« Report: Forrest Griffin out of action for all of 2009 | Home | Video: Dana White on the Road to UFC 93 »
Ticket information for Affliction 1/24 Honda Center event in Anaheim
By Zach Arnold | January 13, 2009
So, I went to Ticketmaster to look for available seats for the January 24th event headlined by Fedor vs. Arlovski. The first thing you notice is that Affliction is giving away a ‘free t-shirt’ to anyone who buy a ticket with a face value of $200 or higher. Underneath the t-shirt offer are prices for parking, which range from $15-40 USD.
In short, you can pretty much get whatever kind of ticket you want for the show. More information here.
I know that on a mailing list for MMA writers, the organization yesterday (like for the first show) was offering free t-shirts as a way of saying ‘thank you.’
Topics: Affliction, MMA, Media, Zach Arnold | | Permalink | Trackback | Share This
That’s great, but they never sent out the shirts from the last time. I’m keeping this anonymous because I’m embarrassed to admit that I asked for one.
In many of the ticket prices, there are still 1st or 2nd row seats still available. That is not a good sign. I think after cancelling the last show, they know they have no choice but to put this one on, no matter how few tickets they have sold.
Tom has come out and said:
That last sentence is pretty sad. We know that you can get groups of ten tickets in every price, so there is clearly not enough sales to warrent the release of more tickets.
Why say something that can be disproved so easily?
He’s been doing it from the get go. No sense in stopping now!
Am I the only one who noticed that they put Rodrigo Nogueira picture on the fightcard instead of Rogerio?
http://www.afflictionclothing.com/dayofreckoning/
It’s funny that he has to lie constantly. We did 100,000 buys. Golden Boy is a great partner. Sales for our Jan. 24th show are doing swell.
Why the constant dishonesty?
mattio: Can you name an honest MMA promoter? Gary Shaw (before he was axed) and Dana White lie constantly. Promoters are supposed to hype things up with little twists like “In reality we are opening up more seating to accomodate the demand for tickets”
What he really means is that he had to open up a larger and cheaper seat area and minimize the ringside and VIP area.
“The first thing you notice is that Affliction is giving away a ‘free t-shirt’ to anyone who buy a ticket with a face value of $200 or higher”
That’s an awesome deal. Since an Affliction t-shirt costs about $200, it’s basically like getting an event ticket for free!
Atencio’s blatant lies will make it very hard to feel sorry for him when his MMA promotion goes out of business. With that said, the lack of legit competition to the UFC is nothing to celebrate. Franklin vs. Henderson should not be the main event of a $45 PPV. Hughes vs. Alves should not have been the main event of a $45 PPV. Bisping vs. Leben and Stevenson vs. Sanchez should not be the main events of major shows (albeit not PPVs, but people still had to pay for tickets). If the UFC had more legitimate competition, they would have much less of an ability to get away with sometimes offering sub-standard product at full price.
I disagree. UFC 93 was put on to financially hurt Affliction. If Affliction wasn’t around, would the UFC have even put on a PPV 2 weeks before Penn/GSP 2? It’s questionable. And that Franklin/Henderson Main Event would have been able to go on the Sanchez/Stevenson card instead, only making it stronger.
Whether the UFC has competition from other MMA organizations, they are still competing for the consumers dollars. They are also always fighting to stay away from the perception of being like boxing. That is why we see stacked cards like UFC 92 and UFC 94.
With that said, I do think they get ahead of themselves sometimes and try and put on too many shows without having enough headliners to fill those slots. Take for example the O2 Arena show coming up with Stevenson/Sanchez. That should never be the main event. But I don’t think that has anything to do with competition. Just poor planning. They shouldn’t be running 5 UFC numbered shows in 4 months, especially when they only have 5 weight classes and 5 champions.
Ivan: Bisping vs. Leben and Stevenson vs. Sanchez are pretty sad main events, but I don’t really understand the complaints against Hughes vs. Alves and Franklin vs. Henderson. The latter two fights both feature two top ten competitors going at it, and Hendo/Franklin has been a dream fight since those two held their respective divisional titles. How aren’t those two fights respectable main events?
Wolverine Says:
“Am I the only one who noticed that they put Rodrigo Nogueira picture on the fightcard instead of Rogerio?”
That IS Rogerio
“Since an Affliction t-shirt costs about $200, it’s basically like getting an event ticket for free!”
No, you get the $35 event shirt.
#1 splitting the event into 2 shows on different channels is lame.
#2 Except for Fedor Arlovski the card has poor match ups.
These are the match ups we want to see…
Vitor V Frank
Vlad v Frye
Nog v Law
Barnett v Rico
Yvel v Paul
Kiril v Soakajew
#3 Affliction is failing to get the HW action. Why is paul fighting a middleweight?
#4 the under card is way underweight. 2 fights at 145? and the Vlad Lil nog rematch is a waste.
“With that said, the lack of legit competition to the UFC is nothing to celebrate. Franklin vs. Henderson should not be the main event of a $45 PPV. Hughes vs. Alves should not have been the main event of a $45 PPV. Bisping vs. Leben and Stevenson vs. Sanchez should not be the main events of major shows (albeit not PPVs, but people still had to pay for tickets). If the UFC had more legitimate competition, they would have much less of an ability to get away with sometimes offering sub-standard product at full price.”
This is completely wrong, because it assumes that the UFC CHOOSES to give “substandard” main events. In fact, its more of a function of the structure of MMA competition, than anything else.
Lets take a look at the main events you consider “substandard”. Hughes vs. Alves was a replacement for Liddell vs. Rashad which was a replacement for Liddell vs. Shogun. Even so, that was a main event of a former long-time champion vs. an exciting future #1 contender.
The upcoming 93 is main evented by Franklin vs. Henderson. Thats one former long-time champion vs. another former long-time champion in a fight that people have waited a long time for.
Simply put, the only way you can have better main events than that is with current champions. But even that isn’t always the case. Anderson vs. Cote was a shit main event, so was Anderson vs. Leites.
