Follow up on the Oklahoma PPV tax
May 23, 2012
Last week, the Oklahoma Attorney General decided that the state’s tax on pay per views was unconstitutional. MMA Payout takes a brief look at the potential legalities behind this question.
As those who have been following know, the UFC threatened to sue the state of Oklahoma for its 4% tax on pay per views. As a result, there was a possibility that the state would have to shut down the regulation of MMA events within the state. Since the initial issues, the state Attorney General reviewed the PPV tax and determined it could not defend the constitutionality of the law.
So we postulate on what the AG could have looked at to determine why it could not support the law.
State regulations and state taxes that burden interstate commerce can be challenged under the dormant commerce clause of the US Constitution if they place an undue burden on interstate commerce. Essentially, even if Congress has not acted with respect to a state/local law affecting interstate commerce, it would fall under the purview of federal law. Under the Dormant Commerce Clause, there is a strong presumption against state discrimination against out-of-staters. Any tax related to this would be struck down. The US Supreme Court has made it clear that states cannot use their tax systems to help in-state businesses at the expense of out-of-state businesses.
In general, taxes specific to out of state commerce are never allowed while nondiscriminatory taxes are much more likely to be permitted.
In Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady, the issue was whether a tax was unconstitutional because it was applied to an activity that was a part of interstate commerce. A tax was placed on Complete Auto as it hauled General Motors vehicles from out of state to in state car dealers. The US Supreme Court upheld the law and applied a four part test in concluding that a state tax does not violate the commerce clause. The four part test ask if:
1) It is applied to an activity with a substantial nexus to the taxing state;
2) It is fairly apportioned so as to tax only the activities connected to the taxing state;
3) It does not discriminate against out-of-staters; and
4) It is fairly related to services provided by the state.
Without going through an exhaustive analysis of the test (since the issue has been decided), arguably the state PPV tax could fall within the Complete Auto test if the tax was similarly applied to in-staters (#3, the nondiscrimination element). However, as explained in this article, most of the OK State Athletic Commission’s revenue came from out of state PPVs. The AG probably looked at the likelihood of successfully arguing in favor of the PPV tax and determined that the law could not be successfully defended.
Obviously, there were other legal issues it factored into its analysis but this was one of the likely hurdles the state decided it could not overcome.
DISCLAIMER
The information in this post is opinion only. In addition, and because this is my opinion, it is not intended to be (and is not) legal advice or an advertisement for legal services. This post provides general information only. Although I encourage interested parties to contact me on the subjects discussed in the article, the reader should not consider information on this site to be an invitation for an attorney-client relationship. I disclaim all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any contents of this post. Any e-mail sent to me will not create an attorney-client relationship, and you should not use this site to send me e-mail containing confidential or sensitive information.
Does Jones arrest hurt Jones, UFC?
May 20, 2012
Jon Jones was arrested on suspicion of DUI in upstate New York early Saturday morning as it was first reported by TMZ. The arrest blemishes the Jon Jones brand as he was easily becoming the face for the UFC.
Jones’ manager, Malki Kawa released a statement in lieu of the arrest:
“I can confirm that Jon Jones was arrested early this morning on suspicion of DUI. ”While the facts of this situation are still being gathered and situated, First Round Management fully supports Jon and we are asking for fans and media to respect the privacy of Jon and his family during this time.”
Although Jones will go through the legal process to determine the facts surrounding the arrest, TMZ reports that Jones crashed his Bentley into a pole and was arrested at the scene. He was bailed out by his mother a couple hours later.
Payout Perspective:
Drinking and driving is a serious offense. While we might say that it was a mistake and a stupid thing to do, many innocent people have died due to drunk driving. With that being said, there have been many professional athletes that have overcome offenses like this (and even worse crimes) without it affecting their careers. Will it hurt Jones’ sponsorship opportunities? It certainly will take him off of any beer ads. How about the blue chip sponsors? Depending on the facts of the case and how Jones proceeds with this (legally and from a PR standpoint), it may be just a blip on his screen. Jones may still have a chance at sponsor deals but he may have to wait a while. If you look at Ray Lewis and Kobe Bryant, they have been able to overcome off the field/court issues to regain sponsors. Tiger Woods lost major sponsors and his play has not helped him recover from the misdeeds of a couple years ago.
