My Mistake...

Underground
223

Blazing Knees - 
mrwhipple - I'm glad Blazing Knees saw fit to explain his position because we can know see what type of person is attacking Nate and his comments - an extreme laissez-faire, Ayn Rand objectivismist.


I'm not attacking anyone-IF you had bothered to read the thread, you would find that I'm a fan of Nate and remain one, regardless of this drama.



Here's just ONE example of why the UFC has to control sponsors-Spencer Fischer, one of the best, gettting ripped of by yet another fly-by-night 'sponsor'



 http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/thread/1661965/Toe-2-Toe-owes-me-money/?&page=1       I cold find countless other examples of guys getting screwed by sponsors-THIS is why there is a financial ante to play in the bigs



 



I'm a free enterprise capatalist-hardly obsessed with 'getting rich' but I find it awfully hypocritical to rail me for talkiing about capatalism vs socialism while the thread Nate started is about getting paid-



The mendacity stinks, just like your Candian income taxation rate and your socialized health care system does.



 



 



You'll notice Fisher made that complaint in June, 2010, a year after the "sponsor tax" was implimented. The tax also didn't stop Pretorian, Cage Fighter, and numerous other companies from not paying Mark Bocek, Jorge Rivera, Roy Nelson, and many, many more, (including Nate Quarry who's sponsor, Fight Mafia, failed to pay him 7 months after the tax went into affect). 



The "tax" doesn't stop sponsors from not paying fighters. What it does is it guarantees that those sponsors pay the UFC first before they have the right to appear in the cage. After that it's still up to the fighters and their management to collect. What it also does is allow a company to pay extra to be an exclusive sponsor to the UFC, driving out other competing companies, giving them the field to themselves, and then allowing them to lower the amount they pay to individual fighters.

224

Great post. Phone Post 3.0

225

Large Fun Bags - Thanks for allowing me to enjoy all your hard work! You're a fucking badass


P. S
Didn't read :) Phone Post 3.0
Love it. Vtfu! Phone Post 3.0

226

Good fckng post! Phone Post 3.0

227

Prominent managers made the argument that the tax would benefit their fighters--on this site. 

228

Blazing Knees -


Nate Quarry is thankful to UFC president Dana White for helping pay the bills when it came to back surgery. The former middleweight contender wasn’t able to train and informed White who paid for the operation years ago. “I will always be indebted to Dana White for helping me there and I know he’s done that over and over again for other guys,” said Quarry to Bloody Elbow. “He’s one of those guys who’s generous to a fault with helping fighters – helping people in general. You hear that over and over again."



 



"What most people don't know is, before my back surgery, I went to Dana White and said, "I can't even train anymore. My back hurts so bad and I can't afford surgery. I don't know what to do. "And he said, "We'll take care of it. Go get it done." So Dana White is 100% responsible for saving my career"



 



The UFC 'cares nothing about their fighters" is also what you said. You got hurt on TUF and they let you stay and coach. They let you pick your replacement and you picked Leben and coached his corner. The UFC has supported you in every facet of your career and I think this little PR stunt you're pulling is BS

Agree Phone Post

229

mrwhipple - 
time traveling 12er - 
mrwhipple - 
John 'nottheface' Nash - 
Blazing Knees - 
mrwhipple - I'm glad Blazing Knees saw fit to explain his position because we can know see what type of person is attacking Nate and his comments - an extreme laissez-faire, Ayn Rand objectivismist.


I'm not attacking anyone-IF you had bothered to read the thread, you would find that I'm a fan of Nate and remain one, regardless of this drama.



Here's just ONE example of why the UFC has to control sponsors-Spencer Fischer, one of the best, gettting ripped of by yet another fly-by-night 'sponsor'



 http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/thread/1661965/Toe-2-Toe-owes-me-money/?&page=1       I cold find countless other examples of guys getting screwed by sponsors-THIS is why there is a financial ante to play in the bigs



 



I'm a free enterprise capatalist-hardly obsessed with 'getting rich' but I find it awfully hypocritical to rail me for talkiing about capatalism vs socialism while the thread Nate started is about getting paid-



The mendacity stinks, just like your Candian income taxation rate and your socialized health care system does.