So realistically, for a main event to be “standard”, it has to involve either a champion vs. a realistic contender, or two top and super-marketable fighters in a desired fight. But in order to have one of those fights on every card, you’d have to outright abandon some of the most desirable fights. UFC 93 could be improved with Penn vs. Florian. But that would leave UFC 94 with St. Pierre vs. Alves, certainly a great fight, but not the dream fight we are getting. UFC 93 suffers because we’re getting one of the greatest fights of a generation later this month.
Furthermore, lets say the UFC DID do Penn vs. Florian and St. Pierre vs. Alves. Who would be next for each of them? Keep them fighting three times a year in order to give every card a championship main event, it isn’t long before they are both in Anderson Silva territory.
Maybe the UFC can solve the problem in the future, but right now it can produce one elite challenger about every nine months, and one mediocre challenger every six months or so. Rematches between a champion and former champion or elite challenger are the best business, but not always doable. The faster champions fight, the less time fighters get to make it to elite challenger status, which is again where Anderson Silva is, trashing guys who haven’t had the time to reach elite status. That isn’t good for anybody.
Really, if you want better main events, what you’re saying isn’t that you want better main events. What you’re saying is that you want fewer cards. Thanks, but I’m quite happy with all the MMA we get. Let the market decide which events they want to buy.
Franklin vs. Henderson is a good match-up, but not as the main event of a PPV event, especially when PPVs cost $45. Same goes for Hughes-Alves.
Ivan, I responded to that, but my comment is awaiting moderation. Basically I say that main event quality is limited by the structure of MMA, not the UFC being stingy with its product.
Nobody is forcing them to put on that many events.
Wolverine Says:
“Am I the only one who noticed that they put Rodrigo Nogueira picture on the fightcard instead of Rogerio?”
Grafdog says:
“That IS Rogerio”
The picture on the fightcard is indeed Rodrigo Minotauro. He has the Pride heavyweight belt over his shoulder.
I got tickets to Affliction & WEC…gonna be a couple good days back to back.
Ivan: nobody is forcing you to buy them, either. So why do you complain?
Franklin vs. Henderson is a match-up I’ve been waiting years for, so I’d gladly pay for that fight alone.
Seriously, going back to the old UFC vs. Pride days, I was firmly in the camp that thought Dan Henderson was the best 185′er in the world and Franklin was an overrated UFC marketing creation that Dana protected by getting rid of Lindland. I was itching for Henderson to leave Pride, come to the UFC, and knock Franklin’s head off.
Fast forward a couple of years, the fight no longer has the promotional rivalry behind it, it won’t determine the best in the world and it isn’t even at 185, but it will still scratch the itch.
As someone else pointed out, that is indeed Rogerio Nogueira on the Affliction website.
If Tom has all this money to burn he should donate to military veterans organizations. He couldn’t just be happy with an MMA version of Sheldon Goldberg’s NECW and give up and coming fighters a shot, he had to be national~! Affliction Clothing looks like JNCO and a BeDazzler kit crossed paths.
I am completely perplexed as to how anyone can say Franklin-Hendo is not a fantastic main event. Aside from Chuck-Wand, it is THE Pride vs UFC superfight that I have been waiting for.
As far as the ‘Nobody is forcing them to put on that many events’ quip goes … are you kidding?
Would you really rather go back to the days of five or six cards per year? You’ll definitely get stacked cards that way, but you’ll miss out on a boatload of awesome fights from guys who don’t have name recognition … yet.
Speaking only for myself, fuck that. I’d rather get monthly PPV’s with a half-dozen SpikeTV shows thrown in for free. It beats the hell out of what we got from 1997-2004.
That’s a good one. I’m not being forced to buy them, so I can’t complain? That’s right up there with, “If you’ve never fought in MMA, you can’t criticize MMA fighters!” on the logic scale.
My comment, “Nobody is forcing them to put on that many events” was in response to the general sentiment that the UFC is putting on so many events that it’s hard to have PPV-worthy main events for all of them and that it’s almost like a natural part of the industry that there are going to be some PPVs with main events that are not PPV-main-event-worthy.
My response to that sentiment or attitude is this (to make it more than one sentence this time): If that’s the only defense to the sub-standard PPV main events, then it’s a cop-out because nobody is forcing them to run 12 or 13 PPV events per year. So far, it has generally only been a few times per year that they have PPV main events that aren’t worthy of being PPV main events, so I’d much rather have 10 PPV events per year and have all of them be worth $45 than have 12 per year and have a few of those with sub-standard main events.
The UFC knows that it’s going to get a guaranteed 200,000+ buys just based on the UFC brand name, no matter what the quality of the card is. Charging $45 for PPV events with sub-par main events (ie, fights that are not worthy of headlining a $45 PPV), just because they know they can, is not the best way to build customer goodwill in the long run.
PS: I just read on Bloody Elbow that Gonzaga vs. Carwin might actually be the main event of the March PPV. The UFC usually goes longer than two months in between sub-standard PPV main events, so hopefully this is not a sign of things to come as far as what the UFC is going to produce after Affliction is gone.
On an unrelated note, I guess it’s nice to know that Howard Jacobs is still just as incompetent as ever.
““(The CSAC) basically said, ‘well, you can’t prove that it actually came from the legal supplement, as opposed to from the banned substance, so you lose because you didn’t prove it to us,’” Jacobs told MMAWeekly.com. “We say we didn’t have to prove it, you had to prove it the other way around.””
In addition to the fact that you can’t just declare which party has to prove whifh facts and have that be the case just because you say so, there’s also the inconvenient little fact that even if they were to prove that it was 100% the fault of the supplement, the fighter is still responsible for what he puts in his body.
Jacobs has had the same B.S. argument every time a fighter has wasted their money hiring him in Nevada or California, and he almost always loses, and he’s always told by the commission that a fighter is responsible if banned substances are in his body whether they got there knowingly or unknowingly, and yet he comes back with the same argument the next time and loses again.
Keith Kizer of the NSAC did an interview with MMAWeekly in 2007 where he talked about a lot of the drug testing myths that fighters often try to explot to make it seem that they’re not responsible for what they put into their system. The URL is: http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=4414
“That’s a good one. I’m not being forced to buy them, so I can’t complain? That’s right up there with, “If you’ve never fought in MMA, you can’t criticize MMA fighters!” on the logic scale.”
Don’t make my eyes roll any harder, they’ll fly out of my head into orbit around Earth.
