The Importance of the UFC's UK Television Deal
Kevin Iole says the UK deal will serve as a guinea pig for U.S. networks interested in airing UFC events:
"In the time slot we’ll be on, FIVE has been averaging between 600,000 and 2.5 million viewers," Zelaznik said. "To give you a perspective of how big that is, our best-rated shows on ESPN and Setanta did just under 300,000 viewers."
...
The deal is good news for fight fans not only in the U.K., but in the U.S. and around the world. You can be assured that network television executives will be paying close attention to the ratings and the reception "UFC Main Event" receives from sponsors.
High ratings and strong advertiser acceptance will make it more likely that a U.S. network will give the UFC an opportunity.
...
But a successful launch will have far-reaching implications. A successful run could help open doors to countries where the television and sports establishment still keep MMA at arm’s length. And in the U.S., it will unquestionably be an impetus for a broadcast network to reach a deal with the UFC if things go well.
The markets operate very differently, but it does stand to reason if the UFC can succeed in the U.K. under the terms of the new deal in that timeslot, the UFC in the U.S. should easily be able to duplicate that success. Hard to find fault in the deal with FIVE, although some certainly tried to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
But there is another reason to find the deal favorable. This is further case of the popularity of MMA being little more than The UFC Show. As Zuffa expands its influence in the British Isles, the rest of the MMA scene in the U.K. is hanging on for dear life:
By all measurements, mixed martial arts has never been more popular on this side of the Atlantic. Media coverage, talent and public awareness progressively rise, and yet, despite these increases, domestic promotions are finding it harder than ever to attract the fans that play the video game, buy the magazines and watch the UFC.
On June 2, a press conference held in decadent, West London surroundings heralded a new dawn for British MMA. The British Association of Mixed Martial Arts (BAMMA) sought to bring cohesion to the splintered UK scene with a trilogy of televised events. They would culminate in an end-of-year card, on which six definitive British champions would be crowned.
Two months and one event later, BAMMA is on the verge of collapse. Their website has been taken off-line, their events have been cancelled and official statements are eerily absent.
Sounds familiar to an extent, doesn't it?
I think the regional show bubble in America is going to pop, too. It won't look the same as the U.K's and there will always be regional promoters at the very local levels able to put on affordable, decent shows. The bubble here actually still has a little growing to do as promoters in states new to MMA regulation try their hand at the game. Eventually, though, the regional MMA business will have four or five reliable go-tos complimented by a turnstyle of MMA promotions able to string together only two or three events before running out of money.
It's the UFC's world. We just live in it.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Comments
Attention any new startup MMA promotions:
Don’t attempt to build an acronym around “MMA”, it sounds silly no matter what you do.
AMMA, BAMMA, CAMMA, DAMMA…
Keep firing Assholes!
ZE GOGGLES! ZAY DO NOZING!!!!
by Ubernoober on Sep 9, 2009 12:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
YAMMA
Keep firing Assholes!
ZE GOGGLES! ZAY DO NOZING!!!!
by Ubernoober on Sep 9, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
when you say regional promotions...
what kind of shows are you referring to?
because where i am, there are tons of local promoters putting on great cards and attracting strong audiences. i don’t see any bubble about to burst with these little cards.
are you drawing a distinction between regional shows versus local shows?
by GregS123 on Sep 9, 2009 12:48 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
I’m sure the climate is more favorable out West, but large-scale regional shows, I think, have a difficult road to monetary success. The costs of talent and production are often too high, to say nothing of PR expenses. Meanwhile, the talent is either garbage and cheap or semi-succesful and anonymous while being pricey.
Some large brand leaders will emerge. And on the very local level, shows will be just fine. But in between Straight Dave’s Man Slamming Action and the UFC is a lot of perilous territory. It will take a while for this dynamic to play itself out in the U.S. We aren’t THAT close, but I believe it’s coming. The market will consolidate around the UFC, perhaps a few smaller brand leaders while everything else moves hyper local.
by Luke Thomas on Sep 9, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok, i think i buy this argument.
how would you classify bellator, which seems like they might be on to a workable formula?
by GregS123 on Sep 9, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hard to find fault in the deal with FIVE, although some certainly tried to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Apologies for not donning a cheerleaders uniform and being giddy with excitement.
