View Full Version : Forbes.com aligning with unhappy UFC fighters


monaroCountry
01-17-2012, 04:09 AM
From Dagwood @ Global MMA

Looks like Forbes.com one of the biggest and most well-respected business journals/news media companies in the world is chiming in with their take on the UFC fighter unionization issue and the ESPN vs Zuffa battle.

For business media and analysis it doesn't get much bigger than Forbes. It would seem in light of other professional sports, they are aligning themselves more on the side of the the many unhappy UFC fighters on this one.

Remember, to be fair and show balance... Forbes has givin a lot of very positive coverage to the success of the UFC and have done highlighted pieces on the new billionaire Fertitta brothers. This also includes putting them on their Forbes 400 Richest People In America List and putting on the cover of their magazine.




http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/5282/forbesufcfightersunion.jpg


The Unionization of UFC Fighters: Fair Fight or Punchy Argument? - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/prishe/2012/01/16/the-unionization-of-ufc-fighters-fair-fight-or-punchy-argument/)

RIZO24
01-17-2012, 03:32 PM
I was shocked to read that The UFC makes anywhere from 300-400 million dollars a year and the Median average salary a year for a UFC figter is 20-40 thoudans diollars a year.. WTF

-Swizzy-
01-17-2012, 04:55 PM
I was shocked to read that The UFC makes anywhere from 300-400 million dollars a year and the Median average salary a year for a UFC figter is 20-40 thoudans diollars a year.. WTF

does it really matter what the UFC makes? they could make 20 billion a year, at the end of the day, they worked to get the company that profitable. They put their asses on the line to get that company that big and they're the reason fighters even getting paid over $1000.

Just go back and look at what fighters like Ken Shamrock, Dan Savern and Royce Gracie got paid per fight in the 90's.

You have unknown fighters now getting $25,000 per fight which is WAAAAAY more than what the best fighters got in the early days of the UFC.

So having said all that, if UFC makes $20 billion a year, and they still have entry level fighters on their payroll making $10,000 per fight, I have no problem with that cuz the Fertitta's deserve to keep the money that they worked for almost every day for the past 10 years.

nodogoshi
01-17-2012, 05:19 PM
does it really matter what the UFC makes? they could make 20 billion a year, at the end of the day, they worked to get the company that profitable. They put their asses on the line to get that company that big and they're the reason fighters even getting paid over $1000.

Just go back and look at what fighters like Ken Shamrock, Dan Savern and Royce Gracie got paid per fight in the 90's.

You have unknown fighters now getting $25,000 per fight which is WAAAAAY more than what the best fighters got in the early days of the UFC.

So having said all that, if UFC makes $20 billion a year, and they still have entry level fighters on their payroll making $10,000 per fight, I have no problem with that cuz the Fertitta's deserve to keep the money that they worked for almost every day for the past 10 years.
They didn't put their asses on the line. The Fertittas are billionaires who used government corruption (not free enterprise) to acquire the UFC in the first place, and at well below its true value (apparently about $2 million).

See if you notice anything interesting about this clip.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BzNo8kqkzq8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

monaroCountry
01-17-2012, 07:41 PM
They didn't put their asses on the line. The Fertittas are billionaires who used government corruption (not free enterprise) to acquire the UFC in the first place, and at well below its true value (apparently about $2 million).

See if you notice anything interesting about this clip.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BzNo8kqkzq8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Very interesting and just shows how those corrupt mafia scums do business.

WARQUEZ
01-18-2012, 02:08 AM
does it really matter what the UFC makes? they could make 20 billion a year, at the end of the day, they worked to get the company that profitable. They put their asses on the line to get that company that big and they're the reason fighters even getting paid over $1000.

Just go back and look at what fighters like Ken Shamrock, Dan Savern and Royce Gracie got paid per fight in the 90's.


THE FIGHTERS made the UFC what it is today. If it wasn't for Shamrock vs. Ortiz the business wouldn't even exist today.

monaroCountry
01-18-2012, 06:41 AM
THE FIGHTERS made the UFC what it is today. If it wasn't for Shamrock vs. Ortiz the business wouldn't even exist today.

Very true.

Fighters are used, abused, and discarded by the UFC when their usefulness/profitability is done.

-Swizzy-
01-18-2012, 02:18 PM
They didn't put their asses on the line. The Fertittas are billionaires who used government corruption (not free enterprise) to acquire the UFC in the first place, and at well below its true value (apparently about $2 million).

