The UFC's Biggest Challenge in 2010: Filling Main Events

by Michael Rome on Sep 3, 2009 3:21 PM EDT in News Comment 72 comments

The UFC is on a roll lately with signings. They've gobbled up fighters from Phil Baroni to Antonio Rogerio Nogueira, ostensibly so they can fill a large amount of cards in 2010. The problem with running 16 major shows a year though isn't the undercards. Sure, it's nice to have stacked cards, but on television and PPV, the vast majority of people buy or watch based on the marquee fight. And come 2010, with at least 16 major shows a year if they get this network deal done, it is going to be a challenge to find appropriate main events.

Look at 2009, a banner year for the UFC on PPV. They are on pace to break the all-time PPV revenue record, which they set themselves last year. Still, a number of shows didn't have big main events, and suffered for it. UFC 93, UFC 95, UFC 96, and now apparently UFC 105 look to have nothing resembling a big main event fight. They've made up for this and more with other big shows, but it will get tougher next year if they have to do four main events on the level of BJ Penn vs. Diego Sanchez on a network.

Here's a quick mental exercise. Of the shows this year, which four would have been on a network if the UFC had a deal? I assume the appropriate choices are UFC 97, 98, 102, and perhaps 104. Those are cards with main events that will be good enough to satisfy network executives, and can bring in ratings without giving away the biggest fights. Now under this new model, they will supposedly still be doing 12 PPV shows. How can they continue to provide routine big shows on PPV if they have to give away so much for a network? My guess is we'll see more UFC 103's than we do UFC 101's on PPV next year.

They can sign all the guys they want, but what they really need are guys that can credibly draw in main events a few times a year. That's why Tito is back. That's why Chuck will be back. That's why Randy just got such a huge contract. That's why Hughes will probably get one too. Perhaps Antonio Rogerio Nogueira can be a headliner...I have my doubts. There was a time Faber and Torres could have come in and would have been big stars, now there is no way you can put a MIke Brown fight on top of a UFC PPV card. Maybe their big stars will start fighting 4 times a year, there's really no other way to pull it off without suffering a huge drop on PPV.

At the same time, there is also a huge issue brewing in Europe, where fans feel betrayed as a result of being fed a steady diet of B-level shows since UFC 75. If the main event of UFC 105 is really Michael Bisping vs. Denis Kang, UK fans will see it as an insult. The overall question is how can they do 12 PPV shows a year, 4 network shows, and 6-8 additional international shows while keeping PPV numbers at a record level, pleasing network executives, and keeping European fans happy? It won't be easy.

0 recs | Comment 72 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Read More: ufc, michael bisping, uk, spike, network, bj penn

Comments

PPV numbers will suffer. The UK shows could get possibly worse, or at best, stay the same quality, and if that’s the case, the fans overseas will probably continue to feel pissed and ripped off.

Whatever TV deal they get, better be worth it. I honestly think the exposure in terms of media, marketing, etc. will blow the UFC through the roof if done right. However, I seriously doubt the UFC can have their cake and eat it too. I feel the UFC may be stretched too thin, and their international expansion hopes will suffer in the short term. Of course, adding the WEC to their roster will help, but like you said, you can’t really have Mike Brown headlining.

Long term, it should be good for the UFC. Short term, I think they’ll go through a period of renewed growing pains as they try to balance out their roster and appease both the network and PPV gods.

I love me some Sexyama!

by pud333 on Sep 3, 2009 3:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If the main event of UFC 105 is really Michael Bisping vs. Denis Kang, UK fans will see it as an insult.

Damn skippy.

Also worth noting, that there are a few events (superbowl, new years,milestone) every year that will have the equivalent of 2/3 main events on a single card.

by -Sam on Sep 3, 2009 3:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Roome, you’re 100% right. It won’t be easy. But if anybody can do it, it’s the UFC — the guys responsible for turning this sport into such a huge money-making machine in the first place.

On top of that, the UFC marketing machine has a way of making us care about fights that we might otherwise not really give much thought to.

