Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: UFC 146 Results: Junior dos Santos TKO's Frank Mir

As 2010 Ends the UFC Towers Over the Competition

There are many pretenders, but only one Dana White. Dana White look alike contest photo via mmajunkie.com

Cruising into the New Year, the UFC's Dana White has every reason to be satisfied with himself. While the UFC's rate of growth has slowed some, there can be no doubt that Zuffa stands alone at the top of the MMA heap. 

Let's survey the rubble.

First there's what's left of Japanese MMA. Dave Meltzer reports on the financial status of FEG, Japan's biggest MMA (Dream) and kickboxing (K-1) promoter:

It's not a secret that FEG has been battling financial problems stemming from the decline in interest in both kickboxing and MMA. Ratings are down. Attendance is down. Money is beyond tight. Fighters, who often have to wait months before getting paid after a fight, are looking to get out.

The most telling news about the scene was UFC's signing of Dream's biggest drawing card and best known current star, Norifumi "Kid" Yamamoto, earlier this month, eliminating him from appearing on the December 31 show.
...

There may be light at the end of the tunnel. Those involved with the promotion were told at the Dec. 11 K-1 World Grand Prix show, the annual year-end kickboxing tournament, that new money was coming in from investors in France and China. This money would be used to expand into new markets, such as Europe and the Pacific Rim, and not have to rely so much on the declining Japanese market.

A few months back, when FEG head Sadaharu Tanigawa talked about trying to raise capital, he specifically noted that they don't plan on expanding into the U.S., feeling that it would be impossible on their home soil to compete with UFC and World Wrestling Entertainment, which he called the company's two leading competitors on the world stage.

"But I haven't seen the money yet," noted (K-1 U.S. representative Michael) Kogan.

Then there's Strikeforce who have been trying to pick up the pieces of a pretty disastrous 2010. The buzz has been that they are working on mounting a very cool eight man heavyweight tournament with Alistair Overeem, Fedor Emelianenko, Fabricio Werdum, Josh Barnett, Andrei Arlovski, Antonio Silva, Sergei Kharitonov, and Brett Rogers. That would be hot. But Zach Arnold pours cold water all over it:

Between (the news that Fedor won't fight in January) and the fact that Josh Barnett still isn't licensed to fight in California and Alistair Overeem has K-1 obligations and you're looking at a Heavyweight tournament consisting of guys like Brett Rogers and Antonio "Bigfoot" Silva. In other words, if Strikeforce tries to put together a Heavyweight tournament, it will fall apart before it even begins.
...
At this point, all I want to see from Strikeforce is competency. Forget about booking a tournament. Forget about any elaborate plans for 2011. Produce the fights that people want to see and do so in a timely manner. This is a results-oriented business. The rematch between Fedor and Werdum, if there was going to be one, should have happened before the end of 2010. It didn't. The fact that Fedor's camp is even negotiating with Strikeforce and showing strength after the loss to Werdum is amazing. Nobody knows when Werdum or Overeem (or Barnett) is going to fight next. Who's left?
...
It was recently pointed out on Twitter than Shane Del Rosario, a man who Scott Coker loves to tout as a future ace in Strikeforce, has only fought twice in two years for the promotion. In contrast, he fought three years in one year for Gary Shaw under the Elite XC banner.

Ditch the idea of a tournament. Start booking the fights that fans want to see and book fights that are actually meaningful. Book competitive fights with no delays. No more excuses. No more tournaments until you've earned the public's trust.

That leaves Bellator, which just announced a deal with MTV2.

Well look at them and how Dana White can capitalize on the opportunities a monopoly power will afford him in the full entry.

Star-divide

Jake Rossen thinks there are possibilities for the partnership:

If MTV2 wants to make the company an equal content partner, it could mean a radical change in how the network is perceived. If the channel wants to treat Bellator as silent filler and hope the hardcores latch on to it, it won't be worth considerably more than the Fox deal. As we've seen with CBS and Strikeforce, there's no guarantee a deal leads to corporate adhesion. A broadcast partner with no interest in your product isn't worth the coaxial cable it's fed through.

Assuming the network gets it, Bellator still has significant hurdles to overcome: There is potential that its inoffensive production could be reimagined for the ADD generation; injuries often wreck the tournament format; and there's still the inherent suspicion on the part of viewers who don't see "UFC" anywhere in the channel listing.

Although there is no catching the UFC, there are niches available in MMA -- but it takes a marriage between product and provider to secure one. For Bellator to have a chance, MTV2 needs to do a lot more than just the bare minimum. The UFC and Spike gave everyone the formula; it's up to Viacom to find out if it's repeatable.

Dave Meltzer is not high on the deal (via the Wrestling Observer, subscription only):

After reports from several MMA web sites reported here last week of a Bellator deal with FX, the announcement on 12/14 of Bellator signing a three-year deal with MTV 2 comes as almost a death knell for them to be taken as any kind of a serious player.

MTV 2 is a poorly rated network, which recently gave a Lucha Libre based pro wrestling promotion a Friday night prime time slot (where it did around a 0.1 rating most weeks, a normal rating for that network in prime time) which got the company virtually no traction or ratings. ...
The FX deal, which would have included a 30 minute replay highlights show on FSN and Fuel TV, would have at least given the promotion a major chance to be put on the map as a serious player, as they'd have a stronger station and weekly time slot than any MMA show in the U.S.

While Bellator provided a good weekly television show, it made little traction as far as interest past the hardest of the hardcores and drew small crowds, certainly not enough to offset a promotion that paid $100,000 for each tournament winner and had big money deals with stars like Eddie Alvarez and Hector Lombard. Alvarez's deal, believed to be for more than six figures per fight, is so strong that if he was a free agent, the indications we've been given are that UFC wouldn't even consider trying to match it, and Alvarez has been one of the most exciting fighters in the world in recent years.
...
But the fact is, non-UFC MMA has traditionally skewed older than 35 as its prime television audience, not younger. MTV's "Bully Beatdown" and a BET's "Iron Ring" opened with good ratings within the younger demo because of the appeal of the station they were on, and Bully Beatdown still does okay, but both fell quickly from their starting point. While MTV2 lists being in 75 million to 80 million of the 100 million homes that have cable/satellite, our local Comcast carries the station on a premium tier so most have no access to it.

Of the three, FEG is clearly in the weakest position. The powers that be have decided that MMA is a dead fad in Japan and are no longer giving it the push that made fighters like Genki Sudo and Kazushi Sakuraba cross-over stars. They're bleeding money and talent and are just trying to hang on.

Strikeforce still has a chance to turn things around. As Arnold noted, the "X factor" is the relationship with Fedor Emelianenko and M-1 Global. M-1 may be trying to cut a deal directly with Showtime to air the M-1 Global Challenge. If they partner directly with Showtime, why do they need Strikeforce? 

I like Strikeforce's roster, but I agree with Arnold that they haven't managed to do much with the talent they have under contract. 

As for Bellator, they've done an incredible job of finding and building new talent but they definitely didn't build much momentum this year with their Fox Sports TV deal that constantly saw Bellator live shows pre-empted and frequently not shown at all. We'll see how the MTV2 deal pans out for them. Meanwhile they continue their legal battles with the UFC, notably over the contract of The Ultimate Fighter winner Jonathan Brookins. 

Merry Christmas Dana, a couple more years like this and you'll be able to cut any fighter that gives you even the slightest headache and print money while booking shows with no legit headliners like UFC 119 and 122.

Comment 202 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

"As 2010 Ends the UFC Towers Over the Competition"

Umm, how is this different from mid 2010, early 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007…

by Mint on Dec 21, 2010 12:51 PM EST reply actions  

its not.

lol

www.facebook.com/djpullout
www.twitter.com/djpullout
www.myspace.com/djpullout
www.djpullout.com
AIM = djpullout
info@djpullout.com

by DJ Pullout on Dec 21, 2010 12:53 PM EST up reply actions  

/\ this

thank you nottheface!

