• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

MMA Payout

The Business of Combat Sports

  • Home
  • MMA
    • UFC
    • Bellator
    • One
    • PFL
  • Boxing
  • Legal
  • Ratings
  • Payouts
  • Attendance
  • Gate

Bennett explains the need for Zuffa to co-promote

August 24, 2017 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

Earlier this week Nevada Athletic Commission Executive Director Bob Bennett explained why Zuffa needed to apply to be a co-promoter for Saturday’s Mayweather-McGregor fight.  He also offered an unfulfilling explanation of a promoter in Nevada.

Bennett’s explanation as to why Zuffa need to be a co-promoter for Saturday’s event is that it needed to pay Conor McGregor.  It pointed to a Nevada Athletic Commission regulation NAC 467.112(2) which prohibits a promoter from paying an unarmed combatant.  Here, Floyd Mayweather as promoter could not pay Conor McGregor due to this rule.  As such, Zuffa had to apply for the license.

In the interview with MMA Fighting, Bennett noted that Zuffa’s license as promoter does not specifically identify it as a boxing license but merely as promoter.  The importance of this is that it may or may not preclude Zuffa from availing itself to the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act.

Payout Perspective:

The timing of the application, the last commission hearing before the fight, seems curious to me considering Zuffa could have applied for this from the outset.  Moreover, it appeared that Zuffa would allow Mayweather and Showtime as the fight’s producer and PPV distributor to take the driver’s seat while Zuffa would assist on its platforms.  This new explanation seems viable, while at the same time seems to be a safeguard against any withholding of money by Mayweather Promotions.  At one point, I had believed that McGregor had his own promotion company affixed to this event.  Now, it seems that Zuffa is the one representing the MMA side of this fight.  It does seem interesting that Zuffa need not indicate what type of promoter it is.  Whether or not it is inferred that it is promoting a boxing match and automatically avails itself to the Ali Act is a question that I would like to be answered.  If it’s a loophole to avoid dealing with the Ali Act, it might raise some eyebrows.

Filed Under: Boxing vs. MMA, Mayweather-McGregor

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Featured

Johnson plaintiffs take a renewed aim at Dominance in antitrust lawsuit

Scott Coker returns to MMA

Conor McGregor returns July 11th

Keane’s attorneys fire back at Top Rank based on undiscovered evidence

White writes letter to Trump requesting change to law

UFC Freedom 250 kits revealed

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout
Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Rams trading for Myles Garrett just to watch the Seahawks hoist the Lombardi in SoFi is gonna make for some insane crashouts in LA 🤣

A shot to the nuts is always funny...except the dude that got hit.

Baseball Quotes @BaseballQuotes1

Dude fouled a pitch off his nuts and the camera cuts to the first baseman losing it 😂😂

DO WE GOT A POLYMARKET ON IF IRAN WILL BOMB SOMETHING DURING UFC WHITE HOUSE?

FIFA World Cup brings anticipation, criticism via @nwasianweekly

Some of the comments... :-)

MMA Payout @MMAPayout

Dana White Goes Card Shopping | Spends Over $36,000 On Rare Tom Brady, M... https://youtu.be/0Jgx9ubjnCA?si=Z3oGlNvHhk_1g1qe via @YouTube

Load More

Copyright © 2026 · MMA Payout: The Business of Combat Sports