One solution to all of this is going to be the disappearance of fight cards that feature two or three main event quality fights, like UFC 92, 97, 100, and 101. You can take that to the bank. The negative aspect of that is obvious: the instances where we see legitimate blockbuster fights take place on the same night will be fewer and far between. The positive aspect, in my mind, outweighs that: younger, lower profile fighters will receive more exposure and thus the whole problem referenced in the article will fix itself as more stars will be created.

I fucking love the UFC.

by dropkick101 on Sep 3, 2009 3:16 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

I tend to agree that in the end, the UFC can work it out.

I love me some Sexyama!

by pud333 on Sep 3, 2009 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i believe in Dana.

by I Can't Feel My Face on Sep 3, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It’s true… so far 105 has a terrible headliner and is chock full of TUF alum, mostly from a season i considered the least talented.

by nastyem on Sep 3, 2009 3:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

(1) Lil Nog should be making his debut at 105, according to Fighters Only. I’m betting he fights Luiz Cane (Vera and T. Silva would work too) so that should at least add some credibility to the card.
(2) I’ll put money down that Marquardt v. Hendo gets added as the headliner.

If those two fights do end up on a free card on Spike TV, along with Bisping-Kang and Hardy-Kim, 105 will actually wind up being pretty fucking solid.

by dropkick101 on Sep 3, 2009 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

How much you wanna out on it we can do a paypal bet

by SouthAlaBamaRampage on Sep 3, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Put**

by SouthAlaBamaRampage on Sep 3, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its a tough one this though. When do you sit back and consolidate? When do you use your momentum to propel you to new heights? Its a tricky balance to get right, with a very real risk of expanding beyond your means or conversely stagnating beyond repair and one that has crippled many a company (and industry) before.

by -Sam on Sep 3, 2009 3:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Two ideas to help this

1) Merge the current WEC into UFC allowing for lower weight classes. There are faces that are already well known and will help push up the numbers. Keep WEC around as more of a “feeder” organization

2) Create a Cruiserweight class. 206-230 lbs.

Both ideas create more title fights which help sell PPVs. While Randy vs. Nog was an epic fight and will do good numbers, imagine if there were 2 more round andthe numbers it would have done if it was for a title.

In 2008, there were a total of 13 numbered UFC events. With every title being fought for twice, there was 10 title fights. With the addition of the interim heavyweight title between Mir and Nogueira the total was brought to 11.

by SanDiegoMMA.net on Sep 3, 2009 3:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I’m 140% with you on the Cruiserweight class. Guys like Lesnar and Carwin are simply too large, and the fact that there can be 30lbs or more weigh difference at Heavyweight is ridiculous.

by HizaGiri Nightmare on Sep 3, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree that this could work, but I’d actually argue that the weight limit should be more like 215-220. At this weight, all the guys up to 240 can cut down, which effectively solves the problem.

Make the limit higher… 230 or so… and then you’ve got guys as big as 255 who will be able to cut all the way down. I think this would defeat the purpose and leave too few monsters fighting at 265.

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cruiserweight is a terrible idea

We go through this debate like every 3 months it seems

HW is already by FAR the least talented of the five major weight classes. It’s always been that way and still is. It’s not a very deep division, and cutting it in half would simply take the weakest division in the UFC and split it into two even weaker divisions. Assume than anyone under 245 cuts to 230…

205-230 Top ten
Fedor
Nog
Dos Santos
Couture
Arlovski
Werdum
Velasquez
Monson
Cro Cop
Kongo

Starts to get terribly weak, even in the top ten.

And it’s MUCH worse at 230+
Lesnar
Mir
Carwin
Rogers
Overeem
Herring
Sylvia
Antonio Silva
Rothwell
Nelson

Wherever you put the limit, it just creates laughably weak divisions. We’re going to have 1-2 title fights in each division and then you’ve got nobody left to fight for the title. Heath Herring is the sixth best HW in the world in this pecking order. WTF.

no, please

Jeremiah Johnson
Contributor
FightMatrix.com

by Jeremiah Johnson. on Sep 3, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have the same concerns Jeremiah.

But think about how some people are arguing for a new 195 class because of guys like Franklin and Silva who are tweeners. I’d argue this is a terrible idea, but that instead you could do this:

Reduce 205 down to 200. Now you have a more reasonable gap from middleweight to light heavyweight. Then make a new cruiserweight division at 215.