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 1:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Wow, you had obscene expectations for Strikeforce

Honestly, aside from the lack of CBS (which I and many others expect to return in 2011), I think they look stronger now than one year ago. Fedor and Hendo may have lost, but we’ve seen Hendo return with a vengeance, a decent LHW division (which I thought was impossible), a great HW division, WW prospects, etc.

Let’s not forget UFC 100 in 2009. They we so completely on top of the MMA world then that we’d barely notice if other orgs went bankrupt.

by Mint on Dec 21, 2010 11:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Great Article and Finds but...

Events like 119 and 122 are going to be hard to come by with WEC folding in. Also cards like that happen all the time with other promotions…

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 1:07 PM EST reply actions  

name some other PPVs with headliners that weak

you can’t.
Hopefully adding 2 more titles will reduce the number of non-title headliners but we’ll see.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 1:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Well 122 was free

And no other major company does PPV.

Dear audio diary: Today I may have accidentally registered myself as a sex offender! WHAT IS WRONG WITH MY LIFE
- T-Rex

by sitnam90 on Dec 21, 2010 1:22 PM EST via mobile up reply actions  

But it’s the UFC. There is nothing wrong with holding their cards to a higher standard and ask that they give us something better than a Bellator final or Strikeforce Champions card. Especially if they are going to charge $45 for it.

by John Nash on Dec 21, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Sure but...

with this comment

while booking shows with no legit headliners like UFC 119 and 122.
i believe Nate was implying that if there was another promotion that rivaled the UFC then the they would feel comfortable putting out cards like that one btw which was free.

So im just going with the promotions we have and I see shit cards all the time with other promotions.

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 2:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Well sure i can't but name another promotion that regularly puts on PPV's

But if we were talking about just cards i could name plenty…

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions  

They will always dominate. Though Strikeforce might have something up their sleeves. Anyone watch Helwanis new Backstage with Coker interview today? He hints at something huge coming soon. Something “special”. I’ve heard rumors of a reality show from them. Would be cool. Especially if its on CBS!

Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up, they would pound each other behind the barn."

by xFenixKnightx on Dec 21, 2010 1:20 PM EST reply actions  

They've got something bigger than you could possibly imagine

if this article is accurate.

Shane Del Rosario, a man who Scott Coker loves to tout as a future ace in Strikeforce, has only fought twice in two years for the promotion. In contrast, he fought three years in one year for Gary Shaw under the Elite XC banner.

He fought THREE YEARS in the space of ONE YEAR.

With a time traveller on their roster, it’s only a matter of time before they send him back to 92 to coach Art Jimmerson to victory in UFC 1 and kill the UFC at its inception.

by Terminhater on Dec 21, 2010 3:44 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Nooo you might get stuck in the 3rd level!

It's official. Les Miles DOES NOT have a deal with the devil. He beat him Nov. 6th, 24-21.

by DayGeaux on Dec 21, 2010 3:52 PM EST up reply actions  

We have to go…deeper.

Hard core MMA fan since UFC 99

by ChiCubs23 on Dec 21, 2010 4:17 PM EST up reply actions  

lol

Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up, they would pound each other behind the barn."

by xFenixKnightx on Dec 21, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions  

I was always confused...

How are Dana and Japanese MMA at each others throats again?

Most of the American public has no clue that the scene exists in the first place.

"Brock Lesnar's NCAA record 8 years removed is absolutely relevant. Alistair Overeem winning the K-1 World Grand Prix in 2010? A total Non sequitur that isn't worth debate."

by VelociAldo on Dec 21, 2010 1:21 PM EST reply actions  

well

Remember when Pride was around?
Remember how they had a couple of fighters the UFC wanted and couldn’t have? Like oh, let’s see….Shogun, Big Nog, Wandy, Cro Cop, Dan Henderson, Little Nog, Takanori Gomi…etc etc
Now we’re seeing the UFC rob FEG/Dream and Sengoku of Kid Yamamoto, Akiyama, Gomi, Omigawa and many many more.
In a global marketplace with a limited number of top competitors, it doesn’t matter if promotions are competing for the same audience as much as that they’re competing for the same fighters.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 1:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Those Japanese promotions shouldn’t be surprised if some of their fighters decide to jump ship to the UFC; the UFC always pays their fighters!

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 1:51 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah

When the money dries up the fighters won’t stay so Dana has no worries there.

"Brock Lesnar's NCAA record 8 years removed is absolutely relevant. Alistair Overeem winning the K-1 World Grand Prix in 2010? A total Non sequitur that isn't worth debate."

by VelociAldo on Dec 21, 2010 2:10 PM EST up reply actions  

Merry Christmas Dana, a couple more years like this and you’ll be able to cut any fighter that gives you even the slightest headache and print money while booking shows with no legit headliners like UFC 119 and 122.

The WEC folding will prevent events like that from happening. At least, that was one of the big reason for why fans wanted the merger (amongst other reasons). I really hope that is the case. However, I do not put it past the UFC to push fans, to see just what they can get away with in terms of weak shows vs returns. If it ends up that way, then I guess I’ll just have to be more selective in which shows I will buy/watch/support. Yes, other promotions put on mediocre cards all the time, but they’re not the UFC. If Dana expects us to treat the UFC as being the be-all, end-all of MMA, then he’s gotta give us the quality. For the most part, the UFC has done a great job delivering quality, so I hope that quality does not diminish just because they feel they can get away with a certain floor for buys.

by pud333 on Dec 21, 2010 1:28 PM EST reply actions  

any monopoly will abuse it's power

that’s just human nature. power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
shockingly even fight promoters and casino owners are not immune.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 1:40 PM EST up reply actions  

So, the UFC making good business decisions is a sign of corruption?

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 1:52 PM EST up reply actions  

It’s not a sign of corruption. The fear is what too much success and monopolization may do to fighters, fans, and quality of shows. It’s a legitimate concern.

by pud333 on Dec 21, 2010 1:55 PM EST up reply actions  

I don’t see the NFL, NHL, MLB or NBA doing anything to lower their success despite being monopolies in their respective sports. Why would the UFC sabbotage themselves by making their fans angry and cause them not to buy their PPVs?

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

there's a difference between a cartel

like the NFL which has 26 competing owners and a single owner organization like the UFC.
If Terrel Owens can’t get along with one owner, he can always field offers from the rest of the league.
The UFC doesn’t work that way.
MLB is a little different because of the inequitable way they split TV revenue but even there if you piss off the Yankees there are always the Braves, Red Sox, Cubs, etc to bid for a top player’s services.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions  

True but come on Nate do you really ever expect MMA to become mainstream if...

consumers are forced to do hardcore research to find out which promotion their favorite fighter is going to fight on next and if they have the channel?

Consumers need singularity. One place to watch one sport and keep up with thier favorite fighters. The sport can’t get any bigger than it is if we expect casual fans to become hardcore fans.

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 2:36 PM EST up reply actions  

If the casual fans only know of UFC, what’s the difference?

by Rufford on Dec 21, 2010 2:38 PM EST up reply actions  

The difference is the future of the sport...

Overeem, Fedor, etc in the UFC. These are people casual fans don’t have access to because you never know where they are fighting next.

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 2:42 PM EST up reply actions  

But the sport will still grow if casual fans NEVER learn of those guys.

Fan recognizability of Fedor and Overeem does not preclude the growth of MMA. Believe it or not, but there are NBA caliber players playing in Europe right now who are a l;ot better than some of the players currently in the league. Just like MMA, sometimes a basketball player can make more money outside of the NBA than inside it. One player a couple years ago (Jannero Pargo) left for that exact reason. Allen Iverson is another example. Still, all the Euro-league players who haven’t had their big break haven’t hurt the NBA’s appeal to the fans simply because they (the Euro league players) are absent.

Consumers need singularity. One place to watch one sport and keep up with thier favorite fighters. The sport can’t get any bigger than it is if we expect casual fans to become hardcore fans.

