Fedor Emelianenko's Tapout Deal Sunk by UFC
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 10:42 AM EDT
in MMA News
Email
Print
From BJPenn.com editor Pedro Carrasco:
I am privy to certain details that I just got authorization to release to the public.
Initially, Fedor Emelianenko, the number one heavyweight fighter in the world, secured a deal to sport the always growing and ever popular "TapOut" clothing line at this weekend’s Strikeforce events.
However, during my time here in San Jose, while spending time with very legitimate sources close to the situation, I was advised that certain parties within the UFC halted TapOuts participation in the event and threatened a UFC lifetime ban, if Emelianenko came out wearing their line.
These are probably the most upsetting moves that the UFC makes because rather than a direct move to hurt the competing promotion they are a direct move to hurt both a long time sponsor and fighters. I'd say with this move goes any tiny sliver of hope anyone could have had left that somehow Fedor would end up in the UFC at the conclusion of his Strikeforce contract. And it sounds like Vadim would say the same:
Q: When can fans get Fedor's Tapout shirt:
A: I'm afraid to disappoint the fans, but it seems like, never. Literally today they called me from the TAPOUT firm and told me that they were contacted by the representatives of the UFC, and that under the threat of tearing up all the contracts with their organization demanded that TAPOUT categorically stop producing all the shirts from the line of Fedor Emelianenko.
This is how Dana White feels about Fedor. So tell me, what can we think about such person after this, that even in things that have nothing to do with UFC, he still tries to mess it up for us. So it seems that the shirts will just stay a rarity that fans will see in pictures. Say thanks to UFC and their politics of monopoly.
I'd honestly like to see one of the UFC's big money sponsors make a move to sponsor a Strikeforce card. It'd just be interesting to see if the UFC would pull the same tactics on a company that is bigger than they are, such as Bud Light, of if this is strictly limited to the smaller sponsors that put money in the fighter's pocket rather than the ones that pay the UFC's bills.
297 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
UFC apologists in 5…4…3…2…
There's a WAMMA belt in my Cracker Jacks!
Tweeting @dmiller23
by Drewplata on Jun 26, 2010 10:23 AM EDT reply actions 5 recs
Yep. Excuses… excuses.
What a joke. Just ridiculous. What an asshole. Sounds like dana does give a shit about what they’re doing after all. I can imagine his face all red and yelling on the phone late at night when he could be ‘hanging out with his kids’.
by PipRocks on Jun 26, 2010 10:35 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Can’t believe this took Dana away from his investigation into fight organizations paying bloggers to rank their fighters…
There's a WAMMA belt in my Cracker Jacks!
Tweeting @dmiller23
by Drewplata on Jun 26, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Here I am!!
It’s business, that’s all. Dana knows that he is NEVER going to work things out with M1, so he might as well do everything he can to make their lives miserable.
The reason most bloggers and journalists take these things to heart is because they are not businessmen, they are writers and McDonald’s employees. They can’t understand that the underbelly of business is dirty and ugly. It’s the same in every industry on earth.
Go listen to Coker’s goodbye statements on Baroni and Buentello, he’s just as capable of being a complete douche, just like Dana. The difference is that Dana actually has relevance and leverage, while Coker doesn’t.
by Bob Loblaw TX on Jun 26, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 9 recs
Are you really suggesting...
that I find this to be less than desirable because you’ve decided that mma writers work at McDonalds?
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions
No
He’s suggesting that most bloggers and journalists aren’t businessmen, and don’t understand the dirtier sides of the business world.
If Zuffa, as a for-profit corporation, has an opportunity to gain a business advantage, it’d be ignorant of them not to make the most of it. By keeping sponsorship money out of Fedor’s pocket while he fights in other organizations, they make signing with the UFC a more lucrative prospect. It gives him one more business reason to sign. Not only does he get the salary and the PPV bonuses, but it opens up the door to some of the bigger sponsors.
Whether or not the fan and fighter disdain that this earns is worth it also needs to be taken into consideration though.
all I know is that...
I work for one of the largest financial institutions in the world. I know Nate and Luke’s backgrounds which are extremely professional. Rome is finishing law school and is in a position that understands the “business” aspects of the sport more than most. Snowden’s background speaks for itself…etc
…But don’t let these kind of things stand in the way of the whole “live in your mom’s basement and work at mcdonalds” attacks on MMA media members.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You work for a large financial institution?
I hope your enjoying your bailout money. And dont say your firm didnt need any or receive any, all yall got bailed out through AIG and the feds 0% window. Make all the money you can before your neighbors turn on you, and they will.
The quality of posts on fight weekends
drops through the fucking floor. Are we evaluating poster’s personal lives now? I’m sure Mr. Brookhouse personally orchestrated both the financial crash and the bailout. But if we are critiquing Internet authors’ personal lives, put yours up for scrutiny first. Then we’ll see how morally superior you are.
Otherwise, you can shut up about others, and come here to discuss MMA, which is the intended purpose of this site.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
by Sabate on Jun 26, 2010 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 6 recs
Fuck yeah Sabate!
Rec’d.
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Jun 26, 2010 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions
This person clearly...
has a greater sense of my importance in the american financial industry than I do.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I know the truth.
Identify yourself, Mr. Robber Baron:
No, but for real, I was being sarcastic, when I labeled you the cause of the troubles. Just wanted to make that clear, as I’m not sure which “this person” you’re referring to.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
Attacks on MMA media members are another topic, and aren’t really relevant to my point here.
The point is that these are business decisions. If this gives the UFC a more advantageous business position, why should they not do it? They may love the sport, but at the same time, they’re trying to build a business and make money here.
Fans and media voicing their disgust are ignoring these realities. What would you have them do, make poor business decisions?
You're entire point
was a defense against a bullshit ad hominem against the writers of this site.
You’re clearly not able to explain why Zuffa gains a business advantage in language that goes beyond high school home economics, so you just keep asserting that it is over and over again until its accepted as true. Unfortunate, repetition is the weakest form of argument.
The entire point of this post was to debate whether or not this is: a) a wise business decision; b) a legal act of business competitions; and c) a moral business act.
Lots of folks have done that in the posts below. All you’ve done is assert that MMA writers don’t know anything about business, so we shouldn’t be talking about this. Which really shows that you don’t have anything intelligent to contribute to the discussion.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
by Sabate on Jun 26, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You’re putting words into my mouth, I haven’t asserted anything of the sort. I wasn’t defending anybody, I was responding to Brent.
Are you really suggesting… that I find this to be less than desirable because you’ve decided that mma writers work at McDonalds?
I simply stated that no, I did not believe this to be the case. The point wasn’t that a person finding this to be undesirable must be undereducated and of poor employment, but rather that they weren’t looking at it from a business perspective. Maybe that wasn’t the original poster’s point, but that was mine. That is not an ad hominem argument.
If you read Brent’s post, he sees this as a move that hurts sponsors and fighters, and is upset by it, while ignoring the possible business benefits to the UFC. That was my point.
