The Difference Between Mark Cuban and Dana White and Vince McMahon
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 12:21 PM EDT
in Business of MMA
Email
Print
Last Friday the UFC's parent company, Zuffa LLC, sent a message when they denied media credentials for Strikeforce: Diaz vs Daley to a number of sports reporters. The UFC has always taken an aggressive stance with reporters, viewing credentials as a reward for coverage they like, rather than as a way to help the press cover the sport.
CBS Sports reporter Loretta Hunt, a veteran MMA journalist who has written for Full Contact Fighter, Sherdog and the Los Angeles Times, was one of those denied credentials. As a result CBS Sports pulled all coverage of the event. Hunt spoke with Sherdog's Jason Probst (transcription via Fight Opinion) about the situation:
"Did it hurt me? Yeah, sure. That was my first assignment for CBS Sports. I worked with one of the editors, producers over there who does the NFL and also had done MMA in the past. His name is Denny Burkholder, he's a big fan of Mixed Martial Arts and CBS Sports, I'm told, hasn't really covered MMA for the last year or so for various reasons I'm told because they've had some difficulty with getting interviews and things like that in the past, so they kind of cooled off from it and then they were coming back in, this was the first show that they were going to do in quite some time. They brought me in, assigned me, and then we were turned down. So, CBS Sports decided that they just weren't going to do any coverage at all of the UFC. They don't want to be told who they can send to their events and who they shouldn't send to their events representing them.
"Yeah, I mean that I'm sad this door closed. I mean, a door really did close. CBS Sports is not going to look at MMA for at least a little while."
...
"Yeah, you know, I don't want to speak out of turn. I just, I had some conversation with CBS Sports a little bit. They just haven't really covered Mixed Martial Arts so much because, uh, you know, because like I said I don't want to speak out of turn but I definitely got the indication that, you know, when they were running the Elite XC events on CBS which was a competitor, you know, I think some of the access that they wanted to get in interviewing certain people and stuff was difficult for them. They felt some kind of restriction, so they kind of backed away from it and this was them kind of dipping their toe back in the water again...
...
"But, you know, the bigger picture here is, it's not just about me, there's other people involved, too. There's other media that's not allowed in. It's the UFC's decision that they're going to do this because, from everything I've been told, this doesn't happen in other sports. Journalists are granted credentials if they work for a reliable media outlet and, you know, are responsible reporters. I don't think it's been proven that any of us on this banned/restricted list were ever irresponsible in our reporting, we haven't been. So, you know, that's the bigger picture with the media ban for people are kind of stepping into this and seeing this for the first time."
In part of the discussion, Hunt references a recent blog post by Mark Cuban, owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, explaining his view of sports media in 2011. Cuban makes a number of interesting points. His central argument is that in the modern media environment a sports team is also a media company using its web site, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter accounts to communicate directly to its fans.
We'll hear more from Cuban his fellow NBA owner Ted Leonsis and SI columnist Jeff Wagenheim in the full entry as well as seeing a breakdown of the UFC and WWE business models.
For this reason, Cuban has sorted requests for media access into distinct categories: Newspapers, TV, and Internet Reporters. He views the first two categories as essential outlets that he must cooperate with to reach their audiences which are often offline and out of the reach of the Mavericks own media efforts. Internet reporters, not so much.
Washington Wizards and Washington Capitals owner Ted Leonsis has a more open approach than Cuban and responded to Cuban's diatribe. It's clear from Leonsis' piece that he shares Cuban's frustrations on a personal, emotional level, but nevertheless is maintaining an open access policy because he believes in openness and dialogue.
But note the key difference between Mark Cuban and Dana White and their media policies. Cuban has made a hard-headed decision to tolerate the media outlets he can't replace and purge the rest.
In contrast, White is more than happy to restrict access to entities like CBS Sports and ESPN that undeniably bring audiences that the UFC/Strikeforce can't reach on their own. Meanwhile many sites that Cuban would ban because they don't bring a unique audience and are blatantly engaging in rumor-mongering to generate traffic are credentialed.
Ironically Cuban's own HDNet was long blocked from using UFC footage on its Inside MMA program. They've since worked out a deal, but it took Cuban backing off entirely from any talk of competing with the UFC as a promoter.
Hunt points out the contrast between the Zuffa approach to press and most mainstream sports:
"(Zuffa) wants to move into being a mainstream sport and a mainstream league at this point, like I don't think that's there any argument that UFC is now the our league of our sport, right? The thing that we didn't think would happen but it happened and, you know, I gladly I can admit that and say that about this sport. If they want to be like all the other leagues, you know, the NBA like you know barring whatever Mark Cuban is considering, the NFL, all these other guys they don't restrict the media and I bet you they don't like the media that comes through because they are probably a lot more critical in other sports than the hardest critics are in Mixed Martial Arts. So, what's happening is extraordinary and makes us seem kind of hokey, you know, Mixed Martial Arts compared to all the other sports. What other big promotion do you know that doesn't let the media in? It's the WWE, it's the professional wrestling. They don't let certainly media in that they don't like, who they don't want covering certain things. Dave Meltzer's been banned from the WWE for years. So the UFC's following a model of a fake sport!"
UFC fans don't want to hear this, but Vince McMahon is clearly Dana White's business role model. The WWE has built its business on the following:
- Use of free cable TV programming to reach fans and promote Pay Per Views
- PPV as the big revenue driver
- Aggressive international expansion
- Ruthlessly compete against domestic competitors and buy any that are too big to crush
- Use the brand and the company executives as the front man of the company to prevent any single fighter/performer from getting too big.
UPDATE: Sports Illustrated columnist Jeff Wagenheim pulls no punches:
On the same night that Strikeforce ascended to the major leagues of MMA, running what by all accounts was a smoother, slicker show while bidding adieu to insufferable window dressing such as the pyrotechnics that at past events had rattled bones during fighter introductions, the organization also apparently stooped to the amateur-hour vindictiveness of its new ownership. Two reporters assigned to cover Saturday's event by major media outlets were denied press credentials, just as they have been refused access to all UFC events in recent years after writing stories White evidently didn't consider worthy of his company's PR clip file.
...
"It would be a good thing if news organizations applied some counterpressure," said Roy Peter Clark, who teaches writing and sports journalism at the Poynter Institute. "When the leaders of a sport start screwing around with press credentialing in response to what they perceive to be unfavorable coverage, that sends a big message to all responsible journalists who are covering that sport."It might take a while for that message to sink in with enough media members for it to make a difference. Perhaps nothing will change until the UFC and Strikeforce are firmly entrenched in the American sports fabric, and company officials are regularly dealing with editors who demand the professionalism of mainstream sports leagues and teams. Clark, for one, believes the time will come.
"Any time someone tries to control coverage in this way, it backfires," Clark said. "They look like jerks. They look like bush leaguers. And the actions that they take against journalists become stories in and of themselves. They end up inviting negative coverage."
Wagenheim, a tenured member of the elite sports writers fraternity that has been so resistant to covering MMA, is an opinion leader in his circles. Other sports writers and pundits who are less open-minded about MMA than Wagenheim will take their queues from him.
The big league sports news entities that the UFC needs desperately if they truly want to make MMA the biggest sport in the world are watching and they are not impressed. But again, I think Dana White knows exactly what he's doing. His interests are perfectly served by keeping MMA as the biggest PPV sport in the U.S. and nothing more.
237 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The press credentials thing has always seemed bizarre to me.
Dana holds grudges like nobody I’ve ever known.
"Unless you can’t think of something intelligent to say, don’t reply and make the world as dumb as you are appearing to be." - mabel4life
by lowellthehammer on Apr 13, 2011 12:30 PM EDT reply actions
I think it's more insidious than that
It’s not just about holding grudges, but rather exercising control. In the case of someone like Hunt, a UFC credential can have a huge material impact on her ability to do her job and make a living. By dangling credentials like baubles, and yanking them at will when reporters write things that the UFC deems unflattering, Dana and his PR apparatus are aiming to bully the MMA press corps into complicity with UFC wishes. It’s dirty business, and scary because it is probably fairly effective.
Tatum: I think he's a good man. I like him. I got nothing against him, but I'm definitely gonna make orphans of his children.
by Dave Strummer on Apr 13, 2011 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 8 recs
Like other sports leagues/businesses/organizations don’t decide which journalists to provide access to and which to deny.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
I wonder how many of those leagues
also had their leader call a reporter a “fucking dumb bitch” and then ban her forever even if she’s writing for a massive media conglomerate like CBS because she had the audacity to write a critical piece on them.
