the price for the same work and they know they can get away with it.

What the ufc doesnt realize is that eventually this will come back to kick them in the ass when/if a union does arise, or another company overtakes them or matches there notorioty and their fighters start seeking greener pastures ala Arlovski and Sylvia.
PABLOMAFIOSO
4/12/09 8:25:49PM
Dana and the UFC needs to chill out a bit, it is bullshit how they try to screw fighters out of money! I am a huge fan of the UFC but even reading the terms and conditions of the ultimate fighter contract makes me sick. We don't need the Don Kings of the world in MMA!!!!
SpiderSilva
4/12/09 8:54:19PM
seems to me the ufc is protecting what makes the money and its worked so far

i guess sylvia is doing great after that payday sense hes trying boxing by the time he is ready for a mma fight affliction will be gone and aa has said he would go back to the ufc

i am glad to watch sf grow like crazy but how many of their fighters would love to go back to the ufc or would jump at a chance to fight their first fight anyway most fans dont care about this i mean to see someone complain about making 200,000 a fight not 2,000,000 is stupid the ufc will ALWAYS have people willing to fight for under 100,000 a fight the greedy ones seem to be seeing their own way out
cmill21
4/12/09 9:58:48PM

Posted by SpiderSilva

seems to me the ufc is protecting what makes the money and its worked so far

i guess sylvia is doing great after that payday sense hes trying boxing by the time he is ready for a mma fight affliction will be gone and aa has said he would go back to the ufc

i am glad to watch sf grow like crazy but how many of their fighters would love to go back to the ufc or would jump at a chance to fight their first fight anyway most fans dont care about this i mean to see someone complain about making 200,000 a fight not 2,000,000 is stupid the ufc will ALWAYS have people willing to fight for under 100,000 a fight the greedy ones seem to be seeing their own way out



Theres always somewhere to fight, and already there are fighters who aren't happy with the UFC's contracts, ATT guys, Couture, Fedor, Tito, GSP, Anderson, Barnett, ect. Some people want the best fights, that includes me, but I want two orgs that would work together. I don't understand how K-1 can be a monopoly and still let their fighters have the basic right of choice but the UFC can't, oh and it's been working for FEG since they have more coin then Zuffa.
JimiMak
4/12/09 10:35:25PM
Everyone's always complaining about things we don't really know about.

We hear very little of what actually goes on in these negotiations.

Things like exclusivity are no brainers, of course they want exclusive promotion. What they want someone to win a belt and leave? They aren't stupid.

How much do any of you know about sports contracts in general? Or the fine details of how these specific contracts work?

Some guys don't sign and fight elsewhere. So? That makes Dana the devil?

Please. We know so little about this side of the business and yet everyone's an expert.
cmill21
4/12/09 10:48:26PM

Posted by JimiMak

Everyone's always complaining about things we don't really know about.

We hear very little of what actually goes on in these negotiations.

Things like exclusivity are no brainers, of course they want exclusive promotion. What they want someone to win a belt and leave? They aren't stupid.

How much do any of you know about sports contracts in general? Or the fine details of how these specific contracts work?

Some guys don't sign and fight elsewhere. So? That makes Dana the devil?

Please. We know so little about this side of the business and yet everyone's an expert.



Please read the article...
telnights
4/12/09 11:18:10PM

Posted by cmill21


Posted by JimiMak

Everyone's always complaining about things we don't really know about.

We hear very little of what actually goes on in these negotiations.

Things like exclusivity are no brainers, of course they want exclusive promotion. What they want someone to win a belt and leave? They aren't stupid.

How much do any of you know about sports contracts in general? Or the fine details of how these specific contracts work?

Some guys don't sign and fight elsewhere. So? That makes Dana the devil?

Please. We know so little about this side of the business and yet everyone's an expert.



Please read the article...



For one its not an article its a post on another forum. For two from reading the post and your post its fairly clear he was replying to the post. I didn't see anything that showed he didn't read the post at all.