 



 



You'll notice Fisher made that complaint in June, 2010, a year after the "sponsor tax" was implimented. The tax also didn't stop Pretorian, Cage Fighter, and numerous other companies from not paying Mark Bocek, Jorge Rivera, Roy Nelson, and many, many more, (including Nate Quarry who's sponsor, Fight Mafia, failed to pay him 7 months after the tax went into affect). 



The "tax" doesn't stop sponsors from not paying fighters. What it does is it guarantees that those sponsors pay the UFC first before they have the right to appear in the cage. After that it's still up to the fighters and their management to collect. What it also does is allow a company to pay extra to be an exclusive sponsor to the UFC, driving out other competing companies, giving them the field to themselves, and then allowing them to lower the amount they pay to individual fighters.


I don't know where the idea that the sponsor tax protected fighters came from but it isn't true.


Several fighters and and sponsors have said since the sponsor tax started they can go to the UFC with any problems and the UFC will try to take care of it.  They don't guarantee the money but if a company screws over a fighter they can ban the sponsor, like in the case of praetorian. 



Also I think people are not saying it blocks people from ripping fighters off, just that it's less likely for a company with a multi-million dollar advertising budget to rip off a fighter like a fly by night garage t-shirt vendor might.  The idea is that it encourages a higher level of businesses because they protect the ones that spend the most.  Just like how I assume in Bellator all energy drink sponsors are banned because they have an exclusive deal with monster.  Except in the UFC they have the tax.


But the UFC could do the same thing, ban sponsors who don't pay, without the sponsor tax. They had the right to do that before.

And companies that can pay the tax may be more likely to pay fighters but several companies have failed to pay even after the sponsor tax was put in place. What it also does is drive out possible sponsors meaning there is fewer companies competing for fighters which means less money.

The reason there's a sponsor tax is because the UFC wants to get a big cut of this revenue not because it was meant to protect fighters


Actually, everyone benefits and if the UFC wants a cut of the 'tax' then so be it, it IS and for-profit company and not a charity. What kind of compamy allows it's workers to control it's p.r. marketing and assets? One that will soon be out of business, that's for sure. Imagine YOU ran this company and had thousands of employess and thier families to look out for by the revenue you generate with your decisions. It's an easy equation, once you take the emotion out of it



 



That's the problem with this generation-they've been conditioned to think that 'big business' and 'the 1%' is THE enemy. It's a social construct that's been developed by the current political administration and the main stream media who refuses to question a leader who they overwhemingly had a hand in electing with the constant barrage of brainwashing thru tv, movies, interwebs and print. Let's not kid ourselves-there IS an agenda being shoved up our collective asses and IMO there is nothing that can be done about it until the tidal wave of resentment washes upon our shores and tide turns the political flotsam and jetsom back out to sea. Teh political pendulum WILL shift, but time can't be hurried.



 



 



 

230

great post nate!

 

231

Hammerstein - Just FYI, but you sound like a moran bringing politics into this. Phone Post 3.0


If you can't  keep up-step off.



It's relevant and brings the current mindset of this 'gimme mines'  generation that hasn't earned jackshit yet, much less any self respect for self sufficiency. If you feel the need to suck on the gov't titty-go ahead. I'll be at work, generating the income neccesary to support some of your lazy asses.



I'm a full time single father of two boys 15 & 11-no help-no support-no nothing but me. I'm hardly 'rich' but I work 6 days a week to provide a better life for my two men-in-training and dream of better days. This 'defeatist attitude I see on here is puke worthy.

232

I see BK is still dropping knowledge. Voted up.

Cindy Phone Post 3.0

233

CindyO - I see BK is still dropping knowledge. Voted up.

Cindy Phone Post 3.0


I'm just defending truth, honor and the American way.



 



 



"merica Fuck yeah!

234
Blazing Knees - 
Hammerstein - Just FYI, but you sound like a moran bringing politics into this. Phone Post 3.0

If you can't  keep up-step off.

It's relevant and brings the current mindset of this 'gimme mines'  generation that hasn't earned jackshit yet, much less any self respect for self sufficiency. If you feel the need to suck on the gov't titty-go ahead. I'll be at work, generating the income neccesary to support some of your lazy asses.