To a lesser extent, the Jones arrest may hurt the UFC. TMZ’s main picture of Jones has him adorned in a UFC shirt. Jones is one of the faces of the UFC and a likable figure that sponsors could gravitate toward. Remember, he stopped a purse snatcher and then won the world title in the same day. There aren’t too many American fighters that the UFC could promote. Certainly GSP and Anderson Silva are draws but Jones is the only true big star coming from the US right now. Will it hurt the UFC’s quest for blue chip sponsors? While it could harm the potential for sponsors, I don’t think it would affect it in any way. It probably would have been a bigger deal if he tested positive for an illegal substance.
It would be in the best interest of Jones to accept responsibility and move forward. He could cut PSAs about his mistake and the perils of driving while under the influence. Not sure if the UFC really needs to punish Jones right now. It wouldn’t hurt to remind its fighters to be responsible when out and have a driver if they decide to have a little fun.
UFC left off of ESPN salary list for lack of information
May 3, 2012
Earlier this week, ESPN released its list of highest paid athletes in sports. Notably, the list left off the sport of MMA and specifically the UFC due to the fact that it could not confirm salary data.
MMA Fighting wrote that Dana White is right and wrong with not releasing fighter salary data. It states that White is right to withhold salary info because it is private. Presumably, it protects the privacy of its fighters by not telling everyone how much they make per fight. However, there is a reason to release salaries:
Football, basketball and baseball are mainstream because they’re big business. And part of the reason we know they’re big business is because players salaries are made public.
It then argued a reason to make salaries public is to entice up and coming fighters.
And make no mistake, there are plenty of possible MMA stars who are on football fields. In many parts of the country, football and wrestling work together to create quality athletes. But then what happens? As the athlete progresses, he starts thinking about his future. And where is there a better chance for a future? Of course most, if given the opportunity, will move on to football. Why? Because long-term, there is a chance for a windfall payday. Even if it’s remote, there is a chance.
It uses the Jones brothers as an example. Two of the Jones brothers are now in the NFL while Jon is probably the most famous as the UFC champ. This example is flawed considering there is no evidence that Jon Jones was good at football (or any other sport) and chose MMA instead.
Payout Perspective:
MMA Fighting’s argument that the sport of MMA could lose out on potential athletes because of the lack of salary information is improbable. Most likely athletes will choose their profession based on the best possible chance of making it in the professional ranks of the sport. There are examples of athletes choosing a sport and then reversing course. (NFL First Rounder Brandon Wheedon played baseball a couple years before going back to play college football and getting drafted.) But that example is beyond the scope of the theory that someone will actually choose a sport based on how much you could make. There are instances of former football players taking up MMA after their pigskin career is done. But, that is after their first career is over.
Moreover, it’s not plausible to think that someone would choose a career in MMA over a career in NFL because money in MMA is not as good as that in professional football. Even without knowing the salary structure in MMA, one need only look to the salaries that NFL rookies will make to assume that if you had a choice to play professionally or fight in MMA, one would choose the NFL.
Transparency of the UFC’s salaries lends credibility to the sport based in part on the fact that the other sports are willing to reveal the way it pays its athletes. For the UFC to say “it’s none of your business” makes it seem that it is hiding something rather than protecting the privacy of its fighters. The ESPN OTL report builds on the premise that it is hiding something. Like it or not, that is how it is perceived.
UFC coaching certain fighters in interviews?
April 16, 2012
Cageside Seats reports on an interesting part of the job for the UFC fighter that is somewhat glossed over: the post-fight interview. Dave Metzler suggested on his radio show that the UFC assists certain wrestlers with talking points for their interviews.
The discussion of the post-fight interview comes from Saturday’s UFC on Fuel TV 2 in which many of the fighters interviewed deferred on the question: “who they want to fight next?” Many stated in one way or another “whomever the UFC wants me to fight.” Rather than demand or offend anyone, the fighters went with the easy, non-controversial way out of the question.
Dave Metzler suggested that the UFC gives tips to those fighters it can trust to keep the training a secret. Thus, when the fighter uses the training in an interview, it would seem organic, articulate and compelling.
Cageside Seats made the parallel that the UFC is similar to the WWE if it does coach fighters into promoting themselves or an upcoming fight or “fued.”
Payout Perspective:
When I read this my mind went to my favorite NBA interview session: Rasheed Wallace’s infamous “both team’s played hard” post game interview. A classic. Wallace’s post-game response to any question posed by a reporter was: “Both teams played hard.” It was hilarious considering it mocked the whole professional player-reporter interview process.
