In other words, are they allowed to have their own sponsors and endorsement deals everywhere except when the UFC camera is on them?
With all of the complaining about the reebok deal, you would think that the fighters intrinsically "deserve" to get their own sponsors in the cage...but if they are allowed to have their own sponsors outside the cage, and the primary reason for a sponsor paying the fighter is because of the fighter is (and not because the UFC is exposing the sponsors brand to the masses), shouldn't the fighters be able to get significant sponsors outside the cage? similar to what lebron and other prominent athletes do?
And if this is not the case, is it the UFC that really "deserves" the sponsorship money?
Depends on the Pipe Fiters union rules...
Fiters trane UFC bro! 
most of the fiters i knew when i did dry wall didn't have outside sponsors adn stuck with ridged threading machines but the rules may have changed since then. i know hilti has stepped up their game alot.....
what good is that to the sponsor? Why sponsor a fighter if you don't get the exposure of when they're on TV? A fighter wearing your gear or showing your name to the 100 people at his gym that see him everyday won't boost your sales. 500,000 watching on fox or PPV will drive up your sales.
Wanna fite about it? 
cruedi - what good is that to the sponsor? Why sponsor a fighter if you don't get the exposure of when they're on TV? A fighter wearing your gear or showing your name to the 100 people at his gym that see him everyday won't boost your sales. 500,000 watching on fox or PPV will drive up your sales.
I agree with this, but I have seen some of the fighter twitter, facebook, and do photoshoots with their sponsors. Not sure about the outcome but Ive seen them trying to get names and business out there the best they can
gokudamus - In other words, are they allowed to have their own sponsors and endorsement deals everywhere except when the UFC camera is on them?
With all of the complaining about the reebok deal, you would think that the fighters intrinsically "deserve" to get their own sponsors in the cage...but if they are allowed to have their own sponsors outside the cage, and the primary reason for a sponsor paying the fighter is because of the fighter is (and not because the UFC is exposing the sponsors brand to the masses), shouldn't the fighters be able to get significant sponsors outside the cage? similar to what lebron and other prominent athletes do?
And if this is not the case, is it the UFC that really "deserves" the sponsorship money?
You're seriously trying to compare UFC fighters to LeBron James? Even sticking with the NBA, guess how much your median NBA player gets in endorsement money? You know, like, the 6th or 7th guy on the bench?
The answer is $0.
It's not the really prominent fighter being hurt by this deal. It's the people who aren't Ronda Rousey or Urijah Faber. Your median fighter on the UFC roster is pretty much shit-out-of-luck with this deal. Maybe some of them can hold onto existing sponsors for now, but for most fighters that's not going to last. Hell, Demetrious Johnson lost his XBox sponsorship even before he fought Horiguchi. Anyone just coming into the UFC basically loses everything until they reach the top 10-15% of the roster.
Sponsors dont want to pay tons of money to a fighter just because, they were paying for the TV and PPV exposure. Take that exposure away and theres no longer any benefit to them and theyre just throwing away money.
But as I understand it, the fighters CAN have their own sponsors outside of Reebok, BUT they arent allowed to wear their stuff or promote them during fightweek including interviews, press conferences, weigh ins, and on fight night. And since thats really the only time a fighter gets any kind of exposure or camera time, it effectively does away with outside sponsors.
cruedi - what good is that to the sponsor? Why sponsor a fighter if you don't get the exposure of when they're on TV? A fighter wearing your gear or showing your name to the 100 people at his gym that see him everyday won't boost your sales. 500,000 watching on fox or PPV will drive up your sales.
someone like lebron james gets paid like $100K for a tweet...the point is that if the fighter is the reason for justifying thes ponsorship, shouldnt that apply outside the cage? if not, is the sponsorship value based on the ufc's broadcast or the fighter himself?
Chromium -gokudamus - In other words, are they allowed to have their own sponsors and endorsement deals everywhere except when the UFC camera is on them?
With all of the complaining about the reebok deal, you would think that the fighters intrinsically "deserve" to get their own sponsors in the cage...but if they are allowed to have their own sponsors outside the cage, and the primary reason for a sponsor paying the fighter is because of the fighter is (and not because the UFC is exposing the sponsors brand to the masses), shouldn't the fighters be able to get significant sponsors outside the cage? similar to what lebron and other prominent athletes do?
And if this is not the case, is it the UFC that really "deserves" the sponsorship money?
You're seriously trying to compare UFC fighters to LeBron James? Even sticking with the NBA, guess how much your median NBA player gets in endorsement money? You know, like, the 6th or 7th guy on the bench?
The answer is $0.
It's not the really prominent fighter being hurt by this deal. It's the people who aren't Ronda Rousey or Urijah Faber. Your median fighter on the UFC roster is pretty much shit-out-of-luck with this deal. Maybe some of them can hold onto existing sponsors for now, but for most fighters that's not going to last. Hell, Demetrious Johnson lost his XBox sponsorship even before he fought Horiguchi. Anyone just coming into the UFC basically loses everything until they reach the top 10-15% of the roster.
ok...lets take away the lebron example and use examples within the UFC...you mentioned her..hautned housey...pretty sure she gets plenty of $$$ from sponsors outside the cage, meaning the value is based on who she is, not simply that the UFC is broadcasting a patch on her shorts...
if a median fighter does not have significant enough of a reputation to garner a sponsorship outside the cage, why is it that the fighter is somehow entitled to the sponsorship in the cage?
Of course that can get their own sponsors, but that requires them to be good at their job. No more cheap sponsor grabs for any/all fighters. Cerrone still has ALL of his corporate sponsors.
Not every athlete in the nba or nfl have sponsorship deals and Kobe isn't wearing the name of his watch company on his laker uniform.
This has been talked about a lot previously. The majority of sponsors didn't give two shits about supporting the athlete - they were there for the cheap advertising platform that the fighters provided. It was a platform paid for by the UFC and distributed through the broadcast partners.
Of course fighters can keep all their sponsors but now those sponsors have to either pony up more money themselves to market the product or partner up with a fighter who gets a large amount of exposure on their own. it becomes more like an actual partnership with an athlete and wanting them as a true brand representative instead of what time they're fighting at and who else is on the card.
Managers gonna have to manage for that 10%.