"Unless you can’t think of something intelligent to say, don’t reply and make the world as dumb as you are appearing to be." - mabel4life
by lowellthehammer on Apr 13, 2011 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I don't think anyone defends how Dana spoke about Hunt
It was childish and counterproductive (although it might have actually helped him with the LGBT community when he tucked tail and apologized). But the idea that only interacting with positive/neutral media is an exclusively McMahon invention is patently absurd. See King, Peter and Goodell, Roger.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
King & Goodell is a different issue, where King is a softball pitcher who grooves the occasional planned fastball to Roger. Perhaps like Ariel seems on the way to being in MMA – someone who has an implicit understanding to avoid certain approaches to certain topics & who handles their interviewee the way they want to be handled.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
The NFL doesn't ban reporters who write nasty stories about the NFL
If there did, there would be a shit storm. The UFC is protected by the fact that it remains niche enough that major outlets like CBS don’t really seem to care one way or another whether they cover MMA. If the NFL tried to pull that, Goodell and the owners would be castigated 24 hours a day until they relented.
Other sports leagues may make policy decisions based on the size/nature of outlets that qualify for credentials, but they don’t pick and choose reporters based on personal grudges.
Tatum: I think he's a good man. I like him. I got nothing against him, but I'm definitely gonna make orphans of his children.
by Dave Strummer on Apr 13, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I somehow really doubt that.
I don’t think the NFL HAS to ban reporters anymore – the networks wouldn’t dare put someone on that took massive shits on the league. They understand that being open/willing to work with journalists isn’t a suicide pact.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
No one is going to just continually shit on the league and continue to have an audience or employer, but if/when there is actually shady stuff going on, people pursue it, at least superficially, even when the league would prefer otherwise. Hmm…maybe they just have a more sophisticated media leash…
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
The leagues stance on concussions
Has been completely attacked by pundits and reporters from all the major networks.
Contributor at cagepages.com Come check us out.
Head Kick Legend
by Neil Manich on Apr 13, 2011 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Not nearly to this degree
According to anyone who’s ever covered another sport, if you represent a legit organization you are going to get credentials.
Hair.
"Ellismania is, along with the black President, a symbol of the future." - Mayhem Miller
Tweeter!
Wow cares if the UFC's buissness model is copying the WWE?
It don’t bother me at all, and I hate pro wrastling.
Learn JiuJitsu, it's fun.
the thing that should be of concern to fans
is the fact that the WWE basically proceeded to run pro wrestling into the ground once they had no serious competitors.
There is very good reason to be concerned that a UFC monopoly won’t be any better for MMA than Vince McMahon’s complete control has been for sports entertainment.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Vince did not purchase TNA yet but you’re right . . . the industry could be better.
I’m praying that Bellator and MFC does really well. I enjoy their product and they’re FREE!
I tend to be biased towards strikers . . . exciting strikers.
- - - - -
VEe is ANIMated!
by VeeisAnimated on Apr 13, 2011 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
TNA hasn't ever amounted to a threat
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Totally Disagree
I truly believe DW and Zuffa’s interest to grow the sport its in the business model, by having athletes choosing to be MMA fighters the business grows. Unlike the WWE which entertainment. just like Cirque du Soleil. As for credentials i have a feeling that aside from couple of old grudges like Hunt and Gross there are limited amount of credentials that can be given and the UFC is making their decision based on who gives the best coverage. Luke Thomas was angry for not getting ones but on his show confirmed that he received it why?
I think Kid Nate nailed the real issue, at least for the time being
Make no mistake, while Zuffa has done more to build MMA worldwide than all others combined, there is a point at which it is in the UFC’s interest to keep a ceiling on the growth of the sport to ensure their continued complete control.
This is far more important to them than growth of the sport for growths sake, including the unwanted idea of scrapping the PPV model for a network deal that anyone could come along and replicate, given time and resources.
I’ll wager that Zuffa is relatively content with where they are right now in the US and will be mostly looking overseas for significant sources of future revenue growth.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The SF move cemented the UFC as the MMA league like Hunt said. This deal along with other investments take capital from the company. There is substantial amount of capital needed in order to take the sport further more into mainstream. TV deals at this point can hurt the sport if the UFC is not strong enough to make the decisions we will have some CBS executive deciding the future of the sport.
true
yet that had to do with their failure to capitalize on the near-monopoly they found themselves in and had increasingly shitty shows, ridiculous ‘comedy’ bits and pretty much anything Vince McMahon could do to satisfy his petty ego.
besides, unlike the WWE, UFC does put on the matches the fans want to see. the champions earn their spots and there’s no bullshit politics getting in the way of the action. so i’m not really worried.
by Victor Rodriguez on Apr 13, 2011 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions
WWE still makes a ton of money,
it isn’t as big as it once was, but this has less to do with Vince (imo) and more to do w/ MMA siphoning off a big part of the audience.
Pro Wrestling has had the times pass them by—but they still make tons and tons of dough.
funny how things change?
Dana White used to look like a skinny bald george castanza from seinfeld with a nervous stutter lol! Now Dana is trying to be big like a fighter because he could never make it as one sadly. But he is lucky he’s got the best friend with the cash to give him the publicity and cash he needs to get ahead faster. THANK YOU FERTITTAS
It don't matter where you came from, its where your going!!!
I’ve only been following MMA for the last year-ish, so I’ve only known Dana as he is now. It was pretty shocking when I went back and watched TUF1 and saw him then.
"Ellismania is, along with the black President, a symbol of the future." - Mayhem Miller
Tweeter!
Goodfella that Dana is, right Joe?
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 Apr 13, 2011 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Scrawny, insecure Dana White is hilarious.
Here’s supposedly his first interview as UFC president:
by M.Sphinx on Apr 13, 2011 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Oh SNAP!!!!1
Never seen that! LMAO! Dana’s teeth were jacked and he looked hungry as hell.
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 Apr 13, 2011 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
He looks about 45 in that video. 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 Apr 13, 2011 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
LMAO.
Hey… money can fix anything.
My favorite K1 fighter:
Yuta Kubo the best 70kg striker in the world.
by Untitled_Artistry on Apr 13, 2011 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey did CBS or ESPN help build MMA or the UFC to where it is today?
I know they can only help them reach a bigger audience but currently the UFC is doing fine with out them.
- Wondering what is the financial impact of the NBC abandoning the NBA? Did ABC benefit from the post-Jordan NBA? NIKE is still a huge supporter of the NBA.
- HBO decides to leave the heavyweight division of boxing. Well BOB Arum shakes hands with CBS to promote Pacquiao vs Mosely. What’s the meaning? They will reach many fans but I don’t see boxing making a huge return based on that fight or Pacquiao vs Mayweather Jr.
* ShowTime is still Strikeforce. The UFC said fuck you to CBS, HBO, ShowTime, etc. I’m sure Spike TV is still smiling pretty.
At the end of the day, those banned media outlets will simply sit on the sidelines, blogs like Bloody Elbow will continue to cover MMA and slowly but surely . . . the UFC fanbase will increase. It doesn’t have to happen overnight but it will. (And probably more bad MMA will continue to be made.)
I tend to be biased towards strikers . . . exciting strikers.
- - - - -
VEe is ANIMated!
"UFC's interest to keep a ceiling on the growth of the sport to ensure their continued complete control."
I love the UFC, but with each passing day, I am more and more convinced of this. I’ve long believed there is a natural ceiling to MMA, based solely on the fact that combat sports aren’t for everyone. It’s easier to digest Hockey, Football, Basketball, etc. from a casual fan standpoint, but blood and pain isn’t really everyone’s cup of tea, and while we like to spout how athletic and talented these fighters are, for some people, it will always be just human cockfighting. And I accept that. What I don’t accept is the ridiculous things the UFC does sometimes. I know they want to control the narrative and the fighters (we’ve seen how bad things go when a promotion doesn’t have control), but who gives a flying fuck what Loretta Hunt wrote in the past? A sports media giant like CBS giving exposure to MMA can only be a good thing. I appreciate what Dana and co. did for MMA, but that doesn’t give a blank cheque for them to do whatever they feel like. The whole “It’s their company, they can do what they want” defense, while technically true, is a copout. An excuse to justify whatever Dana does.
It’s frustrating, but I’ve resigned myself to the fact that whenever I talk to my friends about MMA, they will always look upon the sport I love as a niche novelty. I don’t know just what CBS could do to help MMA grow, but coverage by the big guys lends legitimacy and credibility that Blogs and new media just doesn’t quite have yet.
by pud333 on Apr 13, 2011 12:45 PM EDT reply actions 16 recs
hear hear!
Tatum: I think he's a good man. I like him. I got nothing against him, but I'm definitely gonna make orphans of his children.
by Dave Strummer on Apr 13, 2011 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Good to see that the Loretta/UFC "thing" is still going strong. Ugh.
On a side note about the whole WWE=UFC meme, the same business model is not equivalent to having the same product. Both men have to be promoters. They have to push a product to fans who don’t know they want it yet. The mainstream sports have publishers, and not promoters as much, because they know fans already want their product, they just need to make it accessible to them. MMA still has a lot of opinions to change, and it needs promoters. This doesn’t mean the UFC is becoming a fake sport as insinuated by Hunt in the last quote block.