I'm so sick of reading how evil the UFC is or how bad fighters have it or how bad the UFC is towards their fighters. Oh yeah and the hole Dana is the devil. It gets old really fast. People like to read a story and think they have full understanding of contracts and how the UFC should be run. But truth is they seam to be doing a hell of job at it by themselves. I could spend all day explaining why the UFC run things the way the do and show how almost 95% of Pro Boxers have it a lot worse than any of the fighters in the UFC. I could show you gyms full of Pro MMA fighters that would kill to be in the UFC. In the end the UFC seams to be the only MMA company running in the green and still putting on one to two shows a month. Show me one other company that has been able to do this and keep their heads above water. Now don't get me wrong there has been some great company's that have come and gone (aka Pride) but none of them have come close to what the UFC has done for MMA in North America or been able to put on near as many shows as the UFC does. So before anyone post how the UFC needs to change or think they know how it should be run think for a min on what they have done and still are doing for this sport and how they have been the only company to stay alive through the years. So I think they have a better understand of things than we do.
mkiv9secsupra
4/12/09 11:40:22PM

Posted by telnights
So before anyone post how the UFC needs to change or think they know how it should be run think for a min on what they have done and still are doing for this sport and how they have been the only company to stay alive through the years. So I think they have a better understand of things than we do.




The rules of a monopoly are not the same rules that apply to a competitive market.... The UFC can do whatever they want no matter how unethical or rediculous with little to no recoil or consequence
grappler0000
4/12/09 11:51:10PM

Posted by cmill21


Posted by JimiMak

Everyone's always complaining about things we don't really know about.

We hear very little of what actually goes on in these negotiations.

Things like exclusivity are no brainers, of course they want exclusive promotion. What they want someone to win a belt and leave? They aren't stupid.

How much do any of you know about sports contracts in general? Or the fine details of how these specific contracts work?

Some guys don't sign and fight elsewhere. So? That makes Dana the devil?

Please. We know so little about this side of the business and yet everyone's an expert.



Please read the article...



I read the article (if you want to call it that) and although there is maybe an argument to be made, I don't think the this guy does a good job of it. If I were to make an argumentative piece, I would probably put together something a little more solid than a few quotes. It's pretty easy to pick the post apart.

For example:

1. Fedor was offered a contract that was much stricter than normal. On the flip side, he was asking for a much larger payday than normal. It's give and take. Also, if Fedor wasn't present at these negotiations, then he really only knows what he is told and what he reads. This argument can go on for days, so I think it's just safe to say that there are always two sides to a story.

2. Matt Lindland's quote really amounts to nothing. MMA is not bound by the Muhammad Ali (Safety) Act..maybe someday, but for now, it means nothing. Also Lindland was campaigning to get back in the UFC as recently as last year. Take it for what it's worth.

3. Why would the UFC not reserve the right to rebutt a sponsorship? There are conflicts of interest in every sport and every business. I haven't seen too many fighters having problems filling out the landscape on their shorts. I see this as a no-brainer. As for the UFC having absolute control over sponsorships in the future...I have read of such things, but I haven't seen anything more than that, so I guess I'll reserve judgment until we see more.

4. How was the UFC in breach of contract with Shamrock? I'm assuming he has a losing clause just like everyone else...and he did plenty of it. To me, it appears that it's just a quote from someone who doesn't understand the language of his contract...and perhaps a little bitter.

Considering Zuffa put in the time and money to put MMA where it is in the US, I don't see them giving the 'get rich quick' orgs an easy route to pushing them aside anytime soon. Is Zuffa perfect? Far from it. Are Dana's antics over the top? Sure, they often are...and sometimes it causes problems. But, does this guy's copy-and-paste sum any of that up properly? Not really. Although there are a couple of legitimate issues that were touched upon, I can't read the article without having the feeling that they were grabbing for straws when it came to UFC bash material.
cmill21
4/12/09 11:59:09PM

Posted by telnights


For one its not an article its a post on another forum. For two from reading the post and your post its fairly clear he was replying to the post. I didn't see anything that showed he didn't read the post at all.