These are probably the most upsetting moves that the UFC makes because rather than a direct move to hurt the competing promotion they are a direct move to hurt both a long time sponsor and fighters
I simply stated that by reducing the possible sponsorship revenue available to fighters outside the UFC, the UFC can make fighting in their organization a more lucrative proposition. Your assertion that my stating this in an easy-to-understand “high school home economics” way, and then repeating it, somehow makes for “the weakest form of argument” on the other hand, is an ad hominem attack.
If you want to discredit my viewpoint, you should be addressing the content of the argument, not the way in which it was presented.
I mean
“Zuffa should gain business advantages if they can” is perhaps the most commonplace bromide I’ve read in a while.
It’s insanely ludicrous that you write that “most bloggers and journalists aren’t businessmen, and don’t understand the dirtier sides of the business world” when you have such a simplistic understanding of what’s at-stake here yourself.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
All these "you don't know business" posts..
..are fucking hilarious. You instantly frame the dispute between M1, Tapout and Zuffa in moral terms, instead of in a business perspective examines the possible economic variables, strategies and relationships at play.
Your post, for instance, frames this entirely in personal terms – Dana hates M-1, so he’s going to screw them over as much as possible. To me, this sounds like the Real Housewives analysis my wife infuriates me by watching on Bravo, rather than the thinking of an experienced businessperson.
It leads me to believe, and I may very well be wrong, that you are posturing in the extreme.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
Business wise you could look at it as hindering a long time sponsor from growing even bigger. The more successful TapOut becomes the more money that can spend with the UFC.
That's definitely an interesting point.
There’s a whole bunch of different ways – pro and con – that you could look at it business-wise. Unfortunately, all the self-proclaimed “business experts” in this thread are too busy crafting UFC and M-1 fairy tales to do so.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
I don't know if you're just a troll...
…or simply misinformed.
Have you ever heard of tortious interference?
Por isso eu tomo ópio / é um remédio / sou um convalescente do momento / moro no rés-do-chão do pensamento / e ver passar a vida faz-me tédio
This doesn’t punish M-1 or Fedor. If he made a sponsorship deal with Tapout, chances are his money is guaranteed whether he wears the product or not. So it is Tapout who gets burned because they can’t even capitalize on their investment in Fedor where it matters, similarly to when Affliction was banned from the UFC and still sponsoring GSP. So these thuggish demands of UFC sponsors aren’t a threat of punishment, they are a form of punishment (for the sponsor) that comes with the threat of excommunication/obliteration.
I think Tapout will look back on its association with the UFC as a net positive.
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
Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2010 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
If what you say is true, and Tapout doesn’t feel burned (ie, feels that it is worth losing Fedor to keep Zuffa), then nobody loses.
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
Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2010 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Where do you work at?
First off, what business are you in that is so dirty and ugly?
Secondly, have you ever had extensive business relationships with an individual that pulled such a Machiavellian move?
Business tends to be built on mutual self-interest and trust. You poison the well too many times and nobody will come back to drink. If someone did a similar move to me and then tried to negotiate a contract later on (maybe after 2 fights), I wouldn’t touch them with a 10 foot pole. People don’t forget being screwed, especially when it is out of spite.
This also sends a clear message to every other possible sponsor out there. Dana White will attempt to dictate your business to you, and will use heavy handed threats to back it up. That could come back to bite them in the future.
Haha, love the ufc!
Fedor and Vadim have been sticking it to the fans for years, I’m glad the UFC is getting a little payback.
And give me a break, regardless of this move Fedor was NEVER going to the UFC.
by Razzel on Jun 26, 2010 10:23 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Keep lubing up, buddy. Dana needs you.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 10:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Please don’t lower the level of discourse on this site.
by Hirasawa Yui on Jun 26, 2010 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions
You’re right. What I should have said was, “You’re doing exactly what Dana wants you to do, contributing to a monopoly and empowering a bully who is attacking the most loyal sponsor this sport has ever seen, one who has taken far better care of the fighters than he himself has.”
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
You say it like it’s a bad thing.
by Hirasawa Yui on Jun 26, 2010 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
uhh this sticks it to tapout which sucks… these are some shady business practices… is it legal?
by kanodogg on Jun 26, 2010 11:24 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
What would?
The ability to freely associate with businesses based on your opinion of your practices?
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
Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2010 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Messed Up
It would have been really interesting if the TAPOUT said ‘eff that and sponsor Fedor’s shirt.
So what kind of stake does the UFC has in Tapout?
- - - - -
VEe is ANIMated!
Tapout is a strategic partner of the UFC. Of course they shouldn’t be sponsoring the competition.
by Redravi7_2000 on Jun 26, 2010 10:28 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Still you gotta wonder...
would they have been as livid if it had been a t-shirt for say, Greg Nagy?
http://fightdrinker.blogspot.com
by some schmuck in texas on Jun 26, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
I love that you couldn't find a picture of Nagy
Betting you tried, too!
http://fightdrinker.blogspot.com
by some schmuck in texas on Jun 26, 2010 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
i didn’t really look, i couldn’t find any pictures of the fight on the first page of google images so this is what you get.
I can’t remember a non-UFC show that I’ve seen that didn’t have fighters sponsored by tapout, this is strictly a fedor issue, to argue anything else is foolish.
exactly
we agree
http://fightdrinker.blogspot.com
by some schmuck in texas on Jun 26, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
This specific instance is simply Fedor, but in the bigger picture
Tapout is one of the rare exceptions rather than the rule.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
hersh is a class act though, everyone loves him
Fav 6 Fighters:Spider Silva,Mayhem,Jon Jones,Aoki,KJ Noons/King Mo
Team Pioli/Haley. Decade of the Chiefs.
Is the mma community deranged?
Company X tries to block competitor Y from enjoying more profits.
OH NOES SATANIC MOVES BY THE UFC
So the fighters are competitors? Not the other promotions?
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Considering Fedor and M1 and Strikeforce are all attached at the hip? Yes absolutely.
by Brent Nahmias on Jun 26, 2010 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Ding ding ding!!
But this is bloodyelbow, where the UFC is the devil, so what can you do? At least they’ve slowed down on the UFC hate articles lately.
This UFC isn't the devil here
This is where more than a few readers are conspiracy theorists with poor reading comprehension skills.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
This site is rare
in that it doesn’t sugar coat the hell out of everything.
When I told a friend at work about this site, I summed it up pretty quick. It’s got good reporting and it doesn’t shy away from criticizing the UFC, especially Dana White.
This article just spot lights what b——es the UFC is and they don’t give a shit about the fighters. Like Grove said in his article, TUF was designed to create and get them to act out, not look out for them, basically. That said, I’ll probably get the Carwin ppv but continue to skip most of the lesser shows.
Yep…and this was written by the guy who TOTALLY didn’t just write a piece about how the UFC’s level of competition means the end for Fedor in the #1 spot.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
U GUYS R BEING PAID OFF BY DA UFC!! I NEW IT
FADOR 4 LIFE!
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
Basically, why do people act shocked everytime the UFC acts like a business? The world isn’t all puppy dogs and rainbows. People need to quit acting like they send assassin’s to fighter’s/sponsor’s families whenever they are in a dispute.