You can’t complain, because there are clear market forces in play here. The market does not agree with you, Ivan, because the market is not forced to buy a card either. Customer goodwill is not lost when the customer is free to pick and choose which product he or she wants.
And that works, because “PPV quality main event” is purely a matter of opinion. Your opinion is that Henderson vs. Franklin is a substandard main event. Many people disagree, and those will be the people buying the event.
At core, your complaint about main event quality revolves around the fact that you think your opinion actually represents or should represent the market’s opinion. It doesn’t. Its just one opinion among many. Let the market work, because it works just fine.
Marc Says:
Wolverine Says:
“Am I the only one who noticed that they put Rodrigo Nogueira picture on the fightcard instead of Rogerio?”
Grafdog says:
“That IS Rogerio”
“The picture on the fightcard is indeed Rodrigo Minotauro. He has the Pride heavyweight belt over his shoulder.”
…my mistake, i didn’t click on the fightcard, i was going by the image on the homepage.
That’s a pretty big boner they pulled there.
Michaelthebox— It’s always nice to be told what I think, but no, I don’t think that my “opinion actually represents or should represent the market’s opinion.”
My opinion is that Matt Hughes vs. Thiago Alves was not worthy of being the main event of a $45 PPV. My opinion is that Rich Franklin vs. Dan Henderson is not worthy of being the main event of a $45 PPV. My opinion is that if Gabriel Gonzaga vs. Shane Carwin does indeed end up being the main event of the March PPV, that will be another fight that is not worthy of being the main event of a $45 PPV.
Those are just my opinions, and I’m pretty sure I don’t need to check with you first to see if I have the right to have those opinions or the right to express those opinions.
Well as someone who’s going to the next London UFC, I can say I’m pretty pissed off at the main event. If I’d paid a reasonable ticket price then it would be fine but I’ve paid £50 ($75, even now with the horrible exchange rate), for basically the worst seats in the whole of the 22,000 seater arena.
Following on from £50 for Leben vs Bisping it’s starting to really get annoying.
As for Affliction, well, it’s sad because I want a competitor to the UFC, but they really have absolutely no idea what they’re doing. The marketing is terrible, their website is terrible, their idea of mixing MMA with other stuff is terrible, their fighter pay is a guaranteed disaster… Never mind eh… eventually someone with a clue will have go at this and we’ll have 2 orgs.
Come on, UFC won’t do Gonzaga vs. Carwin PPV. They’re either going to convince Chuck or put something like Florian vs. Sherk 2 or Alves vs. Swick.
Is Florian/Sherk II really a main event fight though? Who carries that buyrate? Florian?
RE: “Just don’t buy”…well, look. There’s two solid arguments against it. One is that forcing decent but non-exceptional fights to PPV builds resentment with the fanbase over time. That’s not a good thing. The other is that the UFC has had multiple attempts to get cards like the Carwin/Gonzaga one onto various TV outlets and refused to because it would force them to lose some onus of control. Its extremely funny then to hear them use their lock on every aspect of the programming as an excuse as to why they don’t need to pay main eventers higher percentages of the total gate.
“there are clear market forces in play here”
Agreed.
I think the majority of the UFC’s fanbase is just interested in good fights. They don’t give a shit about the names of the guys fighting (with a few exceptions like Chuck/Brock/Randy). If the UFC delivers good fights, they are happy, and the UFC has been delivering good fights recently.
While Ivan is certainly entitled to his opinion, I don’t think many people that actually purchase PPVs share that opinion. I think the angst-ridden stream and torrent crowd might, but the UFCs paying customers are don’t.
And I still don’t get the problem with Rich-Hendo. IMO, that is one of the best main events they have had in quite some time. Not every event can be GSP-Penn.
I think the issue with Rich/Hendo is multifaceted: Its at 205, both are sort of in rankings limbo, and that its a fight essentially to get onto Ultimate Fighter for another bout 6 months from now against someone either man would likely easily beat isn’t that enticing. The loser, meanwhile, is gonna be downgraded appreciably in the eyes of the fans.
What makes you think anyone is going to ‘easily beat’ Mike Bisping?
Ask the current LHW champ how easy it is to beat Bisping.
I A) don’t think Rashad had that much trouble beating him and that the arguments for Bisping winning were ridiculous and B) he looks completely hittable against guys like Leben and Hamill, and shows (predictably) to not have the greatest takedown defense on earth. One of those gets him torched against Franklin. The other gets him torched by Henderson.
Ivan Trembow likes to complain just for the sake of complaining…because if you are a journalist (is that what he calls himself?), then it usually goes without saying that you must be critical most of the time, or run the risk of being called a ‘fan’.
So ignore him, he really brings nothing to the table here. He likes to think his opinion is worth more, when he throws around what he fights he feels are ‘main event’ worthy, but the reality is, the market will decide that. As stated by a number of people above me, if the UFC keeps selling 350k ppv’s per show, then that says a lot of fans are enjoying it.
Speaking for myself, I would rather have more ppv’s and free shows, than less. I enjoy seeing new fighters, up and comers, rather than the Pride’esque retread circuit we used to see in Japan. I see nothing useful out of only having 6 ppv’s a year, so that a few cranky old ‘journalists’ and Pride nutjobbers can then crow on about ’stacked’ fight cards. Bottom line, if an upcoming card doesn’t look attractive to me, I just don’t buy it. I’ll wait for the next one. This really isn’t a big deal. If most people do the same, the UFC will respond in kind.
And Rich Franklin vs Dan Henderson is a good fight. I also don’t understand why all these people feel like they need some good story or rankings backdrop either, to make the fight intriguing. Why? Can’t you just enjoy it for what it is…..two top five/top ten fighters going at it, to see which guy is best? Do we really have to sit around and whine about how the winner isn’t getting a title shot next? Who cares. Fussing over story lines makes it seems like we are one step removed from Vince McMahn(spelling?). What’s next for some of these people, do they need a good “Dan Henderson raped Rich’s sister” plot twist to get them to tune in????
And Rich Franklin vs Dan Henderson is a good fight. I also don’t understand why all these people feel like they need some good story or rankings backdrop either, to make the fight intriguing.