The fact that the UFC may or may not provide media training to certain fighters to generate compelling hype for future and/or upcoming fights is nothing earth shattering. Its media training. Certainly, it should provide that to all of its fighters but I don’t believe coaching an interview is nothing out of the ordinary. In defense of the fighters yesterday, most of them are fringe fighters. A loss or two and they may be out of the UFC. Thus, it makes sense that even when winning they’d want to be gracious and not offend anyone or call out a fighter. It’s not exciting, but at least they would not be labeled cocky.
From another perspective, the poor mic skills of some of the fighters may mean that the interviewer will have to do a little more to “put over” the fighter. No one is a miracle worker, so even Joe Rogan on his best night can’t help some guys. But, at least its better than watching a fighter pull out a list of sponsors it has to thank and advertise their after party.
Payout Perspective: UFC-FOX TV Deal Q1/2012 Performance Review
April 5, 2012
Last year, UFC and FOX announced a huge 7 year TV deal worth as much as $90-$100 million per year, which would move UFC programming from Spike TV to FOX, FX, FSN’s, and Fuel TV. Now that Q1 of 2012 has passed, we look back and analyze what type of impact UFC programming had on the FOX properties and how the new platforms have impacted the UFC.
NETWORK: FOX (112M households) Q1 Ratings:
UFC on FOX:
- UFC on FOX 1: Velasquez vs Dos Santos: 5.7M, 3.1 household rating (1 Hour Block, 1 Fight)
- UFC on FOX 2: Evans vs Davis: 4.7M, 2.6 household rating (2.5 Hour Block, 3 Fights)
Q1 Average: 5.2M … Trend: Down
****************************************************************************************
NETWORK: FX (99M households) Q1 RATINGS:
TUF LIVE:
- TUF Live Episode 1 – 1.3M
- TUF Live Episode 2 – 1.1M
- TUF Live Episode 3 – 1.2M
- TUF Live Episode 4 – 1.054M
Q1 Average: 1.16M Viewers, Trend: Down
TUF Season Average Rating (last 5 seasons) on Spike TV:
- TUF 14 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.5M viewers
- TUF 13 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.3M viewers
- TUF 12 Season on Spike TV (2010) Averaged 1.74M viewers
- TUF 11 Season on Spike TV (2010) Averaged 1.65M viewers
- TUF 10 Season on Spike TV (2009) Averaged 3M viewers
TUF Season Average (last 5 seasons) on Spike TV: 1.84M Viewers
Spike TV Comparable Trend: Down
UFC on FX:
- UFC on FX 1: 1.3M
- UFC on FX 2: 1.4M
Q1 Average: 1.35M Viewers, Trend: Up, Flat
UFN Average Rating (last 5 events) on Spike TV:
- UFN 25 on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.8M viewers
- UFN 24 on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 2.2M viewers
- UFN 23 on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.85M viewers
- UFN 22 on Spike TV (2010) Averaged 1.2M viewers
- UFN 21 on Spike TV (2010) Averaged 1.6M viewers
UFN Average (last 5 events) on Spike TV: 1.73M Viewers
Spike TV Comparable Trend: Down
UFC Primetime:
- “UFC Primetime: Diaz vs. Condit” (Episode 1): 657,000 viewers
- “UFC Primetime: Diaz vs. Condit” (Episode 2): 520,000 viewers
- “UFC Primetime: Diaz vs. Condit” (Episode 3): 442,000 viewers
Q1 Average: 540,000 Viewers, Trend: Down
UFC Primetime Debut Episode Ratings (last 5 events) on Spike TV:
- UFC Primetime: GSP vs Shields on Spike TV (2011): 610K viewers
- UFC Primetime: Lesnar vs Velasquez on Spike TV (2010): 974K viewers
- UFC Primetime: Rampage vs Evans on Spike TV (2011): 1.2M viewers
- UFC Primetime: GSP vs Hardy on Spike TV (2010): 1M viewers
- UFC Primetime: GSP vs Penn II on Spike TV (2009): 880K viewers
UFC Primetime Debut Episodes (last 5) Average on Spike TV: 933K Viewers
Spike TV Comparable Trend: Down, Flat
UFC on FX Prelims:
- UFC 142 Prelims: 880K
- UFC 143 Prelims: 1.4M
- UFC 144 Prelims: 1.5M
Q1 Average: 1.26M, Trend: Up
UFC Prelims Average Rating (last 5 events) on Spike TV:
- UFC 141 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.8M viewers
- UFC 139 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.2M viewers
- UFC 137 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.1M viewers
- UFC 136 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1M viewers
- UFC 135 Season on Spike TV (2011) Averaged 1.6M viewers
Previous 5 UFC Prelims Average on Spike TV: 1.34M Viewers
Spike TV Comparable Trend: Flat
FX & SpikeTV: 2012 (Q1) Primetime Vs. 2011 (Q1) Primetime :
FX
- Men 18-49= -20%
- Men 18-34= -21%
Trend: Down
Spike
- Men 18-49 = +4%
- Men 18-34= +7%
Trend: Up
****************************************************************************************
NETWORK: FUEL TV (36M Households) Q1 RATINGS:
UFC on FUEL:
- UFC on Fuel TV 1: 217,000
UFC on Fuel Prelims:
- UFC on FX1 Fuel Prelims: 148,000
- UFC on FOX 2 Prelims: 144,000
- UFC on FX 2 Fuel Prelims: 113,000
Q1 Average: 135,000, Trend: Down
UFC Tonight:
- UFC Tonight Episode 1: 39,000
- UFC Tonight Episode 2: 20,000
- UFC Tonight Episode 3: 61,000
- …
Q1 Average: 63,000, Trend: Up
Overall Q1 Ratings Analysis (Fuel TV PR):
- Fuel TV is television’s fastest-growing cable network this year, according to figures released by Nielsen Media Research. In both the Total Day and Prime Time, the network recorded the largest percentage increases of total viewers among all rated, ad-supported cable networks in the first quarter of 2012.
- Fuel TV continued its unprecedented ratings increases in March, following the growth trend that began in January when Ultimate Fighting Championship® programming began to dominate key day-parts. February was the network’s most-watched month ever, featuring its first live UFC fight, which delivered the channel its most-watched program, most-watched Prime Time and most-watched week.
- Fuel TV aired 233 hours of UFC programming in February and added another 213 hours in March. FUEL TV telecast 646 hours of UFC programming in the first three months of 2012.
- Q1 2012 was FUEL TV’s most-watched in network history, finishing up +100% in Total Viewers and up +125% in M18-49 vs. Q1 2011
- Q1 Prime Time viewership increased +200% in Total Viewers and +260% among M18-49 vs. the same quarter last year
- Q1 Late Night increased +222% on Total Viewers and +275% among M18-49 compared to Q1 in 2011.
Payout Perspective:
Making a conclusion as to whether the UFC and FOX TV deal is a success or failure based on only the Q1 ratings would obviously be premature, but it also doesn’t mean we can’t start to look at the performance of UFC content on the FOX platforms.
The obvious observations here after Q1 has to be how much UFC has helped out Fuel TV, not only in terms of ratings, but also increasing their reach from 30M to 36M since the TV announcement was made back in 2011. However, Fuel TV at the end of the day only reaches 1/3 of the households that Spike TV reached while still being one of the lowest rated networks in cable TV, so unless Fuel’s reach picks up – doesn’t look like that will be the case until the end of the year at the earliest – the UFC will consistently be placing the majority of their content on a channel that only reaches a fraction of what Spike TV gets.
FOX is doing a great job at exposing the UFC product to the masses, but the last event was actually a big drop-off from the first event as every fight went to a decision and almost tripled the length of UFC on FOX 1. Not to mention that four shows a year is just not enough frequency for the casuals. Getting mainstream sponsors for the FOX events has also not been as easy as was expected when the deal was made last year. The ratings drop of the second show caused for the UFC to create “fun and exciting” match-ups for UFC on FOX 3 rather than book big names in hope that casuals will tune in and stick around for “fan-friendly” and exciting booked fights.
