Dana White explains the disappearance of the WEC brand on last night's Faber vs. Aldo broadcast:
"[The WEC and UFC] are two different brands on two different networks," White said. "Even though they're owned by the same company, they're two different brands owned by the same company. The networks aren't going to let us do it."
"Those of you that have been around the TV business know what a battle it is when you have two different brands and all this other stuff," White told MMAjunkie.com (www.mmajunkie.com). I really have to thank Spike and Versus for working with me on this thing."
"For me to get Spike over the hump to put this thing on and promote the 'Countdown' show and all the other stuff, thank God these guys went ahead and delivered and put on a good night for the sport. It was awesome."
"Whenever you promote a pay-per-view, you don't want to limit yourself. WEC is on Versus. UFC is on Spike TV. We went with no branding for this one, and we got as much promotion as we could."
"They'll figure it out," White said. "At the end of the day, it's about the fights. If you're going to buy tickets to come to the show, if you're going to buy the pay-per-view, it's about the fights that night.
"We just wanted to make sure that we could expose these fights to as many people as possible. A-B-C-D-E-F-G, it doesn't mean [expletive] to me. Sell some pay-per-views. That's what we are at the end of the day: a pay-per-view company."
almost 2 years ago
Scott Haber
25 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
as ufc4 pointed out in another discussion… how does this logic explain the ufc cards on versus? if the brand seperation is necessary, then why wouldn’t it apply in that circumstance?
I think it has to deal with the UFC’s contract with Spike, that allows them to do 4 shows on cable outside the Spike network. I’m guessing that there is no clause for this in the VS’s contract with the WEC. Also, if there is no clause for this with the WEC, while VS might be ok with the WEC getting added eyeballs which will help in later WEC shows on VS, Spike would basically be pumping up another show without much in return (other than keeping Zuffa/UFC happy)
by MMAWrestling on Apr 25, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I mentioned this on the live thread to Brent
I thought it was a stretch then but to see Dana echo that here well….
Sure it does
They want to be able to replay it on SpikeTV.
To further that point, no mention on the PPV broadcast was part of the deal. Spike would promote the PPV with a countdown show and free prelims, but in exchange there had to be no mention of WEC on the prelims or PPV.
by IWillPartyHard on Apr 25, 2010 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I have to wonder how Versus feels about this. If the WEC is about to go 90% PPV then the effort they have put in building it up has just gone up in flames.
What would possibly make you think the WEC is about to ‘90% PPV’? Even the UFC is only about 50% PPV. If this show is a success, we’ll probably see WEC ramp up to about 10%-25% PPV. They certainly go anywhere near 90%.
Plus, the more profitable the WEC becomes, the more shows they are likely to put on. We saw the same thing happen with the UFC from 2004-2006 when they went from 5 shows a year to their current 20. If this PPV makes money, it will likely accelerate the addition of the 125 pound weight class so that they have more athletes to fill slots for additional cards.
I can see the WEC going 3 free, 1 PPV model
It would be doable.
"I strongly suggest watching the O’s play while on a powerful, legal, prescribed narcotic. All the COLORS!!!!! and that Dempsey really makes sense. " - Adam double bubble
They are getting UFC cards
So I imagine they are pretty damn happy
This explanation sounds like BS to me. Why wouldn’t Zuffa slap the UFC name all over this shit if it was just about “selling pay-per-views”?
This also doesn’t explain why the titles went unbranded DURING the pay-per-view as well. Were Aldo, Faber, Henderson, and Cerrone NOT fighting for the WEC titles in their respective divisions? If Zuffa is serious about brand separation, I still don’t understand why you completely wash the WEC name from the entire production. This was Soviet style misinformation.
It seems to me like they were finding out how viable guys like Aldo and Faber were as pay-per-view draws, but I’m still not sure what the endgame is. If they DO want to end up merging BW and FW into the UFC, why wasn’t the UFC name slapped on this? If they want to continue with segregation, why would you go out of your way to completely ignore the brand behind it?
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
OK. I went ahead and read the actual Junkie piece. The quotes are a bit convoluted taken out of the context of the article.
So, they removed the WEC name because Spike wouldn’t air the Countdown show or prelims without it? Seems like Spike TV are a bunch of asshats.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
Spike TV are TV executives, it should be assumed that they are asshats.
by Phildo on Apr 25, 2010 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
On TV executives an asshats
I used to be an editor on a show called Colour Confidential that’s shot here in Toronto. The show is a home decorating show yada yada yada. Anyway I guess each season they do a charity episode and for the season I was working on the show they did an episode at a shelter for abused women and their children.
Anyway as part of the redesign they had the kids help the host of the show paint a mural on one of the walls in the shelter’s playroom. One of the kids painted a picture of a kid or whatever that vaguely looked like Harry Potter. When I forwarded the final rough cut for network approval they nearly tore me a new asshole. They were so incensed by this kids crappy drawing of a person that MIGHT be Harry Potter that I was forced to go back and blur it out through the entire episode.
No sense of perspective.
They just don’t want to promote a show that is not on their network. They probably would have let them keep the branding in for a hefty price, and it was just cheaper to cut the branding for this event. It’s really not that big of a deal when you consider how much extra exposure this got them.
by IWillPartyHard on Apr 25, 2010 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions
This seems like it was a very last minute decision. It was called WEC 48 a lot before this week, and you can see that there was tape over the letters “WEC” on the sponsor banners for several fighters (I didn’t see WEC on any, but I only noticed the tape on a few.
Looking back now I think it was as soon as they announced the prelims were going to be on Spike is when they dropped the UFC presents WEC. From then on it was the Aldo vs. Faber PPV. So the switch was made roughly about 2 weeks ago.
Just BE.
You’re exactly right, they dropped all the WEC branding as soon as the promo deal was cut with Spike.
by IWillPartyHard on Apr 25, 2010 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Zuffa is a PAY PER VIEW Company. - Dana White
I never really looked at it like that. Interesting point.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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.