I'm a full time single father of two boys 15 & 11-no help-no support-no nothing but me. I'm hardly 'rich' but I work 6 days a week to provide a better life for my two men-in-training and dream of better days. This 'defeatist attitude I see on here is puke worthy.

 

Blazing Knees, while I think it's honorable that you are working 6 days a week to provide for your family, I doubt your employers see it in exactly the same way.
 
Rich employers have a word for people who are willing to work long hours for little pay. They call them "schmucks."
 
And as long as the "schmucks" show up for work every day and don't complain, there is zero reason to pay them one penny more.
 
The UFC is a great example of this. One of the reasons they bought Pride, SF and WEC was to keep their payroll down. For fighters, there is no such thing as a "negotiation." It's take it or leave it. Now that Bellator is growing, fighters (like Gil) have a little more leverage. But still not as much as they need in order to be real professional athletes.
 
Until you become a champ in the UFC or a very popular contender, you are not a pro athlete. You are semi-pro at best, or more accurately a hobbyist.
 
Slimy Bob Arum had it right when he said the reason UFC athletes don't get paid well is because they have no leverage. But he said it wistfully, because if he could, he would fuck boxers out of every penny. He's jealous of the UFC's ability to shaft the guys who lay it on the line. Who take the risks for very little reward.
 
Don King was a master of getting boxers to sign contracts that paid him way more than them. Should we celebrate his business acumen or call him the scumbag that he is?
 
I applaud Nate Quarry and others who are exposing the business practices of the UFC, because those practices, while legal, are as slimy as Don King's.
 
And I am in shock at how many people believe that fighters should be quiet little schmucks and let the UFC have their way with them. Fuck that.
 

People are quick to say, hey the UFC is running a business, not a charity. True. But the fighters are running their own businesses as well. And if speaking out publicly helps their bottom line, why shouldn't they do that?

235

Some fans get it. Others don't see past their own situation.

No matter. The media, managers, fighters and sponsors will become more and more aware of key issues as time progresses. That's a good start.

236

<blockquote>Garv - <span id='userPost48614735' class='User-136693'><blockquote>
Blazing Knees - 
<blockquote>
<span class="User-277442" id="userPost48588832">Hammerstein - <span class="User-346366" id="userPost48578405">Just FYI, but you sound like a moran bringing politics into this. <img alt="Phone Post 3.0" border="0" src="/images/phone/apple.png" style="vertical-align:middle;" /></span></span></blockquote>
<br />
<p>
<span class="User-277442" id="userPost48588832">If you can't  keep up-step off.</span></p>
<p>
<span class="User-277442" id="userPost48588832">It's relevant and brings the current mindset of this 'gimme mines'  generation that hasn't earned jackshit yet, much less any self respect for self sufficiency. If you feel the need to suck on the gov't titty-go ahead. I'll be at work, generating the income neccesary to support some of your lazy asses.</span></p>
<p>
<span class="User-277442" id="userPost48588832">I'm a full time single father of two boys 15 & 11-no help-no support-no nothing but me. I'm hardly 'rich' but I work 6 days a week to provide a better life for my two men-in-training and dream of better days. This 'defeatist attitude I see on here is puke worthy.</span></p>
</blockquote>
<p>
 </p>
<div>
Blazing Knees, while I think it's honorable that you are working 6 days a week to provide for your family, I doubt your employers see it in exactly the same way.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
Rich employers have a word for people who are willing to work long hours for little pay. They call them "schmucks."</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
And as long as the "schmucks" show up for work every day and don't complain, there is zero reason to pay them one penny more.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
The UFC is a great example of this. One of the reasons they bought Pride, SF and WEC was to keep their payroll down. For fighters, there is no such thing as a "negotiation." It's take it or leave it. Now that Bellator is growing, fighters (like Gil) have a little more leverage. But still not as much as they need in order to be real professional athletes.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
Until you become a champ in the UFC or a very popular contender, you are not a pro athlete. You are semi-pro at best, or more accurately a hobbyist.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
Slimy Bob Arum had it right when he said the reason UFC athletes don't get paid well is because they have no leverage. But he said it wistfully, because if he could, he would fuck boxers out of every penny. He's jealous of the UFC's ability to shaft the guys who lay it on the line. Who take the risks for very little reward.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
Don King was a master of getting boxers to sign contracts that paid him way more than them. Should we celebrate his business acumen or call him the scumbag that he is?</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
I applaud Nate Quarry and others who are exposing the business practices of the UFC, because those practices, while legal, are as slimy as Don King's.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<div>
And I am in shock at how many people believe that fighters should be quiet little schmucks and let the UFC have their way with them. Fuck that.</div>
<div>
 </div>
<p>
People are quick to say, hey the UFC is running a business, not a charity. True. But the fighters are running their own businesses as well. And if speaking out publicly helps their bottom line, why shouldn't they do that?</p></span></blockquote><br /><p>