Of the five main points listed:
-Use of free cable TV programming to reach fans and promote Pay Per Views
-PPV as the big revenue driver
-Aggressive international expansion
-Ruthlessly compete against domestic competitors and buy any that are too big to crush
-Use the brand and the CEO as the front man of the company to prevent any single fighter/performer from getting too big.
Why are these “bad”? I could certainly do without PPV being the main revenue source, and clearly would prefer a network deal, but the other 4 seem like good decisions for a growing sport, no?
Go Orange(men)!
no no no
there’s nothing bad at all about the UFC following the WWE model. Clearly it’s been hugely successful.
But the thing to be aware of is the limitations of the WWE model which became very apparent after they failed to really absorb the WCW. Pro wrestling stopped growing because the WWE got stagnant and complacent and Vince had too much power.
The UFC isn’t in the same kind of danger because it’s a sport and they can’t control the outcomes.
But it’s very much in their power to keep the sport where it is no and no bigger so that no Michael Jordan of MMA emerges that will be beyond their control.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions
This isn't pro wrestling.
It’s not a soap opera that becomes less interesting under one organization. And Michael Jordan, for all his power, was not beyond the NBA’s control. Ditto for Brady in the NFL, Crosby/Ovie in the NHL or A-Rod in MLB. Without the league, they are NOTHING.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Jordan was pretty damn close
Dude was selling out minor league baseball stadiums to the gills and is a billionaire based off of business outside the NBA.
Not afraid to nitpick
The UFC is a league? Really? I seemed to have missed the regular season and playoffs the UFC organized last year. Not to mention the home stadiums, training facilities, coaching staff, etc and they must have provided.
Derek either can't or won't
comprehend the difference between a league/cartel and a single ownership entity like the UFC.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
But I can comprehend the difference between fake world of pro wrestling storylines and fanboys of certain wrestlers and actual sports, so I guess I’m 1-for-2.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions
To clarify
The WWE/WCW merger hurt pro wrestling in that it made it less interesting. It was never a competitive athletic enterprise – it was a soap opera, and a number of fans preferred the WCW version, so they left when it wasn’t available. This dynamic Cannot and Will Not repeat itself in mixed martial arts.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
you are circling in on a valid point here
my argument is just that when one single figure got near total control of pro wrestling it hurt the industry as a whole.
perhaps the sporting nature of the UFC inherently prevents that as you argue.
perhaps not.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Your argument remains thin in any case
You mention one case in which the ascent of one man to almost total control took a bad turn. But that in itself is no indication that this will happen again or that it isn’t indeed the best way for the UFC to move forward. Especially in this stage, where the sport is young and the talent-pool across all divisions remains not terribly deep, trying to consolidate all elite-fighters into one org, controlling the media who has been hostile towards the sport and so on may actually be the best approach.
Unless you can point out exactly where Dana White is making the same mistakes in a comparable situation that McMahon did and that led to the WWEs diminished popularity, simply comparing them because they are to men closing in on an effective monopoly does not hold water, IMO.
To save me some time on 25% of all threads, here's the universal answer to the Fedor-debate: Fedor is the most accomplished MMA fighter ever. That is a fact. If he still is the best fighter at this point in time is up for debate.
it's two men who followed the same business model
Dana has modeled much of his approach to the biz on the WWE. Where does he go when they took the wrong turn? What model does he follow then? Does he create his own model?
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions
You Guys
push this WWE model too much. What other options does he have? It seems y’all don’t pay attention when they (Dana, the casino bros.) continually mention that they plan way more in advance than the media bloggers and/or journalists can write about.
WWE is all fake. Fake. Fake. Need me to say it again? Fake. their champions are fake. their drama made up…FAKE. essentially, their ‘entertainment’ is all pre-planned…FAKE, therefore way too much time needs to be involved in DESIGNING the plot for the champ to be champ, take the belt, retain the belt, defend the belt, lose the belt, re-gain the belt, etc….(FAKE)
FUCK THAT. in the UFC you can get the belt, be proclaimed the next ‘era’, and lose that shit your next fight. shit is thin and fickle son. Protect ya neck, or sink. you can’t write drama better than that. that’s what y’all wrastlin folks don’t comprehend. this shit is skill ONLY. you just have SOOOOOOO Much hate for UFC that you can’t stop bashing TUF, promoting the WWE’s equivalent, and comparing non-stop dana to the WWE.
MMA that boring that you have to keep bringing up entertainment wrestling, huh?
by Haloe T. Jones on Apr 14, 2011 3:47 AM EDT up reply actions
wow
thanks for cluing us in about pro wrestling being fake.
was really news to me. dang!
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Please be more exact and differentiate between League and Cartel
League can be owned by a single entity or owner.
OK but Cartel and Sole ownership are financial terms where
The term league in this case is used loosely to describe one organization that represents the sport. You can claim that each fighter is a team competing against other “teams” .
No one is claiming that though. The IFL was a league and a fight promotion. So was the short lived Bonecrunch Fighting League. The UFC is not a league in any way, shape, or form.
by VirtualBalboa on Apr 13, 2011 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Wait – the NFL provides home stadiums, training facilities and coaching staff? I thought the teams/cities did that.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
The teams are the NFL. What part of that don’t you understand?
by VirtualBalboa on Apr 13, 2011 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions
The WWE never works well when they have no competition though. They took the business model and made it work great for them. Saying the UFC will stagnate because the WWE for multiple reasons is in a rut doesn’t make sense. The UFC needs to continue to put on relevant fights( or makes us think they are relevant) the WWE needs to sell young stars and actually have some decent writing and creative.
Also the comparison of Vince to DW on a non business model doesn’t really work for me. Vince from all reports stopped being a fan and stopped caring about the product and not up on the competition. White for the most part still comes off as a fan and wants see the best fights. Now dose that mean he wouldn’t want to control it and micro manage the crap out of it.
Twitter @MaZZM
http://mazznettt.blogspot.com/
sure
obviously Dana and co. are free to avoide McMahon’s biggest blunders but I’m writing this because he’s walking on that path and I want fans to see the possible dangers ahead.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Basically
If DFW learned from Vince’s mistakes, it will likely have a positive outcome, but he strikes me as being too much like a kid who imagines it will never happen to him.
Personally I expect Zuffa’s growth rate to slow a bit and the Fertittas to look to cash out while the getting is good within a few short years.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
yeah
that’s my expectations too. I suspect when the PPV biz is hit by the internet they’ll look to get out.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
So, “-Use the brand and the CEO as the front man of the company to prevent any single fighter/performer from getting too big.”" is one of the central tenets of their business plan, yet they’re expecting to get the highest possible price for their product with the largest asset walking? Or do you see Dana hanging around to be the public face while answering to someone else behind the scenes?
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I expect his contract will be a big part of the bidding process.
Dana is the face of the organization. The new owners would want to keep him involved as much as possible.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I agree...
but could you ever see Dana selling control of this to anyone else? I know that’s your vision, but I can’t see that even coming close to happening. Maybe when Dana’s old and gray, but that’s a long way off. An interesting, yet morbid question: What if something happened to Dana (illness, accident, etc.)- do you think that the UFC would be in danger of folding? It seems that putting all of their eggs in one basket is risky….
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Dana only has what degree of control the Fertittas give him as it is.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Here is what I wrote below about Dana and his public persona:a
nother interesting factor in Dana’s persona is that it could be a retirement plan of sorts for him. If and when Zuffa sells the UFC, the fame and cult of personality that Dana has built in the UFC will serve him well. He could either get paid well to stay by the new owners, instantly start another promotion and get a ton of investment capital and immediate fan interest, or even star in his own reality show. He has made himself into a product along the lines of the Donald Trump.Now, to the matter of “will Zuffa sell the UFC or not” I really don’t know for certain, but certain actions suggest to me that they really aren’t in it for the long haul. The number one piece of evidence I can present is their use of taking out large loans not for expansion but to make huge dividend payments to the owners. In the two released S&P statements it suggests that they’ve paid themselves $400 million (and that’s based on the two released statements not any of the other years which we don’t have statement), all while continuing to aggressively expand the market. This is smart because it if the gravy train ends tomorrow they can just declare bankruptcy while walking away with their millions. But if they want to continue as owners at some point they’ll have to tighten the belts and pay of these loans or at lest not take as much out. Can you see them doing that? I see it more likely that they sell the UFC to massive media conglomerate as a prized possession and let them take care of the debt while they get another $1 bil in cash.