FX and the newly revamped “TUF Live” were a big part of the TV deal with TUF being the key platform the UFC uses to create future stars and PPV draws. So far, the show has been a disappointment (in terms of ratings) with all-time rating lows for the series. Dana White and the UFC brass predicted that they could very well reach 3 million viewers for TUF on FX if they were getting around 1.5 million on Spike TV without any promotion. Well, that prediction hasn’t panned out yet, even with heavy promotion leading up the the debut on FX. More shocking is that after UFC moved to FX, FX network’s M18-34 and M18-49 demos have decreased compared to Q1 2011 while Spike’s have gone up. FX dedicating Friday nights as “UFC Nights”, a day which is notorious for bad ratings and when the M18-34 demographic is not at home in front of their TV sets, has also not panned out for the UFC yet. Moving the content to mid-week could be a solution, but FX is happy enough with the Friday night ratings since it’s an improvement from what they get with non-UFC content, so it looks like the UFC will have to ride this out for the time being.
There is something to be said about the simplicity of being a UFC fan and being able to find all the content you needed on one network. Now, with multiple platforms designated with different UFC content, fans are having a difficult time migrating from Spike TV (who will continue to air UFC content through 2012) to multiple FOX platforms. FOX only shows UFC events 4 times a year, FX only on Fridays and sometimes on Saturday, while Fuel TV has designated days where they show no UFC content at all despite airing over 200+ hours of UFC programming a month . The complexity for the typical MMA TV viewer has definitely increased since the deal, but regardless of the vast TV programming now available, MMA fans can always count on tuning in on Saturday nights – usually once a month – to catch a big PPV event. That is a consistent and simple message the UFC has promoted for years and one that still works. It gets hundreds-of-thousands of UFC fans pumped up for a UFC weekend. Sometimes, simplicity can be bliss.
NY Times writes about the MMA generation
March 17, 2012
The New York Times Fashion and Style section this week had a feature entitled, “The Fight Club Generation.” The article details the fascination of MMA with youths to young adults.
The article which reports at a regional MMA card in Atlantic City focuses on youth interest in mixed martial arts. The article refers to the movie “Fight Club” which starred Brad Pitt and Ed Norton as the inspiration for many fans of MMA today. Not sure if this is actually true of most young MMA fans as that movie was filmed in 1999. The mainstream popularity has only occurred in the past few years. The article later devolves with comparisons to the XFL and “The Godfather.”
But, it also identifies, that in general, most people 35 years of age and older are not fans of the sport. In fact, the NY Times states that horse racing and figure skating are more popular than MMA in this segment.
Payout Perspective:
Getting past some of the minutiae in the article, one of the interesting takeaways coming from it is looking at how young fans get interested in the sport. TapouT and Cage Hero are just a couple brands that have marketed MMA toward kids. Last October, Cage Hero rebranded itself with an eye toward kids. Having just attended a Jiu Jitsu tournament today and seeing so many kids under 10 in the sport one can see that grappling, and to a greater degree, MMA is a growing sport. With MMA taking off, it will be interesting to see if the UFC begins to reach out, with more targeted campaigns, to the under 18 demographic.
Can boxing make a comeback? More thoughts
February 19, 2012
Does boxing need pro wrestling hype to sell itself? Saturday night heavyweight fighter David Haye crashed a post-fight press conference and challenged heavyweight Dereck Chisora.
To bolster the spectacle, Chisora inevitably asked Haye to say something to his face and a fight ensued. While the video is not the best, punches were exchanged and Chisora threatened to shoot Haye after the melee subsided. For those not following the story, Chisora lost earlier in the night to heavyweight champion Vladimir Klitschko. Chisora had slapped Klitschko at the weigh-ins and then spat in the face of Klitschko prior to the fight. Unfortunately, for all of the antics, Chisora did nothing of note against Klitschko in the ring.
While the outside the ring hype garnered some press, it does little for the sport. Showtime actually had a good card on Saturday but a post-fight press conference brawl is more interesting to the casual sports fan.
Last week, we opined about the future of the boxing business and whether it would ever return to network television. Do antics like Chisora and Haye spark interest in seeing these two fight in the ring? In the UFC, we’ve seen out of Octagon confrontations to sell fights. Chael Sonnen is a prime example of this with his quasi-pro wrestling rants (e.g. UFC 136). There’s also Anderson Silva putting on a Jabbawockeez mask and getting into the face of Vitor Belfort last year at weigh-ins.
The problem is that most people are not aware of Chisora or Haye as they are British boxers that have fought exclusively in Europe. Thus, North American fans wouldn’t know these guys unless they are hardcore boxing fans and/or follow boxing in Europe. The fact is that there are few Heavyweight fighters from the United States that can challenge the Klitschkos.
