MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[azur_dog]

I just finished watching Inside MMA ep 226 and I was interested to hear that the UFC has a lobbying firm in DC and they state on the show that one of things on its agenda is to keep MMA from being subject to the Muhammad Ali fighter protection act. Until recently with Matt Lindland's allegations I hadnt thought about it but clearly I think the UFC could be in violation of this act if they were subject to it. So what if you guys think.

Heres the video clip for what I'm talking about and source links are below.



MMAPayout.com
MMAPayout.com: The Business of MMA: MMAPayout on Inside MMA: Regulation and Lobbying

Inside MMA 226
HDNet Original Programming - Inside MMA

[Dork8503]

Thing is, they are not subject to it.

From what i have understood an read, that is strictly for boxing

[maxp84z]

lol thats what i said..... Of course the UFC doesnt want the Ali act to affect MMA... that would throw a wrench in the UFC's business model.

The UFC makes about 30-40 million a PPV.... 2-4 percent of that goes to the fighters, 15 percent goes to the production team, etc and the rest goes to the Fertitas and Dana

[TheDirtySis]

They dont have to follow it at all. Thats like saying Rugby has to follow the NFL unions disabilities plan.

Im not saying it doesnt need to be included or shouldnt be but at this time UFC dont got to do shit.

[The Joker]

The UFC follow the "unified rules of MMA" which are determined by a boxing committee (ABC) to protect the fighters health/safety, but do not want to adhere to The Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act of 2000, which will protect fighters rights, because it'll cut into their profits. Not cool at all.

[Punk Ass]

If MMA has to adhear to Boxing athletic commissions, then the Ali act should be enforced aswell. After all, fighters are more important than the promoters, Managers, and anybody else who isn't getting their brains beaten out.

Does anyone disagree? and if so, what logical reasoning do you have?

[azur_dog]

See the only reason I think they dont adhere to it is because the language its written in refers only to boxers, but it should apply just as much to mma because the same kind of exploitation can happen to mma fighters.

[Clint]

It doesn't make sense for legislation that was written specifically with boxing in mind to apply to MMA. The business models between the two are completely different. I would have no qualms with legislation being written specifically to MMA but people have to remember that if the Ali act applies to MMA then ALL of the Ali act would apply including parts that make no sense in respect the the MMA styles business model.

Originally Posted by maxp84z

lol thats what i said..... Of course the UFC doesnt want the Ali act to affect MMA... that would throw a wrench in the UFC's business model.

The UFC makes about 30-40 million a PPV.... 2-4 percent of that goes to the fighters, 15 percent goes to the production team, etc and the rest goes to the Fertitas and Dana

Those are some interesting numbers. For comparison Wrestlemania 24 did 1.06 Million buys at $55.00 each and brought in $31M in Revenue and only $7M in profit (Keep in mind the wrestlers are considered yearly contractors so their pay isn't even included in that).

So at typical buy rate of 500K making 30-40M and the fertitas making 80% profit is absurd.