Seriously Bloody Elbow you’re above that nonsense, or at least should be.
by Brent Nahmias on Jun 26, 2010 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions
There’s a difference between cynicism and practical business, and a gratuitous attack on an organization that has helped make you what you are today.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't think I acted particuallary shocked...
I said they are the most upsetting moves the UFC makes, but should I lie about that? They upset me more than any other move the UFC makes.
Given all the other “horrible” things the UFC supposedly does I don’t think that’s particularly bad.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions
this is a borderline
illegal busines tactic
i believe the term is tortuous interference and possibly restraint of trade
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
What is the difference between this..
and daring any fighter that shows up on a EA Sports game to be lifetime banned (although that was just a threat since UFC now has several fighters that are on that game, Couture, etc). Nobody seemed too concerned about that.
IF YOU CANNOT WRESTLE, FIND ANOTHER PROFESSION...
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/i084.htm
How did I end up on this bandwagon and why does everything say property of Chael Sonnen?
The tort duty not to interfere with the contract falls only on strangers — interlopers who have no legitimate interest in the scope or course of the contract’s performance
UFC is not strangers and they have a legitimiate interest in the scope or course of the contract’s performance.
I like where you head is at but I’m pretty sure you’re misinterpreting the definition of stranger and legitimate interest as its used here.
That statement is a limitation disallowing a party to the contract to sue for both breach of contract and tortious interference.
How did I end up on this bandwagon and why does everything say property of Chael Sonnen?
I’m no lawyer so I won’t doubt what you just wrote. I only understand the business portion of this.
Let me ask you this. If I do business with you selling T-shirts. My contract is the biggest of your entire portfolio. Now, I hear that you are going to sign a contract with an individual I strong dislike. I tell you, you either deal with me or that other guy. I’m not threatening you with a gun but I tell you straight up that I won’t resign with you if you deal with the other guy. It’s up to you to make a business decision on who you sign with. Is this interference? I don’t believe it is. I am using my market power to be an ass, but I do not believe I breached any laws here.
by cyph on Jun 26, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
That's the premise of law to being with though..
The reason for arbitration, litigation, etc.. is to boil down the “interpretation” of said laws in the same manner in which both state and federal jurisdictions interpret that same law.
That’s how they define which side of the argument is correct and which is not and to which the judgment will be rendered for.
Either way.. it’s a good assessment on both your parts..
The only thing really in question should be the morals or ethics of the business practice in question at this point. I’m pretty confident the UFC would refer to their team of law professionals before ever making any business decisions.
Also factor in that we’ve only been given “selective” information regarding the entire topic as a whole. Tapeout has not issued any statements at this time, the UFC has issued no response, and much like other topics surrounding the UFC’s business practices, none of them are conclusive enough to make an informed decision upon..
Every topic remains subjective or “open for interpretation”.. Not that there is anything wrong with that.. It’s great for sparking conversations amongst members..
I would have to assume at this point that the UFC & Tapout both know where they stand from a business standpoint, and a legality standpoint. Neither of them would risk any serious long-term negative decision without any sort of consultation with their respective lawyers.
If anything I think it’s pretty clear that the UFC does have some sort of exclusivity deal from a promotional standpoint with Tapout. Tapout is the exclusive sponsor for Spike/TUF and the “Offical Sponsor” of the UFC (as announced at each event).
The legality of this predicates that Fedor is essentially a “promotional entity or brand” through his stock holding within M1 Global. Thus they can use that against leverage against the sponsorship deal because Fedor is a representative of M-1, by his own admission.. Basically, Fedor has a conflict of interest built in through his partial ownership of his own promotional and management company. It’s easy to allocate Fedor the fighter into Fighter the M1 promotion.. They are essentially being used as one in the same through the confines of “co-promotion”..
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
by MMAuthority on Jun 26, 2010 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Typo... Title should have read " That's the premise of law to begin with though"
Sorry..
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
It's called tortious intereference...
… and depending on the details of what happened (which I’m sure we’ll never find out), M-1 may be able to sue. Borderline unethical and illegal business practices.
Not if the UFC is threatening to “tear up the contracts” (i.e. rescind the contract) based on some breach by Tapout. We don’t know what the UFC’s contracts with Tapout say. There may be a kind of exclusivity clause. Who knows?
My point isn’t that the UFC hasn’t done anything wrong. It’s that we don’t know the terms of the contracts and don’t know what their legal basis for “tearing up the contracts” is. It’s hard for me to believe that Dana made this move without consulting his attorneys. He may appear half-cocked, but he’s certainly a shrewd enough businessman to avoid engaging in tortious interference.
There is no exclusivity clause. Witness all the other fighters that have gone out wearing TapOut gear at Strikeforce events. And he’s not that savvy; he just picks on people who can’t fight back.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
He got signed out of a Tae-Bo class by two billionaires, mucked around for four years, got a hail-mary contract with Spike as gangsters took over his major rival, bullied a bunch of fighters who needed the payday (remember him throttling Couture?) and rode his lawyers and the emerging fanatic loyalty of 175-lb white guys who identified with the fighters to where he is. He was in the right place at the right time playing with other people’s money.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
That Dana White guy sure is lucky. This will be another banner year for the UFC. Dana White’s luck is unstoppable.
by cyph on Jun 26, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Literally every majorly successful business man is also a lucky guy. Weird how that happens.
How did I end up on this bandwagon and why does everything say property of Chael Sonnen?
by Day Man on Jun 26, 2010 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Chance plays a part in everything.
This was actually the truly frightening part of Darwin’s Origins of Species back in the day – the notion that natural selection works more upon chance than it does upon a pre-ordained plan or order. Most opponents saw this view – that chance was very influential in selecting species – as the most nihilistic part of Darwin’s theory, rather than his exclusion of divine providence from creation.
Friedrich Hayek, the Austrian-born neo-classical economist, actually made a similar argument about entrepreneurial success. He said it was about the intersection of chance with knowledge and labor. And Hayek, without question, wasn’t some sort of goddamn hippie communist.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
Sabate, talking about Darwin. I think I found a new soul-mate. If you have ever read The Lucifer Principle we could spend a night taking over the comment sections.
A great recent illustration of the idea that it is more being in the right place at the right time is Malcolm Gladwell’s Outlier. Going through the checklist of items Gladwell listed for what made the super successful super successful, I think Dana White fits into the Outlier mold.
Thanks!
And I haven’t read either Outliers or The Lucifer Principle. Outliers has been on my list for a long time, but I just haven’t had to to read it. Everybody raves about it. I know: Shame on me.
From what I know about it though, you’re absolutely right. It tackles this very issue head on. I really should read it.
I hadn’t heard of The Lucifer Principle. I’ll have to check it out.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
But not all exclusivity clauses are created equal. The UFC’s lawyers are smart enough to craft an exclusivity agreement for contingencies like this. In most cases, the UFC benefits when Tapout sponsors fighters in other promotions. They’ve obviously drawn the line at Fedor.
My only point is that the UFC may not be acting tortiously by threatening to “tear up its contracts” with Tapout.
How can anyone take the UFC’s side in this? Their spiteful, vengeful business tactics only hurt the sport.
Lemonade was a popular drink, and it still is. I get more stunts and props than Bruce Willis- Guru
I wonder what the people @ Tapout were thinking....
