Yes and the article makes clear that the UFC usually ends up paying fighters more than what the commission reports. Again I also don't think it was a significiant point to what you were originally saying. I do think its interesting how quickly Jones has moved to the upper tier of earners even before you count the sponsorship deal he's signed with the UFC.
Which WAS my point hence why i said it was interesting to note that he made a UFC salary of $400k. He's obviously now a major part of the UFC brand. Still i was surprised to see Evans also making that much. Which also indicates how much commercial value both have for the UFC.
Bisping is worth a lot to the British market because his name recognition from TUF. Ironic to think that Dana was completely against TUF and yet its been a breeding ground for many of their stars. Still commercially he is valuable. His fights though tell a different story.
As I said earlier the top guys, we talking about 10-15 ish headliners guys are on a decent whack. But Reem was bargaining form a postion of strength as opposed to a guy like Che, or George Roop. Considering the pride Zuffa puts on having a stacked card and it's one of the main selling points of a UFC PPV And the wage cut, as is nowhere near the ''approaching 55%'' that Lorenzo claims. I know you acknowldeged this yourself, so I have no issue there.
If the likes of Overeem are getting ppv points its probably drilling down to more down 10-15 (for example Faber and Cruz have them) but yeah its a small fraction. The point is that if say 30 top guys have things like ppv points where they're earning significantly more than reported that will certainly skew the numbers and mean that ESPN's estimate isn't true.
I always thought that the ESPN was hyping the worst case scenario to make the UFC look bad, for their own motives. But that doesnt mean there's a hint of truth there somewhere. IIRC wasnt it like 20 something under contract fighters who voice their displeasure, off the record in that report. Obviously that leaves a few questions, but I dont think we can dismiss such claims based purley on a ''hatchet job'' or believe the UFC's retort either. I think common sense should indicate the truth lies somewhere in between the BS and the hype
It was twenty former, current or prospective UFC fighters...which is a lot less impressive. But yeah, agree 100% with this.
Lorenzo basically lied about the tiny sum that boxer made too. That $250 figure was debunked quite quickly.
I think think performance related pay is a great way to go, but I dont think that should excuse the poor base rate some of these guys get. As Lynchy said Che was on £24 000 with Bamma and M1 The old ''he'll make up for it in sponsors'' malarky, whilst true, is a massive skewing of Vince's ''I dont provide guareentes only opportunities'' line in Zuffa's favour
I don't remember the name of the guy but he was cut from the UFC a few years ago, he was in the lowe tier of the UFC and he did manage to get some correct money. He talked to some kind of MMA news website and explained how he was paid. From what I remember he got a signing bonus, a show up bonus, the fight money + sponsor I guess...I think he ended up getting around 30k per fight...
Some fighters have PPV options and get paid more depending on the PPV buys. However, I would say that the winner is Zuffa AND the fighters. Zuffa can make a healthy profit and the fighters can also make good money. Beyond that... by the UFC staying alive, unlike the other orgs... the fighters still have an avenue to make a very good living in MMA by way of fighting in the UFC. I would say that is definitely a "win" for MMA fighters and MMA in general. There is a reason why the UFC is still alive and thriving, while the other top orgs all collapsed. The UFC is doing it the right way.