Under the same rules of single apparel branding that Reebok have, and if we had our time again would you have preferred Tapout as the main UFC clothing sponsor over Reebok?
no difference to me
Of course. At least it would have been a brand who's roots were deeply embedded in MMA.
No. They have fewer resources to pay fighters. Any single company having an exclusive deal will hurt the fighters though. It strangles competition and limits their opportunities to generate supplemental income through sponsorships.
The other side of the Reebok deal is that it helps the lesser known fighters that wouldn't generate the large sponsorship income the top guys were getting. But all-in-all, any exclusive deal for 'uniforms' is bad for fighters
No. That would just be a punchline like Affliction.
T?bikan J?dan -No. They have fewer resources to pay fighters. Any single company having an exclusive deal will hurt the fighters though. It strangles competition and limits their opportunities to generate supplemental income through sponsorships.
The other side of the Reebok deal is that it helps the lesser known fighters that wouldn't generate the large sponsorship income the top guys were getting. But all-in-all, any exclusive deal for 'uniforms' is bad for fighters
single company is a mistake for the ufc and mma. too many fighters and too many personalities. a guy may not be a winning fighter but will still have a good amount of fans ready to support him.
also a guy can have a dope shirt design or collab with a brand that can make him some real money.
a free for all is also not the way to go. their should be some regulations and really only viable “brands” should be sponsoring and working with fighters.
Ex. guy makes 5 million on garage doors and decides he wants to have an mma brand called “face punch” because its badass. he has no web site no distribution but he has 500k to spend on “marketing” ( reality he wants to buy his way into hanging out with fighters) their should be someone in a position at the ufc that reviews the brands looks at the reality of the situation and says sorry but no. go build a brand (working website, real product line, advertising and marketing, retail distribution, history or working with athletes in smaller shows and maintaining a good reputation.) and come back when you do and then we can work together because you are now a working brand with a realistic roi model and are actually interested in building up a business and not just buying access to fighters to impress your friends back home ( their was ALOT of this going on at one time.)
TapouT fed fighters before the organizations could feed fighters. Anyone against TapouT is either jealous, a hater, or jealous. Charles put everything into the fighters.
ducks18 -TapouT fed fighters before the organizations could feed fighters. Anyone against TapouT is either jealous, a hater, or jealous. Charles put everything into the fighters.
that is true. its also true that when he died some very bad people took over.
the brand was first lic out very poorly and then sold.
it was no longer charles company and any good will that he and the original owners and workers carried was no longer their anymore.
had he not died it would be alot different but he did and what happened happened.
i have quite a bit of first hand knowledge on everything that went down.
Lots of good answers for this. Ultimately I liked Tapout as a brand and what it meant/did for the sport, of course there’s not really many brands that exist like that today. I also see how Reebok is able to reach markets and do things Tapout could not, so it would benefit fighters more. Overall I believe there should be more than one brand as mentioned previously. It isn’t as professional (since everything UFC is Reebok), but better for fighters long term.
ducks18 -TapouT fed fighters before the organizations could feed fighters. Anyone against TapouT is either jealous, a hater, or jealous. Charles put everything into the fighters.
also their was a lot fo us back in the day that “fed fighters” bought groceries, made car payments, covered gym fees.
anyone that says different is delusional, ignorant, or a liar.
I think the single clothing sponsor probably did more harm than good. It's good for the fighter that just wants to concentrate on fighting and possibly make a few extra dollars. However the more ambitious fighters could make their own deals for clothing and other products and possibly make more than what Reebok would pay. I think it also killed a lot of fight apparel companies since their products could no longer be seen and represented on the big show. Also it pretty much killed the Fan Expo since no clothing companies could attend.
Before Reebok got announced I thought it would have been UA as the sponsor with them already with GSP.
HITMAN DAN DIAZ -ducks18 -TapouT fed fighters before the organizations could feed fighters. Anyone against TapouT is either jealous, a hater, or jealous. Charles put everything into the fighters.
that is true. its also true that when he died some very bad people took over.
the brand was first lic out very poorly and then sold.
it was no longer charles company and any good will that he and the original owners and workers carried was no longer their anymore.
had he not died it would be alot different but he did and what happened happened.
i have quite a bit of first hand knowledge on everything that went down.
Damn that’s terrible to hear. I am a diehard TapouT supporter because of Charles good deeds.
When he passed away I remember hearing Skrape saying “this was Charles dream to one day get bought out by a big brand (ABG)” and I was thinking uhhh I don’t think this was Charles plan to be a backup product at Kohl’s and Walmart.
Eceryone should see the movie MASK by Bobby Razak! He was much more than a pioneer for MMA. We need more people like Charles in this sport, unfortunately he was a dying breed of something special.
ranier wolfcastle -no difference to me
you know you're one postwhoring motherfucker when you drop in immediately as first poster to say '-'
mindless optimism -ranier wolfcastle -no difference to me
you know you're one postwhoring motherfucker when you drop in immediately as first poster to say '-'
Uniforms are for team "ball play" sports
Makes zero sense for two different fight camps to coordinate their outfits like a high school couple dressing up to go to the mall
Honestly , I couldn't care less what somebody wears... I doubt the fighters would be too impressed with an even bigger pay cut though!
They should never have taken away the fighters ability to secure their own sponsors in the first place.
T?bikan J?dan -No. They have fewer resources to pay fighters. Any single company having an exclusive deal will hurt the fighters though. It strangles competition and limits their opportunities to generate supplemental income through sponsorships.
The other side of the Reebok deal is that it helps the lesser known fighters that wouldn't generate the large sponsorship income the top guys were getting. But all-in-all, any exclusive deal for 'uniforms' is bad for fighters
Assume they had the same money and payments. Strictly comparing the two brands on their brand and clothing
I miss the creativity of Tapout in regards to the limited edition designs like
Chuck’s ice shorts
Franklin’s pink and brown
Sanchez orange shorts
Matt Hughes camo
etc those were UFC fighter kits you could get behind because they had individuality.
The cum stains design on black uniforms with misspelled names and whole over pricing with Reebok is off putting