All of their careers are currently in the toilet!
You hear about all these fighters wanting to make Floyd Mayweather money but the bottom line is no ufc fighter has that kind of draw and earning power.
I mean with someone like Nate Quarry he is somewhat exciting and all but how much is he really bringing in? Same with Brandon Vera or Hallman how much are they actually moving the needle? It certainly isn't 2 million pay per view buys like Mayweather or Delahoya in his prime
Ufc helped a lot of these guys and went out of their way in some instances. Wasnt Dennis Hallman quoted as saying Dana is a great guy when he had to pull out of a fight and STILL got his show and win money? But he was so mistreated.
No matter how good and accommodating you can be to people they will shit on you if they can make a dollar or any cash out of the deal it is a sad state of affairs here in America. 
Yeah, those poor business owners being taken advantage by these greedy fighters who've taken more than they've given... 
Yeah I think it comes across as a bunch of bitter fighters who never quite made what they hoped. At least that's how the ufc will defend I think. By early accounts I was expecting a few bigger name, current fighters. That would have given more merit to the suit and rumors were that was the case. Does anyone know if there is other names involved that haven't been made public?
Jon Fitch wants the big cash payday and his style is painfully boring to watch Jesus H Christ man. I'd rather stare in a fish tank for 12 hours then watch him fight
I'd rather watch Kazaam with Shaq all day long than his fights
UFC kept him around WAY too long and he couldn't ever win the big ones.
newtotheinterweb - Yeah I think it comes across as a bunch of bitter fighters who never quite made what they hoped. At least that's how the ufc will defend I think. By early accounts I was expecting a few bigger name, current fighters. That would have given more merit to the suit and rumors were that was the case. Does anyone know if there is other names involved that haven't been made public?I know they wanted Tito but he didn't want any part of it. They would have put Titos name all over this thing he would have been the poster boy for the lawsuit
Op you're probably going to get voted down for this thread but the thought had crossed my mind too.
Oh and obligatory shill accusation
Mynameisburns - All of their careers are currently in the toilet!
You hear about all these fighters wanting to make Floyd Mayweather money but the bottom line is no ufc fighter has that kind of draw and earning power.
I mean with someone like Nate Quarry he is somewhat exciting and all but how much is he really bringing in? Same with Brandon Vera or Hallman how much are they actually moving the needle? It certainly isn't 2 million pay per view buys like Mayweather or Delahoya in his prime
Ufc helped a lot of these guys and went out of their way in some instances. Wasnt Dennis Hallman quoted as saying Dana is a great guy when he had to pull out of a fight and STILL got his show and win money? But he was so mistreated.
No matter how good and accommodating you can be to people they will shit on you if they can make a dollar or any cash out of the deal it is a sad state of affairs here in America.
(guy who doesn't understand the lawsuit)
TMT -ThisMynameisburns - All of their careers are currently in the toilet!
You hear about all these fighters wanting to make Floyd Mayweather money but the bottom line is no ufc fighter has that kind of draw and earning power.
I mean with someone like Nate Quarry he is somewhat exciting and all but how much is he really bringing in? Same with Brandon Vera or Hallman how much are they actually moving the needle? It certainly isn't 2 million pay per view buys like Mayweather or Delahoya in his prime
Ufc helped a lot of these guys and went out of their way in some instances. Wasnt Dennis Hallman quoted as saying Dana is a great guy when he had to pull out of a fight and STILL got his show and win money? But he was so mistreated.
No matter how good and accommodating you can be to people they will shit on you if they can make a dollar or any cash out of the deal it is a sad state of affairs here in America.
(guy who doesn't understand the lawsuit)
brahmabull81 -
The fighters in the lawsuit are arguing the UFC cost every fighter some amount of money by artificially suppressing their value in the market.
How? If I remember correctly, the complaint made the following arguments:
1) Getting a stranglehold on major league fighting, and bargaining with fighters as the only game in town. In other words, you're stuck in the minor leagues if you don't take their offer, no matter how unreasonable you think it is. So you have no choice because there is nowhere else to go (if you want to be considered elite and get the notoriety and sponsorships that come with that).
2) Contracts you can't wait out (they keep tolling) so the UFC can put you out of work if you don't want to fight for them anymore. Further, the UFC has far more leeway in ending the contract early than the fighter does.
