Affliction's Future Hinges on Main Events
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 7:42 PM EDT
in MMA News
Email
Print
I remain unconvinced Affliction's new joint promotion with Golden Boy Promotions will end in success. However, the bottom line is that Affliction had to make a major change. Financial reality hit after their first show, and they found themselves in a position where they could not afford to lose that much again, but had no way to avoid losing that much again. They deserve credit for making a major change this early. Most promotions have waited too long, lost too much, and fell by the wayside before they could make changes.
In fight promotion, it is a universal truth that the main event sells PPV buys. There's a reason UFC 66 did over a million buys and UFC 73 did under 400,000. Similarly, Oscar de la Hoya vs. Floyd Mayweather did over 2 million buys without any fights on the undercard to speak of. If Affliction can promote joint shows with just one big MMA fight and one big boxing fight, they may be able to pull in enough buys on PPV to survive. Besides those two fights, the fights on the undercard don't matter at all, and they need to avoid fights like Matt Lindland vs. Trevor Prangley, which would have cost about $350,000 for nothing in return.
If the January show has Fedor Emelianenko vs. Andrei Arlovski, as well as the kind of boxing fight that would usually draw about 150,000-200,000 buys on PPV, they could very well double the buys of their initial show without increasing their payroll, as long as they cut out the ridiculous undercard contracts from their last show. They don't even have to market this as a mixed show, they just have to market the two big fights. I am no advertising executive, but I think separate campaigns hyping each big fight could be effective at bringing fans of both in for the show.
I do not have high hopes for this experiment, but they are at least giving themselves a chance. If they eliminate high cost contracts from their undercard, and just focus on one big fight from each sport in the promotion of the January show, they have a small chance. Which is better than no chance, which is what they had as of a few days ago.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good analysis
There are a lot of people doubting this co-promotion venture, but what most people seem to have already forgotten is that their October show had only sold 700-800 tickets, and had absolutely no buzz.
They’re undoubtedly taking a gamble here. They’re depending on the draw of an unproven gimmick, and the sales to a mixed fan base which may not exist. But… at least it has a chance. That October show was going to tank, and tank hard. If they didn’t pull the plug, they would’ve faced huge losses in their 2nd show, with little hope for recovery in their 3rd. With these drastic changes, they have a chance to change their luck. Will it work? Who knows… but at least they won’t be out of business come January.
Back to the article – I agree having huge main events will be important, but will an MMA fan be willing to shell out the price of a full PPV for a single fight? MMA fans are accustomed to being treated to a full night of entertaining fights. Only the minority would be willing to trade in the other 4+ main card MMA fights for a 12-round boxing fight, even if it were huge one. On the other side of the coin, as long as the boxing main event is huge, I think it should continue to draw the boxing fans. They’re used to buying PPVs just to watch the main event.
All evidence shows to me that MMA fans routinely pay for one fight.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 8:29 PM EDT up reply actions
No way is that right. People want to see entire cards…people scream if they don’t get to see all the undercards.
Now their may be one fight which is the final motivation it takes for them to plop down the money but they want the entire thing.
No, internet fans scream if they don’t get to see entire cards. All you need in the undercard is relative entertainment. A show like Lesnar/Couture sells entirely on the main event.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions
An MMA event is like sex…
if its a UFC (hot babe… one you normally wouldn’t dream of getting) you would want:
- a nice setting (good production),
- foreplay (a good style matchup ),
- some oral action (a featured fight of contenders) ,
- right before you climax you go back to some foreplay to prolong the pleasure (one of the good pre-recorded prelim fights)
- Now its time for slow insertion (co – main event)
- get to all the positions and if you climaxed already consider this anal (Main Event)
This is a UFC event.
If your just horny and want to get off a toilet and your right hand will do (youtube/1 fight).
by mmalogic on Sep 14, 2008 10:10 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
rec'd
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Sep 14, 2008 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions
You’re just describing a select group of people…my problem is your sweeping generalization
“All evidence shows to me that MMA fans routinely pay for one fight.”
The majority of people who buy are buying for the main event.
by Richard Wade on Sep 15, 2008 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions
MMA Fans buy different “MMA EVENTS” in different degrees based on different factor that include who’s in the main event…
They do not buy One MMA fight… big difference.
Boxing fans buy for ONE fight and basically watch that one fight.