Sure it can. Where is it written that casual fans can’t embrace another organization? They embrace different golf tournaments and tennis tournaments. Different boxing promoters attract the same fanbase as well. It’s been done before and can be duplicated with MMA.

by Sucker-Lite on Dec 21, 2010 4:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Come on Allen Iverson...

He went because no one in the NBA wanted him… he fell off. But yes i see what your saying.

The thing is Euro League players do not have an audience in N. America. So to go somewhere where there is not a competing audience would not hurt the NBA’s appeal at all. So can we atleast agree on one league for N. America?

Golf is a network television promotion therefore lot easier finding where to watch it. Not to mention its a much older sport with a already strong base of fans. Currently MMA is majority PPV. and as for boxing its a fighter based promotion. As we see with MMA people like a brand.

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, first of all...

….Did Iverson leave because nobody wanted him or did he leave because nobody wanted him in his preferred price range? If he was still in the league, he would be far from the worst guard in the league. The point is, just because some of the best ballers in the world play in Europe doesn’t mean the NBA’s image will suffer as a result amongst fans.

As far as one league in North America is concerned, that would be like saying there’s no room for the Arena Football League. The AFL doesn’t significantly tamper with the NFL’s fanbase at all. If anything, AFL fans are also NFL fans. Similarly, most SF fans are also UFC fans. For those consumers who need singularity, they will merely be UFC fans and not bother with any lesser organizations…pretty much how it is right now.

by Sucker-Lite on Dec 23, 2010 10:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Btw why is it that...

a more likely analogy would be Terrell Owens does not get along with one Camp i.e. Jacksons MMA or managmement and can always take offers from other management.

Now if Terrell Owens had a problem with the owner of NFL i’m very sure it’d be a much different situation.

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 2:40 PM EST up reply actions  

there is no OWNER of the NFL

there is a cartel of 26 (or however many teams it is now) different owners. the commissioner is an employee of the owners.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:14 PM EST up reply actions  

32 Owners

And the Jackson camp analogy doesn’t hold any water because it’s not the camp that pays the fighters. Who cares if a fighter switches camps? It won’t have any impact on his status with a fighter-paying organization like the UFC.

Terrell Owens having a problem with the NFL, kind of like Pacman Jones back in the day, is more akin to a fighter having a problem with Dana White and the UFC. But Pacman violated league rules. He wasn’t arbitrarily targeted. No one individual can ban a player from the NFL. Skills be damned. If a football player can convince one of the 32 owners to take a chance on him, he has a job in the league.

by Sucker-Lite on Dec 21, 2010 3:54 PM EST up reply actions  

learn something new everyday lol

either way…until we have some pure curuption going on then its all speculation as to what could happen.

I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones

by AfroSamurai on Dec 21, 2010 4:34 PM EST up reply actions  

no

that’s not what I said.
But having monopoly power will create an almost irresistible tempation to engage in corrupt practices. all monopolies do it. it’s human nature.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions  

They just don’t see the acts as corrupt, instead it turns into an honorable act of corruption that is done to save what has been “worked so hard far”.

When in Rome we shall do as the Romans, when in Hell we do shots at the bar.

by Barack Lesnar on Dec 21, 2010 2:35 PM EST up reply actions  

What I’m saying is why would the UFC behave against their own interests by pissing off too many fighters (low salaries) or fans (bad cards)? If they piss off fighters by playing hardball with the salaries, some of them will just leave for other minor promotions (there always will be minor promotions, MFC, Bellator, etc.) and if they piss off fans by putting together crappy cards too often, those fans will start not buying the PPVs. Why would the UFC do either of those things?

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 2:47 PM EST up reply actions  

it won't be

they are running enormous profit margins right now. they can water down the product a great deal and still make great profits.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:15 PM EST up reply actions  

If their intention was to water down the product and maximize profits, why would they have sustained WEC so long? Why bother with a bunch of unknowns WEC fighters and not simply fold them altogether instead of bring those guys in?

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 5:07 PM EST up reply actions  

the purpose of WEC was to keep competitors

off of the Versus network. They had to change their Spike TV deal so Spike didn’t have an exclusive deal to be the only cable network that aired UFC events before they could do what they’re doing now — put UFC on two channels.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 5:44 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm hoping for the best, expecting the worst.

I am expecting more fighters to get marooned like so many ex UFC fighters have.

by pud333 on Dec 21, 2010 1:53 PM EST up reply actions  

Well said. Rec’d.

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 2:17 PM EST up reply actions  

amen

"I have smoked weed with alot of UFC champions" - Joe Rogan

by milk72 on Dec 21, 2010 2:25 PM EST up reply actions  

how come fighter salaries in the UFC have not grown to match the growth in profit for Zuffa?

they’ve certainly managed to dramatically increase executive compensation.
This end of the rainbow myth that Zuffa is selling is utter bullshit. “Once we’re the biggest sport in the world it’ll be big pay days for all the fighters.” yeah right.
Lot of good that will do guys in their 30’s right now.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions  

I disagree.

It would be good for the fighters and the next best thing from a union for their negotiating power, but I don’t see it as beneficial for the fans and the fans are the ones who pay the bills.

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:18 PM EST up reply actions  

it's a circle of life type thing

fighters get a better shake, the better athlete fights mma, the better fights we get

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:19 PM EST up reply actions  

fixed
fighters get a better shake, the better athlete fights mma, the better fights we get to talk about, but ultimately never ever happen

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:22 PM EST up reply actions  

That is the downside

But MMA has never been a single organization entity. That has just been a misnomer from TUF era fans.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:32 PM EST up reply actions  

That isn't to say it can't be...

Obviously there are problems with one organization running everything, but there are also problems with multiple organizations getting in the mix. As a fan I’d rather see all the fighters under one roof.

That said, I would also like to see guaranteed contracts and I don’t like the idea that pissing off one guy (Dana) can ruin your livelihood.

Whatever though, I don’t blame Zuffa for making as much money as they can. Such is life and this is the world we live in. I don’t look at MMA as a likely instigator of mass social change.

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:39 PM EST up reply actions  

the UFC can't book Josh Koscheck vs Jon Fitch

for example. even a monopoly won’t give the fans all the fights we ever wish for.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:50 PM EST up reply actions  

right

and where the flyin fuck is GSP vs Anderson? We want it, but Dana has continued to soften his stool on it but never actually drops it in the bowl for us, and doesn’t seem like he ever will.

Grossest analogy ever.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:57 PM EST up reply actions  

Teammates and weight classes

Create enough barriers. Promotional barrier further complicate the problem. 2 + 1 = 3

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:59 PM EST up reply actions  

You mean the modern MMA era? Past TUF, it has most definitely been a single organization entity.

Guillotine.

by iiowyn on Dec 21, 2010 4:09 PM EST up reply actions  

How do you figure?

Pride collapsed only 3 years ago and they failed to secure Fedor or stop Strikeforce from growing. Misnomer.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:17 PM EST up reply actions  

>watching a UFC ppv at a bar <

Friend – “Did you know Herschel Walker fights?”

Me – “Ya, I’m a fan just because..”

Friend – "Is he fighting tonight? "

by Rufford on Dec 21, 2010 4:22 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Friend – Did you see the UFC with Fedor?

Friend – Strikeforce? Is that the other UFC thing?

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 5:11 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't know that that is true.

I remember our local radio guys giving the Rogers and Fedor bout a lot of time here. That Epic Beard Man meme ended up involving a faux promo cut for a rematch in Strikeforce actually featuring EBM that some radio guy did in an interview with them. Their events have been covered on ESPN.

Does it have UFC saturation in the market? No but SF is more popular than people think.

One thing I’ve learned is that we here in the dorksphere have no idea what causal fans think or want or like or believe or know.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:23 PM EST up reply actions  

I don’t think a monopoly would be a big deal if the fighters had a fighters union. They could potentially hold lock outs if their demands weren’t met and could keep the system in check.

