Meltzer: UFC 108 Ratings "The Lowest in Several Years"
by Kid Nate on Jan 14, 2010 5:46 PM EST
in MMA News
Email
Print
From Dave Meltzer's Wrestling Observer Newsletter (subscription required):
The total attendance for UFC 108 was a heavily papered 12,377 at the MGM Grand Garden Arena. The place wasn’t sold out, and there was a curtain up over the upper level on one side of the arena, the first time I’ve ever seen curtains used for a major UFC event. Paid was 8,004, with a gate of $1,969,670. It should be noted that a lot of that paid was casino buys, noting that the MGM Grand had purchased a large block of tickets (which is common practice for big UFC events) and were giving two tickets away to anyone who booked a room in the hotel that weekend.
Current trending patterns for UFC 108 are at this point looking like 255,000 to 270,000 buys, which if those numbers end up accurate, would be the lowest for a North American show in several years. But most figured that would be the case given all the injuries changing the lineup and it was a patched up show. Just like it wasn’t wise to overreact to 107, which did so well, same here, because with all the injuries, it was a show that wasn’t going to do well and it was just a question as to where the actual bottom base is right now. I’m not sure how 109 will do. Whether the public buys the two Hall of Famers deal will tell the tale. The advertising for it so far has been good. Obviously Couture’s drawing power isn’t what it once was, but if they can do the same business Couture’s fight with Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira did, then I’d consider it a success.
The UFC has shown tremendous resilience in plugging ahead despite the plague of locusts that have afflicted their fall cards and 3/4 of their champions.
On the other hand, by refusing to consolidate two weak cards into one (say combine UFC 108 and 109) they have now established a new floor for UFC ppvs.
If they don't watch out they will train their loyal fans that not every UFC is worth ordering.
MMA Junkie reported Dana White's more optimistic projections:
"We were looking at (projected PPV buys) and ... our norm is around 500,000, and we think we're going to fall somewhere between (400,000 and 500,000)," White told reporters. "We'll see what happens."
Brent Brookhouse at SBNation commented:
Despite claims by some that Rashad Evans had become a major draw on the heels of his stint as a coach on The Ultimate Fighter and claims by some others that the UFC couldn't dip below 350k buys for any PPV, it looks like that is exactly what we're getting.
The card was just brutally bad in terms of drawing power and while it was an entertaining watch it remains true that the event had no real mainstream appeal.
133 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It doesn’t really matter the line ups for UFC 111, 112, and 113 look fantastic. By the summer everyone will forget about these lousy PPV numbers.
by scrambledeggs on Jan 14, 2010 5:49 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
You're jinxing it.
Next thing you know the UFC 11 main event will be Matt Brown vs. Ricardo Almeida.
Matt Hasselbeck's satellite TV signals would get intercepted.
Interestingly enough, UFC 11 didn’t even have a main event:
Scott Ferrozzo was unable to continue, and as all alternates were injured or unable to continue, Mark Coleman wins UFC 11 by default.
You kidding?
Nobody wanted to fight Coleman. It was a ‘take two years off your life’ card stacked 52 high in the deck against you.
I’d have an injury, too.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 14, 2010 10:05 PM EST up reply actions
Not surprising
Compared to the original card there was no way this card could possibly survive.
Matt Hasselbeck's satellite TV signals would get intercepted.
That's a great point about "training fans"
I’ve never really thought about it but I guess I kinda am trained to order every time. I’m sure the opposite could happen if they refuse to relent on a show regardless of the quality.
The power of negative press is strong.
Even if the card was great.. (not counting the main event, of course)
by grein on Jan 14, 2010 5:49 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
SERIOUSLY
It was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everybody talked about how much this card was going to suck, whioch made everyone ELSE believe this card would suck, which led to a bunch of sheeples not buying the card.
What they missed was an exceptional night of fights.
The path to my fixed purpose is laid with iron rails, whereon my soul is grooved to run. Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering BROCKLESNAR; to the last I grapple with thee.
by judonerd on Jan 14, 2010 6:07 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Yes
Blame the blogs. It’s our fault. What a great argument you’re making.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jan 14, 2010 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t just blame the “blogs”, I blame the collective flock-of-birds mentality that causes people to suddenly agree on the same bit of nonsense at the same time.
The path to my fixed purpose is laid with iron rails, whereon my soul is grooved to run. Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering BROCKLESNAR; to the last I grapple with thee.
by judonerd on Jan 14, 2010 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
But I don't see how the Internet hivemind affected this PPV buys for this card though.
My friends ask me about MMA from time to time and wondered if the UFC had a card coming up. When I told them about 108 it was pretty much “That dude that got in Rampage’s face and….who?”
There wasn’t a lot of appeal to the mainstream crowd and pretending it did would not have done anything.
If Derek Jeter clubbed a baby seal on earth day while wearing a mink coat and crocodile skin boots while burning tires on an iceberg, the reaction would be "Its OK Derek, you’re a Yankee." -First mammal to wear pants
Isn’t it a bit of received wisdom that the internet MMA-o-sphere has no effect on the “casual fan”? And if a show does a low buyrate, isn’t that more plausibly attributed to the “casual fan” not being interested?
by JRN on Jan 14, 2010 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Well, that presents an interesting quesiton.
