The Bellator lawsuit will be interesting as well as the fighters org anti-trust lawsuit against the UFC AND the bill proposing that the Ali act encompass mixed martial arts.
USADA, Brock and Ronda out of the sport, Fighters Unions, the Ali Act.......................the Zuffa's have officially STUCK the dismount. 4.2 billion dollars and giggling all the way to whichever chain of islands they probably bought.
"the Zuffa's have officially STUCK the dismount. 4.2 billion dollars and giggling all the way to whichever chain of islands they probably bought."
http://img.mixedmartialarts.com/method=get&s=dana-white-fertitta-brock-lesnar.jpg
FETT_Lay'n'PrayNINJA - "the Zuffa's have officially STUCK the dismount. 4.2 billion dollars and giggling all the way to whichever chain of islands they probably bought."
http://img.mixedmartialarts.com/method=get&s=dana-white-fertitta-brock-lesnar.jpg
Bellator is jelly that the UFC turns a profit.
Ryann Von Doom -The ufc sold for 4.2 billion dollars, and the fighters didnt see a penny. They are the product and it's their blood sweat and tears that made it. Add in the fact that dana boasted about it constantly and how he has x amount of cars etc... they are the nfl of mma and it's the reason why they are the focal point.
The NFL pays it's athletes around 50% of revenue
The UFC pays it's athletes around 13% of revenue
triforce -The business models are completely different, making those percentages look very skewed.Ryann Von Doom -The ufc sold for 4.2 billion dollars, and the fighters didnt see a penny. They are the product and it's their blood sweat and tears that made it. Add in the fact that dana boasted about it constantly and how he has x amount of cars etc... they are the nfl of mma and it's the reason why they are the focal point.
The NFL pays it's athletes around 50% of revenue
The UFC pays it's athletes around 13% of revenue
FETT_Lay'n'PrayNINJA -triforce -The business models are completely different, making those percentages look very skewed.Ryann Von Doom -The ufc sold for 4.2 billion dollars, and the fighters didnt see a penny. They are the product and it's their blood sweat and tears that made it. Add in the fact that dana boasted about it constantly and how he has x amount of cars etc... they are the nfl of mma and it's the reason why they are the focal point.
The NFL pays it's athletes around 50% of revenue
The UFC pays it's athletes around 13% of revenue
This is always the worst argument. Team sport teams don't have to pay to be in the building. In fact, the UFC are generally paying a company that is within the same overall holding company as said team sports teams to be in their buildings. You go to Toronto for instance and you are renting the arena from MLSE, who owns two sports teams. Raptors and Leafs. 50% of revenue is not a number that is workable in MMA to have a succesful company IMO. 13% obviously isn't good enough, but 50% puts any promoter out of the market.
Molsonmuscle360 -People have such a hard time grasping this. Thank you for elaborating.FETT_Lay'n'PrayNINJA -triforce -The business models are completely different, making those percentages look very skewed.Ryann Von Doom -The ufc sold for 4.2 billion dollars, and the fighters didnt see a penny. They are the product and it's their blood sweat and tears that made it. Add in the fact that dana boasted about it constantly and how he has x amount of cars etc... they are the nfl of mma and it's the reason why they are the focal point.
The NFL pays it's athletes around 50% of revenue
The UFC pays it's athletes around 13% of revenueThis is always the worst argument. Team sport teams don't have to pay to be in the building. In fact, the UFC are generally paying a company that is within the same overall holding company as said team sports teams to be in their buildings. You go to Toronto for instance and you are renting the arena from MLSE, who owns two sports teams. Raptors and Leafs. 50% of revenue is not a number that is workable in MMA to have a succesful company IMO. 13% obviously isn't good enough, but 50% puts any promoter out of the market.
Bellator is not "suing" ufc. When there is litigation, parties to that litigation can subpoena documents/records from third parties to help prosecute/defend the action as long as the documents/records are relevant and necessary. The third party has a right to bring a "motion to quash" which basically says the documents are not relevant, or even if they are, contain protected information and the benefit to parties in need is outweighed by the need of the third party to keep those documents private. In this matter Bellator, as a third party, is simply saying that while their may be a need by ufc, the harm that could be caused to Bellator in producing those records outweighs the ufc's need. It is a simple motion, not a lawsuit. Loooooonnnngggg time lurker.
Brandorm -Bellator is not "suing" ufc. When there is litigation, parties to that litigation can subpoena documents/records from third parties to help prosecute/defend the action as long as the documents/records are relevant and necessary. The third party has a right to bring a "motion to quash" which basically says the documents are not relevant, or even if they are, contain protected information and the benefit to parties in need is outweighed by the need of the third party to keep those documents private. In this matter Bellator, as a third party, is simply saying that while their may be a need by ufc, the harm that could be caused to Bellator in producing those records outweighs the ufc's need. It is a simple motion, not a lawsuit. Loooooonnnngggg time lurker.