I'm so sick of reading how evil the UFC is or how bad fighters have it or how bad the UFC is towards their fighters. Oh yeah and the hole Dana is the devil. It gets old really fast. People like to read a story and think they have full understanding of contracts and how the UFC should be run. But truth is they seam to be doing a hell of job at it by themselves. I could spend all day explaining why the UFC run things the way the do and show how almost 95% of Pro Boxers have it a lot worse than any of the fighters in the UFC. I could show you gyms full of Pro MMA fighters that would kill to be in the UFC. In the end the UFC seams to be the only MMA company running in the green and still putting on one to two shows a month. Show me one other company that has been able to do this and keep their heads above water. Now don't get me wrong there has been some great company's that have come and gone (aka Pride) but none of them have come close to what the UFC has done for MMA in North America or been able to put on near as many shows as the UFC does. So before anyone post how the UFC needs to change or think they know how it should be run think for a min on what they have done and still are doing for this sport and how they have been the only company to stay alive through the years. So I think they have a better understand of things than we do.



First of all it's a post of complied articles...Second the UFC isn't something thats been ran fantastically, had they not hit the reality TV boom they would be gone, or under new management, so don't come around and say they've done it all so well. Dana is known to strong arm, thats a fact. What will you be saying when the top fighters are all wanting to leave because they can't have any sponsors and they make no profits from any of their apperances/UFC merch? Roger huerta is the perfect example, people are pissed at him and for what? Wanting to be paid for UFC promo's and a slice of the video game? People need to stop comparing this to other sports, if you don't like the contract your offered you can move on to another team, and you can pick any equipment sponsor you want. As for the UFC needing to monitor and sensor sponsors to keep their "image", what about 'condomdepot.com' has anyone looked at what it is? If their really concerned then it doesn't look it lol. Yes there are tons of up and comers who want the exposure, but it's going to be the big names who want more and are more concerned with what they're getting. Look at who's left, and look at who's tried to, then look at how pissed Dana gets when people get actual managers who know how rediculous his contracts are. Please remove head from sand....
slapshot
4/13/09 2:02:10AM
The UFC has in the past lost money and they are turning a profit now but they still have past losses to make up for. I think there are some things they do that dose hurt the fighters to some extent but overall people need to remember this is a business and the way they clawed there way to the top is by doing whats good for them and not necessarily the fighters they employ.
Franklinfan47
4/13/09 8:40:40AM

Posted by slapshot

The UFC has in the past lost money and they are turning a profit now but they still have past losses to make up for. I think there are some things they do that dose hurt the fighters to some extent but overall people need to remember this is a business and the way they clawed there way to the top is by doing whats good for them and not necessarily the fighters they employ.



They may hurt some fighters in their contracts, but I'd love to know how many sponsorship deals those same fighters get based on the fact that the ufc gave them a shot. Plus, a stint in the ufc usually = a large paying salary in another, lesser, organization.

Like I said before though, there may come a day however when it comes back to hurt the ufc.
telnights
4/13/09 8:47:18PM

Posted by cmill21
First of all it's a post of complied articles...Second the UFC isn't something thats been ran fantastically, had they not hit the reality TV boom they would be gone, or under new management, so don't come around and say they've done it all so well. Dana is known to strong arm, thats a fact. What will you be saying when the top fighters are all wanting to leave because they can't have any sponsors and they make no profits from any of their apperances/UFC merch? Roger huerta is the perfect example, people are pissed at him and for what? Wanting to be paid for UFC promo's and a slice of the video game? People need to stop comparing this to other sports, if you don't like the contract your offered you can move on to another team, and you can pick any equipment sponsor you want. As for the UFC needing to monitor and sensor sponsors to keep their "image", what about 'condomdepot.com' has anyone looked at what it is? If their really concerned then it doesn't look it lol. Yes there are tons of up and comers who want the exposure, but it's going to be the big names who want more and are more concerned with what they're getting. Look at who's left, and look at who's tried to, then look at how pissed Dana gets when people get actual managers who know how rediculous his contracts are. Please remove head from sand....