And how has a dayum thing any of them has had to say, especially Nate Quarry, made a bit of difference one way or the other? If you move the needle you are paid. If you don't, well you're still paid better by the UFC for your services than you would be anywhere else (an overwhelming majority of the time) which is probably why you don't see guys trying to fight for anyone else, if they have a choice.

What's funny is that you or Nate never seemed to have a problem with the UFC when you were interested in working for them and none of the things being griped about now were unknown or any different then:)  Does that make you guys "hobbyists?"


Cindy

237

"And how has a dayum thing any of them has had to say, especially Nate Quarry, made a bit of difference one way or the other?"

These things take time.

" If you don't, well you're still paid better by the UFC for your services than you would be anywhere else (an overwhelming majority of the time) which is probably why you don't see guys trying to fight for anyone else, if they have a choice."

Sure, but that's just (still!) obtusely looking at a narrow part of the picture even though it has been expanded by now dozens of times ITT.
Nike factory may, for all we know, pay Asian kids better than Adidas.


What matter more than that is, out of the profit sums the company makes how much do the fighters get;
how does that ratio compare to other pro sports and what can we deduce from it;
what are all the other business practices like (remember the bit about fighter pay the way it's still done in the UFC being illegal in boxing?);
how healthy of a stable all those conditions put together can make, in order to make the sport sustainable for the pros, or appealing for potential newcommers.

238
"And how has a dayum thing any of them has had to say, especially Nate Quarry, made a bit of difference one way or the other?"
 
It raises public awareness, and it may embolden others to speak out. If there really was no difference being made, I doubt that you would have went for Nate's jugular like you did on this thread. Love you, Cin, but was really disappointed with how you trashed him on here. There was no need for that--especially if what he said didn't make a bit of difference.
 
"If you move the needle you are paid. If you don't, well you're still paid better by the UFC for your services than you would be anywhere else (an overwhelming majority of the time) which is probably why you don't see guys trying to fight for anyone else, if they have a choice."
 
Joe Lauzon moves the needle and his base salary is less than Danny Castillo's. How could that be? Because when Joe is negotiating his contract, they are probably telling him, hey Joe, you may not make much in base salary, but you keep winning those "of the night" awards, so you're getting rich, kid! 
 
But the bonuses are supposed to be in addition to the base, not in lieu of it. Slimy. Very slimy.
 
Look at the deal they offered Eddie Alvarez. Did he move the needle? He was coming off a loss, but his offer would have made him worth more than some UFC champions. That's an insult to the guys who have been loyal to the UFC and yet still fight for peanuts.
 
The UFC is the biggest org in the world, worth a billion or more. But despite all that money, even you agreed with me (on a different thread) when I said that fighters are essentially hobbyists. That's not flattering to the UFC. They are screwing the fighters because they can. Period.
 
"What's funny is that you or Nate never seemed to have a problem with the UFC when you were interested in working for them and none of the things being griped about now were unknown or any different then:)  Does that make you guys "hobbyists?""
 
Have to disagree with you on this. I have been comparing the business practices of Dana White with Don King for many years on threads. When people would say, hey, the UFC is a business, I'd point out that so is Don King Enterprises. And yet, he gets reviled while the UFC gets praised. I'm sure you were on some of those threads.
 
But did I call Dana a bitch-titted, pathologically insecure emotional retard when I was exploring working for them and SF and other orgs? No. I was more diplomatic, iirc :)
 
But no one could ever make the case for me being a Dana White nuthugger--ever.
 
On the other hand, when Dana does something good, like contributing money for a worthy cause, I praise him for it to this day. Because fair is fair.
 
