Lawsuit filed against UFC claiming monopoly

[iLovesoccermoms]

145. Responding to questions regarding whether Invicta (and all other MMA Promoters) were being established as “feeder” promotions to the UFC, White stated: “As bad as people don’t want to believe it, they don’t want to hear it, meaning the other owners of the other mixed martial arts organizations—that’s what they all are, they’re all the Triple-A [i.e., the minor leagues] to the UFC.” White continued by boasting that all promotions that resist minor league status “end up $30 million in the hole. All the people that don’t embrace it, embrace losing **** loads of money.”

147. Bellator athletes lack significant public notoriety, in part, because it is a “minor league,” and in part because the UFC refuses to co-promote with any of Bellator’s fighters regardless of talent or merit, leaving Bellator unable to promote MMA events of relative significance. Bellator’s bout purses, gate revenues, attendance figures, merchandise sales, television licensing fees and ad rates are minimal compared to those obtained by the UFC.

148. As White said on November 14, 2013, of Professional MMA Fighters under contract with Bellator, “I feel sorry for the kids that fight there. I do. I truly feel sorry for the kids that have to be stuck in that s**thole.”

this is funny lol

[BKM-2010]

Well if they fail with the lawsuit, atleast this might make Dana tone down with his mouthy BS from now on because no doubt something like this is gonna happen again in the future. They've gotten away with it untill now, so the Fertitas are gonna step in a put a muzzle on baldy.

[iLovesoccermoms]

102. As more fully set forth below, due to the anticompetitive scheme alleged herein, the UFC has been able to suppress Elite Professional MMA Fighters’ compensation to a very low percentage of the revenues generated from bouts. On information and belief, UFC Fighters are paid approximately 10-17% of total UFC revenues generated from bouts. As alleged further below, all UFC Fighters—from the highest paid to the lowest—have had their compensation artificially reduced due to the anticompetitive scheme challenged in this Complaint.

103. Athletes in sports such as boxing and the “Big 4,” i.e., football, baseball, basketball and hockey in the United States, generally earn more than 50% of league revenue, a significantly higher percentage of revenues than those paid to UFC Fighters.

104. Boxers Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao take the number one and two spots, respectively, on the “Forbes 100-highest paid athletes list,” earning upwards of $40 million in guaranteed purse for a single bout, before inclusion of PPV profits. Mayweather’s compensation has reportedly topped $90 million for a single bout for an event that draws comparable PPV purchase to high-profile UFC events. As a result of the scheme alleged herein, UFC Fighters get a fraction of that level of compensation. Famed boxing promoter Bob Arum, for example, pays his fighters approximately 80% of the proceeds generated by a Card. Comparing the fighter compensation between boxing and the UFC, Arum accurately described the disparity between the UFC and boxing as follows: “Because of the monopoly that the UFC has, they [the UFC] pay[s] their fighters maybe 20% of the proceeds that come in on a UFC fight.”

[iLovesoccermoms]

126. Throughout the Class Period, the UFC has used the monopoly power that it has acquired and maintained by the exclusionary scheme alleged in this Complaint to threaten sponsors into pulling out of deals with non-UFC Elite Professional MMA Fighters as a means of coercing those Fighters to sign exclusive contracts with the UFC. For example, when Elite Professional MMA Fighter, Fedor Emelianenko, refused to sign a contract to fight for the UFC, the UFC demanded that Tapout, a prominent clothing company and MMA sponsor, ***8220;dump [Emelianenko] or lose access to UFC events,***8221; according to M-1 Global President Vadim Finkelchstein, Emelianenko***8217;s promoter/manager. In response, Tapout withdrew a potential seven-figure, one-year sponsorship deal with Emelianenko.

127. Prime physical venues and marquee sponsors are ***8220;must-have***8221; inputs for would-be rival MMA Promoters and, without them, such MMA Promoters are impaired in their ability to enter the market and/or compete effectively. Therefore, the UFC***8217;s exclusive arrangements with venues and sponsors, combined with the other aspects of the UFC***8217;s scheme, foreclose competitors from attracting Elite Professional MMA Fighters and thereby competing successfully in the MMA Promotion business at the highest level.

132. As part of the alleged exclusionary scheme, in the years before 2011, the UFC had actively sought to use its market dominance to put Strikeforce out of business. For instance, as part of this scheme***8212;even when it was not economically rational but for the potential for exclusion***8212;the UFC regularly ***8220;counterprogrammed***8221; against Strikeforce events, i.e., purposely staged UFC events on the same nights as Strikeforce events to prevent Strikeforce from gaining adequate ticket sales, television viewers or public notoriety for its events. The UFC counter-programmed against Strikeforce not because it was profitable in the short-run, but rather because it was a means of using the UFC***8217;s dominance in the Relevant Markets to prevent Strikeforce from successfully promoting MMA events and thereby gaining adequate economies of scale or scope. Moreover, the UFC used its market power to pressure sponsors of Strikeforce***8217;s MMA fighters to withdraw their sponsorships by threatening to ban them from sponsoring UFC Fighters or otherwise appearing in UFC broadcasts.