Maybe it’s already been answered, but just who does influence the casual fan’s interest in a particular card (one not headlined by The Lesnar or His Riddum)?
I guess I’d always assumed that it would be name recognition first, but that TV sources would also have a big impact, shows like MMA Live and HDNet’s stuff. But I’m not casual, and I also don’t have access to either of those shows on TV (my internet’s too slow to watch them streaming).
So just who does influence the casual fan?
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 14, 2010 10:09 PM EST up reply actions
Even if I accept that those make up the vast majority of
variable conversions (which I’m not saying I disagree with you), we then have to have some sort of idea how much advertising goes into each show, dollar-wise in order to really understand the negative impact on this show, and others like it.
I read somewhere that Mayweather paid like $20mil in advertising for his fight against Marquez. I understand UFC isn’t anywhere near that figure, even as a percentage of revenue, but I guess my point is that if they didn’t really advertise to people or make a big deal out of it on Spike, then why would we think the casual fan will be ‘conditioned’ at all? If there wasn’t a big push about this particular card, then how many casual fans actually made a conscious decision not to buy it?
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 14, 2010 10:15 PM EST up reply actions
Actually it’s both.
The base energizes the casuals and Zuffa makes sure the casuals CAN be energized.
The reason it doesnt work for the afflictions, wfa’s and strikeforces of the world on ppv is because the casuals arent equipped to be energized when the base tries. The casuals dont care and its like talking ballet to them.
The homerun UFC shows are when BOTH the base and the casuals are interested.
The base is a very important spoke in the wheel.
by mmalogic on Jan 15, 2010 12:30 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
“I blame the collective flock-of-birds mentality that causes people to suddenly agree on the same bit of nonsense at the same time.”
The card sucked on paper.
Try convincing a casual fan to watch this:
Evans vs Silva (non-Spider, non-Wanderlei).
Semtex vs McLovin
Dos Santos vs Yvel
Miller vs Ludwig
Lauzon vs Stout
Step back and think about it for a second.
How many casual fans will buy that lineup?
People didn’t buy this not because they are following what everyone else is thinking…
People didn’t buy this card because they don’t know who the hell is fighting.
Take Mayweather or Pacquiao off a scheduled card, and replace it with a top 10 fighter with little mainstream appeal…and see how many PPV buys they’ll lose.
“But, but….the undercard is good and will ‘probably’ have good fights”
“Who cares…I’ll order the next one”.
dont be a dick, lets have a normal discussion here.
The path to my fixed purpose is laid with iron rails, whereon my soul is grooved to run. Towards thee I roll, thou all-destroying but unconquering BROCKLESNAR; to the last I grapple with thee.
by judonerd on Jan 15, 2010 1:13 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Just a word of advice: you probably don’t want to call the Editor-in-Chief of the website “a dick”.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jan 15, 2010 2:01 AM EST up reply actions
Luke wasn’t being a dick. And being called a dick and everything else under the sun by people on a nearly daily basis on his website would be more than enough reason to be one.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jan 15, 2010 4:10 PM EST up reply actions
Oh come on, now.
It’s not kool to call out the author/head of a website or other publication. That’s for certain. But it was also pretty not kool for Luke to call out all the people who rec’d his comment (which there were quite a few more than three when I first looked, if I’m not mistaken).
It’s fine to be a participant in your own blog, in fact most readers relish the opportunity to bump shoulders with the creators of their favorite intellectual property (myself, I’ve never had anything but positive interactions with Luke). But he was actively engaging in a style of posting which is pretty much counter to the general guidelines of the site. His place, his rules, but I also think it’s ok for people to point it out if they see something as unfair or inappropriate, regardless of who the source is.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Haha you took the words out of my mouth. Why do 95% of people think that everyone else is either nut hugging on UFC or anti UFC? Isn’t it possible that the majority of people who say something contrarian are just MMA fans that call it as they see it? This card was lackluster, plain and simple. That does not mean the fights were not/could not be good, it just means the card lacked in name recognition and near term title implications. A low buy rate indicates the casual fan is not as gullible to the UFC marketing machine as many believed. In the long run I think this is beneficial to all because the UFC will realize they need to put on better cards for us, the fans.
"You don't come to have your fingernails or your toenails painted. Goddamn, you come to fight, not to be a fairy."
Don Frye
by keyboardwarrior on Jan 15, 2010 8:54 AM EST up reply actions
I bought to see rashad's fish impersonation, what a disappointment.
Some people just don’t know how to read. They said the card was weak, it was true, it was a weak card, a great night of fight, but a weak card. When a strong card blows, you don’t hear people complaining “but you guys said the card was strong!?” because everybody knows you take a chance everytime you put money in a PPV.
"You hit too hard, too hard, too hard..."
pfft
the casuals who make or break a UFC ppv don’t read the mma media.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I know what you mean it’s the type of fan who goes to ufc.com for their mma news who drives PPV numbers.