They’ve already gone through stuff like this with RVCA and Affliction. Not saying I’m in support of stuff like this but I don’t understand how they didn’t see something like this coming.
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'll take a guess
They were thinking that their worldwide brand – a brand that literally covers almost every nook and cranny of the sport – could be applied to a non-UFC fighter in a scenario that in no way involves the UFC brand whatsoever. If that’s chutzpah, then I’m not sure the word means much anymore.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions
If they were willing to threaten other brands that even affect fighters that fight under the Zuffa banner for simply associating themselves with Fedor, I wouldn’t see this going any other way.
I think it’s lame but it matches up with how they’ve treated other prominent brands that want to attach themselves to Fedor.
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
Correct me if I am wrong (I might be, I just woke up), but weren’t the RVCA and Clinch Gear issues related to use at UFC shows? I can’t recall this happening in non-UFC shows like…ever.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes you're right....
This is the first time to my knowledge that something like this is affecting a non-UFC show. But after putting RVCA and Affliction on the outs (and bringing them back after) for associating with Fedor they had to know that there was going to be some type of Zuffa backlash and this is the form it took.
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
Good point.
I’m a Fedor fan and resent the hell out of them taking money away from him like this.
I understand the business world, but this is till dirty no matter how anyone wants to dress it up. I think this shows how right Fedor has been about White.
pretty sure bj wasn't allowed to wear RVCA because they had previously sponsored fedor when he fought on cbs
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2009/12/10/1195293/snapshot-of-the-day-rvca-banned-by
so yeah… i think this is the first time they’ve tried to tamper with sponsorships prior to strikeforce shows.
This is truly
disgusting. The UFC should have no right to tell a company who this can and can not be associated with. What if one day the NFL who is an organization way bigger then the UFC would say to Tapout, we don’t want you dealing with UFC fighters anymore…. Just our players…. If you don’t terminate your contract with them, we will take our money off the table. What if something similar like that with the Zuffa, but not on their terms. Would it suddenly be an outrage then? I have to say this is really a fucked up situation on the UFC’s part and I have a feeling somehow this is going to come back and bite them in the ass someday.
by devious1 on Jun 26, 2010 10:38 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Someone doesn’t know anything about business relationships in the slightest and is internet raging. In for future lulz.
IF the NFL randomly wanted tapout to make all the jerseys/shirts/hats etc for the nfl and cut off all UFC ties? They would do it in a second if it was more profitable/no contracts with the ufc got in the way.
by Brent Nahmias on Jun 26, 2010 10:43 AM EDT up reply actions
You’re in the vast, vast minority here, Nahmias.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Then I guess
I don’t know anything about business…. What I do however know, is that Zuffa is taking food out of Fedor’s mouth from this stupid decision. I also know that when Fedor’s contract is up with Strikeforce and Zuffa comes back to the negotiations table with him there’s a darn good chance that Fedor will tell Zuffa to f off. So in the end, maybe this isn’t such a bright business decision on Zuffa’s part after all?
by devious1 on Jun 26, 2010 10:58 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
They’re going to outlast him. He only has so many fights left, and in the meantime, they’ll keep projecting the Cane Velasquez’s of the world as legitimate threats. Eventually enough people will believe that someone is good simply because he’s in the UFC, and Dana will monopolize the sport by default.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Interestingly
Fedor just filed for bankruptcy protection.
yeah but your argument fails in that tapout has no exclusivity deal. the NFL exclusivity deal that they have with reebok ensures that reebok outfits all the teams, and no one else does, though it does not restrict what reebok can do
by kanodogg on Jun 26, 2010 11:34 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
If Reebok went...
to the NFL saying they are going to make the UFL gear.. the NFL will threaten them just like the UFC is doing with TAPOUT, no difference…
well 1 very important difference like i mentioned above, unlike reeboks deal with nfl, there is no tapout exclusive deal with ufc.
UMMM...
The NFL does this very thing with their sponsors… So yea… if Tapout was a sponsor of the NFL they likely would not be sponsors of the UFC… It business!
Sounds like everyday business to me. Nothing too shocking.
Yes, time flies. And where did it leave you? Old too soon...smart too late. - Mike Tyson
by lovingmma25 on Jun 26, 2010 10:39 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Threatening to remove one of the biggest sources of income for your own employees is “everyday business”?
by Sink on Jun 26, 2010 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
this is a very hostile business practice… imagine Microsoft going to adobe and telling them if you write software for macs, we are pulling your dev license for windows.
by kanodogg on Jun 26, 2010 11:36 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Actually you can do it to disuade a party (e.g. Tapout) from entering an economic relationship with another company (e.g. Fedor) but once they enter that relationship, intentional pressure to dissolve the relationship (that actually does and causes damages) is a tort in most U.S. jurisdictions.
How did I end up on this bandwagon and why does everything say property of Chael Sonnen?
A summary of logic's response
Fuck…idiot….moron….dipshit….strikefarce.
by ufc4 on Jun 26, 2010 11:20 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 4 recs
Followed by losing 18k that would have been spent drowning his depression in Stoli and Eastern European hookers.
Lets mutherfukers
Walking the line between intelligence and ignorance since 1985
@deowade
UFC stole money from Fedor!
Oh no! UFC is the devil of the west!
Wait, he gets a couple of million and has ownership on M1?
Would Tapout get HUGE monies from sales of FeeDoor shirts? Not in US, his name isn’t big enough… wonder how shirt sales market in Russia are? (not sarcasm, really I have no idea on shirt sales trends in Western Europe).
I think Tapout should be able to decide if a Fedor shirt is or isn't worth their invesment
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m ok with that as long as it’s stipulated up front. If it was, then the UFC can do whatever they like.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. They are VERY clear about their policies.
by magneto on Jun 26, 2010 10:59 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Oh?
Do tell. You have the contractual agreements between the UFC and Tapout? Well, share this with the group please.
If you’re just speculating, then shhh. We can all do that.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Nobody is saying it's in the contract...
but the UFC (and a lot of other people) detests the way M-1 does business. Now if they are in a relationship with a company that decides to support M-1, then it’s only logical that they may decide to terminate that relationship.
Interesting
I didnt see the M-1 logo on te Tapout shirt..
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Get Dana's nuts out your mouth dude
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
Opps
I forgot to put "cue vadims buts in my mouth joke.. my b yo
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Shh? LOL
Thanks dad,
obviously, just speculating. However, going off what I have seen of a UFC contract for both a fighter or sponsor, which would make most hippies cry due to the amount of paper, they don’t hide the fact that they will drop you if you are friendly with the competitor. And why wouldn’t they?
OK, now I will “shh”.
by magneto on Jun 26, 2010 11:09 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Shh part Deux
Remember the whole video game fiasco with Jon Fitch?
VERY clear
by magneto on Jun 26, 2010 11:12 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
In case you were wondering:
No. They are not clear in their policies. Quite the opposite actually.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Why should Tapout run anything past Dana at all? Dana and the UFC don’t own Tapout, nor does Tapout own any stakes in the UFC. Tapout is a company that should be allowed to make business dealings with whoever they please. One should have no bearing on the other
by devious1 on Jun 26, 2010 11:04 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
and they made a business decision here. They decided that it would be better to stay in business with the UFC than not.