Cindy, if you defend the business practices of the UFC, you have to defend Don King's as well.
 
Is Don King just running a business, and tough shit on the fighters if they aren't smart enough to make sure they get their fair share?
 
 
 
239

"The UFC is the biggest org in the world, worth a billion or more. But despite all that money, even you agreed with me (on a different thread) when I said that fighters are essentially hobbyists. That's not flattering to the UFC"

lol!

Now that is some funny shit in this whole ordeal.

Imagine the premier league of any spectator friendly sport; football, basketball, soccer; if we were watching hobbyists in there.

Can you imagine the hype and the star commercials.. Someting like, meet Peter, a dentist by day, a killer basketball player/star in the evening!

240

"Can you imagine the hype and the star commercials.. Someting like, meet Peter, a dentist by day, a killer basketball player/star in the evening!"

lol, exactly.

Remember when Dana told the WSJ: "We're already bigger than the NFL."

Well, NFL referees made $173K in 2013. That's more than many UFC fighters will make in their careers. It's more than some UFC champions make.

And this douche is  wondering why people are talking about fighter salaries.

 

241

Kneeblock - 
Blazing Knees - 
Hammerstein - Just FYI, but you sound like a moran bringing politics into this. Phone Post 3.0


If you can't  keep up-step off.



It's relevant and brings the current mindset of this 'gimme mines'  generation that hasn't earned jackshit yet, much less any self respect for self sufficiency. If you feel the need to suck on the gov't titty-go ahead. I'll be at work, generating the income neccesary to support some of your lazy asses.



I'm a full time single father of two boys 15 & 11-no help-no support-no nothing but me. I'm hardly 'rich' but I work 6 days a week to provide a better life for my two men-in-training and dream of better days. This 'defeatist attitude I see on here is puke worthy.



BK, just as you're criticizing the mentality of the modern generation, saying they're entitled and that they haven't earned anything, you're parroting a line of reasoning that comes from a different generation. 



I would submit that neither generation has an intrinsically superior mentality, just one that seemed to fit the circumstances of the time.



There's nothing defeatist about wanting your employer to allow you free reign to develop alternative revenue sources. In fact, there's nothing more capitalist than a worker trying to get the best deal for themselves and trying to diversify their revenue streams, particular when they're an independent contractor (which the UFC says all of its fighters are). 



And no one does anything with no help no support no nothing but themselves. We're all social beings and have advantages and disadvantages. Some we're born with, some we luck into by being in the right place at the right time. "Working hard" doesn't carry any intrinsic benefits because you can work hard every day and get nowhere. The fact that you've done right by your boys mostly independently is laudable, but I think the point is that at bottom if there were opportunities for you to not struggle so much, you would be insane for not taking them.



To systematically deprive a fighter of that for no good reason is greed, plain and simple.



Sensible post and thanks for the props. Life is hard sometimes and you have to work for what you want unless you're born 'lucky' financially. The truth is-some of the most miserable bastards I've ever known had been born into money or fell into it accidentally and discover that money does NOT buy happiness. I'm not such a blind capatalilst/patriot that I can't be reasoned with logic- 'Victory without struggle is empty'. I'm all for the fair treatment of the fighters and the sport that I love-or the other hand, I look at the salaries of some NBA players and bench riders in MLB and shake my head in disgust, It's a dual edged sword. I



I think initially what I took task with was the retrospective that Nate offered and it seemed so ungrateful. I don't know how you can thanksomeone like Dana and the UFC, work for them for years ( with preferential treatment, I might add) and then complain 9 years later that you got fucked. I don't think Nate would even have his current job at MMa uncensored' if not for the UFC-do you? He certainly would not be competing and having a somewhat 'normal' life if not for Dana ponying up for 100k to fix his back-and then wear NUvasive patches on his shorts for sponsor compensation would he? Was the 100k a loan or gift? If the latter, how can you say anything about 'not taking care of it's fighters" when he's one of the biggest recipients of it's graciousness?



