In the Forbes magazine it says that the UFC employees around 275 fighters and that the average fighter makes over 100k a year? Is that true???
I can see that.
Using the 80/20 principle that means the top 20% or 55 fighters take in 400K a year average.
Sounds plausible.
NO! For the love of everything holy. Look at the UFC website. They list 166 fighters. Some of which d not even fight in the UFC and some do not fight at all. And it says, "most" fighters make over 100K, which is ridiculous at best. "Most" of them don't even fight 4 times a year for the UFC and at an average of around 20K that does not add up. Forbes just copy and pasted some UFC press release propaganda is all.
gorillagrappling, good point!
They might include the WEC in that.
ttt
That bit about the number of UFC fighters and their pay isn't even the most egregious offense of fact-checking in that article.
Forbes also got a couple of other facts ridiculously, indisputably wrong - like how biting and eye-gouging weren't quite encouraged, but were still allowed in pre-Zuffa UFC.
Or how Fertitta is the one who had the rules changed to include rounds, time limits, and judges, to thus be able to get sanctioning for the UFC (when Zuffa actually inherited those rule changes, which had already been implemented in the UFC under SEG).
Truly lazy fact-checking there.
So that pay part was actually just a relatively minor, dubious claim in that article.
But btw - if the UFC really did employ 275 fighters as that article claimed - and if "most" of them make more than $100k a year as that article likewise claimed - then which 138 UFC fighters (which would form the bare minimum of "most" as being over 50% of those 275) can you name who would be realistic candidates to have made more than $100k a year?
Unlikely.
That was just another detail that the writer casually tossed out there without actually bothering to do any independently verifying research (just like with the eye-gouging and biting examples, and the Zuffa-created rules).
Even the most minimal fact-checking there would have filtered out those obvious inaccuracies.
Their fighter count may include other Zuffa assets, such as WEC. And remember we do not see what bonuses are being paid out every PPV. Say what you will about fighter salaries, but the bonuses have become pretty large. Last PPV the UFC handed out 4 x 75K bonuses. That will push up the average fighter pay up a ton.
Actually if you include the WEC, the total number of fighters would go up, but the percentage making 6 figures would definitely go down since the WEC pay scale is generally quite a bit lower.
And again, which 138 UFC/WEC fighters would you expect to make over $100k a year (which would be the minimum number necessary in order for the writer's claim to be true, that "most" of the UFC's "275" fighters do).
And were biting and eye-gouging permitted in the UFC before the Fertittas came in?
And were rounds, judges, and time limits not already in the UFC before the Fertittas came in?
Because that writer sure seems to think so, since that's exactly what he represented in his article.
i read that article too
it was whacked..
i was gonna post on it here but i just thought it didnt deserve the attention.
Chuck Liddell makes what, $5,000,000 a year if he fights like 3 times? Then Joe Takedown makes maybe $30,000 a year? The average of those two (mean) is $2,515,000. It's perfectly believable when you think of how Rampage, Chuck, GSP skew the average towards the top.
eljamaiquino - "Chuck Liddell makes what, $5,000,000 a year if he fights like 3 times? Then Joe Takedown makes maybe $30,000 a year? The average of those two (mean) is $2,515,000. It's perfectly believable when you think of how Rampage, Chuck, GSP skew the average towards the top."
- Yeah, except the writer didn't couch it that way at all (i.e., in terms of averages).
Here's his exact quote:
"UFC employs 275 fighters.
Most make more than $100,000 a year."
(http://www.forbes.com/business/forbes/2008/0505/080_3.html)
So according to the writer, "Most" of those "275 fighters" are supposed to "make more than $100,000 a year." He is not averaging out the total fighter payout to thus yield $100k a year.
Plus, here are a couple more gems of well-researched accuracy from that article:
"The most violent acts--eye-gouging, biting, head-butting--were not encouraged, but they couldn't be stopped either, because there was no judge or point system."
"But Lorenzo Fertitta understood his company was going nowhere without state approval. He worked with the Nevada State Athletic Commission to get UFC sanctioned in Nevada after adopting some rules: There would be weight classes, judges, point systems and a limited number of rounds. The referee could also stop a bout when a fighter could no longer protect himself or lost consciousness."
- So were eye-gouging and biting not prohibited in the UFC, but merely "not encouraged" before Zuffa took over?
And did Fertitta actually help come up with and put in the rules about "weight classes, judges, point systems and a limited number of rounds. The referee could also stop a bout" - or did SEG already adopt all of these rules (which is how the UFC was sanctioned in New Jersey) before the Fertittas even bought the UFC?
The dude just didn't fact-check, plain and simple.
Yeah I read it today too.
Still good to see the Fertittas in Forbes though.
"like how biting and eye-gouging weren't quite encouraged, but were still allowed in pre-Zuffa UFC."
while they were officially banned after the first few UFC's back in early SEG days, in the first UFC there were no official prohibitions on biting or eye-gouging.
there was a fine system set up where you would lose $1000 per fight where you did that, but in theory someone could have eye-gouged their way to the $50,000 check and only lost a few thousand.
Of course I'm sure the Forbes chick didn't know that.
Forbes did what every other lazy ass media outlet does today. Copy and paste a press release.
any chance that they include sponsorship and non-UFC paid income in the figure of $100K...my bet is that they do and attribute it to being affiliated with or fighting for the UFC...even if it's their day job training other fighters, being in the UFC allows a premium to be charged. While a bit of math-magic this seems like a likely interpretation to me.
THEY ARE INCLUDING SPONSORSHIPS IN THAT NUMBER
Full time UFC fighters easily make that much...Chris Leben is far from the highest paid and his post TUF deal started at like 30k/30k. If he fights 3 times and goes 1-2, he makes over 100k, and that's before you factor in bonus money and sponsorship money. The last UFC had KO, Sub and fight of the night bonuses of 75k, and it was 4 prelim fighters who got the $. Marcus Davis made more than 100k for his fight with Paul Taylor when you factor in bonus money. You no longer have to be top ten, or even on tv to make more than 100k in the UFC...
Fathead, what is your source for this nugget of knowledge? I would assume, along with the rest of America, that when someone does an article about how much my employer is paying that it does not include my personal portfolio. Are you guessing, or did someone from Forbes hit you up on the two way and clue you in? Do yourself a favor and take a look at the list of fighters on the UFC site and do some research. See how many times they have fought in the last year. Many of them have NOT fought at all. Some have fought once and "most" would have to fight 5-6 times a year to make 100K. I call BS on the article and on you knowing that the sponsorships are included.
Fighters are essentially businesses, so it doesn't make sense to say that if a fighter earns 100k then that is his/her salary. After deducting the costs of running your business and tax, this is not an impressive sum.