The UFC has every right to ban companies from their TV shows by whatever means they determine. This is the third time it’s been publicly stated that working with Fedor is something that can give you the boot.
bag of sand
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually the UFC doesn’t have that right. There are anti-trust laws on the book for trying to force such exclusive dealings. I think this falls under third line forcing which is always illegal. But no one will challenge them because they stand to lose more taking the UFC to court and winning then they would working with the UFC. Bully tactics 101
And the UFC can decide not to do business with whoever they please
Personally, I find Tapout at greater fault for even wanting to do business with Fedor and M-1. These guys have shown their true colors time and time again.
Agreed.
However it’s one mobster vs another, I mean monster. ;)
by magneto on Jun 26, 2010 11:15 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
devious,
are you 100% sure Tapout doesnt own any stakes in the UFC? Because I think they may. A lot of the UFC shows are presented by Tapout, Mask is a UFC HoFer. This isn’t standard for the other clothing companies.
How you expect to run with the wolves come night when you spend all day sparring with the puppies - Omar Little
by The Omaplatapus on Jun 26, 2010 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
No Omaplatapus....
I’m afraid tht I don’t.
I only know that once upon a time as a very new company Tapout was there to support the UFC (and MMA as a whole) when the company wasn’t as big as it is right now.
I also know that Tapout supports all types of fighters in different MMA organizations. Because of this I haven’t heard yet of Zuffa holding Tapout by the balls for sponsoring or supporting any other fighter not under the UFC banner as of yet.
Mind you this may change now, but whose to say what other stakes Tapout has with the UFC. Nothings come to light at this point from what little I know
Western Europe
Russia isn’t western Europe, it is pretty much as East as Europe goes. just sayin.
lol dana forever the fall-guy
i doubt he singelhandedly made the decision
Facts don't come with points of view.
by Robert Livingston on Jun 26, 2010 10:53 AM EDT reply actions
Was this directed at the comments?
because I never once mentioned him.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Do we know when all the squabbling happened with TapOut/UFC/Fedor/ M1?
Curious to know how long TapOut held out before they made the decision to give in to what I personally think is better judgment. They sell more shirts via TUF & live events than Fedor.
by magneto on Jun 26, 2010 11:02 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Isn’t Mask in the Hall of Fame? Wonder if it’s too late for him to get out.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 10:53 AM EDT reply actions
Fedor in boardshorts is like chewing tinfoil
Just weird to see Fedor in Shorts.
1. Same thing happened with Mousasi. Clinch Gear stepped in at the last minute and saved the day.
2. TapOut knows better than to mess with Dana and his toys. Fedor is like the big stuffed animal at the fair that you can never seem to win for old uncle Dana and TapOut was making him a little jealous.
by magneto on Jun 26, 2010 10:57 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
This is going no where good
The UFC has no right to tell a third party company how and with whom they can spend there money on. The UFC is taking money out of fighters pockets. Sure Fedor might not miss the money. But what happens when UFC takes the next step and say any sponser of the UFC cant give that same support to any other fight out side of there promotion. From world famous to local talent. UFC has every right to tell its fights what they can and cant were inside there promotion but thats where it stops. What we need is a company to step up and say fine, we will take our brand else where. But unfortunately that will not happen in the foreseeable future because TapOut or any other company really have no where else to go…….YET
The UFC has no right to tell a third party company how and with whom they can spend there money on.
Correct, which is not at all what they did, The DO have a right to control what sponsors are allowed to place products in UFC events. It’s called leverage, and the UFC has it. There are benefits to being the big kid on the block, and to Fedor, there are benefits to being WITH the big kid on the block. Maybe this will help him see that. If not, no big deal, his time as (current) No.1 HW in the world is waning, the UFC doesn’t NEED him.
by Axl_Pabst on Jun 26, 2010 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
The business world is a ruthless place. You don’t get to the top by being Mr. Friendly. Obviously you try to build good business relations, but I doubt that these kinds of strong-arm tactics are out of the norm. Just because we don’t hear about it in other industries, doesn’t mean it’s not happening. It just so happenes that the UFC’s business is splattered all over the internet for us to nitpick through.
The same situation but backwards happens ALL THE TIME.
How many times have you seen a sponsor drop an athlete/group because of what he did off the field or tell an athlete he can’t do certain things? Phelps losing sponsors/Jordan covering reebok logos etc. It’s just flipped that the sponsor DOESN’T have the leverage now.
This only makes it more likely Fedor will be in the UFC
I don’t understand how the “don’t hurt Fedor’s M1’s feelings” meme took off but the UFC is just flexing their muscles and trying to gain more leverage over M1 in negotations.
I’m sure the argument they can make at the table is obvious to anyone; and that’s exactly what people call “playing hardball” in the business world. M-1 aren’t innocent either; this is just tit for tat.
There’s no need to put any serious weight on their public posturing.
TapOut was supporting the UFC when it was on the run from McCain. Guess this is where loyalty gets you.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:11 AM EDT reply actions
Yep, Tapout has gotten absolutely nothing back from the UFC....ever. It has been a one way street relationship.
Poor Tapout.
And the UFC has gotten nothing from them. Oh wait, they’re the single biggest apparel sponsor in the sport, paid fighter’s salaries and kept events going when the UFC itself couldn’t afford to, allowing there to actually BE a sport, and they have sponsored dozens of other fighters outside the UFC in the past, providing a fertile ground for the UFC to poach talent. And their founder is in the UFC Hall of Fame. Other than that, clearly TapOut is completely dependent on the UFC for everything.
by Tim the Enchanter on Jun 26, 2010 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
TapOut was supporting the UFC when it was on the run from McCain. Guess this is where loyalty gets you.
well said
LOL.. I guess they must have missed this news over a year ago..
http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=ki-afflictiondone072409
The UFC absorbed the contracts of Affliction and in turn it kept Affliction from breach of contract on multiple fight deals, they were to sponsor the UFC in return..
Not encroachment in the least bit… Tapout was hand delivered the Spike/TUF deal for their taking.. That deal FAR surpassed anything that Affliction can stand to make off the UFC sponsorship deal..
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
the UFC only has "1 official" sponsor...
Tapout..
Just because Affliction has a placement on a couple ring posts means nothing.. Tapout has been and is announced as the “official sponsor” for the UFC.. They also have their logo present on the mat (Afflcition does not).
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
Seems like I’m a little late to the UFC is evil party, but for a similar case, Adidas withdrew it’s clothing deal with the University of Central Florida after Marcus Jordan decided he would wear some of his dad’s sneakers in an exhibition game.
So please, please don’t act like this is some sort of special evil reserved for only the spawn of satan himself, mr. dana white. This is how clothing deals work, this is how business works.
by Phildo on Jun 26, 2010 11:12 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
A) No one mentioned Dana White
B) I went to a high school that had a shoe deal. It’s literally the winningest high school football team in America (Valdosta High School). Wearing a competitor’s sneaker is breach of contract.
Support or don’t support the UFC’s actions, but if historical precedent is any indication this is a completely separate matter.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not referring to the article, there were just too many anti-dana comments for me to pick just one.