2 years of a netwrok deal...
will get them that billion. But, you make a good point. However, as you acknowledge, those 2 statements without any other evidence tell us little. Of course it’s possible that they’ll cash out, but they still have a lot of legacy to write before that happens. Also, they’ve built the UFC name into a huge entity in and of itself- if they didn’t get out when the Fertitta’s first wanted to cash out when the promotion was hemorrhaging money, I don’t see them doing it when they’re mainlining cash. If they remain a PPV driven business- then that ceiling that Nate mentions for their growth has already topped out. If they’re intent on doing everything that they’ve said publicly, and they want more money, then the network deal phase will be coming. If you’re right, then I’d imagine that we’ll see them sell within 2 years.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
2 years of a Network deal if they could draw huge ratings, which hasn’t been proven to be the case yet and may even be detrimental to their bottom line.
here’s why I don’t see the UFC ever really going to network tv: they would have to do huge ratings to equal what they make on ppv. The lowest selling ppv – pays more then the highest rated Kimbo card could ever get on CBS. 10 million plus viewer would be need to offset the loss of a 250,000 ppv seller. And to get those numbers they would have to put on the big stars that could make them a hell of a lot more on ppv than on network tv. And then comes the risk that fans want and expect better free shows on TV, thus skipping the ppv, or that the interest grows so much that it opens the door for more competition. driving the star payscale up that they’ve worked so hard to keep under control. No I think they would love to have something like TUF on network but not their regular events.
I’m under the impression that network licensing fees are not dependent on ratings- while the price of said fees will be negotiated based on projected or past ratings, once a contract is signed, the fee is locked. The NFL doesn’t get less money if a week does poor ratings- the rate is locked upon the signing of the contract. And while you’re right that it’s not a 1=1 ratio when comparing PPV viewers vs. network viewers, a mainstream audience will NEVER pay $55 a month/ twice a month to watch their sport and the audience will grow exponentially when given the product for free on networks. Just how much, well, neither of us know, nor do you know that your 10 million viewers figure is correct, unless you can give me hard figures as to how networks value each individual viewer.
Much of the criticism of the UFC not being able to maintain the growth that it’s experienced over the last 5 years is correct, however, such a marked period of growth is impossible to maintain indefinitely without an alteration to their revenue model. If the UFC is happy with where they are now, in perpetuity, then fair enough. That’s not the sense I get, given recent statements and actions.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
that is true, usually when a contract is signed the license fee is set, but the UFC is going to want a large license fee to offset the loss of ppv and what happens when their ratings don’t meet the networks expectations? they’ll be dropped. And what evidence do they have that they’ll draw huge numbers in the first place? They’ll probably have to run a one-off or some other card to demonstrate their drawing ability. And a one-time special (or maybe two or three time) to serve as a giant gateway is all I really see them doing. I just think the idea of them eventually going to network is a pipedream for some delusional fans. I could be wrong though.
And the 10 million (with the UFC’s demographic) is the kind of number a network would want to see to justify a $3 or 4 million license fee, which is the type of number that might make it worthwhile for the UFC. Unless, again, they are really looking to do maybe a show or two a year.
the Fertittas to look to cash out while the getting is good within a few short years.
I’ve never understood this meme. Certainly, rich folks love money, but I also think that Lorenzo eats up being on camera, at the weigh ins, at the fights, being called the real brains behind the UFC, the yin to Dana’s yang (wait, that sounded wrong…) and would like to be viewed in the annals of history as the most important man in the history of the sport. The UFC has become so enmeshed with Dana and the Fertitta’s personas and with the way that they’ve been treating the sport, it just doesn’t strike me as the type of behavior that leads to growing an asset only to flip it.
Here’s my question: if Dana’s business model is based on WWE, and he’s become a more important figure than any of the athletes are, then how does a prospective buyer pay a market premium for that, if supposedly it’s largest asset walks too? You think that Dana White intends to grow this to a certain level only to sell and answer to someone else? Somehow, he doesn’t strike me as an inside cat.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I think we could see the UFC Going Public
Since the Station Casinos aren’t doing that well the UFC is now the major business the family has and what a great investment that was. I believe the Fertittas will look to go public holding majority share. First in order to raise more money for the growth of the UFC. Second as a way out.
If we're talking WWE
WWE, Inc. became a publicly traded company on October 19, 1999. At our initial public offering, we sold 11,500,000 shares of Class A common stock at a price of $17.00 per share.
From the WWE website why can’t we that happening with the UFC?
in 1999 there were literally hundreds of major IPOs
it was really easy to do an IPO. There hasn’t been a major IPO in the last couple of years.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Just for the record
Arcos Dorados Holdings Inc. on Wednesday priced its initial public offering of 73.5 million shares at $17 each, giving the offering for McDonald’s biggest franchisee a potential value of $1.2 billion.
That was yesterday.
What do you call major? Hopefully Facebook or Twitter will soon.
by Coeman on Apr 14, 2011 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
They've stated repeatedly that they will never go public.
Station Casinos, even in a down period, is a much larger business than the UFC.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
More than down
They are still recovering yes it is a much larger buisness but there is a big reason why Lorenzo is now 100% involved in the UFC the belief that the UFC is now on it way to be bigger.
That's not at all true
Stations Casinos will always be their bread and butter and they both know it.
Why I never joined a frat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-KNVrZaN8M
"Don’t quote old fucks to me" – Brent Brookhouse
"A samurai would bite your cock off if you tried that shit on the battlefield." - Kid Nate
by Chris Barton on Apr 13, 2011 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Appreciate the response
Again, I see similar business models for promotion not for execution of the entertainment. I see UFC still being run as a sport first, entertainment a close second, where as WWE HAD to put the entertainment over the sport (the actual matches, I know it’s not a sport).
Those 5 items got listed as if they were bad things, I am glad to hear that you think they are a good way to grow a sport (again, outside the whole PPV thing, I want UFC on network or Showtime as bad as anyone). Hunt compared UFC to WWE as a bad thing (her personal motives are clear on the subject), and your following paragraphs seemed to echo the notion. I apologize if I inferred too much.
I see the similarities business wise, but I think the similarities end after promoting the product. I have seen too many pieces detailing how UFC=WWE, and this fighter = this wrestler, etc. To me, the business practices are the same as saying Subway and McDonalds share similar business practices. The both expanded and franchised aggressively, and they both sell food, but their client base is not necessarily the same.
Go Orange(men)!
agreed
the products are considerably different — although not completely different. It still comes down to building interest in 2 fighters and even more interest in seeing them fight.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
or another Hulk Hogan leaving for WCW.
or better yet, another Brock Lesnar leaving for the NFL after the company’s future was starting to be built around him.
by Victor Rodriguez on Apr 13, 2011 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions
The problem here is that the WWE
kept growing long after WCW was basically dead. I think it was more MMA that cut into their market share.
CBS can feel free
To hire a real reporter to cover MMA if they want credentials.
by High Knee Destroyer on Apr 13, 2011 12:49 PM EDT reply actions
You mean someone whose clueless about MMA and will report what Dana and the UFC spoonfeed them?
We already see reporting by ‘real’ journalists that are credentialed by UFC parroting their revisionist history without checking externally. Hiring ‘real’ journalists doesn’t mean you’re going to get good reporting especially if they’re easy to manipulate.
by KJ Gould on Apr 13, 2011 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
No
Oh, I suspect there’s a middle ground, my friend. Are you familiar with the Hunt piece which made her persona non grata in the UFC?
by High Knee Destroyer on Apr 13, 2011 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Is Luke Thomas a real journalist?
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions
yes
Hosting a weekly FM radio show featuring multiple original interviews every week makes him a journalist.
Luke is also credentialed by the UFC for UFC 129 with SBNation.com — one of the 10 largest sports web sites in the English speaking world.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
but again
“real journalists” are exactly what the UFC doesn’t want. For example they once paid to fly an SBNation.com football writer out to a UFC event when they wouldn’t cred our MMA guys.
They don’t want serious critical inquiry by a well informed investigative reporter. They want PR.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Nate Wilcox on Apr 13, 2011 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So… they credentialed Luke because they didn’t think he was a well-informed invistigative reporter? Is that it?
that’s what I was getting at. Luke’s credentialing throws a wrench into the theory that they won’t credential any legitimate journalists, which Luke certainly is.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll actually have to confirm that
because my memory is for shit.
They paid to send Ariel Helwani to Abu Dhabi too.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I was wrong
sorry about that. they just gave him credentials when they wouldn’t credential our MMA writers.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I know that he is...
I’m responding to K.J.- who stated that no “real” journalists get credentials.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
I like Luke fine. But Loretta Hunt was doing this before most people here had seen an MMA event. She’s got a track record, more sources than most of us combined, and is fearless. I understand why they are terrified or Loretta and Gross. They know things….
by Jonathan Snowden on Apr 13, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Question
If they’re already being blackballed, what are they hiding and why?
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Really though??
If they know things, but are already treated like they got the plague, why not put on blast what they ‘know’?
fuckin conspiracy theories
by Haloe T. Jones on Apr 14, 2011 4:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Nice to see Subo has found his level…The main thing is that they are much harder to bullshit and will actually report things that happen.
by Jonathan Snowden on Apr 14, 2011 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Web media is exponentially more important to the UFC than to the Mavs
Right now, MMA = the UFC, and as an emerging sport it doesn’t have the luxury of widespread coverage and demand to the tune of something like Basketball.