The most gigantic 205’ers will have to rise up to 215. And the smallest HW’s will now be able to get down to 215.

There are more giant athletic HW’s hitting the scene every year as the sport gets more popular. I think the HW “talent gap” problem is valid, but not impossible to overcome.

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Couldn’t agree more. I like the 15 lbs spread between classes (besides the heavyweight).

Though the 200lbs class should be called “Super Middleweight” and 215 as LH.

by m-e-s-s-i-a-h on Sep 4, 2009 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even just this season of TUF is would beef up the HW division.

by SanDiegoMMA.net on Sep 3, 2009 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree. There are just not enough talented fighters who can also draw audiences to try and split up the current HW division. Maybe later, but not now.

by Hardcase on Sep 3, 2009 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Another idea, which would be a dangerous double edged sword, is to put prospects in bigger fights faster or at least have them CONSISTENTLY on the main card

I am not too keen on this idea myself, but I have discussed it with friends, but how do you really build new stars? It’s not just about who CAN draw right now, but who WILL draw in the future. Putting Jon Jones or Ryan Bader on the un-aired prelims doesn’t help as far as exposure is concerned. It wasn’t until Machida beat Thiago Silva on a co-main event or Evans KOed Liddell in a main event that MMA fans, both casual and even hardcore, REALLY became aware of them.
Like I said though, it is a double edged sword. I understand that, for example, putting Jon Jones in a co-main event against a top ten light heavyweight could fast-track him if he wins, but a loss would kill his momentum as well. I wonder if the UFC has more shows, will they take more chances with prospects to make them into headliners?

by chrisbboy82 on Sep 3, 2009 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hopefully Dana can get a network tv deal done.

In my market there is no free mma. We used to have Strikeforce on NBC and UFC Wired but now they are both off the air.

Between Cable/Dish, HDNET, Showtime, and 1-2 UFC PPV’s a month the bill adds up.

The problem with all this is now we get so many PPV’s that suck. 93.96,99, were not PPV worthy but yet they were made to be PPV’s.

The problem with the cards I dont see changing. Dana knows that the hardcore fans buy every PPV so when they put on a crappy card like 93,96, or 99 they dont expect a great buyrate but around the 300k-350k buys that normally come in.

If the UFC is serious about their product they need to start the focus on a better product and not more. I’m all for more mma but at the same time I want to see a better product as well.

Somebody please explain to me the thought behind 105? Were gonna go up head to head with the biggest boxing match of the year and either give away a great match up like Penn-Sanchez or no good match ups and expect people to tune in?

Make Bisping-Kang your main event and just take your lickings. Hell I fully expect 103 to lose to Mayweather/Marquez. Sorry to say but casual fans matter more and casual fans know more about Pretty Boy Floyd. Plus Franklin, Belfort, Swick, Kampmann, Cro Cop, Dos Santos – None of these names draw. It is a stacked card but there is not a big name on there to get people excited.

by bigdmmafan on Sep 3, 2009 3:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Cro Cop and Franklin are actually pretty good draws.

by Screwface on Sep 3, 2009 3:49 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, and you’d be surprised about Vitor’s popularity even with casual fans. He was a big name back in the day so people who might not sit on forums like this one still know who he is.

by dropkick101 on Sep 3, 2009 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is Cro Cop actually a PPV draw? I was under the impression that his value as a draw was mainly in Europe (and, going forward, perhaps Japan).

by JRN on Sep 3, 2009 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well probably more in japan than europe, where we saw him fight MMA like, once…

You don't look like a Tanaka.

by spectaa on Sep 3, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He’s definitely more popular in Japan, it’s just that Zuffa’s UFC hasn’t done any shows there. My understanding was that he was signed to the ill-fated one-fight deal to bolster their card in Germany because they needed a live-audience draw there. I never heard anything about his ability to sell PPVs. I mean, who would he sell them to? People who were really awed by his win over Eddie Sanchez? Thousands of PRIDE fanboys?

by JRN on Sep 3, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the champions would just fight 3 times a year that would solve most of the problems, unfortunately it’s usually been only twice a year so that does leave a lot of room
to fill. The UFC definitely needs to start building up more main event level guys to fill all these cards, the only real draw they have added from outside the organization in the last couple years is Brock.

Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.

by ufc4 on Sep 3, 2009 3:38 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs

One more thing, it’s too bad they couldn’t get that Russian dude who is supposed to be such a bad ass, what’s his name?

Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.

by ufc4 on Sep 3, 2009 3:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs

vladimir putin. wicked sambo skills.

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Several strains of thought

1) Adding the WEC adds 5 new title matches at bantam- and featherweight. But if Faber is not involved in the match, could they carry a card or would they just add value to the main card.
2) Expect to see a lot of fights with little divisional consequence carrying the card. They’ve got Chuck, Forest, Randy, Tito, Ace, Hughes, and maybe Vitor as big enough draws for non-title main events. Expect a lot of legends matches.
3) I’m guessing that means twe can forget the idea of superfights. Can’t see them having any more BJ Penn-George St. Pierre fight or the rumored Anderson vs George or Anderson vs Lyoto. By having two title holder meet you’re eliminating another main event that year.

by nottheface on Sep 3, 2009 3:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Slightly off topic

but that pic reminds me that Rampage is possibly the king of the intense stare down. Whether you’re friend, enemy, or frenemy, Rampage will sneer and stare bullet holes through your skull. Love that guy.

by rzor on Sep 3, 2009 3:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Also, will too much MMA be a bad thing?

If they’re puttong on 2-3 shows a month, plus having the reality show a couple times a year, plus there are the Strikeforce/non-UFC org shows….

With all that going on, it’s going to be easier and easier for the hardcore fan to pass on buying a PPV once a month.

by Razzel on Sep 3, 2009 3:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Could be, but keep in mind it’s casual fans who really pay the pay-per-view bills. They won’t care as much about watered down cards as long as the main event is something they want to see.

by Andy R on Sep 3, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The hardcore fan base is going to tune in no matter what and find a way to watch it. It’s everyone else they’re looking at. The jump in buys from 600k for UFC 98 to 1.7m for UFC 100 means a lot of new eyeballs are now either quasi-interested or very interested in this MMA thing. Right now I would say the problem is under-saturation, which this increase in shows should fix.

by dropkick101 on Sep 3, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the UFC puts on 3 shows a month, the market will become over saturated. There are only certain people that can be huge draws on PPVs (Tito, Chuck, Brock, Randy, Penn, etc) and it is REALLY tough to make new stars. The UFC has been building up Bisping for years and he is still getting criticized for headlining a weak show. If it was easy to create stars, boxing would have had about 3 DLH’s by now, but its not that easy. Remember how popular Poker got and how every network had a Poker show not too long ago?

This is not an easy problem to tackle, and completely agre with Rome here.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Sep 3, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oversaturation isn’t the problem, the problem is just that they don’t have enough main events. There’s no proof at all “oversaturation” hurts the UFC, in fact it looks like just the opposite. Strikeforce will be the biggest casualty of 3 shows a month.

by Michael Rome on Sep 3, 2009 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

My dad watch soccer 3 times a week and sometimes it’s way more boring than any arlovsky/silvia fight, no oversaturation, not one bit _…

You don't look like a Tanaka.

by spectaa on Sep 3, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The lack of main events is due to the overwhelming amount of events being put on, which creates more watered down cards. Yes Strikeforce will suffer, but then, all MMA will be lumped in together, since you will be able to watch it in some form in a number of channels and media.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Sep 3, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Merging WEC will be key...

Think about it this way, if you add in the WEC (or don’t merge it, but just create new bantamweight and featherweight divisions in the UFC), you get 2 new weight classes and champions.

135,145,155,170,185,205,265 = 7 weight classes

If each champion defends his belt twice a year, that’s 7*2 = 14 supposedly main-event-worthy title fights.

You could also assume a couple of these guys will defend the belt 3X per year. That gets you to maybe 16-17 title defenses per year.

It’s definitely possible to accommodate the larger schedule of events, without even getting into the big, complex discussion of entirely new weight classes.

