Bellator MMA land 'game changing' multi-year nine-figure deal with DAZN

Since UFC is doing something similar I feel more confident that it isn't just a panic move, but a smart move and future thinking.

What college students who move into their own home in 3 years will order cable?

Plus the $ figure isn't to be undervalued. That can help them get to the next level.

Broke college kids will be pirating bellator streams like crazy. I can't see hardly anybody coughing up 15 bucks a month to watch Kongo vs Ayala or something similar.
 
Broke college kids will be pirating bellator streams like crazy. I can't see hardly anybody coughing up 15 bucks a month to watch Kongo vs Ayala or something similar.

I meant the current generation of college students once they move into their own home and start making money.

I mean are we, or are we not moving away from cable television? Cause it feels like there's more cable cutters every year, and that the younger demographics are growing up to much more heavily favour subscription models like Netflix.

"2017 was the first year in history in which watching downloaded or streamed video was more popular than watching traditional TV among U.S. consumers aged 45 and under."

I see that only getting worse, and I think everyone else in the industry does too. There must be a reason why so many companies are making these same kinds of moves, not just Bellator.
 
Last edited:
Let's see how "great Bellator is" coming from you anti-UFC fans when you actually have to start paying for it.

It's a basic cable TV attraction right now but the narrative will change if people have to pay each month to watch events.
Bellator PPVs have bombed in comparison to the UFC. So would subscription numbers.
 
Let's see how "great Bellator is" coming from you anti-UFC fans when you actually have to start paying for it.

It's a basic cable TV attraction right now but the narrative will change if people have to pay each month to watch events.
Bellator PPVs have bombed in comparison to the UFC. So would subscription numbers.

Not saying its going to succeed for sure, but you throw in one month for free, and $9.99 a month after. 7 cards on DAZN if all 7 in different months you are talking about $60 after the free trial, which is still cheaper than 1 PPV to watch all 7.

Screenshot_20180627-112308.png
 
Since i got DAZN...i can not complain at all...

DAZN's first month is for free...btw

You also get alot of boxing PPV for free...plus BAMMA, Glory, EFC, M1, NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB, Rugby and so on...for 10 bucks
I’d drop 10 bucks on it, considering they offer some solid stuff. I’ve read that they also offer some of the better soccer leagues in the world

Boxing, mma, soccer, nba. That’s honestly enough to sell me. May not have bought it for Bellator alone, but that’s great value (granted it’s 10-15 a month)
 
Not that risky
They bought it for $2m
Dumped around 45m in it before seeing any kinds of return though right? I think I’m remembering the numbers right.

Gotta respect fertittas dedication when it mattered most.
 
Lol. I made the same argument regarding UFC going to paid streaming and you told me it was a good move.

First off, I never said this was a "bad deal" just the exposure is limited
Very different scenarios/deals though
ESPN owning ESPN+ means that the biggest sport network will be promoting UFC.
The exposure/promotion on ESPN is a huge part of the deal. ESPN is building up a whole MMA division because of the deal.
Also ESPN will be showing cards as well, so while the C-level shows will have less of an audience, the B-level shows are on a different platform that is bigger than FS1 by a large volume

If UFC took their biggest fight ever (what Coker is calling the card) & moved it to ESPN+, I would say it meant less exposure

You also need to understand the difference in the deals.
ESPN+ is paying UFC $150m for OTT alone & that is just US
Bellator sold their rights for $20m worldwide
 
Last edited:
This helps Bellator get out of the red, but this doesn't help them as far as exposure & making fans pay for content


The extra revenue should help them snag bigger names for their roster. And hopefully help them promote and build up more new stars
 
Dumped around 45m in it before seeing any kinds of return though right? I think I’m remembering the numbers right.

Gotta respect fertittas dedication when it mattered most.

Of course, but $50m is not a huge risk for UFC, as time proved.
But the narrative they spin is a fun one.
But they were making money yearly by 2004/5, that is incredibly fast
 
Last edited:
The extra revenue should help them snag bigger names for their roster. And hopefully help them promote and build up more new stars

Its more the rev helps them stay alive, which is the best thing
Trust that they will not spend $20m on talent
If they do they are back in the red
 
The usual suspects came in to crap on it.
Not saying they’re bad posters and not saying I don’t like them. Just saying they’re shills who want Bellator to fold.