But the issue with Saturday night’s brawl might not be that there was a brawl. It might be the fact that the Heavyweight champion of the world defended his belt in Germany and that the fight could only be seen online at Epix for those of us in North America. Or, if you were in Manhattan, the jumbo screen in Times Square. In fact, Alexander Povetkin and Vitali Klitschko, other claimants to a heavyweight title, also will fight overseas and on Epix. The Klitschkos are as popular in Germany as Jeremy Lin is to New York (there, I’ve satisfied the Lin requirement). So, its hard to argue that they fight anywhere else.
If boxing is going to make a comeback, it needs to develop a heavyweight division that is visible to North America. Being on HBO or Showtime would help as well. It appears that the Klitschko brothers have disappeared from the boxing landscape due to the fact they aren’t on one of the two big networks for fights. There are successful regional promotions, like Fight Club OC, that have maintained a steady fan base while promoting good fights. NBC Sports Network’s quarterly fight program could help if its willing to develop its fighters and back stories.
Getting back to the brawl. Its a spectacle but it doesn’t seem like much traction can be made of it. This probably was not a coordinated stunt since threatening to shoot someone is probably frowned upon.
We promise to be back with more MMA talk this week as we ramp up to the UFC’s visit to Japan this Saturday.
Pro-SOPA editorial may have led to hacking of UFC.com
January 22, 2012
The UFC’s Executive Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence Epstein wrote an op-ed in Sunday’s Las Vegas Review Journal in defense of the UFC’s position in favor of SOPA. On the same day, the UFC web site was hacked in what is believed to be a response to the UFC’s position on the bill.
In addition to its support of the controversial SOPA bill, Epstein’s editorial argues in favor of the Protect IP Act (PIPA). A bill supported by Nevada Senator Harry Reid – a friend of the UFC.
Overall, Epstein’s piece attempts to find common themes that the reader would agree with (stealing is bad, it hurts the economy and hurts American businesses) before coming to his point that the UFC is against piracy of its PPVs. The piece uses the UFC as an example of a U.S. success story.
Via the Las Vegas Review Journal:
The UFC itself is an example of American innovation. The Fertitta brothers, who are Las Vegas natives, along with their friend, Dana White, co-founded today’s UFC by rescuing a dying company from bankruptcy. They cleaned up the sport by inviting clear, enforceable regulation of fighting events, put their own livelihoods on the line and created a new market (with thousands of jobs) where none existed prior. That is exactly the kind of entrepreneurial engine that our country needs, especially now.
The op-ed also indicates that the UFC “contributes more than $300 million” to the economy. It also argues that there must be a rule of law to regulate online sites from stealing from businesses like the UFC.
Payout Perspective:
The timing of the op-ed piece is interesting considering the SOPA boycott occurred earlier this past week. As a result, a scheduled vote on SOPA this week has been put off. The UFC’s position on SOPA is of no surprise as Lorenzo Fertitta sent a letter of support to the bill’s sponsor last November. The WWE was another company in favor of the legislation.
Still, the placement of the editorial is interesting considering the timing. But the actual intent of the piece lacks persuasiveness. A better use of the editorial would be to acknowledge the strong opposition but assert the reasons why SOPA protects intellectual property rights of many companies including the UFC. It does get into its position a little. But mostly we get a broad American values editorial which carries no weight. While there are certain political lines that the UFC is trying to straddle with its position, it could have asserted its support of the controversial legislation while carving out its reasons. Since a big portion of the UFC’s target audience are those that would support a protest of SOPA, it would make sense for the UFC to explain itself in better detail.
As some believe, Sunday’s “hacking” of UFC.com could have been a result of the UFC’s position. While the UFC will be concerned from an online security perspective, it should also look at it from a PR perspective. For the UFC, this may not be as easy as it seems. The UFC has been aggressive in its stance against illegal streaming and distribution of its fights. In supporting SOPA and PIPA, it sees legislation that can assist in its fight against online piracy. But, opposition to the laws, which include many young, internet savvy individuals – the same people that likely follow Dana White and many other UFC fighters on twitter, utilize social media and embrace the online community oppose the restrictions that would come with the proposed laws. We will see how SOPA and PIPA will evolve and if the UFC will continue to support it.
Torres back after twitter termination
January 5, 2012
MMA Fighting reported last week, Dana White reinstated Miguel Torres after he was let go 20 days prior for an inappropriate tweet.