But this is how it works. If you have a sponsorship deal with one company and you enter into one with one of their competitors, they are going to get pissed.
I'm fine with that
I’m suggesting these issues need to be ironed out ahead of time. Put it in writing. I don’t think that’s an outrageous demand.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
In fairness, it may have been. (Probably not but we really don’t know)
by ufc4 on Jun 26, 2010 11:25 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
It's not...
Unless a very solid source is lying to me (or simply wrong)..it’s not in writing. I don’t have it as a 100% fact nor can I put my source on the record…so I can’t write the story. But I’m pretty damn sure that it is not in writing.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m the guy who suggested a new weekly series, Kid Nate Poops all over Dana but I don’t think I used the word “poop” in response to a recent not-so-subtle attack type article and I have to give Brent a pass on this one. Luke is right, Dana’s name wasn’t mentioned and it isn’t like everyone reading it doesn’t have an image of a fired up Dana screaming into his iPhone last night.
In other words, it was a subtle comment on Dana, a blatant one on UFC business practices. Well done without going ad hominem.
TapOut wasnt supporting there competitors. If it was gonna be Stirkeforce brought to you by TapOut then that would be a legit problem and arugument for the UFC. But its was a single fighter. Seems like it is just a spiteful move due to the past events with said fighter.
Why are Fedor and M1 separate when it’s convenient one way, but they are separated when it’s convenient in another way.
Fedor=M1, Fedor is a competitor.
I don't know
How much more distinct can you get than a guy’s name?
What’s the shirt supposed to have, a disclaimer that says “This is a Fedor shirt, not a M-1 shirt”
They can’t get any more distinct than the man’s name.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions
In a word
Frustrating.
Hard core MMA fan since UFC 99
by ChiCubs23 on Jun 26, 2010 11:19 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Two Bones to pick...
First isn’t huge, but Tapout does pay the UFC for sponsorship, I see it on the ring posts. So to catagorize Tapout as one of the “smaller sponsors that put money in the fighter’s pocket rather than the ones that pay the UFC’s bills” is incorrect. The UFC would stand to lose money along with fighters if Tapout were banned. Impact on fighters being greater, a point I am sure could be argued.
Second is where is the, what is Tapout’s angle here question? Its fairly clear from Vadim’s comments that Tapout told them what happened. Tapout had to expect M-1 go go public. So Tapout is either extremely dumb, or they just fired back at the UFC in the most effective way they could.
by pwrcartel on Jun 26, 2010 11:20 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Interesting post.
It’s weird how the rest of these posts that begin “If you knew anything about business”, proceed to frame this in terms of good and evil, and then conclude in favor of the UFC.
It’s nice to see a post that actually looks at the other side of the event from business perspective.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
All the BS that M-1 has been pulling in the last couple years, people should be cheering!
The UFC is taking a stand against what M-1 is trying to do in MMA. Yeah, this time Tapout got caught in the middle, but Tapout is going to be FINE lol. I don’t remember this big of a backlash when Fedor got pulled from a Strikeforce card so M-1 could renegotiate the contract.
That’s the kind of stuff people should be up in arms about….not this.
These beliefs don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
Personally
I think the UFC is bluffing and would no way ever ban them from the UFC.
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:24 AM EDT reply actions
No way ever
is a bit harsh. But I agree, I don’t think they would have pulled them over this. However, it shows how much Tapout’s success is invested in the UFC that they didn’t even consider calling the bluff. Once again, that’s leverage, and the UFC has it.
To the people that brush these issues (Affliction, Fitch’s image rights, etc.) off as “business as usual”, do you subscribe to the belief that “all’s fair in love and war”?
I don’t feel very strongly about this, but at the very least, as presented, this makes Zuffa look like a scorned lover.
Twitter: @Mike_Fagan_13
http://www.sackmikegoldberg.com
Are they a scorned lover, or is M-1 really scum?
If you think M-1 is bad for MMA, this is great news. If not, UFC is the devil.
Is it really that black and white though?
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
No one
has said M-1 isn’t scum but what exactly does M-1 have to do with Tapout making a FEDOR shirt.. Not a FEDOR/M-1 shirt.
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Well
He has stake in the company so of course he is going to make money.
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Like I said above..
..it’s really weird how you frame a business decision in terms of good and evil. And by “weird”, I mean “incredibly naive.”
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
Scorned lover?
How about wise (if fairly ruthless) business?
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
Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Obviously the dynaimcs of a signature shirt changes the equation
But in Tapout’s defense, the sponsored Kimbo three months before his fight with Petruzelli. That was the main event on CBS for EliteXC. The UFC was the top dog then, but the polarity of the universe was also very different. Slice was covered head to toe in Tapout gear as was his entire entourage and family.
So, support or don’t support the UFC’s decision. But I can absolutely see why Tapout thought this was perfectly acceptable to do.
Also, Loretta’s article makes it clear Tapout realized they couldn’t do a M-1 shirt, but they themselves – guys who’ve been working with the UFC for years – saw no issue with a Fedor shirt. I dont’ know guys, if Tapout didn’t see it coming, that says a lot.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
Bingo
It wasn’t a co-promotion tshirt
by TennesseeTopTeam on Jun 26, 2010 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions
I see this as the UFC’s main point of contention, if Fedor is making money it stands to reason that M-1 is making money from it too and I understand the UFC not wanting that money going into a competitor’s pockets. That’s what makes this different from the Kimbo situation as Kimbo is just an individual, not a business partner in a rival MMA promotion.
by ufc4 on Jun 26, 2010 12:39 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
M-1 is manager/promoter for Fedor.
With Tapout sponsoring some UFC shows like TUF I’m guessing there is some kind of promotional exclusivity in them not partnering with another MMA promotion. So I was wondering about this too.
Fedor has the built in conflict of interest of having his manager also being his promoter. As Fedor’s manager/promoter M-1 would most definitely be getting a percentage of any sponsorship deals. So the fact that M-1 is a manager/promoter for Fedor Zuffa may have been obligated to defend the promotional exclusivity in their contracts. Or they could just be being jerks about the situation.
Just BE.
Fedor is more than fighter and M1 more than a manager
Fedor is “part owner” of M1…
That’s what creates the built in conflict of interest..
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
But in Tapout’s defense, the sponsored Kimbo three months before his fight with Petruzelli. That was the main event on CBS for EliteXC. The UFC was the top dog then, but the polarity of the universe was also very different. Slice was covered head to toe in Tapout gear as was his entire entourage and family.
True, but he wasn’t a free agent with a promotion acting as an agent that they had been in negotiations with for a long time and wanted badly. What would be the point of putting on the “Zuffa squeeze” at that point?
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'm not speaking to the UFC's motivations
I’m talking about Tapout. To suggest Tapout should’ve seen this coming – the their premier partner would threaten to end it all – over this is silly. Whatever the UFC’s aims, Tapout didn’t exercise naivety here.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I am not so sure that this isn't another bargaining chip for the UFC...