And a lot of fans are going out of their way to defend this card for some reason the fights on 108 weren’t great by any stretch.
by scrambledeggs on Jan 14, 2010 6:16 PM EST up reply actions
With the exception of the main event it was entertaining. It just didn’t have any huge draws or interesting grudges/background stories pulling people’s interest. Heck about the only buzz the card was getting was the fact that the card was constantly changing due to voodoo magic.
Of course it was entertaining it was MMA after all but it wasn’t great fights is all I mean.
by scrambledeggs on Jan 14, 2010 6:26 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, they WERE great fights, that’s what who me was saying. Not one of them went to decision other than the main event. They just didn’t have as much star power as usual.
I’m beginning to think that you’re defining “great fights” as ones with “huge draws or interesting grudges/background stories pulling people’s interests”.
I guess what you’re missing that when I said they weren’t great fights I wasn’t speaking for “who me” I was speaking for myself.
And no I’m not going to be convinced they were great fights because you think they were either or anyone else for that matter.
If you think they were great good for you.
by scrambledeggs on Jan 14, 2010 11:07 PM EST up reply actions
It was not negative press but a lack of star power and spectacle
The Hurt Locker is one of the best movies of the year yet no one is flocking to it. Why? No Brad Pitt , no WIll Smith, no alien invaders, no men in capes. You put GSP and Evans against Rampage in a grudge match and you’ll see huge numbers.
by John Nash on Jan 14, 2010 6:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
No nationwide release. Its playing in about a tenth of the theaters avatar is.
The man know simply as "Christmas Cheesesteak"
There is no nationwide release because there is no national interest. If they saw it had a wide appeal they would have added 600 screens overnight.
The same thing happened to “Black Dynamite”. They thought they could build up because of how strong the exit polling and fanboy chatter was but as soon as they released it they new it was not getting any attention from the audiences. No stars. No spaceships.
did you mean “Not every UFC is worth ordering”?
It’s a weaker claim but I think it’s more accurate than “Every UFC is not worth ordering”.
My motto,
As I live and learn,
is:
Dig and Be Dug
In Return.
-Langston Hughes (no relation to Matt)
yes much better
thanks
that’s what i meant — fans are learning to only order when there’s a belt on the line
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
As I said over at SBNation. They’ll bounce back huge with 111 and 112 but it does prove that the claims that A) Rashad is a big draw coming off TUF and B) that the UFC can’t fall below 350 at this point…are both very wrong.
It’s not doomsaying, and I think they’re going to be just fine. But, it does go to prove that the brand name alone can’t carry a card yet.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jan 14, 2010 5:55 PM EST reply actions 6 recs
they still made money
but yes, I agree with both of those points.
http://mixedmartialartsblogger.wordpress.com/
by Cory Braiterman on Jan 14, 2010 6:05 PM EST up reply actions
It can carry a card, for about 250,000 buys. Thats still 2.5 x Affliction’s stacked cards.
by Michaelthebox on Jan 14, 2010 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
http://mmajunkie.com/news/17420/dana-white-says-ufc-108-expected-to-do-400k-to-500k-ppv-buys.mma
“We were looking at (projected PPV buys) and … our norm is around 500,000, and we think we’re going to fall somewhere between (400,000 and 500,000),” White told reporters. “We’ll see what happens.”
They were a bit off on those projections, but starting with UFC 111, those numbers should be kicking up again.
I fully expect...
Dana to deny this number.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jan 14, 2010 6:01 PM EST up reply actions
Btw, I ordered the event and I don't regret it one bit. I enjoyed the fights.
by snakecharmer1340 on Jan 14, 2010 6:01 PM EST reply actions
That's in hindsight.
I order many events at home, but when cards don’t overwhelm me, I just go watch them at BWW.
Point is 108 was a gamble and I don’t think as many people are willing to drop their $50 and let it ride on cards like this.
Perhaps my best years are gone. When there was a chance of happiness. But I wouldn't want them back. Not with the fire in me now. No, I wouldn't want them back.
by jebushchrist on Jan 15, 2010 9:59 AM EST up reply actions
Wonder what Dana will do for the 2010 Year End Event?
Pray that there isn’t a string of injuries?
Matt Hasselbeck's satellite TV signals would get intercepted.
To me that is a decent number considering how many people wrote about how bad the card was and calling for it to be canceled or stuff like that.
Also I applaud them for their dedication to providing those fighters the paydays promised to them on that date. I for one am glad they did what they could to put on the best fights possible that night. All the while not sacrificing other events at it’s expense.
Joe Silva gets a good pat on the back for doing such a fine job in that injury infested match-making process for the fights he ended up making.
Just BE.
Putting it on Spike for free would of required them to actually plan for that and get Spike to agree to it.
by who me on Jan 14, 2010 6:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Spike bends over backwards for Zuffa, 6 weeks before the event they could have decided to air it for free and started selling ads. Since Zuffa does all their own production I don’t think they’d have to worry about getting Spike crews onboard. And I am sure Spike would have been more than happy to have aired 108 over whatever they had playing that night. Would they make as much? No, it definitely would have been a money loser for Zuffa, but that might have been a better option than allowing fans to choose not to buy the show.