For Cuban, shutting out reporters from online outlets is thumbing his nose at a content distribution channel he’s long made a point of not really endorsing. For Dana, it’s more like cutting off his nose to spite his face.
It’s interesting to see business model brought up in the discussion as well, since all of this really does point to Dana having more of a head for the “inside baseball” of squeezing everything out of what the UFC is right now, and less for the expansive work of growing promotional channels or hype for ‘the sport at large’ if there’s a tradeoff in terms of control.
Smart business for Cuban, who made his fortune in broadcast.com (nee Audionet) which started webcasting basketball games…
Basically the other side of the coin from Dana – each does what they know to be in their own best interests when it comes to the media.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Dana seems to look at the internet media as an adversary. Maybe because he doesn’t get it and can’t sort the wheat from the chaff. Twitter is somehow different to him.
This is crazy because MMA is fused with the internet media at the hip. What other sport has their athletes so involved with the new media?
agreed
Taking a step back and just looking at Dana overall as a person (and I’m honestly a fan of his by and large), is there a single facet of him that doesn’t scream pathologically controlling? The man’s charm is that you can still tell he’s a hardcore fan under it all, but he’s as much a Mario Puzo character as much as a traditional businessman:
- That time he wanted fighters to sign away the lifetime rights to their likenesses for any videogames ever
- The statement he’ll gladly lose money combating the piracy of Zuffa telecasts
-Tenacity towards snuffing competition VS. tenacity towards expanding distribution channels for his business (I’m admittedly not an insider but how did Strikeforce get to network and premium cable distro first?)
- The occasional Sonnenesque reversal of opinion regarding fighters, camps and promotions as they enter or exit his good graces (and the umbrella of Zuffa-profitable things)
by LBo on Apr 13, 2011 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
And the UFC...
is exponentially more important to these web sites than the other way around. Once BE, and Heavy and all of their ilk close shop, or decide to become strictly Muay Thai blogs, Dana will come hat in hand.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
i bet you they run into legal problems
for abuse of dominance. i don’t know what the applicable legislation is in the states (anti-trust?) but in canada it’s the competition act. not now, but eventually.
Probably not
The courts seem reluctant to break up or side against the major sports leagues. The NFL has been challenged more than once, I think, and even when it loses, it suffers no punitive action of any consequence:
A 1986 anti-trust suit filed against the National Football League was decided that the NFL was found to have violated anti-monopoly laws, but the USFL won a judgment of just $1, which, under anti-trust laws, was tripled to $3(from wikipedia)
by High Knee Destroyer on Apr 13, 2011 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
thanks for that
on the other hand, i know baseball has a specific anti-trust exemption. the other major sports also don’t use their powers so arbitrarily. because their athletes are unionized there are pretty fair procedures set up to handle things.
i hear your point and i believe you, but if dana keeps it up they could ru into trouble.
impossible
Those apply to collusion.. This is an independent organization. It would be antitrust if they acted in concert with strikeforce for salary levels. Even then it’s iffy.
U C O N N Huskies
2011 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Champs!
by Austin Martin on Apr 13, 2011 12:58 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
no
not impossible.
if one organization dominates the market, it can get in trouble for abuse of dominance. think of microsoft. it wasn’t accused with colluding with anyone.
that’s my understanding anyway.
It would be abuse of price setting, not something as silly as not allowing media figures to cover events
U C O N N Huskies
2011 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Champs!
by Austin Martin on Apr 13, 2011 1:37 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
It would ultimately be
something shown to restrain competition.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
to clarify
i’m not sure the anti-trust laws would apply in this situation – media passes – it was a general prediction about what might happen if the ufc keeps acting so capriciously as they evolve towards becoming the “major leagues” of mma instead of one competitor among many.
It seems inevitable
That if MMA gets big enough, it’ll start to have the same kind of government oversight given to other sports leagues, but they’re not there, yet. The UFC would have to get even MORE dominate for that to happen.
by Christopher Bradley on Apr 13, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn’t Dana have bosses? And aren’t those bosses the ones who specifically were going to handle the turnover with cbs and strikeforce? So how is this solely resting on his whims?
U C O N N Huskies
2011 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Champs!
by Austin Martin on Apr 13, 2011 12:51 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
forgive me a figure of speech
but it seems pretty clear he personally drives their PR strategy.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
But you can't deny....
that the actual product is big league.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Fights are easily the best
And the fighters are easily the best. But damn FEG knows how to do everything else.
Contributor at cagepages.com Come check us out.
Head Kick Legend
Just wait
Espn won’t be such a problem for UFC. They give access to the MMA Live guys and others, just not Gross. As far as the Loretta Hunt ban goes, all Dana would have to do is have a meeting with management at cbs sports and show them video from that Fighting Politics Doc where Hunt pushes the b.s. idea that Dana fired Lindland because he was lanky, balding, boring, etc so he couldn’t fight and beat the ufc’s “pretty boy” Rich Franklin (of course hunt never talks about the fact that they brought in Anderson Silva, (lanky, bald, and non english speaking) who beat Franklin twice.
by AnthonyHarris on Apr 13, 2011 12:54 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Is ESPN allowed to show the finishes to fights?
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
That's more about protecting the value of a PPV
If ESPN is allowed to show the best parts of a fight, that diminishes the value of paying $55 for the PPV. Not sure how many people that’s going to sway, but it’s probably non-zero.
Not afraid to nitpick
comparing Matt Lindland's looks to Silva's....
is an insult to looks.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sure, Silva is better looking in all ways a guy can be better looking than another guy . . . if you ignore a giant elephant in the room when discussing Silva’s appearance . . .
by Christopher Bradley on Apr 13, 2011 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
this must be a giant invisable elephant.....
Because I have no idea what you are talking about.
"True strength is not always shown through victory. Stand up, try again and display strength of heart." - Rickson Gracie
"Wanderlei eventually got to his feet and stalked Fujita like a Japanese octopus in an all-female prison." - Sean Baby Cracked.com
by the-gentle-way on Apr 13, 2011 5:15 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
i wonder how many elephants that guy sees on the way to his klan meetings.
Lindland looks like a fuckin orc. If he was not a profighter he would spend his time trying to kill Froto and company or hassling billy goats for trip tropping on his bridge.
I don’t think being dark skinned or green skinned can make someone look worse than lindland.
The man can wrassle though that’s for sure. I just got his dirty boxing book. I am really digging on it.
"True strength is not always shown through victory. Stand up, try again and display strength of heart." - Rickson Gracie
"Wanderlei eventually got to his feet and stalked Fujita like a Japanese octopus in an all-female prison." - Sean Baby Cracked.com
by the-gentle-way on Apr 13, 2011 6:04 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Since my sons have gotten into wrasslin I have started watching it here and there. Not religiously like I do MMA but I did take them to a recent Houston Smack Down and ordered Wrestlemania. I haven’t really noticed Vince McMahon on the scene at all like he was back in the days when I was a hardcore fan and he had a feud with Stonecold. Or is he on Raw or something?
Mike Goldberg: "You know Joe, When Matt and his brother Mark Hughes were growing up, they would pound each other behind the barn."
Thought he backed off because his wife was going into politics or something.
"Unless you can’t think of something intelligent to say, don’t reply and make the world as dumb as you are appearing to be." - mabel4life
by lowellthehammer on Apr 13, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
He hasn’t been on TV regularly much in the last several years.
Host of Bloody Elbow Radio/Founder of Team Buh Bye
Follow me on Twitter
I dont get it.....
…“The big league sports news entities that the UFC needs desperately if they truly want to make MMA the biggest sport in the world are watching and they are not impressed. But again, I think Dana White knows exactly what he’s doing. His interests are perfectly served by keeping MMA as the biggest PPV sport in the U.S. and nothing more.”
This sounds like what you’re saying is essentially this, because the UFC/ZUFFA/Dana White brougth MMA to where it is now, they also have the right to fuck it up and we should be ok w/ that.
Not if we consider the sport beyond the brand
Including the competitors. There is something seriously wrong with the notion UFC should be allowed to fuck up and bring the sport down with them.
So when are FEG, SEG, NVR, Affliction, and EliteXC gonna get punished?
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Can I Rec
this about half a billion times?
sit back and pay for ppv UFCs and shut the fuck up.
by Haloe T. Jones on Apr 14, 2011 4:20 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't think he's saying that we should be okay with it
At least that’s not the impression that I got. That’s just the reality of the situation. From a purely business perspective, it’s in the UFC’s best interest to keep MMA small enough to retain total control over it.
while they
keep breaking ground, paving way for competitors, and going into new countries and/or continents, all the while funding politicions who are pro MMA in Anti MMA states?
yeah, that sounds like they’re trying to keep interest small enough to me.
by Haloe T. Jones on Apr 14, 2011 4:21 AM EDT up reply actions
He is not saying we should be okay with it, but KN is pointing out the obviousness of their true motivations.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Edit*
I meant to quote this paragraph
They view media entities like CBS and ESPN more as potential competitors than as allies in bringing the sport to a bigger audience. Make no mistake, while Zuffa has done more to build MMA worldwide than all others combined, there is a point at which it is in the UFC’s interest to keep a ceiling on the growth of the sport to ensure their continued complete control.