So far they’ve managed to put a halt to Fedor’s RVCA sponsorship ($360 000 – $10 000/month @ 36 months) and this “seven figure” sponsorship as well. Now Zuffa can say – “Look at all of the extra money you’re leaving on the table by not signing with us.”
by MMArmy on Jun 26, 2010 11:34 AM EDT reply actions 4 recs
Not to mention...
with Tapout’s and UFC’s very close working relationship, this could have been wholly staged for the reasons stated above.
rec'd for thinking about a negotiating tactic that never came to my mind yet and makes total sense....
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
Read Loretta's article
M-1 brings this up directly. They’re trying to corner them. Will it work? Your guess is as good as mine. I find it hard to believe, but only time will tell.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Jun 26, 2010 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
I think the UFC is really off-target here.
I really think the cultural differences in negotiating style will just make Fedor less likely to sign with the UFC.
If the UFC was only negotiating with M-1, then I think it would be less of an issue. M-1 has done business internationally, they’ve surely encountered (or probably even used) hardball negotiating tactics.
But Fedor isn’t M-1. This is a guy who’s over the years become something of a Russian cultural nationalist, who is very religious, and who, by all descriptions, is very modest in displaying his wealth (if, in fact, M-1 hasn’t stolen it from him).
I think Fedor, himself, might just interpret this as another instance of Western rudeness on the part of the UFC, and another reason not to sign.
If you fight, you fight. If you hope, you hope.
by Sabate on Jun 26, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
That may be true….MAYBE….but what absolutely is true is that Fedor won’t sign because M-1 is demanding co-promotion, which is an absolutely insane thing to demand in the first place.
someone green this man's thoughts for me
Blackberry can do a lot of things, but sadly recking the shit out of a good post isn’t one of them.
by ScooterMagruder on Jun 26, 2010 11:54 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I got you scooter. Green’d. :)
"The path to enlightenment is through suffering"
by RearNakedChoker on Jun 26, 2010 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Plain Out Tasteless
As much as I love the UFC and dislike Fedor I still feel that this is tasteless and just plain out bullying. Tapout has been a big part of the growth of MMA and the UFC as much as anything else. For the UFC to pull something like this is just sad to see that they are willing to hurt friends of the sport to flex some muscle.
Door swings both ways, buddy.
Tapout would be 1/20th of it’s size without the UFC ,now they want to sponsor their biggest enemies (Strikeforce) premier fighter?
It’s business. Many businesses do not allow their sponsors to sponsor competitors.
by Bob Loblaw TX on Jun 26, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
why is SF an enemy? they arent trying to be the ufc, look at the SF LA card...they arent trying to be the ufc...coker just wants to get along!
Fav 6 Fighters:Spider Silva,Mayhem,Jon Jones,Aoki,KJ Noons/King Mo
Team Pioli/Haley. Decade of the Chiefs.
I know it's all business...
but this is a tremendous dick move.
Agreed 100%.
But, being great at business often means being great at being a dick. I can’t tell you how many people I’ve seen passed up for promotions, simply because they couldn’t make the very hard and difficult decisions involving people’s livelihood. (Such as layoffs and firings.)
by Bob Loblaw TX on Jun 26, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
because they're
ultimately fans of the sport who mark out on Fedor as much as everyone else, if not more.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Meh, I don’t like it regardless because it is taking away money from a sponsor and fighter even though Fedor is king money.
Tapout had an exclusive Hershel Walker T-Shirt which is strangely odd.
I don’t get why the UFC would “lifetime ban” Tapout, these guys help fighters within the sport with sponsorship money and possible merchandise, and if this were to happen, UFC better up the pay for some “smaller” fighters.
But meh, I am sure we will get over this like we did Clinch Gear, RVCA, Condom Depot, ect.
uuuh yeah I write for the Cincinnati Enquirer. Thanks?
Didn't Tapout help out the UFC when they needed it the most?
And now they won’t even let Tapout sponsor anyone they want?
not sure about that.
I am friends with one of the owners and several of the top guys in one of TapouT’s main competitors and they told me 2-3 years ago, that the UFC had invested heavily in TapouT. Considering what has gone on in that time frame, it makes a lot of sense. TapouT has exploded, been the clothier for TUF and so on.
Assuming this to be fact, I can understand why they are doing this. understanding does not mean I like it or when a promotion blocks any suitable sponsor.
And I brought this up yesterday and several times in the past, so take it for what you will.
makes sense but at the same time its just a shame....and its just a shirt!
Fav 6 Fighters:Spider Silva,Mayhem,Jon Jones,Aoki,KJ Noons/King Mo
Team Pioli/Haley. Decade of the Chiefs.
No h/t to Supremacy? He had his story in a fanpost about 7 hours earlier.
Anyway, this is perfectly in line with what Zuffa has done in the past. It was scumbag thing to do then and nothing has changed since.
I specializes in grammar fail.
by a tommy point on Jun 26, 2010 12:17 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
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
Um…it’s hyperlinked…
also tommy point below…
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 heard Brookhouse was threatened with a lifetime ban if he came out with Supremacy’s information…
by BJJDenver on Jun 26, 2010 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2010/6/26/1538211/ufc-forces-tapout-to-drop-fedor
It’s right there on the front page.
I specializes in grammar fail.
by a tommy point on Jun 26, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
No offense, but it wasn’t his story. I chose to wait until this morning to post a story I wrote last night. We don’t hat tip to anything unless THAT was how we found out about the story.
I wrote it last night, put the finishing touches on this morning and set it to publish.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions
to make it clear...
he wasn’t how I found out about the story, so he doesn’t get a hat tip simply for publishing a fanpost when a conscious decision was made to wait until today to put this story up.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
God dammit...
this keeps reading more defensive than I mean it to sound.
WHat I’m trying to say is if I see a piece on the fanposts that directs me to a story or info I didn’t have previously I give it a hat tip. But we have a pretty sophisticated scheduling system based on when to post what..etc. If we hat tipped to every fan post that went up with the info before our piece it would make it seem that rather than scheduling posts of our own we’re just mining the fanposts for stories and then writing off of those.
Supremacy had a nice piece, but it wasn’t where I got any info I used, so I didn’t hat tip to it. Not out of spite or any intentional slight.
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
MMA Editor - SBNation.com
by Brent Brookhouse on Jun 26, 2010 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Supremacy had a nice piece, but it wasn’t where I got any info I used, so I didn’t hat tip to it. Not out of spite or any intentional slight.
LOL man, that’s all you had to say. Well, not that you had to say anything. I was just curious because of the time difference.
I specializes in grammar fail.
by a tommy point on Jun 26, 2010 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Meant to type “this story” instead of “his story”.
I specializes in grammar fail.
by a tommy point on Jun 26, 2010 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions
enough of SF fan boys or UFC fan boys BS.
The fact is, fans love MMA, we have the ufc, we have bellator/wec/strikeforce on tv or satelite for free….Dana wants ONE organization…
what a shame to threaten tapout like that…
dana, you cant make fun of strikeforce like they are just so terrible, then block everything they do or anything related to them…ufc 113 for FREE just to COUNTER other MMA? sigh, dana, no one wants the throne
Fav 6 Fighters:Spider Silva,Mayhem,Jon Jones,Aoki,KJ Noons/King Mo
Team Pioli/Haley. Decade of the Chiefs.