Spike has to budget for live shows, they just can’t add one in like that (Zuffa does want to get paid). They already had UFC live events scheduled on Dec 5th and Jan 11 on Spike, it would of been hard to get them to pay up for a third in between them. Of course chances are that Zuffa made more off even a crappy PPV buyrate than they would of gotten from Spike for a last minute deal too.
I remember someone commenting that it was like performing open heart surgery to book this card..
And it was. Still entertaining but unfortunately Papa Shango turned it into a salvage job. I’m surprised that Meltzer didn’t get injured reporting the numbers…
If Derek Jeter clubbed a baby seal on earth day while wearing a mink coat and crocodile skin boots while burning tires on an iceberg, the reaction would be "Its OK Derek, you’re a Yankee." -First mammal to wear pants
Weak cards do poorly...Stacked cards do well
Sunrise…Sunset
Likely only hardcores buy weak cards….thus the low numbers
If Brock’s return only does 400k, then we have a serious problem
I eagerly await all the folks who claimed that the notion that “the UFC is loging momentum” was complete and utter nonsense to admit that they were viewing the situation through Dana-colored glasses. Anyone? Anyone?
Chop down a moving tree?
If Derek Jeter clubbed a baby seal on earth day while wearing a mink coat and crocodile skin boots while burning tires on an iceberg, the reaction would be "Its OK Derek, you’re a Yankee." -First mammal to wear pants
by Tonley on Jan 14, 2010 6:29 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
So they’ll admit that now, and then you’ll admit that they never lost momentum the next time they have a card that does 500k?
Can we stop having dick measuring contests and discuss what’s happening?
Who is bigger?
Dick Ebersol or Dick Cheney?
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Dick Cheney is by far the biggest dick.
by John Nash on Jan 14, 2010 6:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Right. Because that’s how momentum works. What’s happening isn’t news. UFC 100 broke records, but instead of PPV buyrates shooting into the stratosphere, card quality diminished, and so did the buyrates. Now obviously the cards getting weaker involved factors outside of Zuffa’s control, but that doesn’t change the fact that, people who predicted low buyrates were chided for not “supporting” MMA. To me, a low buyrate says more about the promotion than the fans. That being said, UFC will most likely try harder to separate us from our money next time, and their Springtime cards reflect this.
If you actually want to track momentum then you need to do it across a long period of time not from event to event. How did the UFC do in 2009 (a very bad year economy wise) compared to 2008 or even better has the mean and median values for events improved from year to year. That would be a way to get to some numbers that actually mean something.
Laughable
This says nothing of momentum. Thanks for playing.
Blackout612- "Wuts teh UFC?"
Ubernoober- "It like two guy who just stand and swing for fence and try to knock each other shit out it awesome"
ahem
just want to point to our pre-fight prediction of 275k:
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2010/1/2/1230499/ufc-108-ppv-prediction-275000
not bad if i do say so myself! and people were calling us out when dana… on fight night… said it would do 400-500k, which was a weird and oddly timed thing for him to say.
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
by GregS123 on Jan 14, 2010 6:25 PM EST reply actions 5 recs
Keep it up.
I love having information like this at my fingertips.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 14, 2010 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
Kudos, you seem like you could be on to something.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jan 15, 2010 12:35 AM EST up reply actions
thanks guys we shall see. we’ve made some bad predictions too. hoping it’s good ones from here on out, but there will always be some unpredictability…
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
All it takes are a couple critical
data points and you’ve got a lot of the variability accounted for. Obviously finding those points won’t be easy, but they’re there. Eventually you’ll get them.
I would guess you already know all of this, but my first thought would be to assess how much weight the casual vs. hardcore fan-groups account for in your predictive criteria.
Anyway, I’m no pro. Just keep up the good work.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 15, 2010 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
Like i’ve said before leave the business to the guys who know how to run it, considering the low payroll for the event a buyrate of around 300k (which I expect this to be when all the numbers roll in). Would put this very much in the black and yet another profitable show, this is the upside to how the UFC has structured their business model.
While Affliction spent millions and had to get this type of buyrate just to break even the UFC can do a uk ppv that does 200k and they make a profit hence why cancelling shows is beyond stupid.
The fact is that depending on star power and matchups ppv’s will always fluctuate the important thing is that the UFC puts on good shows that make money. UFC 108 did both so will UFC 109, while UFC 110-112 will make alot more money so basically nothing has changed.
Right...
because diluting the brand would never have any consequences!
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
One show hasn't.
I chose my phrasing carefully. The word ‘would’ does not meant the same as ‘will’. Outliers happen and the world moves smoothly, but if more of these happen then the strength of the brand and consequently the loyalty to it will begin to evaporate. Raker is talking about the profit of each show as an individual venture, which is all but meaningless to the discussion at hand.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
The diluting the brand thing would have a lot more weight if 108 had in fact been a bad card. But 108 was a very fun card, more worth the money than some other cards with better credentials. And all they guys who avoided the card cause it was likely to suck spent the next week hearing about how they missed a good card. 108 certainly buffs the “weak cards end up being great” line of thought.
If the UFC continues to produce quality events to the point where the weakest card in years turned out to be very watchable, it ultimately will boost the brand.