Five years of LURK!!!
Samoa -Brandorm -Bellator is not "suing" ufc. When there is litigation, parties to that litigation can subpoena documents/records from third parties to help prosecute/defend the action as long as the documents/records are relevant and necessary. The third party has a right to bring a "motion to quash" which basically says the documents are not relevant, or even if they are, contain protected information and the benefit to parties in need is outweighed by the need of the third party to keep those documents private. In this matter Bellator, as a third party, is simply saying that while their may be a need by ufc, the harm that could be caused to Bellator in producing those records outweighs the ufc's need. It is a simple motion, not a lawsuit. Loooooonnnngggg time lurker.
Five years of LURK!!!
It was more like five years of lurk... Sign up so I can stop lurking... Five more years of lurk.
........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
FETT_Lay'n'PrayNINJA -Samoa -Isn't this common in other sports as well?cyberc92 -Article on main page. Interesting article about how the plaintiffs are only going after the UFC and the UFC subpoenaed it's competitors to show that other contracts are more restrictive or similar. I also find it interesting how Bellator/WSOF seem to slide by while the UFC is under attack from MMAFA and MMAAA.
The UFC is the one that restricts other endorsements.
Team sports yes.
Individual sports, mostly no.
Dana constantly wants to compare UFC to one of the team sport leagues, ie NFL, NBA. But MMA is an individual sport, when it comes to endorsements the more logical comparisons are tennis and golf.
Samoa -........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
The documents I read are a motion not a complaint. A complaint is a lawsuit. A motion is a motion.
Brandorm -Samoa -........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
The documents I read are a motion not a complaint. A complaint is a lawsuit. A motion is a motion.
I'm not a lawyer but every media outlet is framing it a lawsuit. Wouldn't a motion be filed within the same court that would be issuing the demand for documents?
I see headlines of lawsuit but then I do see verbiage of motion in the articles. I think you're right and the headlines are just sensationalistic.
Samoa -Brandorm -Samoa -........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
The documents I read are a motion not a complaint. A complaint is a lawsuit. A motion is a motion.
I'm not a lawyer but every media outlet is framing it a lawsuit. Wouldn't a motion be filed within the same court that would be issuing the demand for documents?
Yes, it generally is considering there is an existing action so the court with jurisdiction would usually be where the original suit was filed.
Brandorm -Samoa -Brandorm -Samoa -........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
The documents I read are a motion not a complaint. A complaint is a lawsuit. A motion is a motion.
I'm not a lawyer but every media outlet is framing it a lawsuit. Wouldn't a motion be filed within the same court that would be issuing the demand for documents?
Yes, it generally is considering there is an existing action so the court with jurisdiction would usually be where the original suit was filed.
Which is odd because Bellator filed in California but the anti trust lawsuit is being heard in a Nevada court.
Samoa -Brandorm -Samoa -Brandorm -Samoa -........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
The documents I read are a motion not a complaint. A complaint is a lawsuit. A motion is a motion.
I'm not a lawyer but every media outlet is framing it a lawsuit. Wouldn't a motion be filed within the same court that would be issuing the demand for documents?
Yes, it generally is considering there is an existing action so the court with jurisdiction would usually be where the original suit was filed.
Which is odd because Bellator filed in California but the anti trust lawsuit is being heard in a Nevada court.
I agree. Federal courts do operate differently than state courts, but still have different circuits, districts, etc. The only reason I can think Bellator went to the California court is if that is where they have their principal place of business, so they are claiming that court has jurisdiction to hear the motion.
Brandorm -Samoa -Brandorm -Samoa -Brandorm -Samoa -........and it's a lawsuit in a different jurisdiction than the anti trust suit filed by the fighters org against the UFC.
The documents I read are a motion not a complaint. A complaint is a lawsuit. A motion is a motion.
I'm not a lawyer but every media outlet is framing it a lawsuit. Wouldn't a motion be filed within the same court that would be issuing the demand for documents?
Yes, it generally is considering there is an existing action so the court with jurisdiction would usually be where the original suit was filed.
Which is odd because Bellator filed in California but the anti trust lawsuit is being heard in a Nevada court.
I agree. Federal courts do operate differently than state courts, but still have different circuits, districts, etc. The only reason I can think Bellator went to the California court is if that is where they have their principal place of business, so they are claiming that court has jurisdiction to hear the motion.
Makes sense. Good discussion. I think you're original position was right and mine was incorrect. I was duped by sensationalism in the headlines.
"Bellator sues the UFC" is much sexier than "Bellator files motion to block two subpoenas".