Torres had sent a quote from FX television show, “Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” which caught the ire of White.
Via MMA Fighting:
A soft-spoken Torres said he visited five different rape crisis centers in the Chicago area, donating money and talking with the people there about the power his words have, even in an off-hand attempt at humor on Twitter, he said
Payout Perspective:
Although this occurred last week, its an interesting case of impulsive administration rectified. Another example of this occurred in October when Nick Diaz was taken off the UFC 137 card after no-showing two press conferences. He was then put back on the same card against BJ Penn.
Certainly, the UFC can do what it pleases in terms of disciplining its fighters. However, Torres’ dismissal appeared not planned out thoroughly. Its debatable whether Torres should have been fired for his tweet after Forrest Griffin had a tweet mentioning rape. But, Griffin is higher in the fighter food chain than Torres. The UFC could have just suspended Torres for a period of time. Realistically, a suspension has the same effect of discipline yet does not have the stigma of a termination. It would have still had the same message to other fighters to be weary of what you tweet.
From the standpoint of Torres, he was admirable in doing the right things to try to get back with the UFC. Its good to see someone that makes no excuses and is proactive with their career. Obviously, Torres’ underlying goal in visiting rape crisis centers was getting back to the UFC. However, the interview seems like Torres took away some valuable information.
The good news is that White accepted the meeting with Torres and then let him back in. With social media so much part of the UFC, it would be best if the UFC designed a set of rules for fighters to abide by so as to not get in trouble. Although this may have been hashed over at last year’s fighter summit, it appears that a refresher course may be necessary. As the UFC moves forward with its relationship with Fox, it must present and maintain an image to the new viewer. Standards and practices for fighter behavior should be known and not just subjective. There will be obvious cases where a fighter must go (Paul Daley sucker punching Josh Koscheck), but Torres case seems like the punishment did not fit the crime.
UFC weigh ins provide comedy, branding opportunity
November 19, 2011
UFC 139’s weigh-ins last night provided some comic relief and three overweight fighters in preparation for tonight’s PPV. With some of the weigh-in comedy, one wonders whether the weigh-ins are now a place to work on fighters’ personal branding.
Remember when putting on a Jabawockeez mask to intimidate your opponent at the weigh-ins caused a near riot? It seems like the weigh-ins are becoming much more entertaining than just that.
Here are some highlights from yesterday:
-Danny Castillo wearing a tux which you could zip off from the back scored major points in the creativity department
-Tom Lawlor going Steven Seagal (shooting glasses and all). He also did his best Baron Von Raschke impression during the staredown as he gave the infamous claw. He also sported an XBox 360 shirt. In speaking with an XBox rep, Xbox is sponsoring Lawlor for its launch of the Kinect Sports 2. Demetrious Johnson remains as the only UFC fighter to be exclusively sponsored by XBox.
-Kyle Kingsbury and Stephan Bonnar hammed it up with a WWE-type posedown on the scales. With his patented fanny pack, Kingsbury is Zubaz and doo-rag away from being a 1980s wrestler from the Mid-South region.
-I’m not sure why more t-shirt sponsors of fighters allow the sponsored fighter to throw out free shirts to the crowd at weigh-ins. It gets your brand out there to the fans with the hopes of them coming back to purchase shirts. Of course the other side of that is the crowd is a considerable distance from the fighters. Thus, you get the Rick Story problem as he was unable to reach the crowd with some of his t-shirt throws. Since the NBA is out for some time, could the UFC borrow some of those t-shirt cannons to shoot out into the audience?
-Was Nick Pace confused in what division he was fighting in? Six pounds over really means that he should fight at 145 not 135.
Payout Perspective:
The weigh-ins seemed unorganized in terms of the actual weigh in. Whether there were issues with the scale or operator error, the weigh-ins seemed much more of an issue. Even though there were several fighters overweight, it usually doesn’t stop the pace of the weigh-ins. Also, it didn’t seem like the woman operating the scale knew about the one pound weight allowance as she grimaced each time she had to move the scale.
Similar to how the UFC wants its fighters to use twitter as a way to market themselves, the weigh-ins seem like an opportunity for fighters to promote themselves as well. Yes, the weigh-ins are usually something people pass over as its just guys getting on a scale. But, with a little more personality, it could be something that can be capitalized on in the future.