"an excellent example of why most MMA "journalism" is a joke. Pseudonyms like "toxic" and shitty writing like that dopey article"--- Joe Rogan.
the quality of the fights on the card is irrelevant
if no one watched it.
the casuals decide to watch based on the big name fighters at the top of the card. period.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
mmalogic
Care to comment? And you were so convincing that the trend was continuing. . .
A clear line break would be less than 300k ppv buys.
Unless this resistance line breaks there’s absolutely no evidence that the UFC has lost momentum.
Actually UFC 107 confirms that the trend is continuing and hasn’t stalled.
Think; It's not illegal yet.
by azruavatar on Jan 14, 2010 7:32 PM EST reply actions 7 recs
Less than 300k buys and the resistance line has broken. Now there is evidence that “momentum” has been lost. Now you can say, with the evidence you have that momentum has been lost. There was no argument that momentum was lost – you could have argued that momentum “could” be lost because of the output (i even made those arguments and outlined what a ppv card should look like and differentiate itself and to compensate for the increase in free content in other comments in other posts), but now that the resistance line has broken consumption behavior has changed.
UFC 106 type shows may still do well but a UFC 100 type of show may not be enough to break the record without a new catalyst driving and changing the consumption behavior.
A catalyst could now be where every ppv is UFC 106 quality to re-engeneer consumtpion behavior and set a new base line or a tuf like vehicle to drive more quantity of consumption to make up for the behavioral change (network tv?).
as to the article:
If they don’t watch out they will train their loyal fans that not every UFC is worth ordering.
That has already happened… with this ppv confirming it. People can write it off as “injuries” and this and that but consumption behavior for UFC ppvs have clearly changed – regardless whether this show is still profitable or not it was bad. This card on paper wasnt very different than UFC 103 and besides not being able to promote as much as one would have liked – because of the injuries – you can even argue it had some other advantages to offset that (better date than 103, etc…).
Going forward Zuffa has to ensure that every ppv card is of the UFC 107 variety (108 and 106 was scheduled to be but it has to be ensured that it is).
Whether it’s because more mma is on free TV now (ufc 105, etc…), the markets expectations changing. successive “103” type cards making up the majority of the events in the last part of the year – it doesnt matter. PPV Consumption behavior has changed.
Will the shows from 110 til the beggining of the summer be that catalyst? or will shows like 112 and 111 (even producing good numbers) continue to change consumer behavior decreasing the revenue for shows like 103 and make it harder to break the record. (in the old consumption model a UFC 100 type show would have been enough to break the record if the trend continued, probably not anymore).
Because the resistance line was broken indicating the markets behavioral change the ante has been upped and it’s possible Zuffa will have to do more to generate the same ppv revenue, it’s almost certain the market’s trend will not produce better ppv revenue next year if Zuffa produces the same quality of output as it did in 09.
So Zuffa has to do more than 09 to just be on par with it in ppv revenue in 2010 and most likely will have to do ALOT more than 09 to beat it. That’s why it’s bad (even though the show still made a shit load of money). The resistance line matters.
by mmalogic on Jan 14, 2010 9:48 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
thanks
i always appreciate your input and respect your shilling. you shill well.
but when even mmalogic has to admit the UFC has fucked up by offering watered down card after watered down card, it’s time to admit that they’ve lost steam.
personally i think it was the failure to sign Fedor that was they key moment. the stars aligned and the future of the sport hinged on the moment. Their previous disrespect of Fedor came back to bite them in the ass.
the decision to fuck around with Dan Henderson also fucked with them.
For all their many virtues and great contributions to the sport and treating the fighters pretty well on the whole, Dana and company’s propensity to bully and disrespect fighters is what’s cost them.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Jan 14, 2010 10:07 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Everything that could go wrong with this card... did go wrong.
“…it was the failure to sign Fedor that was they key moment. the stars aligned and the future of the sport hinged on the moment. Their previous disrespect of Fedor came back to bite them in the ass.”
The Fedor that sold 100,000 PPVs. That Fedor? Fedor is the best HW in the world but the casual fan is not all that familiar with him or invested in his fights.
It was just a card that, after the 11+ injuries, didn’t have any buzz. The countdown show was really weak. Lesnar vs. Carwin would have made this event a success.
by snakecharmer1340 on Jan 15, 2010 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
You do realize you just wrote a comment that has nothing to do with Nate’s point, don’t you? Because you did.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
Oh you and your imagination of “hurt feelings”.
Fedor, Hendo, none of them would have solved this problem. This is a strategic and structural problem. Zuffa needs to increase shows in order to expand overseas and as a result there are short term consequences and risks of longer term consequences to ppv revenue.
Overseas markets arent ppv consumers so the gain in one part doesnt reflect the loss in another.
People still seem to think Zuffa planned these shows this way… If this show would have produced 103 or 106 numbers then we wouldnt even be having this conversation.