Is it good news? Undoubtedly. But any good news seems to get blown out of all proportion by MMA bloggers. This is especially odd considering most MMA media is US based and the understanding of the UK TV model is limited, regardless of whether you can regurgitate some easily digested stats.
Regardless, I was only trying to temper the enthusiasm some what. While 5 is network TV, it is the least viewed and least regarded channel, which is why I questioned why they couldnt get a better time slot.
by -Sam on Sep 9, 2009 12:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t even link to your comment.
by Luke Thomas on Sep 9, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah but you linked to mine that simply lol’d at the description of Channel 5, which you wouldn’t have done unless -Sam had posted his views directly beneath it.
The fact is – this is not a great deal in terms of building the sport in the UK, for one it’s on the most maligned, least watched terrestrial channel going and at a time slot where no-one is watching*, which means the “stumble upon” factor is going to be almost non-existent (assuming they stick with the midnight Sunday/Monday slot).
Although it’s absolutely not your fault, I’m going to have to echo Sam’s views about US commentators misunderstanding the UK TV market and overestimating the significance of this deal, I really don’t think it’s going to have any bearing on the impending US deal at all.
*yeah, I’m gonna have to call bullshit on Zelaznik’s viewer figures – there is no way in hell FIVE is watched by 2.5million people at midnight on a Sunday, it’s just outright not true.
Here is a link where you can find the top 30 shows on FIVE per week:
http://www.barb.co.uk/report/weeklyTopProgrammesOverview?_s=4
As you can see – they only have 2 shows that get more than 2 million viewers, both of which are on week day evenings. None of the top 30 are on any later than 11pm.
by An0nymous on Sep 9, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I expect that...
…his Sunday night channel FIVE figures are from when they showed the NFL / NBA in that time slot, like i said in the other post about this subject. Now FIVE has dropped it’s American sport coverage there is no hope in hell of them drawing that many views in that time slot.
by Barry619 on Sep 9, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Five
hasn’t dropped coverage of “american sports”
:/ people in the UK make me sad
"he's the best punchy face man in the buisness"
by blubber_guard on Sep 9, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“Yeah but you linked to mine that simply lol’d at the description of Channel 5, which you wouldn’t have done unless -Sam had posted his views directly beneath it.”
Um, ok.
by Luke Thomas on Sep 9, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good insight. We really have no clue here in the states how scene is over there.
Thanks.
by MMASuPreMaCy on Sep 9, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
also
im amazed nobody has thought to mention
channel 5 now has a main events show..
and espn viewers on feeview. the ufc events finish anywhere from missing out the actual main event, to one round in, and they just stop showing
"he's the best punchy face man in the buisness"
by blubber_guard on Sep 9, 2009 5:55 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think this deal is definitely good for MMA in the UK, though its hardly earth shattering since as everyone knows, its fairly easy and inexpensive to watch the UFC in the UK anyway on ESPN. Channel 5 is probably the weakest of the 5 FTA channels in the UK, but it was the only channel I could ever seen wanting the UFC. There is boxing on ITV so its possible they would have been aaginst it being on ‘their’ channel, and the BBC is awful generally in terms of sport.
Midnight is hardly primetime, but it could be a worse timeslot, at least its not during the week. I think this is an interesting experiment to see how much this raises the UFC’s popularity, I think ESPN will be hoping it boosts the number of subscribers they get. It would also gain a lot of mainstream attention if Channel 5 mentioned the UFC in their news reporting, which would be a good idea in terms of promoting the show and I hope its something they do since no other free channel has MMA
by StevenGiles on Sep 9, 2009 8:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Steven, how is the BBC awful in terms of sports? They have the best sport website in the world and their coverage is second to none in the UK.
They don’t show a huge amount oflive boxing, cricket, soccer or many manjority sports but then they are funded by the license fee, ie the public, and can’t just throw money around like a private company such as Sky or ESPN.
Also, with regards to the article, I don’ t think there is a big comparison between the UK and US MMA markets. The UFC is the market leader in both but that’s about it.
by IainLiddle on Sep 10, 2009 6:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 