Great news for Bellator.
 
Very different scenarios
ESPN owning ESPN+ means that the biggest sport network will be promoting UFC.
The exposure/promotion on ESPN is a huge part of the deal. ESPN is building up a whole MMA division because of the deal.
Also ESPN will be showing cards as well, so while the C-level shows will have less of an audience, the B-level shows are on a different platform that is bigger than FS1 by a large volume

If UFC took their biggest fight ever (what Coker is calling the card) & moved it to ESPN+, I would say it meant less exposure

You also need to understand the difference in the deals.
ESPN+ is paying UFC $150m for OTT alone & that is just US
Bellator sold their rights for $20m worldwide
Not really. When we talked the ESPN+ deal had just been made and there was zero talk about cards on anything other than ESPN+. 15 cards for 1.5 billion and this streaming deal forced UFC viewers to buy into yet another paid platform (besides PPV). I made the argument it was wiser for the UFC to put as much free content on cable TV to try and get massive exposure. When I said that you blew me off as someone who didn't know what they were talking about.

Now you're saying the same thing about Bellator. Essentially, getting a streaming service hurts their exposure.

If anything a larger company like the UFC needs more free exposure. Also, not all exposure is the same. ESPN talking about UFC isn't the same as free cards. They don't need more talk exposure they need more action exposure.
 
Its more the rev helps them stay alive, which is the best thing
Trust that they will not spend $20m on talent
If they do they are back in the red

DAZN helping 50 cent not have his car repo'ed like Tito too.
 
They don't need more talk exposure they need more action exposure.

I dunno about that part. Both of them could badly use more talk time on ESPN. Need them to talk into legitimacy, action would be found by now for those that want to see action.
 
Its more the rev helps them stay alive, which is the best thing

Well if that's true and DAZN is saving Bellator from folding, than the deal is of more importance, and a more massive positive than I was thinking.
 
I dunno about that part. Both of them could badly use more talk time on ESPN. Need them to talk into legitimacy, action would be found by now for those that want to see action.
Regarding the overall argument I am making the UFC needs more free fight exposure. Of course both Orgs could use more general exposure but if viewers are seeking out more UFC action they better be ready to plop down money for ESPN+.
 
Not really. When we talked the ESPN+ deal had just been made and there was zero talk about cards on anything other than ESPN+. 15 cards for 1.5 billion and this streaming deal forced UFC viewers to buy into yet another paid platform (besides PPV). I made the argument it was wiser for the UFC to put as much free content on cable TV to try and get massive exposure. When I said that you blew me off as someone who didn't know what they were talking about.

Now you're saying the same thing about Bellator. Essentially, getting a streaming service hurts their exposure.

If anything a larger company like the UFC needs more free exposure. Also, not all exposure is the same. ESPN talking about UFC isn't the same as free cards. They don't need more talk exposure they need more action exposure.

Nope you are off
While I don't remember the exact post, I do know how I felt about the deal & the info known
When the first announcement of ESPN+ was made they were paying UFC for Fight Pass content & paying way more than it was worth & charging 50% of FP.
UFC has 40+ shows a year, they were never putting their best content on OTT & they were still going to get big exposure from whomever they signed with for TV rights.
Also if you think ESPN wouldn't be promoting UFC after spending $150m per year, you are 100% wrong.

But AGAIN, I never said the DAZN deal was bad ... not remotely close
It was a deal Bellator needed & should be taking.
 
Well if that's true and DAZN is saving Bellator from folding, than the deal is of more importance, and a more massive positive than I was thinking.

Well they were in the red, we don't know if they were close to folding (or not) but if they are getting the rumored $20m they needed that definite money.
I think there is more in play then we know now though & optimistic its a good sign.
 
I dunno about that part. Both of them could badly use more talk time on ESPN. Need them to talk into legitimacy, action would be found by now for those that want to see action.

Some don't understand the difference in what ESPN+ is paying for
That is the c-level cards that only hardcores care to watch
The ESPN publicity is huge.
Also ESPN is a PPV partner as well, so they will be promoting the PPV on ESPN
 
Back
Top