Fighters need to get paid so you cant cancel a show. Making the shows free waters down other “103” type shows and ultimately the resistance line would have likely broken anyway. So “Zuffa fucked up” is not quite true. If a show was canceled or taken off ppv then there would have been other ramifications. Instead 3 supped up fight night shows produced an average of over 10 million dollars in revenue each. The short term cost was the behavioral change on ppv consumption and now Zuffa has to up its game to maintain the same ppv results (which would have most likely happened anyway with the expansion)
It’s a structural and growth correction that poses short term problems which if not resolved properly could produce long term ramifications.
This resistance line would have been tested again… I’d rather know sooner rather than later.
I dont see a downtrend being set unless more injuries occur and CBS decides to counter every ppv which talent wise that’s not feasible. So we’ll be in a correction until Zuffa gets its ducks in a row and better organized. Since the resistance line broke I dont see a new ppv record being set until after UFC is on Network TV and the WEC lightweights are folded into the UFC brand (which will happen in 2011 with a new spike deal and a tuf for the lighter weight classes).
Fedor or any other one fighter isnt going to do it. I dont even think the big cards coming up will do it.
This corrective period will be solved once the wec weight classes are folded in the UFC and UFC’s cross syndication in America (NBC sports(versus) or espn) is in full swing.
The magic number was 300k… if the line didnt break during this expansion then it would have been crazy numbers we were looking at.
Once Zuffa collects itself… structurally the sky is the limit. The Abu Dhabi deal has been glossed over just like how Lorenzo coming on board was…
I guess people cant fathom in their minds what having a trillion dollar entity, with political ties to every major government and ownership interests in everything from media, to travel, to defense in some of the most powerful corporations in the world as a partner actully means.
Yep… Dana can now get a camel to fly to his house and suck his dick.
by mmalogic on Jan 15, 2010 1:21 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
small point… but why do we really care if 108 did 275 versus 300? it’s really the same number in the big scheme of things.
we get all bent out of shape because a number that starts with 2 sounds so different than a number that starts with 3.
you seem to be suggesting that you’d be posting a completely different line of commentary had 108 hit 300k buys. doesn’t really make sense to me… the difference is like the margin of error.
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
actually 108 did higher than the estimates that are published here… however the line was clearly broken. ( I even consider 310 as a line break… 325 or a little more then Id have to see results on one more on a comparable show)
If 108 did 106 or 103 numbers or even a little lower – I wouldnt even make a peep and it would be business as usual. In the grand scheme of things this number makes a big difference… and if Zuffa doesnt react accordingly (which it will) long term it could have larger consequences.
Primarily Zuffa cant plan any more ppv shows like UFC 103 or 102 because with the expansion those type of shows will almost definately happen on their own with injuries, etc…
With 13 ppv shows, and the increase in the Free content there needs to be more of a distinction between them to compensate for the increase in saturation.
Couture vs Nog isnt good enough anymore. Franklin vs Vitor isnt good enough anymore. They are great co-main events for ppv’s or main events for free cards but you cant plan that as a main event on a ppv at this point.
I dont even like Cain vs Nog as a main event. That’s a good co-main on a ppv.
with 13 ppv’s being the cieling you need to stack 4 and have a clear minimum of quality on the other nine to maintain the ppv prestige and maximize “peak buying” with 4 stacked cards.
Minimum ppv card being a main event (title fight), co main (contender fight or a marketable fight depending on whether or not the title fight is marketable) and a very intriguing featured fight.
Basically if a ppv isnt good enough for the average joe to plan a party or get together around – it’s not good enough from a business perspective to waste one of the 13 ppv time slots with.
The “resistance line” for consumption has changed so the “resistance line” (quality) for a UFC ppv needs to change as a primary step to get to the next level.
UFC 103 type shows dont cut it anymore and wont work as a spring board to the next level.
The brand is still very much the driver… but Microsoft has to upgrade to keep up with the consumers.
Lots of stuff happening with tuf being developed for different geographies, fan expos, etc… Once cross syndication of the content in america is settled and the new weight classess are folded in then Zuffa 4.0 will rise.
by mmalogic on Jan 15, 2010 2:48 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
well, ok… but the only thing you said that actually addresses my comment was “however the line was clearly broken”
and i’m saying it’s an insignificant difference in the grand scheme of things. maybe “the line” was broken but this is not the stock market where there are are support levels and automatic trades and institutional investors that make technical analysis more relevant. it’s interesting to look but it’s limited. and no, i don’t want to rehash the other thread where this was debated in more detail.
my contention is that even a difference of 275k versus 325k i’d argue doesn’t justify some kind of change in business plan for the UFC. it’s just one weak card that sold a little light!
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
I believe the concept is erosion, Greg.
I’m not logic, nor do I have his (obvious) business sense, but one of the major points here is that the Floor used to be (say) 325k PPV buys. Assuming that not every single hardcore fan buys every single PPV, there is a small margin of error there which could possibly indicate that 275k hardcores (for example) bought it.
But if the number is 275k (like for 108), then what you’re seeing is, assuming the same percentage of casuals that participated in the 325k card, you’ve got ~50k hardcores who decided not to buy. Those are customers you may have actually lost from the hardcore side of the scales and moved back to the casual side. Obviously it won’t be all of them, but I think the point is clear. The dependable base’s interest has shown definite erosion as a result of this poor card. It’s not that the losses are horrific, or that they’ll never re-gain those customers, but it will require some extra incentives.