Nothing upsetting or shocking about this, Fedor and his M1 boys are just finding out that if they want to play games they will lose. Because the UFC doesn’t play that shit, it’s simple you either work for them or get run over by them. As far as Fedor being pissed or him not signing with them so what?. That was always fantasy talk, Fedor wants no part of the UFC it’s fighters and their contracts so why not screw him over like he and his management has screwed over several other orgs this is a great move imo.
"they mad at me, I keep going hard reppin/
cause what's your Rampage to Rashad Evans/"
-Joe Budden (Something To Ride To)
http://www.zshare.net/audio/76866807deabe3c1/
Dana better watch it
…or he is going to be a pair of concrete shoes at the bottom of River Volga.
Por isso eu tomo ópio / é um remédio / sou um convalescente do momento / moro no rés-do-chão do pensamento / e ver passar a vida faz-me tédio
I wish one of the parties involved would take this to court and I don’t even care who wins. I just think it would be very interesting to unravel how all the deals are put together. We could probably get some verification on if and what percentage Zuffa owns of Tapout. Then if there were any conflicts of interest in this deal. Also we would get to see how a Fedor sponsorship contract gets written up. Would it be like his fight contract where the majority of the money is funneled through M-1 and Fedor gets a smaller percentage? Because if that is the case it would answer a few questions and open up a few more serious questions.
Just BE.
I love how everyone's idea of "business' is based off of the WWE model.
A poor one at that.
"Respond intelligently even to unintelligent treatment."
-Lao Tzu
Recently on HDNet's Fighting Words, the Tapout guys were interviewed...
They were asked about doing sponsorship outside of the UFC, given their well-known connection to the promotion and they responded that while you will never see them sponsor another MMA organization itself, Dana is cool with them supporting the fighters.
So I guess Fedor is an exception.
by Polyhedron on Jun 26, 2010 1:20 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
After thinking it over, Fedor probably is an exception because he is part owner of M-1
So this actually makes perfect sense since Fedor is pretty much a fight promoter himself (or at least likes to be paid in such a capacity). That’s probably how Dana gets away with this shit when it comes to Fedor’s sponsors, it makes perfect sense.
by Polyhedron on Jun 26, 2010 1:23 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 4 recs
Ding.. Ding.. Ding..
We have a winner folks..
The loopholes of law can be found with every effort..
:)
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
by MMAuthority on Jun 26, 2010 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
In his negotiations with the UFC, Fedor wanted them to treat him as his own promotion.
He’s just getting what he asked for.
by Polyhedron on Jun 26, 2010 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Tapout has stated previous..
The UFC is fine with them sponsoring fighters, but they’re not permitted to sponsor other promotions..
This leads me to believe they have an exclusive sponsorship deal with the UFC that prohibits them from sponsoring any other promotions, giving the UFC the ability to terminate the contract on a breach if they were to do so.
Case in point, Fedor has a conflict of interest because he’s a part owner of his own fight promotion company, while being a fighter in the same right.. The loophole is that Fedor by all accounts is an acting promotion (M1).
:)
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
I think it falls back to this original deal as well...
Once Tapout and Spike entered into an exclusive deal, they became the official sponsors for UFC as well. The UFC invested money into the company to help grow it, making it a binding agreement because the exchange of money took place. Even without a written contract, the exchange of money can create a binding agreement in many states.
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
And here's a little more info..
http://www.fighthype.com/pages/content5913.html
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
I knew I should have read all the comments before posting. I was just wondering about this above.
So basically the UFC was probably obligated to defend the promotional exclusivity in it’s contracts with Tapout.
Just BE.
:)
Now you’re golden Pony Boy !!!
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
UFC and Fedor/M1 are playing the game
the only loser here is TapouT.
It sucks, but what you gonna do : /
THREE MUSKATEERS BAR P4P BEST HALLOWEEN CANDY
by BloodbathAndBeyond on Jun 26, 2010 1:26 PM EDT reply actions
The UFC is relentless.
They will do whatever it takes to win. It’s what makes the UFC so dominant. Their tenacity is what helped the sport grow through the dark times. But they’re also vindictive and nasty when it comes to fighters that don’t tow the line. In this case, it’s Fedor. Is it fair? No. Absolutely not. But fairness holds no weight in business. And at the same time, people have a right to be outraged. But if this is some sort of negotiating tactic, by cornering Fedor and M-1 and hurting them financially, the UFC has to remember one thing: historically, how well has an employee worked for a company when they are forced to through tyrannical measures? Eventually if you push enough people, someone is gonna shove back. Probably won’t be any time soon, considering the power the UFC holds, but eventually someone or a group of people will hurt them back. Nothing goes up forever. Eventually they’ll get caught.
by pud333 on Jun 26, 2010 1:27 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Really?, then how has the NFL managed to become the biggest sport in the world since the owners there make the UFC management look like softies. The UFC is doing nothing that other business haven’t done before hell they aren’t even close to being the most ruthless when it comes to their business practices. But they sure have learned that being nice doesn’t help you survive if anything being nice allows people to screw you over first.
"they mad at me, I keep going hard reppin/
cause what's your Rampage to Rashad Evans/"
-Joe Budden (Something To Ride To)
http://www.zshare.net/audio/76866807deabe3c1/
Had Tapout told the UFC no and been thrown out of the Octagon
I imagine Affliction/Silver Star and possibly Under Armour would have filled the gap.
Im sorry but it’s an ugly fucking shirt that only douchebags will wear when they are drinking 4 foot tall margaritas and showing off their sick biceps son.
"The only reason I'm cryin is cuz of the adrenaline."
Nope, I do find it amusing though to catch those dudes admiring their own muscles. They are such a fortress of vascular steel that they cannot keep their hands off themselves..
"The only reason I'm cryin is cuz of the adrenaline."
by Earl Montclair on Jun 26, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Hard thing to say..
Is it a dick move when the UFC gave Tapout the ability to make the 200+ million it’s going to see this year ??
Is it a dick move that the UFC specifically gave Tapout the Spike/TUF deal too ??
I would wait for more on this than what’s been reported thus far.. You have one side of the story making accusations without the other side present to confirm or deny the dealings..
The UFC has every right to make that type of call, considering they have invested money into the brand of Tapout and helped grow the brand simultaneously..
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
Not to mention, if Fedor’s lack of mainstream drawing power in the states is any indication, they wont be making googobs of money off that shirt anyhow.
"The only reason I'm cryin is cuz of the adrenaline."
by Earl Montclair on Jun 26, 2010 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions
lol... yeah I liken it to...
the UFC actually saving Tapout money in the long run.. The money they would have spent on the sponsorship and licensing rights they can now go on vacations with !!!
8-29-09
Keith Jardine is now known as "The Dean of Antihistamine" because he is always sleeping early in fights..
So you want to be a fucking sponsor?
"We are entering the last phases of the Farewell Fedor tour, and I, for one, am looking forward to the future." - subo -
by Bob Boblaw on Jun 26, 2010 3:51 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Yeah!
America totally has those colors trademarked! They Don’t Run!
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
Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Jun 26, 2010 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions
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.