See if you notice anything interesting about this clip.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BzNo8kqkzq8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

well below its value? how do you know what its value was? Just because the UFC is worth billions now, doesn't mean it was worth more than $2 million at that time.

Even at $2 million, a lot of ppl weren't exactly jumping up to buy the company considering it was losing money and didn't really have any real assets. The value of the company is mostly based on how much revenue it was generating, and at that time it wasn't generating much. In fact it was losing money, so $2 million might have been generous at that time even if its hard to believe right now.

And do you really believe that UFC(or mma in general) would be in a better place right now if the Fertittas didn't buy it? Lets be real, UFC and MMA in general would definitley not be as main stream as it is now and we wouldn't be seeing all the great matchups that we're seeing right now too.

nodogoshi
01-18-2012, 02:27 PM
well below its value? how do you know what its value was? Just because the UFC is worth billions now, doesn't mean it was worth more than $2 million at that time.

Even at $2 million, a lot of ppl weren't exactly jumping up to buy the company considering it was losing money and didn't really have any real assets. The value of the company is mostly based on how much revenue it was generating, and at that time it wasn't generating much. In fact it was losing money, so $2 million might have been generous at that time even if its hard to believe right now.

And do you really believe that UFC(or mma in general) would be in a better place right now if the Fertittas didn't buy it? Lets be real, UFC and MMA in general would definitley not be as main stream as it is now and we wouldn't be seeing all the great matchups that we're seeing right now too.
Well, if it couldn't get licenesed, there is a case it wasn't worth anything more than $2 million.

Why couldn't it get licensed?

Because of Lorenzo Fertitta, who used his position on the Nevada State Athletic board to deny them a license (as the video makes clear).

So at the moment of the sale? Yeah, maybe it was worth no more than $2 million. Why? Because Lorenzo Fertitta made sure that it couldn't get licensed, single handedly. In so doing, he grossly reduced the value. And then, he bought it himself, off of a guy who otherwise wouldn't have sold.

It is pure strong arm tactics at it's finest.

-Swizzy-
01-18-2012, 03:13 PM
Well, if it couldn't get licenesed, there is a case it wasn't worth anything more than $2 million.

Why couldn't it get licensed?

Because of Lorenzo Fertitta, who used his position on the Nevada State Athletic board to deny them a license (as the video makes clear).

So at the moment of the sale? Yeah, maybe it was worth no more than $2 million. Why? Because Lorenzo Fertitta made sure that it couldn't get licensed, single handedly. In so doing, he grossly reduced the value. And then, he bought it himself, off of a guy who otherwise wouldn't have sold.

It is pure strong arm tactics at it's finest.

ok I don't know too much about that, but I do know that even after purchasing the company, they were losing money for their first 5 years and lost close to $44 million.

So even if the company did get licensed, the guy might not have sold it at that moment, but would have had to later on anyway.

Regardless, I don't really care about all that. As long as they are trying to assemble the best fighters in the world and putting together the best fights possible, I'm all for it. It's not like they're hurting the sport. I still believe that they're doing the best they can for not only themselves, but for the sport of MMA in general.

monaroCountry
01-18-2012, 03:30 PM
ok I don't know too much about that, but I do know that even after purchasing the company, they were losing money for their first 5 years and lost close to $44 million.

So even if the company did get licensed, the guy might not have sold it at that moment, but would have had to later on anyway.

Regardless, I don't really care about all that. As long as they are trying to assemble the best fighters in the world and putting together the best fights possible, I'm all for it. It's not like they're hurting the sport. I still believe that they're doing the best they can for not only themselves, but for the sport of MMA in general.

See, they have actually hurt the sport like no other promotion has done before.

The UFC is all about the brand and not about the sport or the fighters. People are so uninformed that they call MMA as UFC.

The UFC's insistence on no co-promotion and bringing down the achievements of non UFC fighters or ex UFC fighters has actually caused MMA to decrease or reduced the growth of the sports internationally, particularly in Eastern Europe.

-Swizzy-
01-18-2012, 04:01 PM
See, they have actually hurt the sport like no other promotion has done before.

The UFC is all about the brand and not about the sport or the fighters. People are so uninformed that they call MMA as UFC.

The UFC's insistence on no co-promotion and bringing down the achievements of non UFC fighters or ex UFC fighters has actually caused MMA to decrease or reduced the growth of the sports internationally, particularly in Eastern Europe.

so you're Russian I take it.