These numbers for perspective on what I think I understand to be part of the problem, these aren’t intended to be interpreted as the actual numbers.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 15, 2010 10:58 AM EST up reply actions
great points!
quick counterpoint –
what if the base is really 200, not 275. and the UFC just hasn’t put out a card terrible enough to find that base. in that case, the performance of 108 doesn’t really tell you that much.
or perhaps let me summarize my view in a slightly different way:
do i think the UFC has lost some momentum over the past 6 months: no.
am i concerned that it is going to have a lasting, long-term impact on the future of the UFC or the sport? no.
do i think that UFC 108 alone is any indication of a shift or change in momentum? no. it’s just one event, and it’s the least marketable, most injury-riddled event in a very long time.
ultimately i agree with a lot of people’s opinions about momentum and all that, but i disagree that much conclusion should specifically be drawn from 108.
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
That's a good question,
what if the base is really 200, not 275. and the UFC just hasn’t put out a card terrible enough to find that base.
Numbers on this scale, when they represent people at least, tend to be incredibly stable. Like, you wouldn’t see a 5% variance in these numbers if you played this scenario over and over and over. It would take some sort of massive terrain-changing stimulus to move the needle one way or the other.
I asked a question before about how much advertising they did for this card, and never got an answer (probably because nobody here has any way to quantify that). That would be part of answering your question, I think. How many people were exposed (and by exposed, I mean hit with sufficient advertising, not just one poster or 15 second spot) to the existence of this card and chose not to buy it? I think that’s an important factor at play here.
But, if all things are equal for this card and the previous low-tide point (things like advertising effort, approximate PPV buyer base, time of week/day, etc..) then the 275k is a meaningful ‘new floor’ as logic states. People who claim to know statistics, but rend their garments screaming “SMALL SAMPLE SIZE!” are going off at least as half-cocked as the people they’re accusing of taking a poor selection of data to use as projection. These are massive sample sizes, you’re talking (usually) tens of millions of people being advertised to on a routine basis, and the result is a meaningful (albeit not all-telling) number you have to accept and try to understand.
Also, I have to say again, great work on the tracking date.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
date=data
yeah, I know…I should use the preview button.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Here;s something I hadn’t thought about: how many of those ppv sales are from Bars and Restaurants that always show the fight? If a place buys ever fight, how much does that add to the floor of their buyrate. And if certain cards start doing bad – from a bars perspective by not bringing in customers – at won’t point will those establishments start choosing which cards to show?
My understanding is that bars pay
based on their turnstiles that night, can anyone confirm or deny this?
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
The Abu Dhabi deal has been glossed over just like how Lorenzo coming on board was…
I guess people cant fathom in their minds what having a trillion dollar entity, with political ties to every major government and ownership interests in everything from media, to travel, to defense in some of the most powerful corporations in the world as a partner actully means.
The fact that they’ve now got a partner who knows how to do business with the Chinese is huge. People have no idea how sophisticated and shiesty the Chinese are when it comes to doing business. Most foreign companies come to China ready to play checkers, unaware that the Chinese are playing chess. I spent 5 years working as a consultant in Beijing and saw more companies and businessmen than I can count go down in flames. My wife, is in HR and specializes in helping companies get back control of their assets in China when their Chinese managers go rouge. The most clueless are Singaporeans. They assume that because they are ethnically Chinese and speak the language they know what their doing, when in fact the way they do business is about as far from the Chinese way as you can get.
I went to China on business "to play checkers."
They have different rules. The fuck is with that star of David shaped board?
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Let me put this hendo nonsense to rest:
If Zuffa signed Hendo, then payscales for his tier of fighters would have needed to be adjusted and Strikeforce would still have that money to sign someone else.
Zuffa didnt sign Hendo, Zuffa’s “hendo tier” payscale isnt touched and Strikeforce has assigned that money which it doesnt have anymore. How many extra viewers do you think hendo is going to bring on a fedor card? we’re about to find out.
Id rather have all your chips in the pot before you realize you fucked up then half and allow you to regroup for another run.
As far as Fedor… That problem will either be resolved sooner by the market or eventually it will be solved with time… just like how the Frank Shamrock problem was solved with time Fedor will eventually be solved by time if he cant come to terms sooner.
Zuffa compromising its structure and how it does business has more future negative ramifications than not signing Fedor. So just like everyone else who said "Zuffa fucked up by not getting on CBS, Zuffa fucked up by not getting on mynetwork, etc… etc… when you look back on it – it will look like a very smart move like almost every other move Zuffa makes.
by mmalogic on Jan 15, 2010 2:59 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The idea that not signing Fedor and bending over for M1 or handing Hendo a blank check when he’s less of a draw than Rich Franklin once again shows just how far people on here are reaching to bash Zuffa.
Fedor is a nobody all of the shows he’d headlined combined don’t add up to what UFC 108 did, again this is where the spin game falls apart to anyone who actually follows the numbers and know what they mean.
You gotta love that a ppv that does 300k buys and a $2 million dollar gate somehow is a bad thing, yeah the UFC really fucked up when they basically put to shame everyother combat sport on ppv give me a f’n break.
