Dana White's Key Decisions
Jake Rossen did a post over at his blog on Sherdog on Dana White's best decisions. It's hard to argue that any of his choices were bad decisions, but they don't get at the heart of why he's been so successful.
Dana routinely makes very good month to month business decisions, but the most crucial decisions are the ones that aren't so readily apparent. Signing Lesnar was great for business, but it doesn't explain why Brock's debut for the UFC did 650,000 buys while his actual MMA debut bombed on pay per view. The following decisions get to the heart of the question of why the UFC is so successful.
1. Promoting self-sufficiency over dependence: Dana has a number of quotes he repeats over and over, but the most important is the following: "I don't need anybody." He's right, he doesn't.
The UFC controls virtually all aspects of their product. They do the production, they work with the venues, they actively work with the press, they have close partnerships with merchandise distributors, and almost all of their revenue comes directly from the fans who want to watch their product.
For a long time there was a belief that the future of media would be one of free products supported by ad revenue. The entire field of advertising is now under siege, and a new line of thought suggests that the future of media is one of numerous choices where people will pay directly for what they want without being encumbered by excessive ads.
Fans pay directly for the UFC, and as a result, the UFC controls its own destiny. If it keeps providing big shows and big fights that people want to see, they will be in the clear. No scandal that scares advertisers can bring them down, because advertising revenue is such a small portion of the pie. If Bud Light left tomorrow over a Dana White slur, it would be a setback for the sport as a whole, but it would have virtually no effect on the UFC. Third parties may not like Dana, but for the most part, it doesn't matter. His main market he has to please are the fans that watch, not advertisers, and that's reflected in the product that we see.
2. Building a loyalty-based model: I don't think anyone can deny Dana's business style centers around loyalty. Their payment model for fighters promises as little as necessary, and then gives them room to do extensive bonuses for fighters they deem deserving. There are all sorts of moral reasons to criticize this model, but fighters are always willing to jump in on short notice and bend over backwards for a boss they feel does extra for them.
This loyalty extends to fans as well. Why is it that nobody else has been able to succeed in the MMA market? It's mostly because of loyalty to the UFC brand. The UFC continues to do shockingly big numbers even in the midst of the worst recession since the great depression, even as the WWE struggles on PPV and boxing has mostly abandoned it. They've established such a good rapport with their fans that they can get them to splurge even in tough times like these. Once you realize the importance of this brand loyalty, it's easier to understand why Dana was so upset about Anderson's performance. They ask fans to spend 50 dollars in a time where that money isn't easy to come by, and you don't want fans thinking they got ripped off.
3. Resisting network pressure: In 2007 and 2008, everyone anticipated a big UFC TV deal. First it was with HBO, and then with one of the big 3 networks. But when the UFC got into the room with these parties, it was clear that they wanted to change the product for mass consumption. Dana made a key decision to refuse to let network executives take control of the UFC for chump change, and chose to control his own destiny. Now he's the one raking in millions in the midst of a financial crisis while networks axe questionable programming left and right.
This decision, roundly criticized at the time, was one of the best Dana ever made. Networks wanted to pay low rights fees in exchange for production and matchmaking control, things Dana was unwilling to give up. These executives that wanted to mold the UFC knew nothing about mixed martial arts, and Dana was unwilling to put his future in the hands of people who answer only to the latest ratings trends. If ratings fell, network executives would have forced the UFC to give away their biggest fights for free, robbing the UFC of its main revenue source and thus putting the sport at risk in an age of collapsing advertising revenue.
4. Fighting Randy Couture: This was a big one. The UFC's most beloved star shocked White by resigning, and choosing to fight Randy could have alienated fans and turned them against the UFC. Even worse, a huge Randy-Fedor fight was appealing to a number of networks that were chomping at the bit to air it if they got the chance. If the biggest fight in the history of the sport happened outside of the UFC, it would have been a serious blow to the UFC's legitimacy as the suppoed NFL of mixed martial arts.
They spent huge sums of money fighting Randy on multiple fronts. In the end, he was exhausted by the process and chose to come back and end his career with the UFC. This decision was very risky, because there was a possibility of a judge publicly refusing to enforce one of their contracts. But they were able to force it into arbitration, get a settlement, and send a message to any fighter that thinks about leaving in the future.
0 recs |
37 comments
|
Comments
I don’t understand why Dana is scrutinized so much. In any other business if someone took a $2 million company and turned it into something worth over $1 billion, they would be studied in business schools. He has done an other worldly job and we should all just be thankful that those jokers who did YAMMA aren’t still in charge.
by Flyghtt on May 12, 2009 8:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Its all the swearing. If Dana didn’t swear, he would be getting studied in business schools.
Keep firing Assholes!
This is a dream competition for me. I drink as much coffee as I want, and eventually I hallucinate.
by Ubernoober on May 12, 2009 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sounds like America to me. You can kill as many people as you want to turn a profit, but just don’t swear. I say f*** that.
by Flyghtt on May 12, 2009 8:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dana! Fucking! White!
Does whatever Dana Fucking White wants, Fuckers!
:P
Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up, they would pound each other behind the barn."
by xFenixKnightx on May 12, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s the sense that Dana behaves as if the Rules don’t apply to him, and while that seems to be true, many fans can’t help but feel like, if those Rules ever catch up to him, the collateral damage will be to the sport as a whole, not just Dana White the individual.
by madiq on May 13, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
nice article but...
it’s pretty easy to see where dana white has succeeded… i’d be more interested in seeing where he has failed… or if he hasn’t, then i’d like to see that written up some where (with a supporting argument, of course).
has it been all right moves for the ufc since dana and the fertitas came in?
(talking business wise of course)
by ruckus on May 12, 2009 8:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
the point is, his successes have largely outshined any failures or setbacks. if that wasn’t the case, the sport of mixed martial arts (and the company of the ufc) itself would not be thriving as it is.
by dropkick101 on May 12, 2009 9:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
right
i understand… and like you said, the point is obvious and apparent considering the reality of our present situation.
so for me the more interesting question is… has this man/company been batting 1.000 this entire time? cause if so, that would be rather remarkable.
i’m not suggesting that they have been, i’m just curious as to what people far more knowledgeable (like Michael Rome) think.
by ruckus on May 12, 2009 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are some failures, but I think they are failures resulting from their lean and mean model. They don’t have enough employees to get everything done they need to, and because Dana insists on running everything some things go slower. I’d say his biggest failing is an inability to find someone he trusts enough to delegate authority to. Some of these include:
1. Failure to diversify revenue properly;
2. Failure to put together coordinated mass radio campaigns to reach new markets; and
3. Failure to make a real effort to go after certain prized demographics;
So far they have also failed to find a way to market fighters who can’t speak english. It’s a challenge, you can see on certain TV shows that a lot of them avoid having non-english speaking characters altogether because it’s hard to connect with them. Only a few have succeeded (see: Lost), and the UFC has been unable to find a way to get their fans to emotionally connect with fighters that don’t speak english.
Another problem is a failure to get lower end guys over as characters early, and then you end up in situations where they become contenders and nobody cares about them. I still think they should have a daily radio show with interviews of all their fighters all the time so fans get used to hearing them.
These are just some things.
by Michael Rome on May 12, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That first point is pretty interesting… what kind of revenue streams are available to an mma organization? Are they similar to other sports? And if so how long did it take other sports to tap into multiple revenue streams.
You’re also completely correct about the marketing of non english fighters. Seems like a strange phenomenon in a sport that is so visual/aesthetic.
by ruckus on May 12, 2009 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They’ve got clothing – including equity in Tapout, UFC gyms, a reality tv show, action figures, trading cards, and video games. They’ve also (unsuccessfully) explored energy drinks and supplements through Xyience. I too am curious about these other revenue streams that Rome is talking about.
by Jahbulon on May 13, 2009 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just as an example, I work at a Blockbuster Video in Orange County California, and the last UFC dvd that we carry is Jackson vs Griffin. We will sometimes get the latest UFC dvds in a row, but then all of a sudden we just won’t get them (and we don’t do special orders either). Also, personally, I do notice people wearing Affliction and Tapout shirts, but I have not seen too many people wear UFC shirts or apparel. It is one thing that the UFC has clothing, dvds, etc, but that doesn’t mean that they have them easily and readily available at major stores (to the best of my knowledge).
by chrisbboy82 on May 13, 2009 1:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You see, I think that 1 is huge, 2 and 3 are related, and 4 and 5 are symptoms of a larger problem, which is a shortage of ways to create superstars. Right now, the Zuffa Hype Machine is effective on its existing fanbase, but isn’t as adept at reaching beyond the regular watchers of The Ultimate Fighter. This is why its largest PPV draws in this new era are a pro wrestling convert, and a fighter who fits the mold of a standard professional athlete, and is covered as such in his home country.
2010 is a make or break year for the UFC, in terms of determining whether Zuffa and Dana have what it takes to continue growing their company, or whether things will start to level off.
by madiq on May 13, 2009 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really good article.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito on Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on May 12, 2009 9:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Good article Rome, enjoyed your thoughts as always.
And, you’re right about the Randy situation. The way I see it, they handled the litigation as well as they could and the way any company should against a disgruntled employee. They had a huge resource advantage over Randy, so they dragged it out in court without having anything of merit be decided, made it extremely expensive for Randy and got him into arbitration. Then, they settled and kept all the dirty laundry out of the public eye. While it was a messy situation at the beginning, they really quieted it down in a hurry. People may not like it and it’s probably not fair but that’s the way a business should handle the situation.
by kp the ghost on May 12, 2009 9:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I can’t add much. I will just say that Dana’s approach to running the UFC is a no nonsense, bare fundamentals approach. They don’t go hog wild spending, because the sport is hot. But they’re willing to take risks where the potential reward is large, and/or failure to act could be to the detriment of the organization. Dana is nimble and can steer the organization as necessary.
Putting aside the fact that ProElite was so shabbily run, it was also a monstrosity of different businesses where synergy seemed to be an afterthought. Those types of concerns get killed when money is tight, while UFC-type organizations tend to thrive as long as they maintain a solid product. Obviously, Dana and company have a product that’s in demand, whether you like him or not.
by Cannon Jacques on May 12, 2009 9:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The goal was clearly longevity and self sufficiency, the ability to coast through the ups and downs and using the fanbase that already existed in order to sustain and expand the sport instead of going mad trying to get crossover appeal. It’s like you said – they’ll be teaching what Dana’s done in business school for years.
by subo on May 12, 2009 9:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you want to be a fuckin' entrepreneur?
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better. -Samuel Beckett
by themachiavellian on May 12, 2009 11:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because he doesn't make decisions
I guess the real problem with what people say about dana white is that he isn’t what people think. Dana white doesn’t make decisions so he can’t really be given credit for anything. He’s always been a press secretary. I suspect he always will be.
Then again, a lot of people also assume zuffa has been good for mma. It’s true tuf attracted mass audiences for the first time, but there have been grave consequences considering these audiences are populated by hulk hogan worshipers who would much rather see an american super hulk tournament than a bellator playoff system.
Thanks for giving us aids zuffa. Thanks for nothing.
by wentz on May 13, 2009 3:21 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Probably one of the stupidest things ever written.
AIDS? Without Zuffa the UFC would be dead, and MMA probably would be also. Your Hulk Hogan worshipers are paying the bills and that’s all that matters.
And saying that Dana has created the fans that want to see a super hulk tournament? That’s just ignorant. I don’t know if Dana ran over your dog or stole your girlfriend, but get over it.
by Phildo on May 13, 2009 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whilst those 4 points cant be argued and have contributed to the UFC being where it is today, it is interesting to note that 2 of those 4 decisions come with moral and ethical question marks. Those being the discretionary based dealings with fighters in point 2 and the handling of the Randy Couture situation.
Also, I’d be keen to know what input the Fertittas, Lorenzo in particular, had in the strategic decisions made by the UFC.
by GeeDub on May 13, 2009 3:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
UFC can, at the moment, afford to ignore such things as morals and ethics. One of the bennies of being the only game in town.
I’m curious as to what might happen when one day one of their top fighters signs up with a real big-time sports agent (one with clients in several major sports) – and they get a look at his contract. I have a hunch there’s going to be quite a pile of stuff there that won’t hold up to scrutiny…
by lhasafi on May 13, 2009 3:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but even if it wont hold up to scrutiny, it doesnt mean much as shown by the Couture situation. Couture resigned from the UFC with the intention of fighting elsewhere yet the UFC responding by accepting Couture’s resignation as a ‘retirement’ and consequently enacted their ‘retirement clause’. Thats a very shifty thing to do and has holes all through it from a legal perspective. (thats my understanding, correct me if Im wrong)
Couture knew it was shady which is why he was happy to go to the courts, but Zuffa dragged out proceedings and fought tooth and nail to get the thing to arbitration. Couture even filed to have the contract interpreted by the courts but Zuffa successfully challenged that which most probably would have resulted in Couture’s contract being ruled expired.
Point being, just coz the contract doesnt hold up to scrutiny, doesnt mean the UFC cant do exactly what they did to Randy. And due to the brand loyalty, most people sided with the UFC and accused Randy of walking out on his contract, which I dont believe he did at all. Even if the courts ruled Couture was free from his UFC contract, the spin doctor Dana would come out and publicly say he used top lawyers to identify a loophole to end the contract…….or something like that. Again, fans would side with the UFC due to loyalty and label Couture as sneaky and feel that he should ‘be a man’ and fulfil his contractual obligations. Some will say thats good business for the UFC, but you cant have good business and poor ethical standards as far as Im concerned.
by GeeDub on May 13, 2009 3:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The point I was meaning to make (but apparently never got around to) is that a major sports agency may well have more resources to contest a contract in court than a single individual does. Sure, they might not have the kind of bank UFC does, but it’s not necessarily all about the money in such a situation.
Don’t anyone get me wrong, I don’t want UFC to get hurt, but I do want them to start treating their fighters fairly.
by lhasafi on May 13, 2009 4:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh absolutely. I got your point and agree with you. And I guess Randys situation was unique in that the man isnt getting any younger. He probably had the money and the resources to contest the contract but the duration of the battle certainly wouldnt have helped as at his age, his abilities could only decrease as time passed.
I actually wonder what Randys reasoning was to come back to the UFC. I mean, he battled so far and was out of the game for so long already trying to get released. I wonder if the UFC effectively just said “Rightyo. You called our bluff. A court or through arbitration will rule this is your favour if they actually get to rule on this. How much is it gonna take to get you to drop this and come back to the UFC??”
by GeeDub on May 13, 2009 8:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because that’s not what the Randy situation was about.
The Randy situation was completely about money. Randy thought there was more money in a Fedor fight than there was in a fight with Big Nog. So thats what he tried to do.
Then when a bigger money fight popped up (Lesnar) he jumped at it. All the UFC is evil, “I fell disrespected” stuff was bullshit. It was about money from day 1, and Randy continually took the options that looked like they would lead to the most money.
by Phildo on May 13, 2009 8:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think the “I felt disrespected” angle was total BS. I mean, he could have easily been 100% chasing money and just said that his decision to leave the UFC was based solely on his desire to fight Fedor. That would have been a reasonable reason to leave given the stage in his career. To go to excess and completely fabricate a story about his treatment, when it isnt required doesnt seem very likely.
As for the money…..Im sure it played a big part.
by GeeDub on May 13, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Randy said, “you show more respect by paying me more.” this is 100% about money.
It started when Zuffa offered Fedor more to fight Randy than they would have paid Randy. It was all about money.
He knew he didn’t have a lot of fights left. He knew that the Nog fight wouldn’t sell, so he wouldn’t get paid as much.
If any of that other stuff mattered, he’d still be talking about it. But he’s not. He got paid, and he shut up. It was about money from day 1, it was always about money, it will always be about money.
All the stuff about “his treatment” went back to money.
by Phildo on May 13, 2009 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Im getting Jerry McGuire flashbacks!!!!!
by GeeDub on May 13, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t understand why so many people think the UFCs contracts wouldn’t hold up in court. It’s not like Dana wrote them up on a napkin. Their written up by lawyers that obviously know what they are doing (this is obvious because the Randy thing didn’t end immediately in his favor).
It’s very simple, if you don’t like the contract dont’ sign it. The fact that they are th biggest and best opportunity in town, doesn’t really mean anything.
The reserve clause in baseball got thrown out in court because of anti trust problems because multiple organizations (teams) are working together. The only other time a sports contract situation ends up in court is as a result of a collective bargaining agreement, which the UFC doesn’t have.
The courts will very simply say, if you don’t like the contract, don’t sign it. You did sign it, now you have to deal with it.
A major sports agency won’t be able to do much because they don’t have any leverage. Rosenhuas and Boras can leverage one team against another. All an agent will be able to do is tell Dana that they’re going to go sign with Affliction, and Dana will say, go ahead, call me when they schedule a show.
by Phildo on May 13, 2009 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But what a sports agent can also do is attract big-name sponsors, such that the fighters can make more by not fighting than they do in fight purses and bonuses. In that context, a holdout affects Zuffa’s bottom line more than the fighter’s.
Furthermore, an experienced agent knows how to use Media, and to get his message out there, rather than merely be limited by the Company Line. So if a BJ Penn wants to start a campaign to get himself a shot against GSP, rather than defend his Lightweight Title, he can achieve those results more readily, and gain a bigger payday for himself in the process. We’ve already seen this play out without an agent in play; how much more power would a Frank Shamrock, a Tito Ortiz, or a BJ Penn have in dealings with the UFC, and would White be able to contain his venom?
Randy Couture was too old to keep the fight going. They gave him a big-money fight, and a chance to (somewhat) save face. But the next Randy Couture might be 25, rich, and willing to outlay a bunch of money to get his way…or might be backed by people with deep pockets, who are willing to upset the Zuffa Apple Cart.
by madiq on May 13, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But when the option is Zuffa or nothing, which it is, you can’t go acting like that.
Randy thought he could run to Affliction, but it turned out Affliction is a joke.
Sponsors aren’t going to pay tons of money to people that aren’t fighting. Tito has done an ok job of keeping his name in the limelight, but how long can it last?
I don’t think a holdout would hurt the UFC at all. Randy’s holdout barely put a dent in anything. The UFC is the brand, they do better when they have the top fighters fighting, but they aren’t going to be hurt by one person making a stand, their too big for that, and too many of their top fighters are loyal to them, so they don’t have to worry about a major walkout, which is the only thing that can hurt them.
by Phildo on May 13, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not talking about right now, though. I’m talking about 2-3 years from now, when the top fighters WILL have options. Even if Bellator, Strikeforce, and DREAM fall by the wayside, a fighter who reaches a Tiger Woods level, where he’s a household name, can afford to fight once a year, like big-time boxers do. And if your champions are not fighting three or four times a year, and your average PPV buyrate drops from $600K to $300K, then the leverage does shift.
You say that sponsors aren’t going to pay money to people who aren’t fighting, but I would venture that they WILL, because they’ve proven willing to do it in the past, when an athlete reaches a certain level.
And this is to say nothing of other opportunities, like acting. If a UFC fighter wants to pull a Cung Le, or if a fighter turns into the next Duane Johnson, while he’s a champion, then what? Other sports have a compensation structure that mitigates this risk a bit, but in team sports there’s always the sense that the interests of the team outweigh the interest of the individual. What fighter would choose three $500K fights over one $5 million movie payday, especially if he isn’t getting concessions from management, and being treated like a star?
by madiq on May 13, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The whole point is that in 3 years, the UFC will be paying people enough that it won’t be an issue.
The UFC is constantly upping the pay and doing things to keep their fighters happy.
Everyone acts like the UFC is the worst company in the world to work for, when it’s probably one of the bests. If they give you a fight, you’re going to get the fight, and you’re going to get paid at least as much as you were contracted to get. You get the most exposure, so you get more from the sponsors.
Randy threatened to do what you are saying, and saw that there was nowhere else to go. Tito has been saying he’s going to do it forever, yet in the past he came crawling back, and he still hasn’t found the magically place that’s going to pay him a ton to do nothing, because it doesn’t exist, and it won’t exist.
Zuffa would be stupid to let it happen, and nothing has shown that they are stupid like that.
Randy said he had it, they called his bluff, and he came back. It’s not like Zuffa doesn’t know what’s going on, they do, and they’re taking advantage of it.
by Phildo on May 13, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think a Straw Man argument is necessary. I never said that the UFC was “the worst company in the world to work for,” I just implied that a company that has been doing well for about 5 years can’t assume that being unyielding and autocratic won’t one day limit their growth. Is Dana White worthy of accolades for captaining the ship thus far? Sure. But there’s a large grey space between the Best Guy and the Worst Guy.
Fact is, anyone bold enough to proclaim that a person or organization doesn’t need anyone, or isn’t beholden to advertisers, or the free market, or public pressure, should be prepared to back it up, especially against the relatively tame counterargument that there’s a difference between flying under the radar on a fairly obscure fledgling network, and becoming “the biggest sport in the world,” in direct conflict with bigger, more established players, with infrastructure and cultural significance that dwarfs that of even the most visible fighter.
And remember, I’m talking about the future, where the larger landscape will prove unwieldy to manage in an authoritarian way, and where figuring out how to slice the pie will be less important than figuring out how to grow that pie, but concerns about how to slice it will continue to besiege anyone at the helm. If dealing with the Randy, Tito, Rampage, and Fitch situations led to near-burnout, what of other problems, like MMA’s first life-threatening injury, or a high-profile scandal, like gambling, or steroids, or sexual assault? These are pitfalls that other sports have endured and persevered through. This cynical group thinks that money is the answer, and profit equals power, but I suspect otherwise.
Comparatively speaking, this sport is in its adolescence, and like a reckless teenager, it’s feeling itself, and carries an air of invincibility. But thinking you know better isn’t the same as knowing better, and claiming you’ll never sell out is often a Long Con away from being in somebody’s pocket before long. I’m not saying it WILL happen; I’m just saying that it COULD.
by madiq on May 13, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dana did a great job
recognizing an opportunity that was not being properly capitalized on. Everyone was clamoring about how crazy the UFC was when it first came out, but it was not marketed well. Dana took that interest, where people wanted to see what would happen if a Karate guy fought a Kick Boxer or a BJJ guy… and turned it from style loyalties to fighter loyalties by promoting fighters like Randy. This built up loyalty and kept the UFC from going the way of Slamball. They also made the sport more palatable by adding some rules to protect guys, making it legitimate and tolerable for the mainstream
by ryanwk628 on May 13, 2009 8:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 





















