Rank these people in terms of credibility

Define credability

 

How do we know their 'actual intentions' as most people on this forum have never spent a significant time with any of them?

Every single one of those promoters have said one thing and done another. It's just the way business is done. But Dana White is at an obvious disadvantage as he gets the most media coverage. So there will be many more examples of his credability being tarnished that either Finklestien of Coker. Who's to say they dont promise one thing then do another behind closed doors?

It's just impossable to judge fairly unless we all develope some kind of ESP

 

No my opinion is never trust ANY promoter to give you the truth or let ethics get in the way of a $$$

But, to humour you I'll rank them

Scott Coker
Dana White
Vlad Finklestien

 

Why would you say Scott Coker is more credible than Dana?

 

Ariel Herwani
Scott Coker
Bloodstain Lane
Dana White
Finklestein

 

For me, it's mere speculation.

I just think Dana is such a poser. I also don't know how much control he really has, and view him as more of a mouth piece.

Coker just seems to be more genuine than Dana.

 

Simply for the fact he has less blotches on his record. But considering Dana has been in the limelight for longer and has 10x the mdia attention thats not surprising

Selling your company rendering a load of staff who've worked to ake SF what it is today redundant whilst retaining a exectutive job yourself doesnt screa credability too me and that's what I meant about ethics and $

Now Im sure there's an arguement to be made that if Scott didnt sell SF could have folded, but that's a 'what if' at this point

 

I respect Ariel, Bloodstain is an irrelevance

I just noticed he's no 1 on your credability list

Bloodstain critises Dana for talking tough in videos with out any experiance of fighting and disrepcting fighters and leaching off others to earn a buck

Meanwhile Bloodstain talks tough in internets videos disrepecting guys like GSP and calling out Nate Marquand, calling them pussies despite having no MMA experiance himself and sells Team Takeover hoodies at $30 each with fighters pictures on it

See the irony? Explain to me his credability

 

To be fair Coker was a minority shareholder who by the time he agreed to the purchase had little choice - the major shareholder SVSE had already made their decision. And from the looks of things he was fighting pretty hard to find alternatives.

I dunno to me you look at Coker and in a relatively short space of time he's been found out on things. Commission shopping for Barnett. Lying about asking commissions to allow five round non-title fights in the SF GP. Telling the media that the brackets originally released for the GP weren't the final ones (they were). The issues surrounding giving Overeem and Cyborg dates for their title defenses. Etc etc.

Not saying he's a bad guy but I don't see him as being any more credible than White. Although you're right - the best rule of thumb is to treat anything a promoter says with healthy scepticism.