So, it changes the payscales: UFC would still be making money, wouldn’t they? And more importantly, who could Strikeforce sign with that money they had left over if everyone at Henderson’s level got a pay bump? I mean, that’s what’s supposed to kill off Strikeforce eventually, isn’t it? The UFC being able to pay so much for fighters that they leave no talent on the market of worth? Why not just kill them now if that’s the plan? Seems like an astonishingly stupid risk to allow a competitor into the market.
by VirtualBalboa on Jan 15, 2010 8:34 AM EST up reply actions
Hendo was not pushed into Strikeforce’s arms to bankrupt Strikeforce. In fact, Strikeforce probably got the best deal possible because the UFC pulled out of negotiations with him, so he had no leverage with Strikeforce. The UFC handed him over to Strikeforce to send a message to all of their other fighters that they had better not try getting the UFC to compete with someone else over their services.
I don’t think there was any particular message. I think they probably offered him more and after the exclusive negotiating period the UFC had ended, off he went. It could actually be that simple. No in-demand fighter is gonna go ,“Oh no! The UFC might not give me a payraise! I better not ever ask!”
by VirtualBalboa on Jan 15, 2010 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
Dana publicly announced that the UFC had pulled their offer off the table, were no longer negotiating with his people, and that he guaranteed Hendo would sign with Strikeforce, all while Hendo’s management was trying to keep negotiating. In other words he basically told Strikeforce what ever you offer Dan he’ll have to take, because we won’t even attempt to match it. And then for good measure he banned Hendo’s company ClinchGear.
I think all that sends a message: “don’t try and play us off against Strikeforce”.
Its a horse and pony show. You think when Fedor’s contract comes up in 2 fights that, if he still hasn’t lost, they won’t be looking to match Strikeforce or better it by a healthy margin?
Same thing with the video game rights. They can afford to make an example of someone like Jay Hieron. Obviously, they’re not as bothered when it comes fo Fedor.
by VirtualBalboa on Jan 15, 2010 4:09 PM EST up reply actions
Rashad the new king for low PPVs?
Rich use to set the bar for low PPV buys.
But Rich was undoubtedly a part of that.
I like Rich, just sayin’.
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
by misterjonez on Jan 15, 2010 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
Rashad previous fight against Machida did 600k.
He’s had solid numbers for most of his cards. You might want to look up his numbers before you crown him.
by snakecharmer1340 on Jan 15, 2010 12:54 AM EST up reply actions
I’m shocked that it did worse than tape delay cards like ufc 99.
Does this mean that Machida drove 98’s buys?
In regard to the discussion above about whether the media’s “negativity” affected the buys, I don’t buy that casuals listen to sherdog radio or visit fightlinker; however, I think that casuals definitely look to hardcores for guidance, the same way someone like me who doesn’t know shit about cars goes to his aficionado friends for advice when he wants to buy one. In this sense, I can see how the perception of the card among the hardcores could have had a second hand effect on the number of buys. But, so what? It’s not the media’s job to run PR for the UFC or even MMA. If two boring teams make it to the NBA finals, the NBA media isn’t going to look the other way, and NBA fans aren’t going to jump down the media’s throats if the finals do crappy ratings.
If the UFC decides that it’s going to go the extra mile in 2010 to raise the floor back up to 325,000 (or whatever it was) this might end up being good for both the UFC and MMA. At least this will prevent complacency. We will probably be able to enjoy better quality cards in 2010 because of this.
the quality of the fights on the card is irrelevant
if no one watched it.
the casuals decide to watch based on the big name fighters at the top of the card. period.
That’s a ridiculous statement, because the people who follow mma will find out that they missed on a great show because they decided to be starfuckers.
So if anything the quality of UFC 108, might mean extra buys next time someone is thinking of passing on a show hurt by injuries like this one was.
Like I said before the way the Joe SIlva was able to produce the type of show he did shows just how ahead they are of the game as compared to everyone else.
You have a very naive view of how things work.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
by Mike Fagan on Jan 15, 2010 1:02 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The reason the buy rates for this card sucked didn’t have to do with people who follow MMA.
If Derek Jeter clubbed a baby seal on earth day while wearing a mink coat and crocodile skin boots while burning tires on an iceberg, the reaction would be "Its OK Derek, you’re a Yankee." -First mammal to wear pants
I wonder what effect this could have on Zuffa’s future handlings of injuries among fighters.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
you mean maybe they’ll ban injuries from future events for being too controversial?
www.tapology.com | twitter @tapology
I wonder if Zuffa won’t be as “pull out if you’re hurt, period” mentality going forward.
"I see him beating Anderson Silva. I see him picking him apart. Him at a 131 years old...(trails off)." - Tito Ortiz on Vitor Belfort at Affliction:DOR
by Rundownloser on Jan 15, 2010 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
bad card
I don’t care what Dana says but not many people are going to drop $60 in this economy for a bad card. Good cards always attract PPVs on Boxing or MMA nothing has changed.
Except for the fact that UFC 108 was actually a good card it just didn’t have big name fighters on it.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bloody Elbow
Related FanShots on Bloody Elbow
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.