Its still not an article its no different than me posting a bunch of stuff from other web pages and calling it a story. As far as the UFC being run how do you know what has and hasn't gone on with the company other than a few news stories. How can you say the company wouldn't be where its at with out TUF are you a market analyst?
So its fact Dana strong arms people? Are you a fighter for the UFC or a fighter agent? I'm going to say no. I'm also going to say you have never dealt with a CEO of a large company before.

Now you want to talk facts. Fact is you cant make everyone happy. Some fighters wont like the UFC or how its run but there are a ton who are very happy where they are at. The UFC has a much higher talent pool than any MMA company and also has more fighters under contract than any of them as well. How did that happen if they are so evil and bad. Their are tons of fighters who try out for TUF show every time they have try outs. This isn't because the UFC treats its fighters bad. But there will always be unhappy people no matter how good things are and that's just part of life.

So why is it bad to compare the UFC to other sports and contracts is that because it doesn't help your down with the UFC point of view? Now as far as condomdepot.com goes they in no way have conflicting interest with the company or any of its other sponsors. It isn't like condomdepot.com is promoting anything bad. Last I checked safe sex was a good thing.

Now to managers...Managers main interest is their fighters/players and themselves. But that doesn't always mean mangers are a good thing. Some managers go so far that they are willing to hurt the very company their fighters or players are working for. They could care less about other fighters/players or if the company fails. Managers are one of the major issue with sports today. Like boxing managers are the very reason why your under card fighters barely make enough money to train and have no chance of making any bonus no matter how good they do in their fight. But yet the main event guy/s are making 99% of the event money with the managers getting large part of that. Then your managers are even taking a cut of the 1% the under card fighters are making because you cant get a fight now days without a manager. You don't seam to have a problem with this so why is it so bad for Dana to have the UFC's best interest in mind.

Now I could sit and post all the bad things fighters and writers have said about Pride when it was around. But that's pointless because Pride just like the UFC wasn't evil or bad just a company trying to make it. Just like the UFC, Pride was a good thing for MMA and had a part in its growth to main stream. But the company failed because of a few bad choices and its shows how easy it is for a company to go under. So I'm not shocked in the slightest that Dana and others within the UFC are very protective of the UFC and its best interest as I would do the same.

I don't have my head anywhere but on my shoulders. I just don't look at things from one point of view. Just like anything else there is more than one side to things. I know many fighters that I've trained in the past or are friends of mine that have fought in the UFC that didn't have one bad thing to say about the UFC and would fight for them again in a heartbeat if asked.
cmill21
4/14/09 4:47:30AM
Lol yes I have acctually talked to the CEO of a large company, CVS controls, one of the richest men I've even met, and also one of the nicest. Also funny you ask because I am an economics major. Now that that is out of the way and you know my apperent internet credentials we can continue to talk. So a post compiled of articles doesn't make it anything other then a post? So our news section isn't composed of articles? There are also links to the actual articles the guy took them from there to so it's not like some guy just made all of these things up...Moving on, Dana White himself has said the UFC was about to be sold and was 40 some million in debt before TUF hit it big, so it doesn't really matter if I know anything about economics, when the President says he was about to pull the plug but TUF saved it I get a strong indication that maybe, juuuust maybe, TUF saved it.

So do you as a fan believe that the fighters deserve a cut of what they're doing for the company? Don't you think that in said fighter goes out and does a promo for the UFC that he should be paid for that? The NHL pays they're players to appear in their ad's, hell the Chicago Blackhawks pay JT and Patty to do those commercials.

It's bad to compare the UFC to major sports because for it to be an actual comparison the NHL would have to own and run all of the teams. Last time I checked it's a competitive market giving players choices on where to sign and still remain in the same light as far as sponsorship dollers go. Also all other major sports have a union to protect the players rights, ie: said player is released from his contract, he is still paid out. The UFC's contracts are one sided and you know it.

Also we have seen why fighters can't just leave the UFC, they have to wait and wait and wait until their irrelavent, get put on an undercard fight so no one see's them and then they can finally leave.