The fight’s not bad. 3 years ago it would have been great. It just sucks that you either have to pay $45, go to a sports bar to watch it on tape, or go through illegal means to see it.
D. Capitated,
I think you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on Bisping.
I think that guy is a tough fight for anybody and find the assertion that Rashad had an easy time with him ludicrous. Evans definitely won the fight, but Bisping gave him everything he could handle and then some. If nothing else, he managed to finish the fight rather than being left in an unconscious heap on the mat like Liddell & Griffin.
Styles make fights, and even now I think people who imagine Rashad as a great finisher are fooling themselves. When I look at Franklin/Bisping and compare it to the fight with Rashad, well, Franklin perhaps isn’t as athletic, but he’s about 3-4 inches taller and has a much longer reach. Matt Hammill virtually outstruck Bisping, and look how he did with Franklin standing. I think Bisping might make it 15 minutes against either one (Henderson because he’s old and gasses early, Franklin because he can be lured into sleepwalking and has fragile hands), but I can’t see him beating either.
I buy PPVs on both the boxing and MMA side. I order fights primarily because I enjoy hosting fight night parties. SO far Ivan is 3 for 3 in predicting my ‘market behavior’. Contrary to comment 34 above I have learned from experience hosting parties that most people don’t care too strongly about undercards but about the fighters they already know. I would not call these guys ‘casual fans’ either…many train and spend hours online tracking down fights.
When I order fights I consider how meaningful to me the entire card is, along with how much excitement it will generate amongst friends. BUT I also consider the upcoming calendar and how many live fight nights I need to enjoy in a month. In the case of Rich and Hendo though I know enough fans of both men to have a decent party I can expect a lot more fun both on the 31st (Penn and GSP) and on the 24th when Affliction MMA + Mosley-Margarito boxing will both be on.
Overall I agree with the sentiment that UFC should slow down on the shows and keep up the quality.
I’m not buying a PPV headlined by Gonzaga vs. Carwin.
They need to get the Featherweight Division in the UFC…. Have 6 champions…. 1 PPV per month… And if these champions each fight twice a year, then we have one title fight per card. And then there are enough stars to sprinkle in a non-title main event for one of the 12 PPV’s if needed.
They are only going to hurt themselves by having people spend $100+ a ticket, then not following through with a respectable main event. It will also teach fans not to buy tickets until a main event is announced.
“teaching fans not to buy tickets” isn’t a good thing, since most tickets are sold in the first week of an event going on sale. If they don’t buy them straight away, they probably won’t at all.
The “free market” crowd (for lack of a better label) essentially argue against intelligent analysis of any kind. In their circular world, if PPVs are sold, the product is good, period, and anyone who criticizes the product or points to dangers down the line is some kind of elitist. This is a mindless position to take. The reason we go to sites like Fight Opinion is because we have opinions and want to exchange them with others.
About the “free market”: I self-consciously “reward” the UFC for putting on great cards by ordering them on PPV and “punish” the UFC for putting on sub-par cards by downloading those illegally. Similarly, I encourage competition to the UFC by ordering PPVs like Affliction’s, regardless of how crappy their marketing is (like I care!).
An individual consumer acting alone makes no difference, but “the market” is simply the sum of consumer behavior. At present, fans like myself are rare, although I’m sure some of you are also self-conscious about your personal contributions to the “free market”. And as the fanbase becomes more educated about the sport, and more PPV-weary, this will become more common.
Steve, ARCE and others who share their sentiment are short-sighted. Sure, fans right now are being suckered into buying a mediocre product, but for how long? What these guys are missing is the point made by D.Capitated: “forcing decent but non-exceptional fights to PPV builds resentment with the fanbase over time. That’s not a good thing.”
Personally, I like having more events. I’m not too concerned about the star power of the main event, as long as it has solid fights I’m happy. I’d much rather have 93 and 94 the way they are, than combine the fights into a single super card. I get more fights, and I get to see some potentially exciting new fighters I would not otherwise know about if every show consisted of established top 10 fighters.
Just tossing my two cents in.
Also, from the fighters’ perspective, more shows mean the fighter’s fight more often (most can barely get 3 fights a year as it is now).
I happen to agree with both Ivan & Mr. Taveras above regarding the quality of this weekend\’s main event & the frequency with which Zuffa is now scheduling PPVs.
Sure, Hendo - Franklin is a solid match up. But, it\’s between a pair of fighters that have fallen off to second tier level now & to me, it\’s far more of a good semi-main event or co-feature than a main event itself.
While I respect opinions to the contrary, that\’s the way I see it.
As for the rate at which the UFC is scheduling PPVs these days, I think they\’re getting a little greedy.
With more & more of these shows being filled out by fighters that we all just saw on TUF a few weeks or months ago, it\’s difficult for me not to feel like these $45 events are becoming more & more watered down …
Of course, no one is \”forcing me\” to watch and/or purchase these PPVs, but the more & the more often that they try to sqeeze out of the consumer for what are increasingly becoming less than stellar cards, the more danger they\’re in of repeating all of boxing\’s mistakes.
The flaw is thinking they are doing it because they can get away with it, rather than doing it because they find themselves in a bad position. I think UFC 93 is a fine card, somewhere between Spike and PPV level lineups, but again fights are so widely available within a day of the show that it’s not exactly worth complaining about.
Hughes-Alves show was originally supposed to be Chuck-Shogun. Penn-Stevenson was originally going to be Penn-Sherk. Franklin-Okami was originally going to be Tito/Forrest.
UFC 95’s main event is a disaster, but it’s a result of them desperately searching for a main event and having no fighters bite. It’s more a reflection of their inefficient use of their own roster than some kind of monopolistic neglect. I am now pretty sure they have a main event they are putting together last minute besides Carwin-Gonzaga, but even if that happened, it would be because Chuck pulled out and all their other top fighters are busy. Not because they want to sell fans that main event.
People confuse lack of direct competition with no competition way too often, it’s a classic mistake. The biggest competitor of all is indifference, which is what the UFC struggles with every day. They need to convince people to pay for fights every month, and they are nowhere near cemented on television. There are plenty of market reasons pushing great shows.
“Personally, I like having more events.”
Okay, but that leads to over-saturation. How often can you really order $45 ppvs? And I am only talking about the UFC alone. Think about all of the boxing (HBO or otherwise) ppvs, Affliction, WWE, TNA, various porn, old King of the Cage ppvs, etc. You’d either have to be a multi-millionaire or have an illegal box to get all of that. UFC is going to have to have more free shows and less ppvs in the future if they plan on running like this. You’re better off waiting until the shows hit DVD, that way you can read reviews of the show to see if it’s good or not, and then get the DVD which would be $20 instead of $45, and you keep the DVD forever and ever and ever.
IceMuncher,
Oh, absolutely. As a fan, I LOVE having more events to watch! The more the marrier, let the good times roll & all that stuff …
But, as a consumer with limited means, it’s just not even remotely feasible for me to be able to afford each & every show that the UFC makes available to me. Especially since I’m not only a hard core MMA fan, but also a lifelong boxing enthusiast as well.
And that’s just with the already established schedule of a Zuffa PPV per month. Now, they’re apparently moving forward toward a new PPV every three weeks …
Which would be fun to watch no doubt, but just impossible for the average fan to pay for IMO.
I’m all for keeping the fighters busier & establishing new stars etc., but I believe it’s come to the point now where Dana & the boys should make a deal for a regularly scheduled Fight Night show per month on basic cable or broadcast television in addition to a single PPV card every four or five weeks.
“marrier, let the good times roll & all that stuff …
But, as a consumer with limited means, it’s just not even remotely feasible for me to be able to afford each & every show that the UFC makes available to me. ”
Get friends. I pay about $5-$20 a PPV, depending on how many people show up. It’s easily affordable, and more fun to watch with a crowd than alone. I don’t think a $45 PPV was ever a reasonable price for a single viewer, no matter how good the show is; I’d never pay that much considering the opportunity costs.
What IceMuncher said.
I typically get together with a group of 5-10 friends, we each kick in $10 to $20, and that covers the cost of PPV, beer, and pizza for the evening. I actually SAVE money versus the typical Saturday night out at the bars.
The “pizza and beer” thing was the defense for boxing moving to PPV years ago. Look how well that ultimately turned out; we now get monthly articles about its demise.
Ice,
Oh, I assure you. That\’s how I survived much of the time period between the advent of PPV in the early \’80s right up until 2004.
It was great getting together with good friends & like-minded individuals every couple/few weeks. But, through an odd set of circumstances in which my three closest friends ( & the core of the group ) each wound up relocating out of NYS within a period of only a few months, I was left holding the bag.
Since then, everyone I\’ve met who\’s displayed an interest in fightsports has made it clear that they\’d rather scratch that itch by going out to the various sportsbar chains. Which, seemed like an option for a short while until I realized that my bill at the the end of the night was roughly the same, if not more than the cost of the PPV would be. Not to mention the worries of having to arrange for safe transportation home should I decide to have a few beers & not risk driving under the influence …
Definitely better to watch in a group and have everyone kick in for the PPV…who’s paying $45 +tax and sitting there to watch an event alone??
Gonzaga, who is not really a ‘name’, fighting someone the average fan has never heard of? I doubt this is the main event…is it?
Meh,
I don’t give a shit about economic theory. I’m just telling you how I pay for UFC cards.
Besides, I don’t think the UFC is a good comparison with boxing. They have been going out of their way to put good cards on free TV. It’s not like Boxing where your choices are (1) buy a PPV or (2) subscribe to HBO.
Anyone with basic cable can see 8 live UFC cards per year without paying an extra penny over their normal cable bill. We didn’t even get that many PPV’s back in the pre-TUF era. We were lucky if we got six PPV shows per year.
I purchase every UFC PPV. I don’t always have people over. If I do, I don’t charge them for it.
I’m not rich, but I make the PPV’s a priority in what I want to spend my money on.
Besides, I don’t think the UFC is a good comparison with boxing. They have been going out of their way to put good cards on free TV. It’s not like Boxing where your choices are (1) buy a PPV or (2) subscribe to HBO.
No offense, but the level of most HBO cards is a lot, lot higher than what the UFC provides for Ultimate Fight Nights. Putting Margarito/Mosley on “normal” HBO would be like showing Sherk/Florian on free TV. Plus, with HBO, you get, you know, HBO.
There’s definitely a trend starting of putting more shows on free TV with lesser quality main events. This is because they need to get all these guys 3-4 fights a year and there’s no room on PPV, and also because they want to saturate the market.
I think they are going to have upwards of 8 free Spike TV specials this year, in addition to Ultimate Finales. The show the week after UFC 94 is kind of a perfect example…the fights aren’t great, but it’s better than no show at all I think.
WEC puts the #1 Featherweight & Bantamweight Fighters in the world on free TV. And UFC money is what funded (and might still) those cards.
And for the UFC Fight Nights vs. HBO Boxing…. It’s Apples to Oranges. UFC puts on 2 to 3 hours of solid fights with Top 30 level fighters. HBO Boxing gives you one, maybe two fights. And many times those fighters are just to showcase noe fighter. At least with UFC Fight Nights, they are evenly matched up fights, which makes for a more compelling viewing experience.
Just look at the first 4 months of 2009. Zuffa is putting on 10 total cards. 4 of them pay, 6 of them free. Hard to complain about.
Klown wrote: “The “free market” crowd (for lack of a better label) essentially argue against intelligent analysis of any kind. In their circular world, if PPVs are sold, the product is good, period, and anyone who criticizes the product or points to dangers down the line is some kind of elitist. This is a mindless position to take. The reason we go to sites like Fight Opinion is because we have opinions and want to exchange them with others.”
Exactly.
Michael Rome wrote: “I think UFC 93 is a fine card, somewhere between Spike and PPV level lineups, but again fights are so widely available within a day of the show that it’s not exactly worth complaining about.”
Are you seriously using piracy of fights as a reason for why it is or isn’t “worth complaining about” lower-than-usual PPV quality?
WEC puts the #1 Featherweight & Bantamweight Fighters in the world on free TV. And UFC money is what funded (and might still) those cards.
The top fighters in lesser known weight classes have fought on free TV for boxing too. On Versus in the last 45 days, no less!
And for the UFC Fight Nights vs. HBO Boxing…. It’s Apples to Oranges. UFC puts on 2 to 3 hours of solid fights with Top 30 level fighters. HBO Boxing gives you one, maybe two fights.
Most HBO cards run about 2 hours and feature no commercial breaks. You’re right: they don’t often feature top 30 fighters. Top 30 fighters fighting each other is for ESPN2 and Azteca America.
“Are you seriously using piracy of fights as a reason for why it is or isn’t “worth complaining about” lower-than-usual PPV quality?”
What is your complaint again? That you have to pay to see it? The fights are available on UFC.com for a couple dollars too almost immediately if you have such a high standard of honor.
You keep changing the goalposts because your complaints make no sense. The bad cards happen when the stars don’t align, why do you suppose they stacked 92 even though they have no competition? Why do you suppose they are trying desperately to get Rampage and Rashad to fight on short notice in March? The only meaningful criticism is they do a bad job spreading out their talent on PPV. The idea that they’re trying intentionally to give out weak cards due to lack of competition is completely bogus.
Their whole model is based on convincing people to pay for shows. If you’re not convinced, you don’t need to buy it. This, like UFC 80, is just an additional show inbetween two big ones aimed at building a smaller European market and giving the hardcores more fights.
2 fights on HBO. That’s it. Typical Fight Night, we see around 5 or 6. And Top 30 talent for MMA is about the same as Top 10 talent for Boxing. With all those weight classes, if they actually condensed a few of them…. the “prospects” they show on BAD, wouldn’t be borderline Top 10 when they are first introduced.
This is why I say it’s Apples to Oranges.
2 fights on HBO. That’s it. Typical Fight Night, we see around 5 or 6.
There’s 5-6 because the fights are generally shorter.
And Top 30 talent for MMA is about the same as Top 10 talent for Boxing. With all those weight classes, if they actually condensed a few of them….
Or if there weren’t like, tens of thousands more boxers than MMA fighters.
the “prospects” they show on BAD, wouldn’t be borderline Top 10 when they are first introduced.
You want to point out some examples? Thinking back, I’d say guys like Gamboa, Kirkland, or Paul Williams were close to it or already there. Certainly a lot closer than a Josh Burkman.
In my household, HBO is exclusively for True Blood and Bill Maher…not for watching 96-pound Latinos swat at each other with massive leather-bound pillows.
If the UFC wants to put on 22 cards that are slightly watered down, versus 14 slightly more stacked cards…..
….then just pick and choose the events you watch. Not a huge deal and not worth microanalysing the company, trying to pinprick holes in their marketing strategy, talking about how they are doing the wrong thing. Because if that’s the angle people want to take (and some seem to be doing that), then they have no case. The UFC is selling good ppv numbers for all their shows currently. It’s working. When it doesn’t, they’ll probably change course.
Dont forget guys that zuffa had originaly planned to show 93 for FREE on spike but spiketv vetoed it for financial reasons? it’s also being heavily rumore all over the net that rampage/rashad will be the main for 96 as well as silva/lietes. does anyone really believe that the ufc would actually have carwin/gonzaga as the main for 96? the ufc is not stupid.
“The “free market” crowd (for lack of a better label) essentially argue against intelligent analysis of any kind. In their circular world, if PPVs are sold, the product is good, period, and anyone who criticizes the product or points to dangers down the line is some kind of elitist. This is a mindless position to take. The reason we go to sites like Fight Opinion is because we have opinions and want to exchange them with others.”
Nonsense. Opinions are perfectly valid, as long as there is some reasoning behind them. “Hendo vs. Franklin is a shitty main event” is not valid reasoning, because of the free market response. There already exists a response in the market to the fact that Hendo vs. Franklin is a main event. If its a bad main event, it will sell few PPVs, and the UFC will adjust accordingly. Basically, Ivan keeps moving the goalposts to find something to bitch about, because he isn’t ever happy. His being unhappy is not any sort of insightful commentary. Its just whining.
D. Capitated’s responses are much more insightful. I think he’s a bit of a negative nancy too, but he’s a smart, contributing negative nancy.
Anyway, there are a few more comments I want to add. The market structure of MMA will make it impossible to EVER make Ivan happy, because the number of top-level “interesting” fighters has a limit, but it is also controlled by how much attention each fighter receives. Gonzaga vs. Carwin, for instance, would be a much more interesting fight if Carwin had been present on the main cards of the cards he was on. It is directly influenced by how much focus fighters get, which is controlled by the number of cards and main event bouts.
Limiting the number of cards to those with “acceptable” main events would limit the number of quality events, which would limit the number of fighters getting attention, which would limit the number of fighters worthy of main-event status, and so forth. Vicious circle.
Once again, main event quality is not a function of the UFC. Its a function of the structure of MMA.
I think the UFC is about 4-5 main event level fighters short of never having to worry about stuff like this. Lucky for them, it looks like they’re gonna pull Rashad/Rampage out of their hat and make it a good show. Anyway, for all the complaining, and I have complained too, the Spring looks like:
96: Rashad-Rampage, Carwin-Gonzaga
97: Leites/Silva, Chuck/Shogun
98: Brock/Mir, Hughes/Serra
Those aren’t a bad set of main events by any means.
If the UFC can put together Evans-Jackson on the March PPV event, that will be a great three-month stretch of PPV main events in March, April, and May.
Also, in response to this from “Michaelthebox”:
“…the number of top-level “interesting” fighters has a limit, but it is also controlled by how much attention each fighter receives. Gonzaga vs. Carwin, for instance, would be a much more interesting fight if Carwin had been present on the main cards of the cards he was on. It is directly influenced by how much focus fighters get, which is controlled by the number of cards and main event bouts.”
You would be right about the main card bouts to build up fighters if I was saying that they should cut back on the number of PPV events AND the number of TV events, but it’s just the PPV events that I think maybe they should cut back on slightly (and I do mean slightly, maybe from 12-13 per year to 10-11 per year).. A cable TV event with a decent-but-not-great main event is perfectly fine by me. A $45 PPV event with a decent-but-not-great main event is what I object to, although I suppose I should check with you in the future to see if I’m allowed to have that opinion or to express that opinion. If, theoretically, they were to cut two PPV events per year from their schedule, they could still have the same number of total main card slots in which to showcase fighters if they were to also add two TV events per year to their schedule (or, for that matter, they could add more than that). They run into these problems where they are scrambling to fill all of the PPV main event slots with great fights, but that would happen less often if they didn’t have quite as many PPV main events that they had to book in the first place.
“If, theoretically, they were to cut two PPV events per year from their schedule, they could still have the same number of total main card slots in which to showcase fighters if they were to also add two TV events per year to their schedule”
The problem is that 90% of the UFC’s revenue comes from their PPV events. Your plan is basically chopping 15% off their bottom line. It’s like asking the NFL to cut back to 14 games or the NBA to cut back to 70 games.
The UFC is merely trying to supply consumer demand. The demand is obviously there, just look at the buy rates. Until those numbers start dipping, I think any conjecture about over-saturation or some hypothetical accumulation of fan angst is unwarranted.
But Ivan, it once again comes back to your opinion of what makes a PPV-worthy main event. The whole point is that the UFC doesn’t cater to one specific opinion. They load up some cards, like 92, to draw in everybody, even the people who only buy a PPV once a year. Other PPVs are aimed only at those who buy whatever is put out there because they have plenty of money and love the UFC product; cards like the Europe cards are generally built that way. You aren’t obligated to buy UFC 93. And all the people who would be disappointed by the quality? They aren’t buying it either, so no worries for them.
The UFC is not going to standardize their product to your expectations. They provide a product that caters to different levels of demand in the market, and the market responds by purchasing the PPVs it desires. You want more free events? Thats fine, but don’t couch it as being about what the UFC SHOULD do. What they do works just fine.
Josh Gross put it a lot better than I was able to (he’s making a slightly different, but similar point about PPV events): http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/josh_gross/01/13/ppv-saturation/index.html?eref=writers
I think the only real solution to this is that we all agree that Hendo/Franklin should be a Spike TV card. I’m pretty sure Spike TV just wouldn’t give them the TV time for it. If not, well, they are foolish.
Oh Ivan. I kind of want to give you the whole ‘get a tape recorder and record everything you say and listen to it’ advice, but I know that it will fall upon deaf ears. “Oh Ivan, you blowhard!”
The problem is that 90% of the UFC’s revenue comes from their PPV events. Your plan is basically chopping 15% off their bottom line. It’s like asking the NFL to cut back to 14 games or the NBA to cut back to 70 games.
Again, the problem with that strategy is that the UFC has gotten offers to be televised elsewhere, possibly for more money. They traded it for control. Is this a canny move that benefits the UFC right now? Sure. Over the long term, the only other PPV properties that we can look at are boxing (slow slide in viewers, often attributed to PPV) and wrestling (slow slide in viewers, no one has bothered to consider PPV’s role).
The UFC is merely trying to supply consumer demand. The demand is obviously there, just look at the buy rates.
The buyrate for this show will probably be in the 200Ks as previous mediocre UK cards were. Will that prove anything to anyone? Probably not.
For following the sport for so long, Gross is still not a very good journalist.
1. Each PPV is $45, not $50. I have not heard of one cable provider who is charging $50.
2. He is putting UFC 94 and Affliction 2 in the same boat, and acting as if UFC 93 is the outcast. If anything, both Affliction & UFC 93 are on the same boat, and UFC 94 is the must buy PPV.
3. Gross is the guy who has always yelled for “MORE COMPETITION”. Now we get it, and he wants to complain about more PPV money? Give me a break. More proof that his model of doing things is not good. It is proven by his very own article.
I’m pretty sure Gross threw UFC and Affliction in the same boat, 45, because he was writing about MMA, and both are MMA organizations. I dunno, you could have read the article.
I did.
” Billed as a “dream card” for longtime MMA fans, UFC 93 feels more like a speed bump on the way to Jan. 24’s heavyweight showdown between Fedor Emelianenko and Andrei Arlovski, and the following week’s mega-fight pitting B.J. Penn against Georges St. Pierre.”
The way he wrote the article, he is putting Affliction and UFC 94 in the same boat. As if they are the same quality of cards. This just isn’t true.
It should have really said, both UFC 93 AND Affliction 2 feel like speed bumps on the way to UFC 94.
You might want to read both the articl and my response again. It’s all very clear.
Yeah, well, Gross considers a fight with the top and (in his esteemed opinion) second best heavyweight on par with GSP/Penn. I guess this is where you make the argument that Fedor really needs to prove his worth against Frank Mir.
You peope still trying to hold onto the myth that Arlovski is Top 3, after beating the best that the IFL had to offer?
D.Cap,
The UFC passed on CBS deal not for control, but because of money. The deal was pretty close to that of the one that Elite got.
I do think the HBO deal was because of control, but the bulk of the HBO folk did not even want the UFC. Would you have given production control to a station whose politics could see your product in the hands of those that dislike you and your company?
The HBO deal would was nowhere near the revenue of the PPVs. It would have been cards that lie between UFN quality and that of PPV.
I think that we will eventually see the UFC will a second television deal for these kinds of shows, with the number of ppvs staying somewhere around 10-12.
But network television is going to have to embrace MMA, not throw it a bone like CBS did. The attitude of “We will allow you to be on our network, you are so lucky.” That is not going to get the UFC, or any other smart promoter, on board.
Yep.
CBS basically bent ProElite over, gave ‘em a proper buggering, and then tossed them some spare change for the cab ride home. In the process, they gained a pretty substantial ownership stake in the company and pressure ProElite into some horrible decision (ie … the second CBS show). No wonder the UFC wanted no part of that deal.
With HBO, the UFC had one ally (CEO Chris Albrecht) within the company. Everyone else, especially the guys running HBO Sports, was openly hostile towards the idea of MMA on HBO. When Albrecht’s career went down in a blaze of alcohol-induced domestic violence, the remaining folks at HBO scuttled any plans for MMA on the network.
Thank GOD the UFC passed on the HBO deal. Could you imagine the nightmare of giving up control of your product to a company that despises what you do? The UFC dodged a serious bullet there IMO.
For the record Time Warner adds $10-$15 in license fees and taxes to MMA and boxing PPVs in New York. I know this doesn’t affect everyone, but since comment 77 mentioned never having heard of it I thought I’d bring it up.
You peope still trying to hold onto the myth that Arlovski is Top 3, after beating the best that the IFL had to offer?
Arlovski, winner of his last 3 in the UFC, and the #1 contender in the heavyweight division when he departed? If only he had lost to a 2-1 former pro wrestler….
The UFC passed on CBS deal not for control, but because of money. The deal was pretty close to that of the one that Elite got.
The CBS deal isn’t the only one that fell apart over control. You know that.
I think he got the $50 figure because the HD versions of the events can be more than that, and there are also those damned “special event fees” from Comcast, Time Warner Cable, etc.
The best guy he has beaten in the last 3 years is Werdum. That does not make him Top 3.
And you can throw around that Pro Wrestling insult about Lesnar all day, but the guy beat Herring & Couture in back to back fights, and I would bet my money on him beating Mir next. The guy is the real deal. And last time I checked, I’m not ranking him Top 3 in the world either.
Let’s say Arlovski is ranked #4 and is indeed “not top 3″ at the present time. I would say that a fight between the #1-ranked heavyweight in the world and the #4-ranked heavyweight in the world is still a pretty big fight. In terms of the comparison that you made, I’d say that main event is a heck of a lot closer to St. Pierre vs. Penn than it is to Franklin vs. Henderson.
That’s if your article or point is primarily about the PPV main events, as Gross’ is. If one is talking about the whole entire card, then the Affliction event becomes a lot less impressive (especially because of Barnett’s opponent being Yvel), and the UFC event becomes a lot more impressive (especially because of Machida vs. Thiago Silva in a battle of undefeated, top-ten-ranked fighters).
But ultimately, I think the point of Gross’ article was not, “X event is better than Y event,” it was that there are too many PPVs and that if this continues, it’s going to catch up to the MMA industry at some point like it did with the boxing industry.
Control of production was a significant factor in negotiations with CBS and HBO, as well as being a significant factor in preliminary negotiations not getting very far with NBC or ESPN. It is very important for the UFC to have control of production (ie, like a pro wrestling company does), as opposed to giving that up to the networks (ie, like every other sport does, including the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, etc).
(I should have worded it that the UFC feels it’s very important for them to retain control of production)
Arlovski isn’t Top 5. I’ve had this debat before. Others agree with me. Some don’t.
For the PPV price… Not sure where you people live, but I have Comcast and don’t get any special fees whether it’s for regular or HD PPV. The price tag is $45.
Also, Gross’s point is just not about the main events. The article specifically talks about the undercard of UFC 93 as a reason for not purchasing the PPV.
And this is why I am bashing Gross on this one:
“3. Gross is the guy who has always yelled for “MORE COMPETITION”. Now we get it, and he wants to complain about more PPV money? Give me a break. More proof that his model of doing things is not good. It is proven by his very own article.”
He is a walking contradiction. All he ever spewed for 2 years on Sherdog Radio was how the UFC needs competition. Well, we have that now… And he is complaining about it. Sounds like he just can’t be happy with the UFC.
*********
As for the reasons why the UFC is not on HBO or Network TV. Do we really have any true confirmation of the negotiations. I know Meltzer has discussed it in the past, but no difinitive information has come out to what exactly broke down talks.
If you remove the Affliction PPV from that article entirely (if it weren’t happening), I think his point would still stand about too many PPVs and the long-term risks that this poses for the industry.
If you remove Affliction from the equation, the UFC is doing exactly 4 PPV’s in the first 4 months of the year. If UFC 94 was one day later, it would be one for each month through April. That’s not a big deal, especially when Zuffa is giving away 6 free cards during that same time period.
And if you it over the course of 15 years, the UFC only really averages a PPV show once every 2.5 months! Oh, 45.
Can’t find a way to have a legit response so you have to make a joke?
During 2008, the UFC offered only one paid event per month. The last time (before UFC 93/94) that Zuffa offered two PPV’s in the same month is… Yep, you guess it… Never.
There are no signs of weakening. Even if Meltzer’s numbers ren’t perfect, it shows an UPWARD trend of PPV Buys, not a downward. Zuffa likely expects around 200,000 for events like UFC 93. And most fans are going to pick and choose their events anyways and purchase anywhere from 2 to 6 a year, depending on the cards.
We get that, 45. Hey, HBO’s two biggest years for total buys came in the last 4 years also. Yet, somehow, you’re the first to say its dying?
“Hey, HBO’s two biggest years for total buys came in the last 4 years also. Yet, somehow, you’re the first to say its dying?”
ODLH can’t fight forever. Heck, after watching his last fight, it looks like his career as an elite level competitor is already over.
Excluding ODLH, boxing’s recent PPV numbers have been abysmal. I think that is where the ‘boxing is dying’ talk comes from. There is no one waiting in the wings to carry the load after Oscar retires.
Mayweather/Hatton did better than, what, all but 2 MMA PPVs ever? And don’t give me that he’s “retired”. His reps are already out hustling for a fight with the Hatton/Pacquiao winner.
Ivan,
One of the execs at CBS once made a public statement that control was not the reason the UFC was not on CBS.
From what I had heard, both the UFC AND CBS acted as though the other was lucky to be talking to them.
The numbers were nowhere near being close.
I think the talk of the “death” of boxing is overplayed.
The truth is somewhat closer to the fact that boxing has never truly achieved its “life.”
People talk about the 2 million or so PPV buys that top boxing cards get as proof that MMA isn’t competing. In truth, boxing, if it were well run, would AVERAGE 2 million buys, and peak closer to 6 million or more. At some point, probably not too far away, the UFC will surpass boxing, and just keep going.
Jeremy, again: The UFC has dealt with more networks than CBS. There was a dance that went for a solid 8 months with HBO. Why did that break down? Why didn’t they bounce on over to ESPN?
Maybe if they weren’t so committed to doing everything themselves, they could get a network to pick up the tab of production for something like a weekly fight show. But they’re not willing to go along with that. I’ve talked to people who get their wonderful press passes for the UFC and they say that backstage, the company frankly is somewhat worried about finding programming to fill the void for TUF when its finally phased out. Their hope is that UFC Primetime can do it, but I have my doubts that a show without any fights is gonna be able to keep them going over the long run.