116. As part of its exclusionary scheme, the UFC has retaliated against (i) UFC Fighters who work or threaten to work with would-be rival promoters, (ii) MMA fighers who might someday wish to compete in the UFC, and (iii) would-be rival promoters who work with UFC Fighters. As a result, UFC11 Fighters have refused offers to fight for actual or potential rival promoters, even those that offer higher12 compensation, out of fear that the UFC would retaliate against both the promoter and the Fighter.13 Professional MMA Fighters are deterred by the UFC***8217;s threats because Professional MMA Fighters14 recognize that being banned from future opportunities to fight for the UFC will substantially diminish15 their ability to earn income as Elite Professional MMA Fighters. Moreover, the UFC has control over16 key sponsors, sponsors the UFC threatens never to work with if they contract with an Elite Professional17 MMA Fighter against the UFC***8217;s wishes.

157. As a result of the anticompetitive scheme, the UFC is able to compensate UFC Fighters below competitive levels even though UFC events have among the highest average ticket prices in all of sports. Indeed, the UFC has been able to raise ticket and PPV prices significantly above competitive levels as the UFC consolidated its market dominance through the conduct alleged herein. Where the average live ticket price for a major UFC event was $178 in 2005, it is now approximately $300. Under Zuffa, the UFC has also increased its prices for PPV events from an average of $28.91 per event for its first broadcast in 2001 to the current price of $54.95 per event for HD broadcasts. Additionally, the number of PPV buys since the UFC***8217;s initial offer of PPV access to MMA fights has increased substantially since 2001.

[iLovesoccermoms]

"116. As part of its exclusionary scheme, the UFC has retaliated against (i) UFC Fighters who
work or threaten to work with would-be rival promoters, (ii) MMA Fighters who might someday wish to
compete in the UFC, and (iii) would-be rival promoters who work with UFC Fighters. As a result, UFC
Fighters have refused offers to fight for actual or potential rival promoters, even those that offer higher
compensation, out of fear that the UFC would retaliate against both the promoter and the Fighter.
Professional MMA Fighters are deterred by the UFC’s threats because Professional MMA Fighters
recognize that being banned from future opportunities to fight for the UFC will substantially diminish
their ability to earn income as Elite Professional MMA Fighters. Moreover, the UFC has control over
key sponsors, sponsors the UFC threatens never to work with if they contract with an Elite Professional
MMA Fighter against the UFC’s wishes."

Been skimming through the file and this is legit.

[iLovesoccermoms]

[BKM-2010]

All of that is true but that's the cold nature of business. You can't play nice when you want to get to the top and stay there.

[-Swizzy-]

1. You can't say they will make more money. Nobody will know until June when it starts. And Brendan Schaub said he lost 5 sponsors just before his last fight. Why sponsor anybody when it won't be shown on TV?

2. And the UFC has bought out Pride, WEC, WFA, and Strikeforce. That's pretty much all of its competition since the beginning minus Bellator. Sounds like a monopoly to me.

And when you buy out the competition and there is hardly any left, you set the prices. You control the market and choose how much you feel fighters are worth. That's the problem.

It's the same with the NBA and NFL. Those leagues have their own sponsors with shoe and clothing companies but fighters can still have and promote their own deals outside of their matches. They can still do commericals and promote those companies on IG and Twitter where they get more direct exposure anyway. Seeing a company plastered on a fighter's shorts doesn't really do much for the sponsors.

and yes the UFC has bought out all those companies but there is still another company called Bellator which is owned by a billion dollar company. Even though they don't spend as much as the UFC they still have some power to cause lucrative free agent deals ie: Gilbert Melendez. <--- that deal is a big reason why I don't think the fighters will win this lawsuit.

Dude you're WAY off on so many levels. The Reebok deal is a complete screw job to every fighter except for the lowest end prelim guys. Even to the top guys, how the hell would they make more with this deal than having contracts with freaking Nike, Underarmour, Xbox etc. and a large number of other big sponsors?

And of cource the entire point of the sponsors is so that they're seen during their UFC fights and appearances(which is now forbidden, hence Schaub getting dropped by all of his sponsors), are you joking with me right now? Maybe you missed the Schaub interview on the ROgan podcast.

Bloodynates post above is spot on as well.

The top guys(champs) get their own independent deals with Reebok. And the lower level guys will also get paid more and also guaranteed to get paid by a legitimate company instead of running after smaller companies that sometimes don't end up paying them at all. It's a good deal for everyone.

[squealpiggy]

All of that is true but that's the cold nature of business. You can't play nice when you want to get to the top and stay there.

It isn't though. There are antitrust laws against this sort of activity. Microsoft have fallen foul of it, despite facing competition from Linux and Apple.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

They aren't a monopoly... Industry leader no doubt,, but there are tons of mma organizations..

Dream
One fc
K-1
Bellator
Legacy
Titan
Wsof


Sounds like a cash grab