3) Discretionary pay structure (how often you fight, who gets a title shot, who gets a bonus). This means how much the UFC brass likes you can determine how much you get paid. This in turn decreases your bargaining power when you try to negotiate a contract.
4) Likeness rights that make fighters less valuable to other promotions. Likeness rights agreements that are on unfavorable terms. Likeness rights did not seem to be the fighter's choice. They either signed them away or were banished to the minor leagues.
5) Exclusionary contracts. These keep fighters from testing the market to see what other promotions would pay for them. It also keeps an enormous pool of elite fighters from signing with other promotions. This means other promotions can only get top fighters before or after the UFC wants them. And this hurts their ability to get top fighters, and their bottom line. That in turn affects how much they can offer fighters. A related issue is the UFC signs far more fighters than they have fights available for, so many fighters cannot fight three times per year, and those fighters are made unavailable to other promotions who could use them.
6) Champions clauses. These make all champions unavailable to other promotions, and continuously extends their contracts (even beyond their original terms).
7) Lack of co-promotional events. This has an adverse effect on other promotions and the amount of money they can offer fighters. This also ensures you have to sign with the UFC in order to be considered the consensus world number one fighter.
8) Interference with sponsorships. Not just the sponsor tax or deciding for everybody Reebok is the only game in town. The complaint alleges the UFC did some crazy stuff with sponsors Rampage had offers from.
9) Requirements that fighters promote the UFC, but no requirement for the UFC to promote fighters. The UFC is free to go to the media and drag your name through the mud, and make you less valuable to sponsors.
TMT - brahmabull81 -So what is different here from let's say the NFL?
The fighters in the lawsuit are arguing the UFC cost every fighter some amount of money by artificially suppressing their value in the market.
How? If I remember correctly, the complaint made the following arguments:
1) Getting a stranglehold on major league fighting, and bargaining with fighters as the only game in town. In other words, you're stuck in the minor leagues if you don't take their offer, no matter how unreasonable you think it is. So you have no choice because there is nowhere else to go (if you want to be considered elite and get the notoriety and sponsorships that come with that).
2) Contracts you can't wait out (they keep tolling) so the UFC can put you out of work if you don't want to fight for them anymore. Further, the UFC has far more leeway in ending the contract early than the fighter does.
3) Discretionary pay structure (how often you fight, who gets a title shot, who gets a bonus). This means how much the UFC brass likes you can determine how much you get paid. This in turn decreases your bargaining power when you try to negotiate a contract.
4) Likeness rights that make fighters less valuable to other promotions. Likeness rights agreements that are on unfavorable terms. Likeness rights did not seem to be the fighter's choice. They either signed them away or were banished to the minor leagues.
5) Exclusionary contracts. These keep fighters from testing the market to see what other promotions would pay for them. It also keeps an enormous pool of elite fighters from signing with other promotions. This means other promotions can only get top fighters before or after the UFC wants them. And this hurts their ability to get top fighters, and their bottom line. That in turn affects how much they can offer fighters. A related issue is the UFC signs far more fighters than they have fights available for, so many fighters cannot fight three times per year, and those fighters are made unavailable to other promotions who could use them.
6) Champions clauses. These make all champions unavailable to other promotions, and continuously extends their contracts (even beyond their original terms).
7) Lack of co-promotional events. This has an adverse effect on other promotions and the amount of money they can offer fighters. This also ensures you have to sign with the UFC in order to be considered the consensus world number one fighter.
8) Interference with sponsorships. Not just the sponsor tax or deciding for everybody Reebok is the only game in town. The complaint alleges the UFC did some crazy stuff with sponsors Rampage had offers from.
9) Requirements that fighters promote the UFC, but no requirement for the UFC to promote fighters. The UFC is free to go to the media and drag your name through the mud, and make you less valuable to sponsors.
Fighters are also going to Bellator, WSOF, and One FC now. How are they not allowed to shop around? Gilbert Melendez did it and got himself into a sweet deal same with Travis Browne
Mynameisburns -LolTMT - brahmabull81 -So what is different here from let's say the NFL?
The fighters in the lawsuit are arguing the UFC cost every fighter some amount of money by artificially suppressing their value in the market.
How? If I remember correctly, the complaint made the following arguments:
1) Getting a stranglehold on major league fighting, and bargaining with fighters as the only game in town. In other words, you're stuck in the minor leagues if you don't take their offer, no matter how unreasonable you think it is. So you have no choice because there is nowhere else to go (if you want to be considered elite and get the notoriety and sponsorships that come with that).
