It could end up good for some and bad for others the way I see it.
As of right now, fighters, based on their popularity, have the opportunity to tell sponsors what they are worth and what they want to get paid for wearing a logo. This is a huge benefit for guys like Sonnen or other fighters who have an abnormally large fan base compared to what they have accomplished in the sport.
Guys that always bring the fight and are the type of fighters that fans don't want to miss have the ability to say that they are worth more because they aren't like Jon Fitch or Ben Askren where everyone goes and takes a piss or gets a new beer when their fight comes on. So in the market right now, the fan favourite fighters are getting paid more than the fighters who people don't care to watch. Those are the fighters that would likely be hurt by this.
It's okay for those fan favourite fighters to work out their own deals with sponsors to get paid more, but if the UFC decides to pay them more because they are fan favourites and pay the guy with the better record less because the fans don't care about him, all of the sudden Zuffa is the bad guy whereas before everyone just wrote it off as the market place and supply and demand. Once Zuffa takes that over, everyone will demand a more even supply of sponsorship money. That takes away a bit of the incentive for guys to market themselves, and it sucks a bit for those guys who are really good at it.
Although, it will likely be a good thing for those guys who don't know how to market themselves and don't care to. They will likely have a lot more time to focus just on the fight rather than worrying about trying to scrape together some more money to cover training costs.
This is a lose/lose for Zuffa though. They become tied to one specific brand and all of the sudden are accountable to that brand in making them look good all the time (no swearing or saying bad things from the fighters when they are wearing their merchandise, and also they end up screwing the fighters who work the hardest to make the most sponsorship money.
Awesome, although having Nike exclusively sponsoring big name fighters always made it more 'special'. At least all the retarded sponsors will be done away with, who want's condom advertisments while you're watching topless men roll on the mat? Ya?
Good Sir - Awesome, although having Nike exclusively sponsoring big name fighters always made it more 'special'. At least all the retarded sponsors will be done away with, who want's condom advertisments while you're watching topless men roll on the mat? Ya?
My guess will be fighters can still go out and get other sponsors. Just not apparel companies so we may still some odd companies on shorts. I think eventually all sponsors will be gone from the sport.
Most likely. Dana is blocking that Nike- Anderson Silva money.
huh, Dana wouldn't let Anderson wear a nike shirt, even in his pre-fight interviews?
No that is not how it works. The UFC has control over what the athlete wears during broadcast times. So weigh ins and fight nights are regulated. For interviews with the media you can wear what you want. The athletes are independent contractors and control only goes so far.
Most likely. Dana is blocking that Nike- Anderson Silva money.
huh, Dana wouldn't let Anderson wear a nike shirt, even in his pre-fight interviews?
No that is not how it works. The UFC has control over what the athlete wears during broadcast times. So weigh ins and fight nights are regulated. For interviews with the media you can wear what you want. The athletes are independent contractors and control only goes so far.
So what are you and other managers doing to make sure your clients make as much as possible from these deals? Think you'd like to see to see something comparable to the NBA or NFL where players get half that revenue. If not that then at least much as fighters would be making now if there was no sponsor tax.
I can't speak for other managers. For my clients it comes down to controlling the controllable. Making sponsorship dollars the night your scheduled to fight is not something we can control.
Our firm has never focused on in fight or ambush marketing the events. We have ran into many situations where the sponsor was not allowed to place their logo in a particular event, that did not change the terms for the athlete, it just made us adjust how we were activating the deal.
I have been on record from the start about how bad the sponsorship programs are. I got into the sport to do it differently and we did. UFC 68 Head to toe one brand and they were not some fight gear brand. SOYO fight Team, Arlovski LCD TV's, Malibu Boats, MTX Audio (sponsoring 0-0 ASU wrestlers with guys who went on to win TUF), Good4U and many other non-MMA brands who have been involved with the athletes of the sport not trying to buy a placement on a UFC PPV.
We will continue to fight the good fight but as long as Managers and Trainagers continue to give it away we are not going to be making much of a difference. For every company that our agency brings into the sport (with the above understanding of not focusing on UFC events and focus on the athletes) gets more calls from managers offering UFC event placement for free then MMA fans calling to buy the product. Bad management is a disease that has gone viral in this sport. If Zuffa wants to handle all the in fight stuff that is fine by me. My job is to build the fighter not sell stuff we have no control over.
Just because Reebok has the licensing rights to a particular sport does not mean that the athlete outside of the time competing has no value. As a matter of fact Nike will like increase the amount of athletes they do lines for if a company like Reebok joined forces with the UFC. Look at how they went after Skate and Golf, both were dominated by endemic brands but Nike carved out a market. In the end the athletes still participate in a free market.
