As opposed to forum-dwellers talking like they know how much fighters used to make from sponsors pre-Reebok?Give me a source for this. Because last I can recall from that podcast is Schaub talking out his ass, Schaub saying he can produce proof, and then it was never heard of again.
Don’t like it then don’t sign the bout agreement you fuckin goof!
Thabks for the link TS. I hadn’t seen this.
But am I the only one who feels like TS is making a mountain out of a molehill?
I have little doubt the UFC made a policy change that didn’t help fighters. I get that.
But compared to the mandatory likeness rights policy changes, sponsor tax, and a handful of other financial policy changes over the years, on a scale of 1 to “UFC fucked over the fighters again”, this feels like it’s about a 1.5....
what does nfl have in place ?
basketball ?
just curious
The U.S. law on this is based on a preponderance of evidence. It's absolutely a check in the employee box, but there's no single policy that means yes/no you are an employee/contractor. The law in the U.S. on this is pretty bad, which is why it's constantly being litigated. I'm not the biggest fan of U.K. law, but they handle this much better. You can go onto an online government website, answer a series of questions, and it'll plug it into an algorithm and spit out a legally binding decision as to whether it's an employee or independent contractor arrangement. In the U.S., you pretty much have to file a lawsuit and go before a judge to get a binding decision.
yeh, they are far better off getting 1k/1k in Bellator
people are queing up to get in the UFC..
Notice the shit he post only benefits the company bottom line and not the fighters?@FrankieNYC Insight?
Notice the shit he post only benefits the company bottom line and not the fighters?
when rebook was first introduced and dana was told by literally fucking everyone on the planet that this screws the fighters over and it's a shitty deal... he responded with "what are you talking about? this is a great deal for rebook, you goofs!"I really wanna see the reasoning behind this and someone trying to defend it.
All sponsors; it demonstrates how terrible the Reebok deal was if a fighter outside the top ten can get at least $100,000 per fight, but the deal was never brokered with the fighters in mind, it was brokered to make the UFC look more mainstream and less like a niche product so that when they sold the company they'd get a better offer.
Except that's not happening and it's not Reebok withholding any money, it's the UFC. Reebok was never giving out checks to individual fighters, the money was always in UFC's hands and they distributed it out.If u have fighters wearing ur gear and they write a big FucKk next to the Reebok name, the company has the right to withhold money.
If someone's reeboked out and says, these clothes I'm wearing should be burned and shit on with the rest of these stupid (insert race here) ... Reebok can withhold money
Nothing new here folks
Unionize
Schaub showed Rogan his tax returns to prove it (because Dana publicly called Schaub a liar). Belfort was making millions from sponsors, so Schaub making $100,000 is easy to believe. It's ironic that you claim that people don't know what's going on, then proceed to claim (without any kind of evidence whatsoever) that you know what Schaub's financials look like, and that he couldn't possibly be making that much.I think there's a lot of ppl who don't get what's going on here...
Firstly, I'm almost 100% sure it wasn't 6 figures per fight so to speak.. maybe averaged out with shorts, posters, ads, endorsements.. etc..