Now to my last point, this is not UFC vs Pride, this is other fans, including myself, feeling that the UFC is unfair to their fighters. It's funny to see the UFC paying out like 7% of their revenue while most other major sports are around 40-50%. Whether you and the UFC like it, it's a partnership, without the fighters what is the UFC? Without the UFC guess what, still fighters.
mkiv9secsupra
4/14/09 8:44:17AM

Posted by cmill21
Now to my last point, this is not UFC vs Pride, this is other fans, including myself, feeling that the UFC is unfair to their fighters. It's funny to see the UFC paying out like 7% of their revenue while most other major sports are around 40-50%. Whether you and the UFC like it, it's a partnership, without the fighters what is the UFC? Without the UFC guess what, still fighters.



That's my biggest issue with the UFC's management.Its simply greed driving this management team. 800,000 PPV buys @ $45 = nets $36,000,000 and usually add on top another $500,000 for ticket sales and gate receipts. Each show tends to pay out an average TOTAL of $1,000,000 to fighters. Im not sure of all the prodcution costs of a UFC show but i doubt it will pass 15 million dollars often...... So where does that $15,000,000 to $20,000,000 difference go? Right into the pockets of the Zuffa and UFC management.... pure greed.


Why do fighter's still get paid 11,000 per fight in the UFC? I make more than that fighter, assuming he even fights three times a year. The UFC is using the excuse well sponsors pay the fighter as well, which is entirely BS. The UFC should have no dealings with sponsors, or even mention them at all, unless they do pose a conflict of interest.
slapshot
4/14/09 12:06:17PM
I dont know where you get your facts but most sports dont pay out 40% to 50% its much less than that for team sports.

Fighters have sponsors, I know a fighter here in Montana that has sponsors, a part time job and a new truck and nice home and he's not even pro yet so to say that all these guys make is what they get payed from the UFC is BS.

What do signed chuck Liddell gloves cost? Most of the money to be made in this sport for fighters is still out there IMO.
mkiv9secsupra
4/14/09 1:55:10PM

Posted by slapshot
Fighters have sponsors, I know a fighter here in Montana that has sponsors, a part time job and a new truck and nice home and he's not even pro yet so to say that all these guys make is what they get payed from the UFC is BS.



So you believe that if a sponsor pays enough money, then Dana shouldnt have to pay the fighter anything at all because his sponsors do that?


Pro fighters dedicate their time and bodies to the sport and dont deserve to be paid the average mans salary.
Wolfenstein
4/14/09 3:56:43PM

Posted by slapshot

I dont know where you get your facts but most sports dont pay out 40% to 50% its much less than that for team sports.



I could be wrong, but I believe the current percentage in the NFL is 55% to the players, and 45% to the owners.
cmill21
4/14/09 4:06:39PM

Posted by Wolfenstein


Posted by slapshot

I dont know where you get your facts but most sports dont pay out 40% to 50% its much less than that for team sports.



I could be wrong, but I believe the current percentage in the NFL is 55% to the players, and 45% to the owners.



And in the NHL it's in the 40% range.
telnights
4/14/09 8:02:14PM

Posted by cmill21

Lol yes I have acctually talked to the CEO of a large company, CVS controls, one of the richest men I've even met, and also one of the nicest. Also funny you ask because I am an economics major. Now that that is out of the way and you know my apperent internet credentials we can continue to talk. So a post compiled of articles doesn't make it anything other then a post? So our news section isn't composed of articles? There are also links to the actual articles the guy took them from there to so it's not like some guy just made all of these things up...Moving on, Dana White himself has said the UFC was about to be sold and was 40 some million in debt before TUF hit it big, so it doesn't really matter if I know anything about economics, when the President says he was about to pull the plug but TUF saved it I get a strong indication that maybe, juuuust maybe, TUF saved it.

So do you as a fan believe that the fighters deserve a cut of what they're doing for the company? Don't you think that in said fighter goes out and does a promo for the UFC that he should be paid for that? The NHL pays they're players to appear in their ad's, hell the Chicago Blackhawks pay JT and Patty to do those commercials.