It's official. Les Miles DOES NOT have a deal with the devil. He beat him Nov. 6th, 24-21.

by DayGeaux on Dec 21, 2010 3:22 PM EST up reply actions  

good luck with that

this is the wrong era to be trying to start a union. the courts, the culture and economics are all stacked against a fighters union. no chance of getting Fedor or Brock to join a fighter’s union and the headliners drive the business completely. you can replace chris lytle with a non-union fighter on the undercard and no one cares.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:26 PM EST up reply actions  

the courts, the culture and economics are all stacked against a fighters union

the problem more so than Dana White’s application

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Unions in sports seem to be common place though. Fedor and Brock might be a lost cause, but I could see a pissed off BJ Penn or another outspoken\temperamental fighter help start a union.

It's official. Les Miles DOES NOT have a deal with the devil. He beat him Nov. 6th, 24-21.

by DayGeaux on Dec 21, 2010 3:36 PM EST up reply actions  

those unions were set up in a very different era

when the courts, regulators and culture were all very much behind the idea of unions.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:50 PM EST up reply actions  

you are wrong

most of the fans are like the rest of the American public. They root for the wealthy to aggregate more and more money and power based on a fantasy that they too will someday ascend the ranks and become royalty.
It’s like watching the evolution of the old serf mentality in Czarist Russia in which the serfs were always ready to violently attack anyone deemed a threat to the Czar and the Patriarch of the Church.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 10:07 PM EST up reply actions  

I know I am but I was trying to go out on a positive note. i mean, there’s a reason the top 1% went from 8% of all income to around 22% over the last 30 years and no one bats an eye.

by John Nash on Dec 21, 2010 10:24 PM EST up reply actions  

I could never understand how so many americans got duped by the conservative right. There is this huge shift in the flow of income that is letting the rich keep a greater part of the economy for themselves, as you pointed out, yet here we are with them supporting a government that deepens the country’s debt solely to decease their taxes.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 4:56 AM EST up reply actions  

This is really pathetic

You’re dropping pseudo economics and historical references, trying to sound clever. What in the hell does people having a misplaced belief in trickle down economics have to do with support of a single company, are you that dissociated from reality that you’re looking so far into it?

I have maybe ten friends who follow mma, and most of them do so very casually, and the only organization they’ve even heard of is UFC, maybe two of them also watch Strikeforce and Bellator. Do you think they do that because they want to make money? Because they support the american dream and trickle down thinking the UFC will make them rich? No, it’s because at the end of the day they’re sports fans, don’t want to bother spending a ton of time researching mma, and will choose the most apparent and enjoyable product.

You need to go out more and take the tin foil hat on, raging against the corporate machine is cool and all, but try to stay grounded and remember the real reason 95% of fans watch a sport. The only people I know who support a stronger single org, UFC, is because they never want to live through the Pride-UFC era again, where your favorite fighters didn’t get to face off.

nottheface actually had a smart post, and he’s completely right why there is a strong argument for competition, especially because the structure of UFC means there’s no competitive bidding for salaries like with the other sports leagues, but your just sounding like a crazy soap box man…

by Matty Euripides Castourkas on Dec 22, 2010 11:21 AM EST up reply actions  

He's not talking about casual fans

He’s talking about the guys that join these discussions and say fighters don’t deserve more pay because true fighters would fight for free, or that they’re being paid more than a normal job so that’s plenty.

Kid Nate and I are baffled that people root for the few individuals that own the UFC to continue taking 4x the income of all their fighters combined.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

/\

this

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 23, 2010 3:12 PM EST up reply actions  

My company has reported profits over $1bilion for 2010, a 20% increase from last year. Think I got a 20% raise?

You are replaceable, and the company will survive by replacing you and most of your coworkers (at least I assume so, or else you need to learn some negotiating skills) with others.

You can be sure as hell that the owners of your company are not keeping over 50% of its revenue, which is probably $10B+ if income is $1B. They’re getting 20% at most, and probably <10%.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 5:21 AM EST up reply actions  

Since when salaries have to correlate with the profits the owners are making? How come guys who deliver fuel for oil companies aren’t making $500k a year?

Are the fighters in the UFC paid fairly considering the market out there? Yep, I believe so. Could the UFC pay them more? Of course, but how much is enough? Who decides what is the right amount? Right now, the market does. Why is that a bad thing? And also, guys who stay in the UFC for a while and prove their worth in terms of excitment generally get nice pay increase with every new contract they sign.

by Shnak on Dec 21, 2010 2:55 PM EST up reply actions  

there's a big difference

the fighters aren’t the fuel drivers they’re the fucking oil.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:21 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

The fights are the oil.

Guillotine.

by iiowyn on Dec 21, 2010 4:10 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

A trained monkey could put together fights. The fighters are what make them compelling.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 4:58 AM EST up reply actions  

Yet somehow the worst UFC event does 3x the PPV buys that “best card ever” Affliction 1 did.

by Phildo on Dec 22, 2010 7:16 PM EST up reply actions  

There are plenty of reasons why executive salaries are way way way out of wack

but this is true everywhere, not just in MMA. Dana didn’t create the system he runs a business in the system.

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:21 PM EST up reply actions  

That doesn't make Dana more of a villain than anyone else out there.

Really do we want him to say screw it. I am going to do everything contrary to standard business practices! I am going to pay more money for services then I have to!

Be sure to tip your waiter and your garbage man Nate.

by truck on Dec 21, 2010 3:26 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm not saying Dana is more of a villain than anyone else

but if the system is utterly corrupt I’m going to criticize those administering it in my area.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:51 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes it does

Look at all the other pro sports. There are execs making far more than the athletes. Still, the athletes get their fair share of ~50%. Why? Because of competition.

Dana White operates to eliminate all competition and pay fighters as little as he can get away with without repercussions. He doesn’t use his monopoly to outbid other offers for fighters, he uses it to coerce fighters into signing contracts that prevent them from accepting other offers. It’s restraint of trade.

Hell, even with businesses and banks where execs get $100M bonuses that piss off the populace, they’re taking <10% percent for themselves, because that’s all that competition will allow them to take. DW and the Fertittas must be taking 50%.

There is nothing standard about this business or the UFC’s practices.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 12:28 AM EST up reply actions  

Hahaha

I just wrote a final for a labour economics and one of the main essays was optimal compensation systems and principal agent theory, the entire thing was explaining why CEOs get paid far too much, kinda wierd timing to wake up hung over as shit and see this :P

And to Kid Nate, stop saying godamn corruption and pick up a book if you want to whine about unfair corporations. There is a ton of literature on why the disproportionate pay occurs and it has very little to do with corruption, not that corruption wouldn’t exacerbate the situation but it’s not the cause.

by Matty Euripides Castourkas on Dec 22, 2010 11:28 AM EST up reply actions  

The disproportionate pay here far exceeds that of nearly every other company

CEOs get paid as much as the free market lets them. The top execs get a few percent of revenue at most. Owners/shareholders very rarely take home over 20% of revenue.

We’re looking at 50%+ in the UFC going to DW and the Fertittas. That huge disparity with the rest of the corporate world is due to the restraint of trade in their fighter contracts.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 1:50 PM EST up reply actions  

the corruption i'm referring to is metaphorical

and relates to the lack of need to offer top notch product that the UFC will inevitably succumb to without competition keeping them on their toes. It’s just human nature.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 23, 2010 3:13 PM EST up reply actions  

how come fighter salaries in the UFC have not grown to match the growth in profit for Zuffa? they’ve certainly managed to dramatically increase executive compensation.
This end of the rainbow myth that Zuffa is selling is utter bullshit. "Once we’re the biggest sport in the world it’ll be big pay days for all the fighters." yeah right.
Lot of good that will do guys in their 30’s right now.


I would blame the politicians…it costs money to legalize MMA…UFC has probbly spent more lobbying than any other promotion…

by Rrice on Dec 21, 2010 3:28 PM EST up reply actions  

and they borrowed that money from bondholders

and certainly didn’t tighten their belts on executive compensation.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:52 PM EST up reply actions  

how come fighter salaries in the UFC have not grown to match the growth in profit for Zuffa?