I think it's sad
Ive been in love with mma since ufc 1. I spent several years away from it during the “dark ages” but came back. I spend at least $500 a year on the ppv’s, and I will continue no matter what any journalist says anything negative about the ufc. That said, I am sad they decide to bully, pick and choose what reporter gets to cover the shows. It is so blatantly obvious they are being unfair and I truly believe they are sacrificing their legitimacy in the long run about being a major sport. How can you talk about your sport being in the Olympics when you won’t even have fair unbiased reporters covering your show. I’m just a measly little fan whose opinion doesn’t mean much in the big picture and I will continue to love mma and the ufc but this still saddens me.
by latheman on Apr 13, 2011 1:03 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
great post
also it’s said to see them cut fighters who they don’t like regardless of merit (remember when they dropped finch after his lost to gsp briefly?)
Fitch being dropped had more to do with just one loss. It was over the use of his name and likeness in video games and other materials. Which, was also wrong.
by pud333 on Apr 13, 2011 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I often read Wahenheim’s articles on SI and OFTEN find myself disagreeing with him. That’s not to say he isnt a good sports writer, he just doesn’t seem as knowledgable or passionate about the sport as a writer for the hugely popular Sports Illustrated should be, IMO.
Sometimes I just want to give it all up and become a handsome billionaire.
I'm a Tweeter - http://twitter.com/Tyler_Sawyer
The banned list
Who besides Hunt, Gross, and the Sherdog staff are banned?
Steve Cofield.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Apr 13, 2011 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Why are each of those reporters banned? I know of Hunt spoiling the TUF results of a few years ago, but I’m not familiar with the rest.
Sherdog spoiled the TUF results
Hunt wrote an article criticizing the access to people like managers in the backrooms of UFC events. Gros was, I believe, the guy who actually wrote the TUF results for Sherdog at the time, although I could be wrong. He’s had a number of articles and appearances critical of Dana and the UFC, so it could simply be his overall body
http://mixedmartialartsblogger.wordpress.com/
by Cory Braiterman on Apr 13, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Wasn’t the beef Dana had with the Hunt managers banned article because she had two managers on record/named, Monte Cox and Ken Pavia and the rest were anonymous?
Plus the implication that the UFC wanted a situation in place so it could negotiate directly with fighters unhindered by management advice or interference. I believe that’s what set DW off.
by AnthonyHarris on Apr 13, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Hunt tries her best to do “investigative journalism” regarding the UFC and MMA in general. Most of the time its an article that portrays the UFC in a bad light, Gross is guilty of this too. Dana and the UFC most likely feel that since they are trying to grow the sport, these two along with a few others are trying to bring them down.
As for the Manager ban, when Hunt wrote that article Joe Riggs and a few other fighters came out about unpaid sponsorships that Ken Pavia owed them. A few months maybe a year later, Pavia gets caught trying providing Bellator with UFC contract terms and conditions. As for Monte Cox his ban is a no brainer since he runs Adrenaline MMA and is in bed with M-1.
by BrothaDarkness on Apr 13, 2011 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Come on guys
One thing we know for sure: Gross and others weren’t banned for “spoiling” the fourth season of The Ultimate Fighter. That show hadn’t even been filmed when credentials from the hardcore MMA sites were pulled.
by Jonathan Snowden on Apr 13, 2011 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This. They pulled Sherdog’s creds around UFC 55, which was long before TUF 4.
In the clearing stands a boxer And a fighter by his trade And he carries the reminders Of ev'ry glove that layed him down Or cut him till he cried out In his anger and his shame "I am leaving, I am leaving" But the fighter still remains
If I remember correctly
Zuffa and Sherdog had a falling out based on the DVD sales at Sherdog.
Zuffa pulled credentials from Sherdog writers of the time like Hunt and Gross even before they wrote TUF spoilers or open letters about steroids. A cynic may even think that stuff like that was retaliation for pulling media credentials. So honestly, neither side comes off looking too good.
What did Cofield do? I remember him still doing interviews with Dana a while back
by AnthonyHarris on Apr 13, 2011 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I think
It has to do with trying again to bring up Mir’s stupid “I want to kill Lesnar” comments (after he had already recanted and apologized) at a big press conference.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hunt- Sherdog>LA Times>CBS Sports
Gross- Sherdog>SI>ESPN
There’s certainly no correlation between a journo getting credentials yanked and having it affect their livelihoods. They may have to hustle more, but the highest profile cases of such are doing pretty well for themselves.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Come on, man
Just because Loretta Hunt isn’t living out of a cardboard box, doesn’t mean this sort of thing doesn’t have the potential to affect the reporters’ livelihoods. And frankly, it doesn’t need to actually affect their livelihoods for it to threaten the integrity of MMA journalism. As long as journalists have it in their heads that their ability to do their jobs could be threatened if they write critical pieces, the UFC has achieved its objective by refusing to credential people like Hunt.
Tatum: I think he's a good man. I like him. I got nothing against him, but I'm definitely gonna make orphans of his children.
by Dave Strummer on Apr 13, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Look- I recognize that the UFC’s media policy is petty and boorish, and will slow their aspirations to be a mainstream sport, if and when they reach that level. I also recognize that in today’s technological culture, you don’t need to be at event to cover them. Many of my favorite MMA writers do so away from the events. All sports have beat writers, who attend every game/event and provide a relatively frills-free account, and columnists, who don’t attend games/events and provide more subjective content. I don’t like the fact that they allow negative content to dictate credential granting, and recognize the inherent understanding that this demands of journos who cover events, but I’ve not seen any instances where it’s prevented stories from getting out- there’s plenty of contrarian and UFC criticizing views within the umbrella of MMA journalism. But, they do have the right to do so, and it’s not terribly unique to the UFC. All organizations do what they can do to implement a level of control. We’re in an age of an unprecedented lack of accountability from certain media outlets and I can understand why the UFC wants to control the narrative, but I also know where I can go to read views outside of said narrative. I see the potential for reporters livelihoods to be affected, but I’ve not yet seen actual evidence of it.
by John Danaher's Hair on Apr 13, 2011 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
This perfectly sums it up imo
And frankly, it doesn’t need to actually affect their livelihoods for it to threaten the integrity of MMA journalism. As long as journalists have it in their heads that their ability to do their jobs could be threatened if they write critical pieces, the UFC has achieved its objective by refusing to credential people like Hunt.
Loretta just happens to be the one here – the real issue is the clearly implied threat to everyone else.
"Sometimes I wonder if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." -Mark Twain
"Life is tough, but it's tougher if you're stupid." -John Wayne
by The American Ronin on Apr 13, 2011 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions
People compare UFC to NBA, NFL and others but...
Until UFC is that big truly in American culture atleast i dont think they will let up on Journalist they don’t approve of…
I don’t see why they wouldn’t. Zuffa feels like they have to taylor MMA/UFC to what hey think it should look like for the future. I think once the perception in American culture is what Zuffa wants it to be, which is a legitimate sport. Then they will continue to deny people who they feel might hinder that.
I’m not resting until I’m officially Anderson Silva status.- Jon "Bones" Jones
I am constantly mind fucked by how the UFC can't handle criticism
Of all the criticism I read from the few MMA sites I visit on a regular basis I never find myself saying “well that’s just unfair!”
Follow me: @IISMASHII
It’s a big deal to anyone who doesn’t want 100% sycophantic news coverage.
by M.Sphinx on Apr 13, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
come on
It’s fight promotion and sports writing. How hard do the questions have to be?
It’s not like these people are uncovering gov. secrets.
Anyway, Sherdog/gross do a fine job covering the UFC without cred, and they will even say it’s not a big deal.
So really, is it a big deal if Dana White plays favorites?
No.
It’s probably better to have outside voices outside the chain of command anyway. Keeps them honest and working harder.
by Roaringblood on Apr 13, 2011 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
"It’s fight promotion and sports writing. How hard do the questions have to be?"
About the likeness rights of fighters? Fucking hard. That’s how hard.
Follow me on Twitter: @MMANation.
by Luke Thomas on Apr 14, 2011 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions
I would like to compare and...
Contrast media practices of the NFL during their formative years. Anyone know if they did similar thing as the UFC or not?
by Sergio Hernandez on Apr 13, 2011 1:28 PM EDT reply actions
The NFL refused to interact with online media at all during their formative years. Hell, they didn’t even film stuff in HD. It was bullshit.
by Jonathan Snowden on Apr 13, 2011 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
That's...
Ludicrous. It’s insane they got as big as they are.
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, SILLY PANTS! =]
by Sergio Hernandez on Apr 13, 2011 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
its like communism or something
Speak well of the party or else face execution/inprisonment.
by Discman2 on Apr 13, 2011 1:35 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
i hope you're not serious
It’s more like, hey let’s play ball and why don’t you not try to fuck with my money making and I won’t try to fuck with yours. Mma journalists are a dime a dozen, at least 15 have sprung up as writers/ editors from this site where they were posters. Yeah, dana is vindictive, but the only thing he’s truly refusing is media credentials to the event itself. Basically refusing people he doesn’t like that have zero relevancy in the actual sports journalism world free tickets to his events if they don’t play nice. Makes sense to me, but hey, I’m just a capitalist.
U C O N N Huskies
2011 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Champs!
by Austin Martin on Apr 13, 2011 1:42 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 4 recs
About this...
Use the brand and the CEO as the front man of the company to prevent any single fighter/performer from getting too big.
As a CEO of Zuffa/UFC, Dana White hasn’t done a single positive thing for MMA.
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
Hahaha, I always get at least one person with that.
Dana White was named president of the Ultimate Fighting Championship® (UFC®) in January 15, 2001, when Zuffa, LLC acquired its assets…
http://www.facebook.com/DanaWhite?sk=info
"Someone is WRONG on the internet. What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"
-Randall Munroe
by pdl on Apr 13, 2011 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Cuban’s central point isn’t that sports teams/leagues can compete with online media themselves by having their own robust online platform. His central point is that the online media are fixated on low quality rumours, knee-jerk melodrama and search engine optimization to maximize their pageviews, and that those priorities are in diametric opposition to his own priorities as a team owner.
The internet reporters who get paid , IMHO , are to the Mavs and any sports team, the least valuable of all media . I’m a firm believer that their interests are not only not aligned with sports teams like the Mavs, but in fact are diametrically opposed. They tend to look at the number of page views they get for any article as ‘their ratings". More is better. Which in turn leads them to gear their work towards generating more pageviews.
I don’t think it’s a secret that MMA media faces the same problem.
by smoogy2 on Apr 13, 2011 1:40 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
The UFC knows how the internet works, and they like to use it to their advantage.
Here they are caught paying people to “pose as fans” and post videos that “look as though [they were] leaked”.
by M.Sphinx on Apr 13, 2011 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
mmalogic?
"True strength is not always shown through victory. Stand up, try again and display strength of heart." - Rickson Gracie
"Wanderlei eventually got to his feet and stalked Fujita like a Japanese octopus in an all-female prison." - Sean Baby Cracked.com
by the-gentle-way on Apr 13, 2011 5:24 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
sure
but the UFC credentials the sites that are the worst offenders — Bleacher Report and Heavy.com — because they’re not critical of the promotion in any substantial way.
Hell the UFC LOVES TMZ covering the sport and does everything they can to help.
Cuban actually has to worry about the well being of his players, the UFC doesn’t really. If a fighter gets caught up in a rumor cycle it doesn’t bother Dana.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Yeah, UFC isn’t so much concerned with the quality of the reporting as long as their key talking points are addressed. The big difference here is that the Mavericks, like most pro sports teams, have their coverage informed from the ground-up on a local level. Traditional media outlets are the foundation of the media support they receive, and Cuban’s viewpoint reflects that.
UFC, on the other hand, is dealing almost exclusively with online publications. Even when ESPN or SI or CBS seek to cover them it’s through the online arm of their operations. Alienating those outlets for the sake of personal vendetta is the kind of boneheaded move that will, for example, overshadow a spectacular fight and see the follow-up coverage dominated by examinations of their media policy. Even if they could fill the entire press row with obedient writers from big portals like Heavy and AOL, their campaign against critical thinking among MMA journalists will continue to damage their credibility.
P.S. UFC pays TMZ to “cover” them. Now there’s an MMA media story that could use some attention.
did he pay jenna jameson ortiz to take hill billy herione?
"True strength is not always shown through victory. Stand up, try again and display strength of heart." - Rickson Gracie
"Wanderlei eventually got to his feet and stalked Fujita like a Japanese octopus in an all-female prison." - Sean Baby Cracked.com
by the-gentle-way on Apr 13, 2011 6:09 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I always marvel at the instinctive impulse some have to immediately defend and explain away any and all actions that the UFC and Zuffa take. They seem to be in deep denial when any Zuffa action is obviously being done for their own interest and not for the sport. And let me state boldly for those quick to react – there is nothing “evil” about what Zuffa is doing. But let’s call a spade a spade and not start proclaiming every action as one that is being done to “grow the sport”. It may not be immoral but it is amoral. Zuffa is a business and sometimes their interest – downright ownership of all mma – does not align with the interest of the overall sport. That’s the truth, but some seem to have an inability to distinguish that fact.
A couple of points:
- It’s amazing how many brush aside Zuffa’s vendetta against certain reporters as being justified. Hunt is being persona non grata for having the temerity to reveal Zuffa’s plan to keep managers out of the locker rooms (a story that was correct), Gross for revealing the final of a reality show that would crown the numbe one contender (which some, including I, viewed as truly newsworthy), and Coffield for asking a question at a Q&A that Dana didn’t like. If reporters can’t be expected to give even that little depth of reporting than we should give up on the idea of any news from the UFC and Zuffa and call it what it is: marketing.
- How can anyone deny that the UFC business model isn’t based on the WWE. It’s been covered and explained since TUF started that it would be the WWE they would be basing themselves on. Just because one is a fake sport and one is a real sport doesn’t negate the comparisons. The model – weekly TV followed by a roughly monthly ppv event – is identical. Some people are too defensive about the wrestling – mma comparison.
- another interesting factor in Dana’s persona is that it could be a retirement plan of sorts for him. If and when Zuffa sells the UFC, the fame and cult of personality that Dana has built in the UFC will serve him well. He could either get paid well to stay by the new owners, instantly start another promotion and get a ton of investment capital and immediate fan interest, or even star in his own reality show. He has made himself into a product along the lines of the Donald Trump. It’s fairly genius.
by John Nash on Apr 13, 2011 1:43 PM EDT reply actions 8 recs
a front pager is someone who writes posts instead of commenting
you write a book’s worth of comments every day. why not do some fanposts?
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I’m flattered, and I can try but I really don’t know how productive I can be with fanposts. I comment mostly at work, while multitasking on some mindless show. Writing fanposts take a lot more concentration than I may be capable of. How about I do a test run and see how difficult it is? Ooh, could i do a weekly “This is Why Subo (or Logic) is Wrong, Again?”
by John Nash on Apr 13, 2011 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd read that
Tatum: I think he's a good man. I like him. I got nothing against him, but I'm definitely gonna make orphans of his children.
by Dave Strummer on Apr 13, 2011 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Everybody is just trying to throw cash at the guy
And he ain’t care. He’s like the Robin Hood of MMA commenting.
Contributor at cagepages.com Come check us out.
Head Kick Legend
by Neil Manich on Apr 13, 2011 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Don’t you want to be able to trust what is being sold to you? Wouldn’t you like to know that a fighter was passed over for a title shot not because he didn’t earn it but because he was having contract problems with the management, Or that a fight wasn’t going into a fight in “the best shape of his career” but actually was injured during training camp? The examples are endless.
by John Nash on Apr 13, 2011 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Would you still enjoy MMA if all you could see is what happens in the cage? I would. Do I enjoy to read/learn more about stuff surrounding the actual fights? Of course. Is my enjoyment of MMA dimished because a few reporters/news outlets don’t have access to UFC events? Not in the least. All I need is an Ariel Helwani-type guy that does interviews after the show, and then a few websites that post articles about the ins and outs of MMA by using their connections to fighters/managers, etc.
Besides, Hunt, Gross, and all those other banned people, they still earn a living because of the UFC, no? So, what are they complaining about, exactly?
The "what does it care to just a fan"
Defense has reached the status, IMO, of conversation stopper. “Why should a fan care” is not really saying anything except, I think, “I don’t like what you’re saying”.
by Christopher Bradley on Apr 13, 2011 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Hunt is being persona non grata for having the temerity to reveal [b]Zuffa’s plan to keep managers out of the locker rooms (a story that was correct)[/b]
That is not what happened.
Zuffa did not change the number of people allowed backstage at all. They simply switched from a lanyard system to a wristband system because people were abusing the lanyards by swapping them back and forth. Zuffa tightened up security and that pissed off the people who were abusing the lanyard system. They didn’t stop approved people from coming backstage, nor did they reduce the number of approved people, they just stopped people from swapping passes back and forth.
That is why Zuffa got pissed about the article. Loretta made it appear they were purposely trying to keep managers out of the backstage area when that is not what happened.
This is news
And while Loretta’s article was more balanced than I remember, the narrative was that Zuffa didn’t want managers around when they talked to fighters after the fight.