It's bad to compare the UFC to major sports because for it to be an actual comparison the NHL would have to own and run all of the teams. Last time I checked it's a competitive market giving players choices on where to sign and still remain in the same light as far as sponsorship dollers go. Also all other major sports have a union to protect the players rights, ie: said player is released from his contract, he is still paid out. The UFC's contracts are one sided and you know it.

Also we have seen why fighters can't just leave the UFC, they have to wait and wait and wait until their irrelavent, get put on an undercard fight so no one see's them and then they can finally leave.

Now to my last point, this is not UFC vs Pride, this is other fans, including myself, feeling that the UFC is unfair to their fighters. It's funny to see the UFC paying out like 7% of their revenue while most other major sports are around 40-50%. Whether you and the UFC like it, it's a partnership, without the fighters what is the UFC? Without the UFC guess what, still fighters.




Well then as a economics major you should know that MMA has only started to become main stream in the US in the past 5 years and is growing and learning as it does so.
You should also know if TUF made the UFC what it is then the UFC made MMA what it is today in the US.
You should also know that players unions haven't helped the growth of the sports but have hurt them in the long run.
You should also know that there are contract laws in place that protect both parties involved.
Now should there be over site YES. But that comes with time and the sport is still young and growing and a players/fighters union isn't going to help with over site in the slightest. Unions are just a burden on the players/fighters and the company's and once said player is retired most unions don't care about them anymore because they are no longer paying them.

Now you made the point for me by saying you and others are just fans thinking the UFC is being unfair. Now like I said I know many fighters I have trained or are just friends with that have fought in the UFC or are still fighting for them and they are more than happy with the way things are. All of them would fight for the UFC in a heartbeat and would be happy to do so. So you as a fan think its unfair but most of the fighters are very happy with the way things are and know the sport is growing and can only get better as it does. Now like a said before you cant make everyone happy but all the fighters I know that have fought or are fighting in the UFC are very happy with the way they are treated or were treated by the UFC. So tell me who do you think knows better the fan or the fighter?
Dragonscale
4/14/09 9:43:19PM
Tell me about it, I see you guys and the freaking press whining about the contracts more than the fighters.

UFC doesn't have much trouble keeping the people it wants to keep... I havent seen any real big names leave the org. (I dont mean big names, plenty of big names have left, but its cause they got their asses handed to them on the way out the door)

Jesus, look at how many gyms these guys open based on UFC name recognition alone.
cmill21
4/14/09 11:04:29PM
Tito Ortiz, Anderi Arlovski, Tim Sylvia, Frank Shamrock, Matt Lindland, Randy Couture, Roger Huerta, Jon Fitch, Josh Koscheck are just some of the fighters I could think of off the top of my head that have had contract or other problems with the UFC. Then you have guys like Fedor, Barnett and those guys who can't come over because they feel the contracts are to constrictive. Anderson's going to retire just so he can have a mean nothing fight with RJJ, since the UFC won't let him now, Mayhem won't come back because he likes to fight in various orgs, how about Nick Diaz? It's obvious that some fighters are happy, and don't mind all the restictions but I don't think all will be well in the near future.
ncordless
4/15/09 12:22:52AM
Alright... as much as I hate to jump into the latest round of pro-UFC v. anti-UFC dogma I am going to throw my 2 cents in.

The UFC is great. I pay good money all the time to watch it. So do most of you. The UFC is not some sacred cow that shouldn't be criticized when it is not as good as what it could be. The UFC is the premier org. for North American MMA and as such is directly responsible for the future of the sport that we all love enough to waste hours waiting for someone to write a paragraph about it so we can respond. When the UFC does stuff that someone perceives hurts mma, it is perfectly fine to write about it as a fan and someone who wants the best for the sport.

There is nothing wrong with UFC engaging in healthy business activities to further its own interests. The UFC has done a brilliant job at bringing MMA into the mainstream. I personally do not care that much one way or the other about the popularity of the sport because I have been watching mma since before Zuffa was around and I will be watching it regardless of what happens to the UFC. But in a larger sense I realize that the increased popularity allows for more fighters to train full time which in turn increases the amount and quality of the mma I watch. I have no love or hate for the UFC per se, I just love anything that grows the sport.