Because they are re-investing in the company.

The UFC is still a baby. Zuffa has only been in the business for 9 years and have only been profitable for about half that time. They are still in growth and expansion mode and are pouring profits right back into the company in the form of international expansion. They have been EXTREMELY aggressive in their efforts to expand their business, and that requires a lot of investment.

by Steve4192 on Dec 21, 2010 6:31 PM EST up reply actions  

that's their line of spin

but it’s demonstrably false. If they were indeed plowing the profits back into the sport that would be one thing, but instead they’re pocketing the profits and using a $500 million loan to pay for the expansion.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 6:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Just because they took out a loan does not mean they aren’t re-investing in the company. Take a look at the balance sheet of any Fortune 500 company and you will find plenty of debt. Leveraging your investments allows you spend many multiples over what you can finance out of pocket.

Honestly, compare the evolution of any of the major stick & ball sports to the evolution of MMA and tell me how Zuffa stacks up. Baseball/football/basketball players went for decades and decades before they ever started to see any real money. Zuffa is less than ten years old and has only been profitable for about four years. Expecting them to ramp up their payscale that rapidly is just insanity.

by Steve4192 on Dec 21, 2010 6:41 PM EST up reply actions  

ah but when competition has been around

they’ve been surprisingly flexible with their payscales.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 10:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Fortune 500 companies produce tangible goods/services. They invest in machinery, R&D, production facilities, etc.

The UFC does nothing but organize, market, and broadcast fights. Costs are substantial for a promotion with a few million dollars of revenue per year, not for one with a few hundred million per year.

We’re not living in the 1950’s. All new sports leagues like MLS or Arena football pay a much larger percentage of revenue to its athletes than the UFC.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 12:42 AM EST up reply actions  

and again

What does Chuck Liddell care about the future of the sport if it means taking a 20% pay cut? How about Chris Lytle?

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 6:36 PM EST up reply actions  

In the grand scheme of things, what an individual fighter makes doesn’t matter to anyone but them.

Those guys are pioneers in an evolving sport, just as Billy Hamilton, George Mikan, and Sammy Baugh were pioneers in their respective sports. Guess what? Those guys didn’t make squat either. It was the guys a generation or two later who got to cash in on their hard work. Why should we expect any different for MMA pioneers?

by Steve4192 on Dec 21, 2010 6:46 PM EST up reply actions  

mmmm because the UFC is far far far far far more profitable than the NFL was

in the 1920s, 30s, 40s, 50s or 60s in both relative and absolute terms.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 10:08 PM EST up reply actions  

With all this talk about how boxing is dying...

How is it that MMA is still trying to go where boxing’s already been (Dallas Cowboys Stadium)? Even without the Pacquiao/Mayweather super fight, boxing has been able to accomplish this. Even with lower PPV numbers and title fights taking place on HBO and Showtime, they’re still able to pay their fighters millions.

They pay more. They get more press coverage. They fill bigger venues. And their mega-fights pull bigger PPV numbers.

How can you possibly equate this to death?

by Sucker-Lite on Dec 21, 2010 4:07 PM EST up reply actions  

They don't pay more.

At least not the lower tier boxers compared to the lower tier MMA fighters. People think just because Floyd and Pacquiao are making millions every MMA fighter should be. How many fboxers outside of Floyd and Pacquiao are making millions per fight? And don’t include their opponents.

by Crazynutts on Dec 21, 2010 4:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Actually, they do pay more

Especially for title fights. The headliners are usually the ones selling the card and thus, in boxing, they make the most money. Bernard Hopkins just fought Jean Pascal this last weekend in Quebec. Pascal’s purse was reportedly at 1.5 million…and it was aired on Showtime, not PPV. I imagine Hopkins’ purse was even more. Not to mention that when you compare million dollar purses across the board, aside from Arlovski’s 1.5 million dollar (or 1.15, I can’t remember) payday in Affliction, Brock Lesnar might be the single solitary fighter in MMA that makes $1 million+ paydays.

Earlier this year when the Klitschko brothers’ promotion company, K2 Promotions, bid on a fight between Wladimir Klitschko and Alexander Povetkin, Klitschko was guaranteed 75% of the $8.3 million bid with the challenger guaranteed 25%, or about 2 million dollars. The fight fell through because Povetkin was a no-show at the press conference. Therefore late replacement Samuel Peter took the payday instead.

An interesting thing that I’ve discovered while doing the research for this response is that boxing promoters bid on fights with the bout going to the highest bidder. Often because boxers have their own promotion companies and thus can afford to pay themselves more money, they can outbid their competition thus guaranteeing higher paydays for themselves and substantial paydays for their opponents.

So, clearly I’ve demonstrated that headliners and champions (and even their challengers), not just the big name fighters like Mayweather, make substantially more than their counterparts in MMA. Take Carwin’s 40k payday in his fight against Lesnar as an example. Whereas in boxing, fighters make a percentage of revenues raised or a substantial guaranteed salary, MMA fighters are like waiters and waitresses who have to rely largely on tips (sponsorships) to make their money while their bosses reap the revenues only partitioning out a paltry wage except the entire wage isn’t even guaranteed. The fighter has to win to receive all of it. In the UFC, they’ve even discovered a way to take a cut from the tips by requiring sponsors to pay an annual sponsorship fee. This has proven only to reduce the amount of sponsors willing to dip their toes in the game. For those that remain, they sure as hell aren’t increasing the fighter payments they dole out as a result.

In fact, million dollar purses are so commonplace in boxing that Sonny Liston received the first million dollar payday back in 1963.

This isn’t an argument on whether MMA fighters are paid “enough” but rather that they are paid less. When you take into consideration that a “dying” sport with less viewers and presumably smaller revenues per event can pay out like this, then whether or not MMA fighters get paid enough becomes pretty obvious.

Pascal payday link: http://www.badlefthook.com/2010/12/17/1881842/mandatory-eight-count-pascal-hopkins-hype-edition

Sonny Liston link: http://fivedogs.tripod.com/misc.html

Klitschko link: http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/news/story?id=5401460

by Sucker-Lite on Dec 22, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Two UFC puff pieces in a row? Either Nate’s getting soft in his old age or he’s driving a new Lexus ;)

It's official. Les Miles DOES NOT have a deal with the devil. He beat him Nov. 6th, 24-21.

by DayGeaux on Dec 21, 2010 1:30 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

what was my last one?

I am now regretting being even handed in this one since everyone missed my point. If I beat people over the head with it, then people complain, if I don’t then people are oblivious to what I’m trying to say.
Lesson learned. Next time it’ll be “Evil Dana Licks His Lips With Blood of Fallen Foes, Will Turn on Fans Next”

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 1:41 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Twas a joke. I was refferning to the Australia piece as the other (even though after the break it wasn’t puff). The last line of your article should make your point pretty obvious.

“Evil Dana Licks His Lips With Blood of Fallen Foes, Will Turn on Fans Next"

 
That’s an awesome title. Why the hell didn’t you use that one?

It's official. Les Miles DOES NOT have a deal with the devil. He beat him Nov. 6th, 24-21.

by DayGeaux on Dec 21, 2010 1:57 PM EST up reply actions  

didn't think of it until too late

plus it’s a bit over the line.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Don’t worry Nate, you have almost 2 whole weeks left. I’m sure you can crank out something on Deep, Taichi Palace, and Jungle Fights to set the record for “most organizations accused of nuthugging in one year.”

I believe in you!!!

by Phildo on Dec 21, 2010 2:11 PM EST up reply actions  

I think you should work the phrase “lamentations of their women” in it somewhere.

Guillotine.

by iiowyn on Dec 21, 2010 4:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Here is my take on your piece.

Thought it was good and was very informative on how well the UFC was doing this year compared to the other organizations. Then your last paragraph just threw me off. I thought to myself “Was that even necessary”.

by Crazynutts on Dec 21, 2010 4:44 PM EST up reply actions  

please

no name calling.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 1:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Sorry.

Accustomed to mediocrity.

by SSreporters on Dec 21, 2010 1:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, what did Fat Joe ever do to you?

by CaptnAmerca on Dec 21, 2010 1:45 PM EST up reply actions  

I’m going to stop you right there. I already know how this ends.

In the butt.

by CaptnAmerca on Dec 21, 2010 1:54 PM EST up reply actions  

For me it was the bar food eating contest to prove who has the most street cred.

John Witherspoon: “Boy you just ate some shit!”

by CaptnAmerca on Dec 21, 2010 2:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh I remember that one

That whole scene was classic.

Accustomed to mediocrity.

by SSreporters on Dec 21, 2010 2:02 PM EST up reply actions  

The whole movie is a lot funnier than I thought it would be.

Great quotes, too.

“Yeah, well, you suffer from homo-unerectus. That means your wang is hugeified not by women but by a man. "

by CaptnAmerca on Dec 21, 2010 2:08 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

What do you mean finding out? You couldn’t tell immediately? She was friggin hot in that movie. And in Major Payne

by disinferno06 on Dec 21, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Thanks man. If he was a little bit thinner in the neck and more roided in the arms he’d be perfect haha

by disinferno06 on Dec 21, 2010 2:03 PM EST up reply actions  

Is the guy on the left "Showdown Joe"

Or whatever the hell that goof on Sportsnet calls himself?

by six_fish_charlie on Dec 21, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions  

I thought I saw Showdown Joe behind 165 in the full size photo. Not a huge fan, he’s a very shmarmy host IMO.

Luke Thomas: If Pro Wrestling had a dick, you'd be the balls!
Kid Nate: ...

by TorQus on Dec 21, 2010 2:32 PM EST up reply actions  

Looks like Pavia shaved his head and entered

When in Rome we shall do as the Romans, when in Hell we do shots at the bar.

by Barack Lesnar on Dec 21, 2010 2:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Also

Maybe not as huge of a factor, but about 90% of the people i have talked to do not have MTV2 in HD. This is a huge deal to me and others. For example AMC just recently aired The Walking Dead which was a smash hit for the channel, however, i did not watch AMC to view the show because DirecTV did not offer AMC in HD so i waited to download the show every week. The same applies to comcast, mediacom, knology, and charter in our region, none carried AMC HD. This feels like deja vu with bellator signing with MTV2. In most regions and television providers do not offer MTV2 in HD which will once again force me to not view it live and wait for the internet download of the HD version. This is a shame because I would be viewing it every weeknight if it had aired on FXHD, which most people have.

by Rocejize on Dec 21, 2010 2:34 PM EST reply actions  

Yo HD is not that different

It’s really not.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 2:49 PM EST up reply actions  

My wallet hates me. I got the HD package for HDnet

so I can get my Bas on, but I rarely even switch to the HD version of whatever else channel I’m watching.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:10 PM EST up reply actions  

He might be watching HD feed on a SDTV.

by someguy22 on Dec 21, 2010 8:59 PM EST up reply actions  

that is crazy talk

HD vs standard def is a very large noticable difference. However, not so much with cable as it is with satellite. The difference between standard and high def on satellite is huge.

by Rocejize on Dec 21, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Who’s the current WAMMA champion?

Respect the Elbow and follow me on Twitter @duanefinleymma.

by Duane Finley on Dec 21, 2010 2:38 PM EST reply actions  

Santa

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 2:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Hahaha…that’s what I thought.

Respect the Elbow and follow me on Twitter @duanefinleymma.

by Duane Finley on Dec 21, 2010 2:40 PM EST up reply actions  

I fail to see how 2010 was so bad for SF

When they made a profit and continued to grow their brand. What, because Fedor didn’t fight after he lost to Werdum? Because Hendo lost? Because they dumped a ratings disaster in Jake Shields on the UFC?

MMA fans may not have been as happy with everything SF did but the year was good for them as they’re in a great position heading into next year.

If you make money promoting MMA on a national scale for an entire year in the USA that is hardly a disaster….

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 2:38 PM EST reply actions  

Commentary

it matters that much

When in Rome we shall do as the Romans, when in Hell we do shots at the bar.

by Barack Lesnar on Dec 21, 2010 2:42 PM EST up reply actions  

No, I agree there

Click my name, I wrote a blog right after their last show about how they needed to change the narrative. Matter of fact, a month ago I might have agreed with Nate whole heartedly here.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 2:45 PM EST up reply actions  

no one is saying it’s a disaster.

People need to stop reading so much into things.

It isn’t a crime to say that the UFC is far and away the top org. It’s a fact. It isn’t a crime to be disappointed that SF didn’t do as much as people think they could have or should have done, it’s an opinion that people are entitled to.

by Phildo on Dec 21, 2010 2:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Well...
Then there’s Strikeforce who have been trying to pick up the pieces of a pretty disastrous 2010.

I agree that Strikeforce did disappoint with some things, but to label this year which overall was a success a disaster isn’t accurate under any stretch.

The UFC was always going to be far and away the biggest and best and SF has never really intended to compete or challenge them. I don’t get the rivalry factor and dichotomies people keep making.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 2:48 PM EST up reply actions  

It can be considered a disaster easily. They fell short in the number of shows they were going to have. They did not have their PPV, they did not have the amount of CBS shows they planned to, and now the future of cards on CBS is questionable. They did not have their MW tournament, their best fighter had 1 fight and they were unable to build off that 1 fight.

The rivalry is stupid, but people believe it, but you can’t say you don’t get it and feed into it by taking 1 line and making major drama out of it.

by Phildo on Dec 21, 2010 2:55 PM EST up reply actions  

It is a disaster or it isn't...

Um make up your mind. Making money =/= disaster. Businesses routinely set goals and change them. With all the moving parts SF has, Showtime, CBS, M-1 etc in addition to themselves, they’ve done a wonderful job of growing and continuing to stay relevant. Surviving alone is a feat in itself in this economy, in this business, if you’re not the UFC. Hell, Zuffa had to fold the WEC this year because it was under performing.

Much less making money? Not a disaster under any stretch unless the measure of success or not being a disaster is completely achieving skyhigh fan expectations.

2010 was far from a disaster for SF.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:04 PM EST up reply actions  

Strikeforce Made Money?

Are we SURE Strikeforce made money? Provide a source please.

May be true, but I really doubt it. Every event – flying in, paying and lodging fighters/trainers, marketing costs, renting the forum, flying in, paying and lodging the production crew, flying in, paying and lodging broadcasting crew, setup, moving the cage, signing contracts, lawyer fees, amortizing executive salaries, numerous expense accounts, equipment depreciation, etc etc etc.
It’s not just what you see when they post the fighter salaries.

by flingom on Dec 21, 2010 2:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Not really proof.

Well, if the CEO of a company that doesn’t release their earnings says they’re profitable, then I think we can take him at his word.

Think about the balance sheet. I think a read a few weeks ago that Bellator was spending like $400k for every show they ran. Strikeforce’s total would be much higher, where are they getting that revenue??

by flingom on Dec 21, 2010 3:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Did you watch the interview?

You responded much quicker than it would take to watch the interview. Please look at the resource provided when you request it before responding. Coker talks at length about their financial structure and philosophy and how they continue to make money where others fail.

Find me a single report that Strikeforce has lost money. The other promotions, Affliction, EliteXC, IFL, etc before the collapsed were awash in reports of financial bad decisions and red ink. I can’t remember a single report that SF has lost any money. Do you have any evidence or is this just speculation on your part based on what you believe the overhead of Strikeforce is?

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Come on now

They didnt dump Jake Shields on to the UFC. That would be like saying the UFC dumped Dan Henderson on Strikeforce.

They had conversations with Shields about resigning with SF but when Shields made it clear that he wanted the UFC they refused to get into a bidding war for him.

If Jake Shields wanted to be with Strikeforce and told them that, it’s not like they would have said no, we dont want you back.

by bigdmmafan on Dec 21, 2010 3:10 PM EST up reply actions  

They dumped him

Jake said he felt disrespected and unwanted by SF. and the way they promoted the Hendo fight supports that. He was a ratings disaster. Would they have liked to keep him, sure. Did they need to or lose any sleep over him? No.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions  

the did dump Henderson on Strikeforce

they deliberately insulted and lowballed him thinking that Strikeforce would take the bait and over pay for him.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions  

So what about Shields?Do you think Strikeforce dumped Shields on the UFC?

by bigdmmafan on Dec 21, 2010 3:26 PM EST up reply actions  

not really

I think Strikeforce gave up once they realized he wanted to go to the UFC.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Why bother to keep him?

He is a ratings nightmare and can’t throw a punch.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:05 PM EST up reply actions  

oh i think that was the right move for Strikeforce

but signing Henderson was a big mistake. Almost as dumb as signing Fedor.
Although that last one was forced on them by CBS/Showtime and the fact that the UFC tried to poach Cung Le and signed Tito Ortiz away from under Strikeforce.
That’s what triggered the war. Strikeforce was originally content to showcase guys who were either on their way to or from the UFC or for whom the UFC wasn’t a good fit (like Cung Le). But once the UFC started poaching their headliners, Strikeforce felt cornered and compelled to go after Fedor.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:17 PM EST up reply actions  

Wow really?

I always thought Henderson was asking too much. Do you have any ballpark figures on what the two sides were Nate?

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:31 PM EST up reply actions  

I've heard very different things on the figures

so I don’t know who’s right on that one.
However I do know for a fact that:
1) The UFC banned Henderson’s Clinch Gear apparel line from the Octagon during negotiations.
2) Dana White said numerous ugly things about Henderson in the press during negotiations.
3) The UFC tried to book Henderson to headline both UFC 103 and UFC 109 at various points in the negotiations even while publicly shitting on him. ( I think that was a question of Dana White and Joe Silva working at cross purposes).

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Henderson hinted that the apparel promotions might have cost him a great deal on Inside MMA. I’m wondering if he made that a deal breaker when his stock was highest (right after UFC 100).

by Rufford on Dec 21, 2010 4:00 PM EST up reply actions  

no telling

I don’t doubt that Dan had an inflated sense of his value. But he also saw peers like Randy Couture, Matt Hughes, Tito Ortiz and Chuck Liddell getting “retirement packages” and wanted something equivalent.
And before anyone brings up the loyalty argument, is it really possible to imagine two less loyal employees than Ortiz and Couture? Those two guys have tried to screw Dana at every given opportunity.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:02 PM EST up reply actions  

because they lost their CBS deal

and built zero momentum towards a PPV.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:23 PM EST up reply actions  

They didn't "lose" the CBS deal

The word has been they’ll be back in 2011 right? Has that changed Nate?

And I don’t recall PPV ever being in the forecast for this year. I remember some talk from M-1 about a PPV with Overeem but I don’t recall Strikeforce saying that was a major focus. Was that ever an announced plan? Even if it was, does that occuring in 11 as opposed to 10 constitute a disaster?

But strictly speaking, with phase II announced for PPV with this tournament format, that isn’t true anyway as there is momentum towards PPV, two rather.

Disaster is a strong word. Did everything go as planned? No but disastrous? Hardly.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:30 PM EST up reply actions  

the “word” for cbs is just the fanboys saying the same shit over and over again and praying that it sticks.

If the plan is to have 4 cards on cbs in one year, and you only have 1, shit is not going according to plan.

by Phildo on Dec 21, 2010 3:35 PM EST up reply actions   2 recs

No disagreement

But again, how does this equate disaster? They made money, CBS isn’t off the table, the PPV’s are gonna happen. Their HW division is better than ever, their LHW division went from nothing to a relatively stacked division with Hendo, Mousasi, Mo and Feijao all championship caliber fighters. MW is plugging along nicely. They’ve got popular fighters.

Is everything perfect? No. But 2010 has been a good year for SF. Was it the breakout messiah year of astronomical achievements we’d hoped?

Why the all or nothing analysis?

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 3:43 PM EST up reply actions  

the PPV's are gonna happen?

them having a plan that MAY lead to a PPV IF they can pull it off does not equal a scheduled PPV.
Why the “all or nothing” analysis? Because I’m writing on a blog aimed at fans who don’t have all day to parse the nuances. I’m looking to make some bold points and stir discussion not write a master’s thesis that will stand up to intense critical inquiry.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:59 PM EST up reply actions  

You wrote a comment that I don't believe is true.

Please don’t get defensive. I don’t see the validity in grossly over simplified black and white analysis that just isn’t true or reflective of the state of Strikeforce at all. This year could have been a disaster all things considered. They made money. Coker just said 2011 PPV announcements will be coming. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn’t. But it’s still planned.

And anyway, I don’t totally agree that PPV is the right way to go for SF anyway. Promoting PPV’s is what could be potentially disastrous.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:03 PM EST up reply actions  

I used one word

it’s an adjective. Its meaning can be parsed with wildly different interpretations.
You apparently think as long as Scott Coker wasn’t dragged screaming from his burning home as his wife and children were led away in chains that it’s not a disaster.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:18 PM EST up reply actions  

disaster
a calamitous event, esp. one occurring suddenly and causing great loss of life, damage, or hardship, as a flood, airplane crash, or business failure.

None of those happened to SF. They stagnated a bit and not everything went according to plan, with some delays of 8 or 10 months on some things. They still had a great year.

I don’t read enough of your stuff to get a bead on your coverage of Strikeforce specifically but comments like that make me think you’re a SF hater.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:20 PM EST up reply actions  

lordy lordy

I’m generally considered to be the biggest UFC hater around.
I’m a critical thinker. None of the promotions gets off easy with Kid Nate.
I started the year a big supporter of Strikeforce because I believe competition is absolutely essential to a healthy sport.
From my point of view, they got their dick put in the dirt in 2010.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Well fair enough

I wasn’t sure if you were an SF hater or a fan kind of butthurtt that SF didn’t come through with everything they promised. Don’t abandon ship yet Nate!

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions  

for the record, I was in the same butthurt boat big time until

their last event reminded me how good they can be.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions  

Fedor's contract explicitly calls for his 3rd fight to be on PPV

And the September and December events were both originally aimed at CBS.
Losing those cards meant that guys like Del Rosario got bumped because Henderson, etc had to fight on Showtime instead of CBS.
If you’re holding your breath based on rumored tournaments from Strikeforce we really need to get on the phone, I’ve got some can’t miss investment opportunities you need to know about.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 3:57 PM EST up reply actions  

Where is the disaster in this?

Doesn’t SF deserve credit for making money and continuing to grow?

Imagine if they’d promoted a Fedor PPV off that loss. Then we’d be dealing with a disaster. It’s not all rosy, but it’s not a disaster.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:00 PM EST up reply actions  

I get that but

I’m looking at the big picture here. Relativism. Disaster is a strong word that denotes failure. It isn’t the case. Hendo and Fedor lost, so it slowed the plans down. Growing pains. SF had to learn the hard way, as the UFC did, that medium term or even short term planning based on presupposed wins from stars isn’t a stable strategy.

But those are the kinds of losses and wrenches in plans that cripple and collapse less stable promotions. They’ve rolled with the punches exceptionally well and produced some classic events and new stars. They’ve not regressed as much as entered into a six or eight month holding pattern where growth was minimal.

Stagnate is a better word. There was definitely some stagnation. I’m not fixating on the word as much the entire phrasing of the situation.

Making money in a national MMA promotion that doesn’t have the UFC initials attached to it is in no way a negative.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:12 PM EST up reply actions  

I think the year has to go down as a failure for Strikeforce for the simple fact that the huge ppv card they were planning failed to materialize. It was what they spent the whole year working on and for it to not happen is a failure. I wrote a fanpost on it/

by John Nash on Dec 21, 2010 4:17 PM EST up reply actions  

This progress cost them dearly and will make future progress much more difficult.