MMA Fans want and watch the whole event.
They buy based on 1 fight plus the guarantee of entertainment they get with every show. Obviously, Affliction has to deliver something besides boring fights on the undercard, but they can get exciting undercard fights that don’t cost a lot on top of 1 big MMA fight and 1 boxing fight. And yes, you’re right that the best way is to just have one pretty big boxing fight at the end of a MMA card.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I was gonna say much the same thing. While UFC fans select based on one fight, they buy expecting to get a whole, consistent product. While Affliction might be able to pull in a decent PPV buy based on one fight, if the undercard doesn’t provide quality entertainment they’ll lose a ton of business on the next card.
by Michaelthebox on Sep 14, 2008 9:32 PM EDT up reply actions
This isn’t really true though, UFC had a disastrous card at UFC 61 with Tito and Ken, just boring fight after boring fight with bad decisions, etc. They didn’t lose any business, in fact they continued to draw based on main events. Obviously MMA fans are there to watch the whole show as opposed to boxing, but they are looking for entertainment. You can satisfy that demand without paying that much.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes you can supply entertainment without paying that much… but they decided to sign crazy contracts.
Would they have sold as many pay per views on their first show without paying lindland 350k? sure.
How does adding boxing change anything? To an MMA Fan that means they are getting less MMA for the dollar and to a boxing fan it means little – maybe a neat novelty.
The only affect this has for both parties is a savings on production/advertising overhead.
Its like when you now go into a dunkin donuts you also have a pizza hut… they save on rent. except imagine dunkin donuts doing it with a pizza store my uncle just opened up,
You would think Dunkin Donuts may not send their best chiefs to the store and maybe just test their new recruits in the store hoping to at least give them some experience and my uncle just trying to unload all the pizza dough, tomato sauce and cheese he bought.
I disagree they didn’t lose business. They had a lot of first-time viewers that card, which didn’t come back or didn’t come back immediately. UFC fans weren’t turned away, because they’re accustomed to good cards, so if one card goes badly, they write it off as a bad night rather than a sign of a bad overall product.
Affliction doesn’t have a lot of built-up goodwill and image with their fight promotion. If they skimp on the undercard in front of new fans, they’ll have real issues. Err, more real issues.
And while you can provide entertainment without paying too much, its more than that. For better or worse, the UFC, by providing top fighters on the undercard, has created the image that if you fight in the UFC, you’re an elite fighter. This is why a lot of UFC fans think UFC fighters are better across the board. If Affliction starts putting together cheap fights with inferior fighters, that will start to affect the image of Affliction’s overall promotion, and fans will begin to expect the undercard to suck. They are stuck with those contracts, but even if they weren’t, they have to pay for decent talent if they don’t want to give off the wrong image.
Furthermore, if they skimp on the undercard, where do the next main events come from?
by Michaelthebox on Sep 14, 2008 10:16 PM EDT up reply actions
check the tuf ratings after the ken tito season…
One thing about Zuffa is when a mistake is made it is learned from and rarely repeated again.
False hype is dangerous.
compare some of the countdown shows to the recent ones in terms of hype.
Over promising and under delivering has its consequences.
Are you suggesting the TUF ratings dropped because Ken/Tito underdelivered?
I don’t believe thats the case, but there might be something to it. I just think TUF 4 was just a complete clusterfuck with no coaches and a lack of interesting characters, that looked even worse in comparison to the wealth that TUF 3 provided.
by Michaelthebox on Sep 14, 2008 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions
This is not the case (TUF 4 going down as a result of overhype). The free fight did unbelievable numbers right after UFC 61 underdelivered. Further, coming off it the same fans that were supposedly disappointed all paid to see Tito fight Chuck in December.
Listen, I understand the value of the overall card. It helps build that base number of fans that will buy every show. Focusing on building that number is not a luxury Affliction has right now.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions
You can look at the July show in 2008 vs. the July show in 2007 for the perfect example. The former had a horrible undercard and a big main event, the latter was stacked with fights (2 title fights, Nogueira, Ortiz). The former did far better because fights sell on main events.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions
But you keep comparing UFC shows. Comparing buyer behaviour with UFC shows to expected buyer behaviour with Affliction shows is flawed, I think.
