How much did UFC pay fighters in 2016 ... (details inside) !

[tithas]

I agree, 17% is still terrible, but if it went up 4% across the board for all fighters I'd still take that as a good sign (considering the new owners had spent $4 billion to buy the company, a pay raise for all fighters would've been surprising). However, I think that 3% increase has more to do with McGregor, Diaz, and Rousey.

4% across the board is likely considering entry pay went from 10k to 12k. That is a 20% increase on lower end fighters.

 

[FrankieNYC]

Oh yes, of course... my bad... I forgot to add fighter pay back on to the profit before I pulled the percentage.

Face Palm.

I did same thing when I reported 2015 was 13% until I re-looked
This numbers stuff can be confusing

 

[FrankieNYC]

4% across the board is likely considering entry pay went from 10k to 12k. That is a 20% increase on lower end fighters.

Issue is under WME a lot of the "bonuses" that Lorenzo was OK with DW giving were cut down
So guaranteed pay seems to have gone up, but a lot less "Here is $50k for a good fight" have stopped or cut down

 

[tithas]

U can’t just compare 8% to 17% though... how many of WWE wrestlers are splitting that 8%? UFC has at least 500 fighters... how many wrestler does WWE have? 100?

167ish on air personalities in raw/smackdown/205 live. 61ish on air personalities for NXT. So 228ish total on-air personalities.

 

[welcometohavoc]

Details on how much UFC & WWE pay to fighters/wrestlers

UFC paid 17% or $119 million up from 13% & $80 million in 2015

WWE as comparison paid 8% (as many know I have said prior)

Details at link


-

PS: If you like the info I bring & always brought to SD, show some support HERE & HERE

17% of what?

Gross revenue? Either way 17% is a joke considering A) The fighters ARE the company. Anyone anywhere could take those same fighters and do good business with them B) Those numbers are skewed because of fighters like Ronda and Conor, who probably account for a large % of that 17%

 

[acannxr]

17% of what?

Gross revenue? Either way 17% is a joke considering A) The fighters ARE the company. Anyone anywhere could take those same fighters and do good business with them B) Those numbers are skewed because of fighters like Ronda and Conor, who probably account for a large % of that 17%

I think fighters should receive 75% of the profits; 25% profit margin for companies is considered healthy.

 

[welcometohavoc]

@FrankieNYC on fire with these threads!

Fighter pay needs to be higher obviously

500 fighters on the roster, UFC could easily afford to pay everyone a minimum $100,000

I think fighters should receive 75% of the profits; 25% profit margin for companies is considered healthy.

I'd be fine with 60/40 but the UFC and most companies will never give employees that much

 

[acannxr]

500 fighters on the roster, UFC could easily afford to pay everyone a minimum $100,000


I'd be fine with 60/40 but the UFC and most companies will never give employees that much

Golden Boy promotions pays headliners that kind of money (even the ones who don't draw a lot of money).

 

[SammyPops]

Why compare to WWE and not NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB?

 

[FrankieNYC]

Why compare to WWE and not NBA, NFL, NHL, MLB?

Did you click the link?

 

[MessiJAH]

Funny thing is that when it's convenient the UFC gets compared the WWE and not the NFL or NBA. When clowns want to say its the realest thing its fuck WWE, and MMA has better athletes then Boxing and this and that sport, that its tougher etc etc. When its how much of the pie the company gives fighters its "if you look at the WWEs figures here as compared to UFC..." I still remember Lorenzo saying the UFC split revenue with talent similar and competetively to NFL and the other sports.

God MMA media is just mouthpiece trash, and then its the shill posters...

 

[Myrddin Wild]

Plus the other sports leagues are taxpayer subsidized and tax exempt for the most part.

Wow, I didn't know that. There's a huge difference there in this case.

So how would the UFC get into that racket? They could save a bundle. I would think Ari would be up on all that if it were possible & so maybe that's coming?

 

[FrankieNYC]

Wow, I didn't know that. There's a huge difference there in this case.

So how would the UFC get into that racket? They could save a bundle. I would think Ari would be up on all that if it were possible & so maybe that's coming?

I THINK a lot is due to revenue they bring into the home city.
They get deals from areas to bring teams

 

[Aslan]

Details on how much UFC & WWE pay to fighters/wrestlers

UFC paid 17% or $119 million up from 13% & $80 million in 2015

WWE as comparison paid 8% (as many know I have said prior)

Details at link


-

PS: If you like the info I bring & always brought to SD, show some support HERE & HERE

Like we supposed to know who you are ts? The answer is no. We don’t care about your precious numbers.

 

[tithas]

I THINK a lot is die to revenue they bring into the home city.
They get deals from areas to bring teams

Exactly. Stadiums, arenas, etc are always heavily subsided, if not outright built, by cities. This means a NFL owner can have free room/board and only have to worry about the operating cost associated with people instead on the long term ones associated with land. The cities feel it is a deal because they get a portion of revenue generated in addition to the local tax dollars for outsiders visits. Cities can also long term finance these tings using bonds and the like whereas a owner may not have the same options available.