There has been a lot of talk about economics in here. I'd like to introduce a couple ideas myself.
1) Unions are formed in an effort to equalize the bargaining position of workers against what they see as unfair negotiating.
2) Professional Athletes get paid a large percentage of the gross revenue of professional sports.

The first is important because I, like telnights, believe that a union would not be good for mma. That's why it makes me upset when I see the UFC moving into fields like *** contracts and the like. The UFC, like any business, should do everything it can to work with its labor force and treat them fairly in order to avoid unionization.

The second point has been brought up already and I would just add that the higher the pay for fighters the more world-class athletes we will get in the sport. If MMA becomes a financially reasonable alternative to a potential pro football player, the sky will truly be the limit.

Finally, to talk a little about business ethics I would only point out that while ethics are not required in business, the lack of them has been the downfall of many a company. The UFC is painting itself into a corner in the long-term with some of their practices. Check out the legal definition of a monopoly that can be attacked by the feds...


1. A monopolistic market share... defined as 70% by the Harvard Law Review
2. The willful acquisistion and/or maintenance of that power in a coercive or predatory manner.

Any company that intentionally harms perceived competition in an effort to obtain a monopoly share in a business sector is in danger of its own success. Successful implementation of that kind of business model will only lead to trouble as the company grows.
telnights
4/15/09 5:15:12AM
I want to make sure no one misread what I'm saying. I'm in no way saying the UFC is perfect because it isn't. But what I'm saying is fighter pay and contracts right now are fine the way they are. Let me explain why this is. I have been around the MMA biz since 94. Just 6 years ago some of the guys I trained were lucky to make 200 at small show and that's if they won. Now the same fighters are making 2000-5000 just to show at small shows. The ones that are x-UFC fighters make anywhere from 5000-40000 now. That isn't even taking in to account their sponsorship deals. Now should fighter pay go up..YES. Will fighter pay go up with time...YES. Right now most fighters are happy with the way things are but in a few years that will change and pay will go up again. Things don't change over night.

I also wanted to point out in the starting post a lot of the real articles it links to are just one small side of the story. Just like 99% of the news out today it has a very narrow point of view. Now I'm not going to break it down story by story because I think that's up to the readers to truly look at the other side of things.
Wolfenstein
4/15/09 4:28:24PM
I think the UFC treats its fighters pretty fairly, and what you see on payouts isn't always the final figure. Many fighters have told stories about being handed money by the UFC after the fight--which is great, because it's like working under the table, hence tax free money. If you perform well for the UFC, they will take care of you.

It's also difficult to ascertain what a fair payscale would be, because the UFC isn't a publicly traded company--so we don't know what their profit is. In light of that, you can't say with any certainty that the payscale is good or bad, because we don't have the information to make comparisons between fighters pay and the UFC's profits.

My only gripe would be keeping fighters in limbo, and some of the unfair clauses that get thrown into UFC contracts. Granted, I've only taken one class in Business Law, where we only touched on Contract Law for a few weeks but I remember that no contract can explicitly bind an individual in perpetuity. If someone should one day choose to challenge the UFC in regards to these contracts that go on for indefinete periods (like the video game debacle) I am certain they would win, and probably set a precedent for the way the UFC phrases contracts.
MASTERofPUPPETS
4/15/09 6:39:26PM
$30,000=UFC/\$1,500,000=Affliction
SociopathX
4/15/09 11:08:27PM
Thats why it's never good for businesses to have a monopoly on a product.. in this case MMA.

Hopefully with the most recent Strikeforce card being awesome and with the new fighters they picked up they can compete with the UFC as well.

If fighters have elsewhere to go (not affliction because it will end up bankrupt by year end ) then the UFC will not be able to pull the crap they do now and get away with it.

I love the fights the UFC puts on but it's true there is some shadey dealings that go on as well.
Pages: [1] 2
Related Topics