2) Contracts you can't wait out (they keep tolling) so the UFC can put you out of work if you don't want to fight for them anymore. Further, the UFC has far more leeway in ending the contract early than the fighter does.
3) Discretionary pay structure (how often you fight, who gets a title shot, who gets a bonus). This means how much the UFC brass likes you can determine how much you get paid. This in turn decreases your bargaining power when you try to negotiate a contract.
4) Likeness rights that make fighters less valuable to other promotions. Likeness rights agreements that are on unfavorable terms. Likeness rights did not seem to be the fighter's choice. They either signed them away or were banished to the minor leagues.
5) Exclusionary contracts. These keep fighters from testing the market to see what other promotions would pay for them. It also keeps an enormous pool of elite fighters from signing with other promotions. This means other promotions can only get top fighters before or after the UFC wants them. And this hurts their ability to get top fighters, and their bottom line. That in turn affects how much they can offer fighters. A related issue is the UFC signs far more fighters than they have fights available for, so many fighters cannot fight three times per year, and those fighters are made unavailable to other promotions who could use them.
6) Champions clauses. These make all champions unavailable to other promotions, and continuously extends their contracts (even beyond their original terms).
7) Lack of co-promotional events. This has an adverse effect on other promotions and the amount of money they can offer fighters. This also ensures you have to sign with the UFC in order to be considered the consensus world number one fighter.
8) Interference with sponsorships. Not just the sponsor tax or deciding for everybody Reebok is the only game in town. The complaint alleges the UFC did some crazy stuff with sponsors Rampage had offers from.
9) Requirements that fighters promote the UFC, but no requirement for the UFC to promote fighters. The UFC is free to go to the media and drag your name through the mud, and make you less valuable to sponsors.
Mynameisburns -
For starters, the NFL has 32 teams (each with lots of resources) that can compete for your services when you are a free agent. In contrast, you can only get one offer from the UFC, and if you don't take it you're in the minor leagues.
Also, I have no insight into NFL contracts, nor do I pay attention to the NFL, but I have never heard of an NFL commissioner crapping on football players' ability, professionalism, or whatever else.
At the end of the day, the NFL has been given leeway to operate the way it does, but in exchange their business structure has been vetted by the courts, and they adhere to what the courts required. The UFC has not yet gone through a similar process.
Mynameisburns - Fighters are also going to Bellator, WSOF, and One FC now. How are they not allowed to shop around? Gilbert Melendez did it and got himself into a sweet deal same with Travis Browne
According to the complaint, the UFC collects 90% of worldwide MMA revenue. If that's so, then merely paying Melendez (or any other fighter) what other promotions can afford to pay will often be unreasonably low.
If you want to be the major leagues, then you should pay like it.
I feel bad for quarry, he got dicked worse than anybody with his main event pay, but that was a long time ago, and I think things are at least a little bette.r at this point. Cung Lee I think was actually paid pretty well for a guy with his ranking. Dennis hallman has not done much beyond being the guy that Hughes couldn't solve over ten years ago. He punched his own ticket out of the ufc with his unprofessional behavior. Other organizations are not going to be trampling down a door to give a guy like that big money. fitch is boring and all, but probably should have made WAY more money in the fights that he was main eventing. Other than that, he is bringing very few eyeballs.
I do feel bad for a guy like Diaz who does bring some viewers to the table. THe ufc got a good deal for a guy like him, ,imo. Partially his fault though. Fighters and managers need to be more aware of their value when they are at the negotiating table. I think the problems the Diaz bros had along with what Melendez did will start to change things for fighters who do have some value. It's all part of the education that fighters need to have in order to know their value and demand a fair return.
^^^
What you bargain for in a fair market and what you bargain for in an illegally manipulated market are two different things.
TMT - ^^^
What you bargain for in a fair market and what you bargain for in an illegally manipulated market are two different things.
I don't think zuffa does everything on the up and up, but not sure how what they do is illegally manipulating the market. Of course, I don't know much about that side of the law, and could surely be convinced otherwise, with facts.
Bigger name fighters need to be smart enough not to sign those stupid 8-10 fight contracts and demand fair value. They need to set a precedent for everybody else.
It'll take time, but I think fighters have more power than they take advantage of.