 

[FrankieNYC]

Exactly. Stadiums, arenas, etc are always heavily subsided, if not outright built, by cities. This means a NFL owner can have free room/board and only have to worry about the operating cost associated with people instead on the long term ones associated with land. The cities feel it is a deal because they get a portion of revenue generated in addition to the local tax dollars for outsiders visits. Cities can also long term finance these tings using bonds and the like whereas a owner may not have the same options available.

Thanks for verifying
Also for always contributing content

 

[tithas]

500 fighters on the roster, UFC could easily afford to pay everyone a minimum $100,000


I'd be fine with 60/40 but the UFC and most companies will never give employees that much

Most big companies pay under 20% of revenue to it's employees. Some are as low as 10%. Granted these are the MDdonalds, walmarts and apples of the world but that is basically the target for major companies. Also increasing minimum pay to 100k might be obtainable but it will drive up cost dramatically. In 2016 an average of 3-5 fighters on each event were at the minimum of 10k/10k. To increase that to 100k flat would cost the UFC 13.94M (41 events * 4 fighters * 85k(15k average)). That is just bottom tier fighters. Increasing minimums to 100k could potentially cost 100M in a single year unless they increased prices or dropped all higher tier fighters to around the same. People like to throw random numbers around but have zero clue what those numbers mean to a profit oriented business's bottom line.

 

[Le Choad]

1. Why would it be better if fighter pay was spread out evenly across the board?
2. Fighter pay seems to be increasing across the board, although clearly at different rates.
3. The UFC is the cutting edge of rising fighter pay in MMA and had been for some time.
4. UFC should pay their fighters more imo, but calling it dog shit is melodramatic.

1. Nobody said it would be better. I was pointing out that a 4 percent rise in total fighter pay over the entire year could be (and was) easily skewed by a couple ppv's.
2. Nobody is disputing that.
3. Nobody is disputing that.
4. If you don't think that making sub 50k a year to potentially get your skull caved in and risk life altering injuries in the "super bowl" of mma (Dana's words, not mine) isn't dog shit, then I don't really have much more to say to you.

Professional bowlers, dart players, pool players, fucking golf players all make more than 20 percent of the revenue of their respective leagues. Fighter pay is a joke.

 

[tithas]

1. Nobody said it would be better. I was pointing out that a 4 percent rise in total fighter pay over the entire year could be (and was) easily skewed by a couple ppv's.
2. Nobody is disputing that.
3. Nobody is disputing that.
4. If you don't think that making sub 50k a year to potentially get your skull caved in and risk life altering injuries in the "super bowl" of mma (Dana's words, not mine) isn't dog shit, then I don't really have much more to say to you.

Professional bowlers, dart players, pool players, fucking golf players all make more than 20 percent of the revenue of their respective leagues. Fighter pay is a joke.

Does bowling, darts, pool and golf have to pay site fees to reserve the various venues they use to the tune of multi millions in a year? Do they have to pay 6% of every gate to a state AC for every event? Do they have to employ 200+ full time employees every year? Do they have to maintain multiple offices around the world (granted WME reduced this footprint)? Do they have to have massive insurance polices for every event they host? The operating cost to run the UFC is much higher than people can imagine. Fighter pay could be better but to assume it is "garbage" is just ignorance on not knowing how much it cost to run a global company and still generate a profit. In 2015 the profit margin as 25% in 2014 it was 16.5%, so lets not pretend that the UFC is making 50%+ profits. Revenue compaed to pay is only one factor, especially in a non-mature industry still expanding and spending to expand.

 

[welcometohavoc]

Most big companies pay under 20% of revenue to it's employees. Some are as low as 10%. Granted these are the MDdonalds, walmarts and apples of the world but that is basically the target for major companies. Also increasing minimum pay to 100k might be obtainable but it will drive up cost dramatically. In 2016 an average of 3-5 fighters on each event were at the minimum of 10k/10k. To increase that to 100k flat would cost the UFC 13.94M (41 events * 4 fighters * 85k(15k average)). That is just bottom tier fighters. Increasing minimums to 100k could potentially cost 100M in a single year unless they increased prices or dropped all higher tier fighters to around the same. People like to throw random numbers around but have zero clue what those numbers mean to a profit oriented business's bottom line.

in 2016, Lorenzo said the company did about earned 600m in 2015. 2016 was a much better year according to Dana. So let's say 700m for 2016. which is a pretty conservative number.
17% of 700m is 119m. Divided equally among the 500 or so fighters, that would roughly translate to almost 400k per fighter.

So even with their current profit sharing model, they could EASILY afford to pay everyone at least 100k minimum.

Now factoring in not all fighters make the UFC the same amount of money, even if you raised the profit sharing to 25% you'd not only be able to pay every UFC fighter 150k minimum but still have over 100m to give to bigger draws.