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 3:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

As long as Anderson Silva doesn’t stay on vacation forever, Zuffa should be in pretty good shape. Even if each champion defends only twice that’s 10 title fights. If the WEC comes into the fold that’s 14 title fights right there. Add in a couple of super fights and Zuffa won’t be starved for main events.

by Andy R on Sep 3, 2009 3:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

right on andy… exact same thoughts, exact same timestamp

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let’s set up a hypothetical.

36 cards next year, give or take a few.

If they merge the WEC (which is not doing incredibly well and I think they should), and each champion defends twice a year, that’s 14 headlining fights.

Now, let’s assume that 12 of the 36 will be weaker cards that are not on PPV. Two big cards a month and one free on spike every month. They’ll have no problem getting matchups for the spike cards, as the standard is not high.

This means for their big cards they will have 14 title matches for 24 events. Which means they need to be able to pull a compelling non-title fight 10 different times throughout the year. I don’t see them doing that. I can see 6-8 really compelling non-title fights in a given year, and some of those will have to be combined to truly make an event PPV worthy.

I think 30 is a better number for Zuffa than 36. This gives you maybe 10 Spike/Free cards, 10-14 title matches (depending on WEC and how much the champs fight) and the remaining 6-10 cards will be much easier to fill because you won’t have as many other cards to fill with good #2 fights.

Jeremiah Johnson
Contributor
FightMatrix.com

by Jeremiah Johnson. on Sep 3, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This also assumes the title fights will be compelling. There is no way they can headline a PPV with a Brian Bowles or Mike Brown defense. Even Anderson Silva has some defenses people don’t care about.

by Michael Rome on Sep 3, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

True, some proportion of title fights currently are not compelling to casual fans.

Let’s say 1 in 10 is pretty weak and everyone knows it, like Silva-Leites.

I don’t think the proportion necessarily changes with 135 and 145 added to the mix. Now you just have a bigger total.

Bowles and Brown are not big draws, but they’re new champs and have no marketing muscle behind them. It could just as easily be Faber and Torres and those guys are plenty marketable.

Basically, I don’t think it’s a 135/145 problem, just generally the way it is with any weight class…

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Total number of fights isn’t the problem, it’s main events that will draw that is. I’m sorry but Brian Bowles vs. anyone but Miguel Torres would completely bomb on a UFC ppv. Look at all the other WEC guys that have come over, they mean nothing.

The WEC merger will help fill out some undercards and Spike cards. They should really do a TUF season of 135 and 145. They need some stars to come out of this merger.

by Michael Rome on Sep 3, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh yeah i agree bowles would bomb on a ufc PPV. but how long will bowles remain champ as that weight class gets more shark-infested. i think we might be saying mostly the same thing.

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I’d say it’s too early to tell how much of a draw Brown or Bowles could be. Obviously Faber was the one with the really big potential there, considering how well he did with what little the WEC could give him, but Brown especially is looking like a dominant champ who’s racking up highlight reel KOs. I could see fans getting behind him.

by JRN on Sep 3, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Question:

Would you guys rather have 2-3 shows a month, or one really stacked card every 2 or 3 months?

by I Can't Feel My Face on Sep 3, 2009 3:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not easy to give an answer here. PRIDE used to do the “one really stacked card every 2-3 months” model. They would just pack an event with whatever great matchups they could find, even if they already had a good main event.

As a hardcore fan, I loved those shows. But it becomes really wasteful from a marketing point of view, because it’s much easier to concentrate and build interest in a single headlining fight, and not worry about even talking much about the undercard. UFC cards are arguably less stacked than PRIDE cards used to be, but the UFC figured out the marketing puzzle to make it work….

At least that’s my 2cents

by GregS123 on Sep 3, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You mean what boxing does.

by MMASuPreMaCy on Sep 3, 2009 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly, boxing REALLY has their shit together, that’s what Zuffa needs to look to model themselves after.

Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.

by ufc4 on Sep 3, 2009 5:44 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs

Um

No – boxing gives does one big headlining fight every 2 -3 months. But the undercard always sucks regardless.

by rainmaker6 on Sep 3, 2009 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Easy, 2-3 shows a month. Instead of watching all the big fights on one card, I’ll see all the big fights in different cards + many good other fights with less known fighters.