Here's the website for Nuvaisive : http://www.nuvasive.com/the-better-way-back/  



Gee, who's that on the home page? Who's in the bio of the company? From the home page;



 "The Better Way Back is spearheaded by spokesmen Nate “Rock” Quarry (MMA Fighter) and Bill Walton (Basketball Hall-of-Famer)"



 



Would this particular door have been opened for Nate if not for the generosity of Dana and the UFC? It's none of anyones business if or how much Nate gets paid, but I  know damn well it wouldn't be there if not for the 100k it cost to fix his back. So does Dana get paid back from this beneficial business relationship that he funded-or did he just throw 100k down the hole of ungratefulness? I know if I gave someone ANY money from the kindness of my heart and they turned on me later, I would be fuking pissed.



So did Dana get paid back while Nate was wearing the Nuvasive endorsements?. He gives him the money, gives him main card fights, let's him keep the compensation from them without getting paid back and now shit is being talked? wtf



SO, if you sign a deal with FOX to expand your company and FOX says 'no Condom Depot patches on asses' what do you do?- Pay the fighter his 'lost sponsor' revenue or have him stand in the cage like Brock did on a Bud Light cage mat and announce ' I'm drinking a fucking Coors light because Bud light sucks and it's for homo's and I'm goiing to go home an bang my wife" 



This is a very complicated subject.  There are thousands of variables that only lawyers can handle. The UFC is infantile compared to the NFL MLB NBA in it's existance and will never be mainstream-never.It's good to talk about the future success of the company and the fighters pay has increased every year and with every event-time will balance the fairness issues I'm sure. To start talking about 3 fiight minimum contracts, 30k a year salaries  $10.00 an hour minimum wages, compensation for trainers, unregulated sponsors  like you've drawn up some union negotiated employment contract is not coming off well. It smacks of ungratefullness and appears to be traitorous--- the timing is wrong and Nate is the last person that I think that should be spearheading this front because of the huge amount of hypocracy involved with his financial and personal opportunities that his employment with the UFC provided-not to mention the personal aspect of preferential treatment that Nate benefited from in every facet of his mma career because of Dana and the UFC.

242
Garv - 
Blazing Knees - 
Hammerstein - Just FYI, but you sound like a moran bringing politics into this. Phone Post 3.0

If you can't  keep up-step off.

It's relevant and brings the current mindset of this 'gimme mines'  generation that hasn't earned jackshit yet, much less any self respect for self sufficiency. If you feel the need to suck on the gov't titty-go ahead. I'll be at work, generating the income neccesary to support some of your lazy asses.

I'm a full time single father of two boys 15 & 11-no help-no support-no nothing but me. I'm hardly 'rich' but I work 6 days a week to provide a better life for my two men-in-training and dream of better days. This 'defeatist attitude I see on here is puke worthy.

 

Blazing Knees, while I think it's honorable that you are working 6 days a week to provide for your family, I doubt your employers see it in exactly the same way.
 
Rich employers have a word for people who are willing to work long hours for little pay. They call them "schmucks."
 
And as long as the "schmucks" show up for work every day and don't complain, there is zero reason to pay them one penny more.
 
The UFC is a great example of this. One of the reasons they bought Pride, SF and WEC was to keep their payroll down. For fighters, there is no such thing as a "negotiation." It's take it or leave it. Now that Bellator is growing, fighters (like Gil) have a little more leverage. But still not as much as they need in order to be real professional athletes.
 
Until you become a champ in the UFC or a very popular contender, you are not a pro athlete. You are semi-pro at best, or more accurately a hobbyist.
 
Slimy Bob Arum had it right when he said the reason UFC athletes don't get paid well is because they have no leverage. But he said it wistfully, because if he could, he would fuck boxers out of every penny. He's jealous of the UFC's ability to shaft the guys who lay it on the line. Who take the risks for very little reward.
 
Don King was a master of getting boxers to sign contracts that paid him way more than them. Should we celebrate his business acumen or call him the scumbag that he is?
 
I applaud Nate Quarry and others who are exposing the business practices of the UFC, because those practices, while legal, are as slimy as Don King's.
 
And I am in shock at how many people believe that fighters should be quiet little schmucks and let the UFC have their way with them. Fuck that.
 


People are quick to say, hey the UFC is running a business, not a charity. True. But the fighters are running their own businesses as well. And if speaking out publicly helps their bottom line, why shouldn't they do that?


Beautiful post.