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
Editor, HeadKickLegend.com
Contributor for CagesideSeats.com and Bloody Elbow Radio
Still Subo at Fightlinker.com
by Derek Suboticki on Apr 13, 2011 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Key lines in the story:
The reasoning behind the UFC’s decision varies according to the source. Some say the move is yet another strike in a campaign to separate fighters from their business representatives. Others say Zuffa is making a reasonable attempt to control unnecessary backstage traffic and lighten overcrowded dressing rooms of freeloaders.
"If there were overbearing managers that get in the way or take advantage, I could totally understand [Zuffa’s] point if they’re back there just trying to make the fight go smoothly and there’s too many bodies back there. But this really isn’t the issue," said the representative.
Zuffa’s public relations department did not respond to an e-mail requesting comment on the promotion’s sudden shift in policy after eight years.She presented both sides of the story, offered them a chance to comment, and was overall pretty fair to both arguments. They could have called and asked for a correction, but instead they decided to hold a grudge. It just seems petty and silly to me since these kind of stories go on every day in other industries and is actually a fairly innocuous story. Fertitta sabotaging SEG getting sanctioned, now that was a damaging story.
And here is theThe link to Zuffa’s side of the story.
by John Nash on Apr 13, 2011 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
That’s a very interesting read on the situation.
by Jonathan Snowden on Apr 13, 2011 9:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Signed in just to say
Excellent Piece. Good job
"Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy."
~Sir Isaac Newton~
Side note:
Mark Cuban has a room in his house dedicated soley for the use of indoor wiffleball.
HT: Scott Van Pelt Show
by muppetsarntpuppets on Apr 13, 2011 3:01 PM EDT reply actions
I don’t have much to add other than that I really enjoy that BE are writing these sorts of critical pieces about the business dealings of the UFC and others. Good stuff.
In contrast, White is more than happy to restrict access to entities like CBS Sports and ESPN that undeniably bring audiences that the UFC/Strikeforce can’t reach on their own.
Huh?
He turned down the CBSSports.com and ESPN.com, not the networks themselves. We already know that they credential broadcasters for ESPN, so I’m sure if CBS sent one of their broadcast reporters to cover Strikeforce for the terrestrial network, they would have credentialed that person. The online arms of those networks are a different story. The UFC can reach online fans with their own efforts, as Cuban outlined.
You really think CBS/ESPN are just going to sit back and let Zuffa pick which reporters they get to send?
Contributor at cagepages.com Come check us out.
Head Kick Legend
The broadcast arm of those networks don’t give a shit about online side of the business.
I think that is pretty clear based on the fact that the broadcast side of ESPN is more than willing to jump in bed with the UFC for major events despite the fact that ESPN.com’s Josh Gross is public enemy #1 on the Zuffa shit list. The network guys don’t give two shits about Josh Gross.
Ironically Cuban’s own HDNet was long blocked from using UFC footage on its Inside MMA program. They’ve since worked out a deal, but it took Cuban backing off entirely from any talk of competing with the UFC as a promoter.
That ban was in effect LONG after Cuban gave up promoting events himself. Cuban gave up on that dream almost immediately when he realized it was cheaper to pay for other promoters content rather than producing his own.
What ended that particular ban was Cuban becoming a Zuffa bondholder, not any promise to stay out of the promotion business.
His interests are perfectly served by keeping MMA as the biggest PPV sport in the U.S. and nothing more.
Make up your mind.
Is Dana a Vince clone or is he not?
Because Vince McMahon has spent his whole career trying to expand the WWE beyond the domestic PPV business. The WWE has gone so far as to start bodybuilding leagues, a football league, a movie division, and a restaurant business in order to expand their brand. Sure, they failed miserably in most of those ventures, but it is pretty clear that the WWE is very serious about expanding their brand beyond the confines of domestic PPV.
In all honesty, he’s a lot closer to Vince than people would like to admit. Zuffa is part owner of Xyience (as was revealed in court documents). They also are rumored to have owned a chunk of Tapout and had a number of crappy business ventures over the years – have we already forgotten Zuffa Music, their nu-metal label?
by VirtualBalboa on Apr 13, 2011 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Has anyone gone to...
cbssports.com?? I mean go to their MMA section. Why the fuck would Loretta Hunt get credentialed for writing for CBS’ MMA section if it never existed.
Also Josh Gross being banned and working for ESPN is really trivial at this point. ESPN already has MMA LIVE and a couple of reporters that are credentialed.
Never existed? CBS Sports.com was probably the first outlet attached to a mainstream sports broadcaster to cover MMA. Sam Caplan and Todd Martin were writing stories for that site before the AOL MMA page existed.
So....
where is their coverage prior to this event? I guess they work for the UG. Who wouldn’t want to get their news from the UG anyway.
I suspect Zuffa is contractually obligated to allow at least ESPN UK access to fighters and events
as is the case with all of its rights holders ESPN does not need Gross to talk to Dana White. Also the UFC’s policy of withholding credentials while rare in the US is commonplace among EPL clubs (various papers and the BBC are banned from various club press conferences). Hell the list of journalists banned from the great Sir Alex Ferguson’s pre-match presser is huge. A number of managers in the EPL have changeful relationships with the media.
http://unintelligentdefense.blogspot.com
I’m of two minds about this one. On the one hand its obvious that they are holding a grudge on the two reporters they blatantly won’t credential but on the other hand as a fan I just can’t seem to care all that much about whether CBSsports internet site covers the events or not. I mean if CBSsports was truly serious about covering MMA to start with they wouldn’t of hired Lorretta Hunt because it’s common knowledge she has been feuding with the company that controls the sport for several years now. CBSsports isn’t going to cover this on tv ever, heck they didn’t do that when they were part owners of EliteXC and showing events so it’s just another internet news site to me.
The fact that Hunt doesn’t think that the media outlets will stand up for specific reporters makes sense to me but the fact that she also thinks that they will just not cover it at all due to specific reporters doesn’t. If an outlet wants to cover MMA then they will work it out and if they are just paying it lip service at this point then they won’t really care either way about a couple of reporters. I mean this is still fringe sport MMA we are talking about, they don’t have the leverage to force big media to their news coverage whims unless big media just doesn’t care about what they are doing. If enough prime demographic fans want coverage there will be coverage by them regardless of Zuffa’s vendetta against a couple of internet reporters.
ESPN and Gross is quite different being as ESPN is putting some effort into the sport and is even covering it on a tv program but still it seems that ESPN manages to get other reporters into the events and the effect is sort of limited to Gross as opposed to the entire outlet. ESPN makes it work and if it was something that really bugged them they would be able to pressure Zuffa to let Gross in, but they don’t. Sure the internet gets shafted pretty hard by the UFC on credentials and sure they are all evil and such for their actions but at the end of the day I just don’t think this is as big of an issue as the media thinks it is. Zuffa is very wrong in what they are doing here but for the most part no one really cares and they may not care in the future either, if Zuffa gets them eyeballs then they will cover it and if it doesn’t they won’t, that is as far as “journalism” is going to go with the media here.
Sure we may never see the levels of “journalistic” coverage like the NFL gets from their business partners the big networks and ESPN but then I doubt we will ever see that kind of business partnering in MMA anyway. Network (which in my personal opinion is dying anyway) isn’t going to pay the kind of money it would take to make MMA more lucrative than it is on PPV. Heck even the big ball sports like the NFL are creating their own premium channels for their product too, things are moving away from the network system not towards it. I’d like to see the UFC maybe get fights onto ESPN and have that kind of business partnership coverage but even that may never happen.
Interesting Stuff.
First of all, this is a great post. I’m sorry I’m a little late to the party.
The first thing we must remember is that MMA is far from “mainstream.” It’s growth in recent years has been exponential, but that tends to be the case with something that starts from almost nothing and gains some measure of popular success.
I think Wagenheim was on the right track. The only way to change the UFC’s mind is with the exertion of financial pressure – the pocketbook. Most organizations, politicians, people in general are quicker to change course when they feel a financial pinch. At some point it may happen to the UFC, but who really knows? It all depends on how big MMA gets and how much these respective media outlets are willing to put into MMA coverage.
Just above, who me makes some salient points and puts this thing into more perspective. The way that media coverage is structured now, it’s difficult for me to believe that the UFC could run roughshod over the sport, fans or fighters without the interested public knowing about it, credentials or not.
I also understand why Zuffa is leery about opening up too much to the media-at-large. While it’s possible for people in powerful positions of business to abuse their power, it’s also very possible for people in positions of power within the media to abuse their powers. You often see “journalist” types pushing whatever agenda they might have. Unlike Zuffa, they don’t necessarily have a vested interest in MMA being successful. They can move on to the next thing. Now, I’m not talking about Josh Gross or Loretta Hunt here. I’m not saying that Zuffa is correct in its stance in regard to the media, but I do think they are right to be cautious. They must protect their business interests, and the media is far from a club for ethics.
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