You don't look like a Tanaka.

by spectaa on Sep 3, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

People beating the oversaturation drum are too focused on pro wrestling. It’s a sport, there is no oversaturation, if anything there is too much demand right now and Zuffa hasn’t been meeting it.

by Michael Rome on Sep 3, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

this

every weekend there is no ufc i am a little bit disappointed

'He built his whole reputation as a waffle house chef. They’ve been serving him up ham and eggs with a side of canned tomatoes' - Don Frye on Fedor Emelianenko

by Well Read Idiot on Sep 4, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would like to see the champs defend their belts 3x a year. That probably should be the minimum frequency to stay in the public sphere and keep some momentum.

by Reciprocity on Sep 3, 2009 4:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Not very many UFC fighters actually fight three times a year consistently. I’d be happy to see consistently 2 title defenses each year in each division. Three would be cutting it a bit too fine with injuries (both in fights and in training) etc.

by lhasafi on Sep 3, 2009 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the European fans want big main events, they need to start spending their money like North American fans. It costs most of us ~$50-60 to buy one PPV, while a European fan can get the PPV plus a months worth of programming from a sports channel for the month for a fraction of the cost.

In Europe, does the UFC really earn enough gate to cover super-star salaries or rights fees to cover reduced PPV buys because of a timeshifted live show?

by bigweeze on Sep 3, 2009 4:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This is a self-fulfilling prophecy, the shows do worse because the UFC promotes them way less here and because they put bad main events on them. Wand-Franklin did like 365,000 overseas, I don’t think Belfort-Franklin will do better.

Their gates have slowly gotten worse in the UK even with more fans, because people arent going to drop 100 quid to see a piece of shit main event live.

by Michael Rome on Sep 3, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bisping vs. Leben was the worst main event idea ever

The fight itself…and actually most of the card wasn’t that entertaining, but since it’s on Spike it’s a way for Dana to plug former TUF guys like he does all the time when a free card is on Spike.

More of UFC 70 and 75 and less of 89, and potentially 105 would be good. Maybe 1 or 2 cards a year in the UK that is stacked with guys like Hendo, Wand, Davis, etc.

Beverly Hills 90210.......Denver Broncos 7.

by SSreporters on Sep 3, 2009 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The live gate isn’t the main problem though. It’s the decreased PPV revenue.

Suppose they’re making a very conservative $20 per buy @ 500k buys = $10m. But when that $10m number gets cut in half, that is 5 million less that squeezes the UFC’s margins – and reduces the pool (which largely goes to the main-eventers anyway). If you need to cut millions of dollars in compensation, you can’t cut it from the undercard.

Say BJ Penn expects to earn 2m per fight. Based on the buyrate and his contract, he won’t earn 2m. But he’s not that stupid – he’s going to demand his fair share or refuse to fight overseas. If Zuffa’s choice is between running a tight ship or subsidising European cards for millions four times per year during a brutal economic period… I don’t blame them for holding onto their cash.

Anyway, the big cards should be held in the Western hemisphere. North American fans are the ones who support the UFC financially. They should be getting to see the biggest events live in prime-time. European fans paid pennies on the dollar to watch UFC 100 and then had the nerve to complain about having between-round banter being replaced with commercials.

The UFC does need to do a better job of scheduling its main events though. Stacking supercards with 2-3 big fights doesn’t help things (like UFC 92). The other part of it is that titleholders like GSP and BJ Penn are only really willing to fight every 6+ months – at that rate the UFC’s 5 divisions would produce only 10 title fights per year. Anderson also ruined his stock for a little while there and had to co-main event.

by bigweeze on Sep 3, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Europe is still in the Western Hemisphere.

by rainmaker6 on Sep 3, 2009 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most of it isn’t (though the relevant portion is). And you know what I mean.

by bigweeze on Sep 4, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The problem isn't with European fans at all

It’s to do with the system – there isn’t really a culture of PPV buying. Because the US is such a big market the PPV model works but it generally doesn’t work in other countries.

UK works only for extremely big fights (i.e. Hatton-Mayweather etc).

The way for the UFC to make money overseas is to increase eyeballs and get big TV deals. Companies like Sky Sports pay huge money for sports licenses. If the UFC wants to make money overseas it’s going to have to invest a lot into marketing and building the brand loyalty in Europe. Putting on shitty cards isn’t going to help that.