TMT -Mynameisburns - Fighters are also going to Bellator, WSOF, and One FC now. How are they not allowed to shop around? Gilbert Melendez did it and got himself into a sweet deal same with Travis Browne
According to the complaint, the UFC collects 90% of worldwide MMA revenue. If that's so, then merely paying Melendez (or any other fighter) what other promotions can afford to pay will often be unreasonably low.
If you want to be the major leagues, then you should pay like it.
The UFC is the #1 and they do pay like it. People think just because the UFC is #1 they should pay out millions and millions of dollars and give out these UFC "minimum" contracts like the NFL has set up. The market determined what the fighters were paid because the deal they signed with the UFC was higher than what they would have earned on the regional scene or any other national promotion. If you have companies offering you salaries and you opt to go with the highest one than that is what you are worth to the market.
The UFC has been outbid in the past for fighter services like when Affliction was around for their 2 events. The problem is that those other organizations don't have the best business people running it and there revenues don't outpace their expenses.
If the UFC were forced to increase pay than they would either reduce the number of events or more fighters would be cut in order to pay the remaining fighters higher salaries. So in other words this lawsuit has the chance of hurting a lot of fighters because the UFC has no obligation to have a 600 person roster and they can limit their events and cut down their roster to say 400 which means 200 fighters are making less money on the regional scene.
Also, if the UFC were to raise their pay scale than that means Bellator, WSOF, and OneFC would have to raise their pay in order to try and compete for talent. You would still get the top guys signing with the UFC because the others won't be able to offer the same amount.
This lawsuit could backfire big time.
^^^
1) The complaint makes very subtle arguments. You're looking at this simply as bargaining for a contract in a competitive market.
The complaint is saying the UFC illegally interfered with the market by damaging its competitors ability to make money, which in turn makes the fighters worth less in the market.
The complaint is also saying the UFC is abusing its position as the major leagues of fighting in a way that directly drives fighters' pay down.
2) Nobody is saying the UFC should pay the same amount the NLF pays. What people are saying is that if the UFC is the major leagues, then it should pay certain percentages of its revenue like the NFL does.
In 2011 NFL players got 55 percent of League Media (including TV and radio), 45 percent of NFL Ventures (licensing products) and 40 percent of local club revenues.
If the lawsuit gets the discovery phase, then we'll be able to see what percentage of revenue goes to fighter pay, and what percentage goes into executive's and owner's pockets.
At this point, the UFC has only been saying "Trust us, the pay is fair." Now, it might possible for a judge to look at the numbers and see if it actually is fair. For some reason, I don't expect we'll find that the UFC has been paying the same percentage of revenue as the NFL. It's just a guess.
TMT - ^^^
1) The complaint makes very subtle arguments. You're looking at this simply as bargaining for a contract in a competitive market.
The complaint is saying the UFC illegally interfered with the market by damaging its competitors ability to make money, which in turn makes the fighters worth less in the market.
The complaint is also saying the UFC is abusing its position as the major leagues of fighting in a way that directly drives fighters' pay down.
2) Nobody is saying the UFC should pay the same amount the NLF pays. What people are saying is that if the UFC is the major leagues, then it should pay certain percentages of its revenue like the NFL does.
In 2011 NFL players got 55 percent of League Media (including TV and radio), 45 percent of NFL Ventures (licensing products) and 40 percent of local club revenues.
If the lawsuit gets the discovery phase, then we'll be able to see what percentage of revenue goes to fighter pay, and what percentage goes into executive's and owner's pockets.
At this point, the UFC has only been saying "Trust us, the pay is fair." Now, it might possible for a judge to look at the numbers and see if it actually is fair. For some reason, I don't expect we'll find that the UFC has been paying the same percentage of revenue as the NFL. It's just a guess.
My issue with the lawsuit is that the UFC is a private organization. Their responsibility is to their shareholders which are the owners. To compare them to a league comprised of over 30 individual owners in which 1 is tax exempt is not a fair comparison. I would be more in line with comparing them to the WWE pre public stock offering because the UFC has blatantly ripped their business model. It is a slippery slope when we ask private corporations to adjust the percentage of revenues to their employees or independent contractors.
As a private company the UFC is forced to use their gross profit for expansion purposes or take on long term liabilities such as a loan payable. Not to mention the UFC has to cover their own operating expenses and the COS associated with each fight card. The comparison to the NFL or any other sports league doesn't make sense because the UFC is a private corporation not a sports league comprised of individual owners competing for the rights of free agents.