• 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

Did Foster lobby for legislation without seeing Zuffa Boxing contracts?

January 29, 2026 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

Thomas Hauser wrote an article in The Guardian this week which detailed fighter contracts for the newly formed Zuffa Boxing which had its debut last Friday.

Of the notable items in the revealing article, it notes that California State Athletic Commission head Andy Foster admitted to not seeing a Zuffa Boxing contract.

Image

While one could debate the timing of Foster’s admission, a reader of the article might conclude that he did not know what was included in the contracts while he was advocating for the new Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act when his state contemplated to endorse the proposed legislation-backed by Zuffa and TKO. The state athletic commission voted unanimously to endorse the law which would offer Universal Boxing Organizations (or UBOs) to run on its own and having the ability to act as regulatory body and promoter.

Also, in December Foster testified on behalf of the Ali Revival Act due in part to the fighter pay per round and increases in health coverage. But, if we may infer from the article, Foster did not know about the contractual agreements.

Also, the members of Congress that so vehemently were in favor of the new proposal did not have any idea what the new contracts were about. Clearly, the subcommittee meeting was political theater under the guise of the health and safety of boxers.

Payout Perspective:

There’s more to the article which you should read about including the report on how much Paramount paid for Zuffa Boxing. But the one big takeaway here is that Foster did not look at a Zuffa Boxing contract. He could have just looked at one without comment just to say he did have a chance to look at one but did not “scrutinize it.” But, its the brazen and unabashed shilling for TKO to appease money interests. I am not saying that they not not do it but there was not even a scintilla of examination of what the act does. The other alternative is that Foster did not think that boxing contracts would be impacted by the new law. Of course, one need only look at the UFC antitrust lawsuits to know that contractual issues are a big part of the issue.

Filed Under: Featured, Le v. Zuffa, UFC, Zuffa, Zuffa Boxing

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Primary Sidebar

Featured

Court denies Top Rank’s Motion to Dismiss in Keane case

Opetaia fires back at IBF in opposition to MTD

UFC 331 Payout Perspective

UFC 331 attendance, gate and bonuses

Scott Coker is back with Ki MMA

TKO owns this weekend

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout
Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

UFC made $1.5 billion in revenue last year. $1 million for brain research through 2030. And they don’t provide long-term health insurance for retired fighters. Fighters carry the damage for life. UFC needs to do a lot more. This deserves scrutiny, not applause.

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

🚨 BREAKING: A MVSU men's basketball player has been detained by ICE

Power forward Qingfang Pang is a junior originally from China, listed as having a US hometown in Flushing, Queens

He just transferred in from Monroe U. in NY

@ThaoTaTV is first on the story for @WJTV @WHLT22

This is why Dana likes podcasts that actual adversarial press conferences

Dana comparing #UFC to the Lakers to come up with his valuation of the brand

MMA Payout @MMAPayout

Dana White eyes $10B for UFC’s next rights deal https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2026/10/08/dana-white-eyes-10b-for-ufcs-next-rights-deal/

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