Having said that I think Dana knows what he is doing.

by rainmaker6 on Sep 3, 2009 10:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There may be a culture that isn’t conditioned to buy PPVs, but that can be changed. I think the gap is widely overstated.

First – It’s not as though PPV is particularly pervasive in North America. What is the live content people are willing to pay for?

WWE – already on PPV in the UK.
Boxing – as you say occassionally on PPV in the UK – just like here.
MMA – not.

The UK enjoys subscription service because it makes sense for their favourite sport. Commercials disrupt the continuous action in soccer, while the NFL’s change of possession breaks conveniently allows for ads

The problem with the subscription model is that the only way to increase revenues is to increase subscribers or the price charged. If the UFC only gets people to watch who already have the channel, they have not brought in any additional revenue and are worth $0 – even if customer satisfcation rises tenfold. However, if the network decides to increase monthly fees, there will be a loss of those subscribers which dislike UFC and only want footy.

Suppose the value of the UFC PPV is $50, the subscription price of the channel pre-UFC was $20. If the channel costs $50 with the UFC PPV included, people will generally either be ecstatic (saved $20) or upset (pay $30 more).

Putting the UFC on a subscription service is unnecessary, and silly. It’s a big gamble to give up current $$$ to increase the UK market share when those fans will in all likelyhood end up coming around eventually. The UFC grew this large on PPV the entire time, and now they have even more programming and a bigger video library to show new fans.

by bigweeze on Sep 4, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the smart move would be to put the European cards on network TV.

If the deal is even reasonable, you can get the network to directly put money into the fight purses to make up for leaving PPV. This can make the quality of the cards go way up (plus the increased sponsorship opportunities should help too).

I’m not sure if these cards should air live in the afternoon or tape delayed that night, but I feel that both would work. People watch sports on Saturday afternoons all the time, especially if they don’t have to pay. I think European PPV’s have been a tough sell (besides the lack of high-quality cards) because they’re so different from a normal UFC event. It’s hard to get big groups together (or fill a bar) to order/pay for a PPV in the middle of the afternoon, and then they run into issues at the regular time slot because so many people will know the results. I think a free show on tape delay will do a lot better than a PPV.

by Phildo on Sep 3, 2009 11:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They talk about europe but it’s just the UK actualy, nothing is going on outside the uk concerning the UFC. I know my country (france) is not ready to hold a human cockfighting event. They should try netherlands, those guys are open minded.

You don't look like a Tanaka.

by spectaa on Sep 3, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Might actually work – there’s some fairly decent kickboxers there. Not that they should fight, but the market might exist.

Scandinavia, maybe, one day.

by lhasafi on Sep 3, 2009 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He posts this...

Then I go over to mmamania and the lead story is that Hughes signs a multi fight deal. I expected him to sign, I just appreciate the coincidence.

"I want to tell me what you see, let's go ahead and see by the fight what you saw, in the ring"

by crinow on Sep 3, 2009 5:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Heres my take

More cards allows for more fighters to shine and build more new stars. I think there are a lot of compelling fighters out there that just need the stage time to tell their story.

In the short term it would be rough but over the next year the UFC could really establish some new blood that could draw. Personally I think the 24/7 features really are the key to establishing new stars and I wish they would do more of that.

"Japan is half-Machida" - iiowyn

by Day Man on Sep 3, 2009 6:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

UFC Primetime

Was a good start but it still pales in comparison to HBO’s 24/7.

24/7 is soooo damn epic every time you watch it.

UFC should do a Primetime for Lesnar/Carwin – to build Carwin as a legit challenger.

by rainmaker6 on Sep 3, 2009 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stop complaining

At least we got fights

by Meshuggeth on Sep 3, 2009 7:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree there is no problem putting on ME’s the only problem is that people just like to complain about them look how many people were bitching about Randy and Nog.

The UFC has pretty much all the top fighters in the top 5 divisions they also know how to put on big fights. But some events will be more stacked than others that’s just the way things go. If you don’t like an event don’t watch it but me I love mma so whatever show is on even if it’s headlined by Bisping vs. Kang i’ll gladly watch.

by Raker on Sep 3, 2009 7:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs