« Scott Coker’s recent comments indicate Strikeforce has ideas but not necessarily the execution to implement them; Update: Kazuo Misaki takes Sengoku booking in August | Home | Strikeforce issues release of curious Fedor interview »
West Virginia Law School presentation on MMA and potential for a fighter’s association or union
By Zach Arnold | June 21, 2010
Download the presentation in PDF format here (5 MB) (Rob Maysey)
The document is a couple of months old, but it’s definitely worth going out of your way to read (as opposed to not reading and replying immediately to this subject).
The presentation starts off with talking about Zuffa’s dominance (UFC & WEC) has essentially ‘distorted’ the marketplace and how the athletic commissions are behaving these days.
(This past weekend did inflict some damage on the perception of commissions. I’m a believer in good governance and having effective athletic commissions and right now neither is currently in play.)
The PDF goes over how much UFC makes live (for casino shows they do site fees), the PPV buy rate estimates, and how much fighters make as a % compared to what Zuffa generates in revenue. There’s no doubt that it costs more to pay real fighters as opposed to the amount WWE pays professional wrestlers, but WWE does pay royalty checks to wrestlers in certain areas that Zuffa does not. (Think: Video game.) One point brought up in the presentation is that boxing has a federal law requiring full compensation disclosure whereas with UFC that doesn’t exist (there’s shower room bonuses, etc.)
Several pages of the presentation focus on Big John McCarthy and the fallout he’s had since no longer working Zuffa events.
There is plenty of focus on the Association of Boxing Commissions and what ideas they have for getting involved in the MMA business as far as weight classes, judging, and recruiting people into the administrative side of athletic commissions.
Virtually identical to boxing counterpart with 2 key differences: It does not contain an equivalent “mixed martial artist’s bill of rights” that is part of the boxing counterpart; and It deletes out medical disclosures required by federal law in boxing. Despite not providing any of the protections provided by Federal law to boxing, the California State Athletic Commission Informs Fighters Federal Law Requires National ID Card.
There is a lot more to the presentation that, for the average fan or for someone who doesn’t follow the MMA business, is a real eye opener (including focus on Jeremy Lappen and how he managed to wiggle his way into a position of overseeing amateur MMA in the state, which is crazy.)
Go out of your way to skim through the presentation and take a look at the bigger picture of the industry.
Topics: Media, MMA, Zach Arnold | 13 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |
There is a lot of good information in there, but Maysey obviously has an agenda to push as the founder of the MMAFA.
He brings up a lot of excellent points, but he also shows his bias by including completely irrelevant information such as Bloody Elbow calling the UFC bonus system ‘predatory’ or Yahoo choosing to boost their web traffic by using a ‘UFC’ tab rather than an ‘MMA’ tab. I also found it confusing why he chose to break down disclosed pay as a percentage of revenue when his very next point showed that disclosed pay is completely useless because of the UFC bonus system. All in all, I think Maysey is on the right track and that MMAFA has great potential, but the presentation could have been better if he had omitted the conspiracy theories and message board fodder.
A shorter, just the facts ma’am, presentation would have been more powerful IMO.
In your eyes, can a fighter’s association or union be developed in a way in which you could feel comfortable that an individual is not profiting from it?
Sure.
I don’t think Marvin Miller got rich developing the MLBPA or that Creighton Miller got rich forming the NFLPA.
The real problem Maysey is going to face is getting high profile athletes on board. All of the other pro sports unions were founded with the support of the elite athletes in their respective sports. Problem is, as Matt Lindland said best, MMA fighters are whores. Guys like Couture and Tito talked a good game about unionization for a while, but dropped the idea the second Zuffa backed up a Brinks truck to their doorstep. As long as elite fighters continue to only look out for #1, the other 95% of pro fighters are going to be stuck with no union at all or a flaccid one at best.
A LOT of assumptions and partial facts. Pathetic presentation for law school.
I’m pro UFC union…. But this presentation doesn’t have enough REAL data to make an accurate conclusion.
Big surprise here!
From a brief skim he’s using any and all information that’s available/reported. One of the biggest issues is that they’ve purposely made all financial information (salaries, side-letters, shower bonuses, PPV figures, merchandising, etc.) such a black box that the only way to get information is from these secondary sources (e.g. Athletic commission figures).
Not to mention one assumes that these slides are a merely a synopsis or a summary of a larger presentation that is/was made.
How one could deduce from only looking at power point slides on the internet that this is a “pathetic presentation” escapes me…but we’ll leave that to the apparent expertise of a substitute teacher.
And I’m in my mid 40’s too. You really are gullable.
There are a lot of things out there that aren’t full disclosed. Doesn’t mean people should be jumping to conclusions, which this clearly shows.
How about talk to some fighters off the record. Do some real research. Then I will care. If somebody is going to start a fighter’s union, they are going to have to ge many fighters talk off the record with some good documentation proof of what they are saying. Until then, a union has no chance of getting off the ground….
Like I said before, I’m pro union. I just think this is one half assed and irrational way of examining it.
So you’re in fact a billionaire business expert that sits on fictional boards and country hops from Dubai-to-Japan-to-Las Vegas and are bosom buddies with the Fertittas and DW just like mmalogic?!?!
Please…if you think I spend a millisecond trying to evaluate what you are passed your numerous anecdotal statements about being a substitute teacher you’re kidding yourself. Either you really are a middle-aged substitute teacher (most likely) or you’re an even bigger loser with so much time on your hands that you’ve created an internet persona that makes references to your job as a substitute teacher. Regardless, you’re so uninspiring you’ve left no one to even question you beyond your own claim that you are a substitute teacher…so chew on that for a minute.
And LOFL about talking to fighters off the record. I’m sure you’d be the first in line to bitch and moan about all the “unnamed sources” that were used to compile that research and how unreliable and/or unverifiable those numbers were too.
A company that keeps its salary information secret and makes its independent contractors sign confidentiality agreements only does so because they’re not proud of the truth.
That being said, even though a quote of mine is in this presentation, I disagree with the overall message and tone of the presentation. I can’t complain because I did make the quote, but I’d rather not be quoted in something like this without being asked when the context of the presentation as a whole is contrary to my perspective.
You are being naive if you really think that is the only reason that tactic is used.
COMPETITION
Say it. Read it. Spell it.
What the UFC does has much more to do with their competition then anything else.
Happens in most industries. Maybe not with salaries, but with a lot of information. There is a business necessity to keep these things under lock and key as much as possible.
1. The presentation just bashes the promotions. It does not show the benefit to the fighters. Which is the only reason to have a union.
2. It does not mention important facts…. Like Lesnar being paid $2 to $3 Million for UFC 100. He uses shaky references to hurt the organizations but not to help them.
3. The athletic comissions have nothing to do with the discussion of a union.
If don’t belive Rome’s quote was used out of context at all. I believed it to be directly relevant to the point being made, but if I was mistaken, I apologize to Rome.
http://www.bloodyelbow.com/story/2007/10/25/203449/75
As to the “tone and context,” any objections to the content? Any factual inaccuracies, misquotes, or anything of the like? Otherwise, it is hard to put the “tone” comment into perspective. What is it you objected to?
As mentioned as well, this is but a part of a larger presentation–it wasn’t meant to be stand-alone and complete on its own.
As to 45 Huddle, agreed! Thank goodness we are not a union, and our intentions are very different.
Thank you to Zach for posting.
[…] (via FightOpinion) No Comments […]