But I concede that Affliction doesn’t have a lot of options at this point.
by Michaelthebox on Sep 14, 2008 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s true about the fight business in general. It’s true in boxing, it’s even true in pro wrestling. PPV sells on main events. Rarely you can get a pop out of the semi main, as they did last December with GSP bringing in a big Canadian number.
Look at UFC 91. They are supposedly doing Jackson/Silva underneath Brock/Randy. That is a move to build long term brand loyalty. In terms of how much they pay those guys vs. what they bring in, there’s no way to justify doing that because everyone will already buy for Brock and Randy. UFC has the luxury of doing things like that, Affliction does not.
by Michael Rome on Sep 14, 2008 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, its true about the fight business in general. Is it true about MMA? The UFC has developed a type of fight fans that show potentially different behaviour.
There is also the fact that Emelianenko/Arlovski is not a big draw the way Lesnar/Couture is, or even Liddell/Evans. The crowd that turns a 300k PPV to a 600k PPV is not the crowd that will swarm to Fedor/Arlovski, and it does not match the crowd that will take note of an Affliction PPV anyway. While the hardcores may not be especially bothered by a mediocre undercard, I think they’d be furious about a mediocre undercard AND boxing cluttering the card.
by Michaelthebox on Sep 14, 2008 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree. Affliction, as an MMA promotion, was on track for certain demise in the coming months. They made a lot of mistakes in how they ran their first event, but those losses are sunk costs. This gives them a glimmer of hope, at least. I really think the clothing deal with Golden Boy could provide a good deal of revenue. Although I don’t care for the idea of mixing MMA and boxing, it’s interesting and untested on this scale, so I don’t think anyone can say with certainty that it won’t work to some extent. Golden Boy has a lot of resources to draw from. All we can do now is wait and see what materializes from this partnership.
Affliction with the most stacked MMA card couldn’t do 100k buys….
Here’s what they are hoping for:
Their production costs get cut in half, and their payroll gets cut in half but the buys at least remain the same.
This way they can slowly fulfill the contracts and maybe cut their losses in half.
But let me ask you… if their most stacked card did 100k buys how much do you think their mixed event will do from the mma fan base?
about 50k at most…
Boxing fights sell based on one fight…
The hardcore MMA fans will not buy an event with one MMA fight.
So here’s the best way to make this work:
create an MMA exent just like you would if it were a normal MMA event except now your main event is the co-main event… the boxing match becomes the main event fight.
This way they won’t lose much of the hardcore MMA fans as they won’t have to sit through boxing to get MMA, they get a real MMA card and as a bonus they get a boxing main event if they so desire.
So Golden Boy saves on the undercard expenses which isn’t much in boxing and half of the production costs.
Affliction saves on half of the production costs and maybe some on payroll…
At the end of the day the only difference this makes is affliction losing money fast vs affliction losing money slow.
If they really mix the event and golden boy just uses these events to as a venue to get some of their fighters some fights then its over after the first show.
Affliction screwed themselves by making so many contract commitments… now they’re trying to get the fighters to sign new contracts for lower pay.
so true...
‘Besides those two fights, the fights on the undercard don’t matter at all, and they need to avoid fights like Matt Lindland vs. Trevor Prangley, which would have cost about $350,000 for nothing in return.’
it’s not about what hard-core fans want (and will pay for) – it’s about making money and keeping afloat
My thoughts on the mma fans buy a ppv for the main fight.
Absolutely true. BUT…
They are satisfied by the entire card. mma fans want to see the entire lineup. they want every fight to be entertaining. they want recognizable names and so on. Yes it is Lesner/Couture that will sell the card. But it is the quality of the entire card that will sell the following ppv.
If you had Fedor/Randy and that was it, I would never buy it. If you had a card of mma fights, but no big headliner, I would be most likely to buy it. If you add them together, I buy it every time.
"The bigger the cushion, the sweeter the pushin'"
So many closet business analysts coming out of the woodwork here.
I dont pretend to know much about the how and why of MMA business decisions but I gotta say respect to Affliction for trying something different and trying to find their own niche. For the sake of MMA in general, I hope they succeed.
Why do people try to downplay good analysis by suggesting the analysis is coming from hacks, rather than say, business analysts? There are a lot of people on this site with business backgrounds, from what I’ve seen.
by Michaelthebox on Sep 15, 2008 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