I hope they pull it off because the time and potential wasted a sin against MMA fans.

by Rufford on Dec 21, 2010 4:18 PM EST up reply actions  

they didn't make very good money this year

and certainly didn’t meet their projections. Just because they survived to fight another day doesn’t mean they didn’t endure a disaster.
The British won WWII but that doesn’t mean Dunkirk wasn’t a fucking epic disaster.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:19 PM EST up reply actions  

What happened to your mastery of history, Nate? Operation Dynamo was a huge success for the British. They managed to rescue the rump of their army from complete annihilation, saving them for use in later battles. The Battle of France, which led to the BEF being trapped in the pocket was the disaster.

by John Nash on Dec 21, 2010 4:23 PM EST up reply actions  

i'm painting with a broad brush here

Dunkirk = the entire French campaign.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Glass half empty

I think it’s half full.

SF was a disastrous year for Scott Smith’s brain though. I think we can reach a consensus on that.

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:29 PM EST up reply actions  

Nate, Favor to Ask

Nate, can you or Snowden or someone please do a critical analysis on Strikeforce’s balance sheet based on all available data?

Just because Scott Coker says in an interview that they made money doesn’t make it so, I’d really like to see someone checking up on it. Before the UFC had a PPV revenue stream they were burning through $10’s of millions of dollars.
Every event – flying in, paying and lodging fighters/trainers/production crew/broadcasting crew, marketing and publicity costs, renting the venue, moving the cage, signing contracts, lawyer fees, amortizing executive salaries, numerous expense accounts, equipment depreciation, etc etc etc.

If you do this, I promise I’ll be 50% less belligerent towards you in my posts!

by flingom on Dec 21, 2010 4:34 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't have the info

I’ll check with Snowden.

Follow me on Twitter @KidNate

by Nate Wilcox on Dec 21, 2010 4:40 PM EST up reply actions  

SF has bigger gates than preTUF UFC right?

Wolfgangsta @ www.ninjasplace.com

by Urijah Bieber on Dec 21, 2010 4:44 PM EST up reply actions  

We can make an educated guess

Michael Rome once gave us a pretty good breakdown of what a UFC event costs:

I’ve done a lot of research into sports overhead, my guess is the UFC is probably spending between $3 and $4 million in overhead costs for the average event not including salaries.
They spend $500,000 on the countdown show, a six figure fee for the arena, between 500 and a million to broadcast in-house, then you have a very high cost of hotels and flights for all their staff and all the fighters, and finally all the money they spend on ad spots.
This is ignoring all the salaries they pay to staff and such, going to assume those as year-end expenses and not event-specific expenses.
My overall guess ahead of time here is they bring in about 12-13 million and spend 5 including salaries and bonuses. It’s a very healthy margin.
Using that are our starting point we can get an idea if Strikeforce is making money or not.

  • Strikeforce gets a $700,000 license fee from Showtime (we know the exact number because the FSAC released it), It’s also been reported that they get an extra $500,000 for CBS cards.
  • From the 7 reported gates they seem to average about $700,000 a show. That would mean a minimum average of about $1.2 mil per Champion show.
  • Reported payout averaged a little under $500,000 per Champion show.
  • It’s been previously reported that a large part of Henderson and Fedor’s deals were made by Showtime and so Strikeforce either doesn’t have to foot the bill or they are least compensated to cover their costs.
  • Arena fees cost $100 k – 200K an event, but almost half their events take place at the HP Pavilion who are part owners of Strikeforce, so those shows probably cost them nothing. And I’ve heard Coker and others discuss the benefits of having a partner who has a great relation with other arenas, so their is a possibility that they are spending less on site fees than others would. It seems as if they also someone time subcontract the location to their partner local promotion. Lets be very conservative and say $100 k site fee.
  • They spend very little in marketing, depending on Showtime and their local promotion partner for advertising, and the bulk of production costs are taken up by Showtimes production. In addition travel expenses and lodging are greatly lowered by having to only fly in only half the number of fighters, since the prelims are made up of fighters from another promotion.
  • Overhead for Strikeforce operations can’t be anywhere close to that of the UFC since it is notorious for being a bare-bones operation with a staff of 12 who depends on Showtime and Silicon Valley Sports and Entertainment to handle a lot of their operations.
  • Their challenger cards seem pretty profitable with an average gate around $100k, payout less than $100k, and a license fee of $350k.
  • In addition Strikeforce’s internation TV deal with Shine is a lot more lucrative than most would imagine – $1 mil + per year.
      My estimate be revenue in the $20-$25 mil a year category with a small(10%) or so profit margin. Not great, but stable for now.

by John Nash on Dec 21, 2010 7:19 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

They’ve taken two step backwards from the trajectory many were expecting after they signed Fedor, but they’re still ahead of their trajectory before then. No way in hell were they expecting a PPV in 2010 before the Fedor deal.

The names/depth added to Strikeforce’s roster in 2010 in all divisions is more than I expected at the beginning of the year. Fedor losing was probably a good thing for them in the long term, because if he cleaned out SF then he would probably finally cash out with the UFC to end his career. Now that the UFC doesn’t want him, SF can sign him long term for much less.

by Mint on Dec 22, 2010 5:57 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm not a huge Diaz fan..

…but…Diaz seems to standout as deserving of a Christmans bonus from Strikeforce…in 2011 they should make Mayhem Diaz happen at a catch weight of 169.66666666666666666—→ lbs…that or blindfold the figters at the weigh-ins…

by Rrice on Dec 21, 2010 3:33 PM EST up reply actions  

Thsis is almost sad to read

You KNOW Nate wanted to write about what was possible in 2011 and what Zuffa needed to do to head off competitors instead of writing about how fucked everybody else is. At least you got that last line in, though.

Flingom pretty much nailed it above. Allow me to look back eleven months, when Gross and others were calling for co-promotion, and cackle with delight.

Luke: What was our best moment?
Nate: When I banned Subo?
Luke: That was a good one.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are in a confederacy against him. - Jonathan Swift
Contributor for WatchKalibRun.com
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com

by Derek Suboticki on Dec 21, 2010 4:52 PM EST reply actions  

I thought Strikeforce had a great year

Aside from the debacle between Miller and Diaz last spring, I think SF had a fantastic year of events. I enjoyed a lot of their cards, and they did a great job bringing up some new talent like T-Wood, OVP, and Cormier. Sure they had some flops like Bobby Lashley and the ongoing frustration with Fedor/M-1, but give them credit. They put together a lot of good shows, signed some great talent, and look to be getting together some big plans for 2011. I’m looking forward to it. Bottom line, is UFC still #1? No question. But did Strikeforce have a bad year in 2010? I would argue definitely not.

by MBeamer32 on Dec 21, 2010 6:05 PM EST reply actions  

I think SF will be okay

but gaining ground on the UFC is a reallllly tough proposition.

by Revolver on Dec 22, 2010 2:05 AM EST reply actions  

I'm a fan of fights

Not organizations.

www.ninjasplace.com

by GDPofBLC on Dec 23, 2010 1:27 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

"I'm working on the intricacies of details of maneuvers that he still doesn't even know the names of." - Frank Mir

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Wario_small
BECW3 UFC 146 Recap & Live Post discussion
Wario_small
BECW3 UFC 146 Live Post
Madmen_icon_small
Dan Hardy: The Outlaw (Short documentary film)
Me_2_small
Farewell Frank Mir
Lebowski_excited_grin_small
A Paean to the Korean Zombie, Chan Sung Jung: My New Favorite Fighter

Recent FanPosts

Small
USA chants during ufc fights!?!?!?!?!?
220px-johnnycash1969_small
Fighters you aren't sold on ?
Small
Duane Ludwig's chasm...ouch
Rousimar-palhares-picture_small
An Appeal to SBNation
Lebowski_excited_grin_small
Top 5 Potential Replacements for Vitor Belfort Against Wanderlei Silva
Obp_small
Help me get a job
Ck1_small
Glory world series livepost

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

MMA Rankings

USA Today / SB Nation Consensus MMA Rankings