MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[trustkill]

Eddie Alvarez fails to win injunctive relief in court - MMA - Loretta Hunt - SI.com

Eddie Alvarez's bid for preliminary injunctive relief was denied on Friday in U.S. District Court, and he will sit out a UFC bout offered to him for April 27, as he and Bellator MMA continue to hash out a contract dispute.

The 29-year-old Alvarez had sought an injunction against his prior promoter, Bellator MMA, so he could accept a main-card bout at UFC 159 on April 27 in Newark, N.J. Alvarez was also seeking the court's judgment that his obligations with Bellator had been completed, thus allowing him to accept a long-term deal with UFC promoter Zuffa LLC.

The Viacom-owned Bellator, which filed a complaint against its former lightweight champion for breach of contract on Dec. 31, claims it matched the UFC offer, obligating Alvarez to re-sign with the southern California-based promotion per the terms of his original contract. The April 27 bout, part of an eight-fight contract offer with the rival organization, would have paid the fighter a maximum of $1,400,000 in show and win purses, plus a $250,000 signing bonus ($165,000 minus applicable fees, paid over three bouts). These are numbers Bellator said it has matched in its own offer to Alvarez.

At the heart of the dispute is the promotion and fighter's contrasting interpretations of specific language in Alvarez's original Bellator contract, which gave the promotion "the right to match the terms of any agreement offered."

Specifically, Alvarez's attorneys contend that Bellator could not substitute the UFC's guarantee to air one of the fighter's bouts on Fox network television with a bout Bellator would air on Spike TV, a cable network with less viewership reach, and have it still be considered a match. In retort, Bellator CEO Bjorn Rebney told SI.com that he'd already secured a guarantee from broadcast partner Spike to re-air Alvarez's bouts on multiple occasions in primetime, if necessary, to match Fox viewership.

In his initial ruling on Friday, U.S. District Judge Jose Linares wrote that he recognized differences between Fox and Spike TV, though he said Alvarez had not shown reasonable probability at this time that he could successfully argue this point of his counterclaim should the case go to trial.

The fighter's representatives also contended that the Viacom-owned Bellator wouldn't be able to match the UFC's offer to pay Alvarez additional escalating pay-per-view revenue for participating events that reached over 200,000 buys, as Bellator hadn't promoted a pay-per-view to date, and didn't have the market muscle or supporting star power to produce equivalent buy success. This potential revenue, which Alvarez would only be entitled to in his first UFC bout and subsequent championship bouts, could total into the high six-figures per bout, depending on the pay-per-view's buy rates.

Bellator has stated that it is ready to promote its first pay-per-view event with Alvarez in a lightweight championship rematch against champion Michael Chandler, and would have the vast resources of parent company, Viacom, a world-leading media conglomerate with million-plus-sold boxing pay-per-views under its belt, at its disposal to help promote and execute it.

On this pivotal matter, Judges Linares wrote that he could not rule either way, as "the Court is in no position to find that Bellator will, at some future date, breach its contractual duty to provide Alvarez with a fight broadcast on Pay-Per- View."
Litigation between Alvarez and Bellator will continue, though the two parties can convene at any time to reach an amicable settlement.

[Fedorlei Gomipierre]

Bullshit, I can't believe the Bellator lawyer actually said that Spike TV and FOX were on equal grounds of media exposure, let alone the prospect that Bellator thinks they can somehow put on a PPV with the exposure and buys of a UFC PPV, actually, the prospect of them putting on a PPV seems like a longshot.

They're putting the screws to Eddie and are just being petty, the didn't match UFC's offer and are just fucking with semantics. It isn't like this will make Eddie want to fight for Bellator MORE?

Bullshit.

[dimerules28]

Meh... I could see the ufc doing the same thing if they were in bellator's shoes, I know it's not the same situation at all, but they were willing to just let Couture sit on the shelf for the rest of his career if he didn't wanna fight for the ufc. Although it really shitty for Alvarez, Bellator is just trying to protect their assets.

[trustkill]

Originally Posted by Fedorlei Gomipierre

Bullshit.

Yea that is some bullshit. But there's a lot going on here. It's obvious to anyone who's watched MMA that Eddie's exposure, and thus, earning potential, would be significantly higher in the UFC. But that earning potential will be realized from third-party sponsorships, which wouldn't be covered in the fighter contract. Bellator is under no obligation to match that.

I can't believe that Bjorn's strategy of simply taking the UFC's contract and replacing "UFC" with "Bellator" is still holding up.

Bellator has stated that it is ready to promote its first pay-per-view event with Alvarez in a lightweight championship rematch against champion Michael Chandler, and would have the vast resources of parent company, Viacom, a world-leading media conglomerate with million-plus-sold boxing pay-per-views under its belt, at its disposal to help promote and execute it.

Another brilliant move by Bjorn. I remember when Bellator announced that in special cases, a championship rematch could be called for at the discretion of the promoter. This happened several weeks to a few months ago. This was publicly disclosed as a means to specifically undermine the PPV component of UFC contracts.

It's totally fucked that Bellator's never had a PPV before. They can talk hypothetical PPVs just to match the UFC offer, when everyone knows that if Eddie re-signed they would never do a PPV. They have him by the balls here. This case will serve as a lesson to up-and-coming fighters who have aspirations of fighting in the UFC--it's Bellator OR the UFC now. The brand lines are being firmly established.

[Y2JUBAE]

Originally Posted by dimerules28

Meh... I could see the ufc doing the same thing if they were in bellator's shoes, I know it's not the same situation at all, but they were willing to just let Couture sit on the shelf for the rest of his career if he didn't wanna fight for the ufc. Although it really shitty for Alvarez, Bellator is just trying to protect their assets.

You do have a point there.

I think Randy was champion though wasn't he? UFC has some kind of champions clause which I can understand.

Difference would be that Eddie actually fulfilled his contract.

[trustkill]

Eddie Alvarez denied the chance to fight at UFC 159 after judge rules against injunction request - MMA Fighting

NEWARK, N.J. -- Just three blocks to the north was the future. The next step. A new home. The promise of millions. It was all of what Eddie Alvarez wanted, and it was all so close. It might as well have been an illusion.

The Prudential Center is visible from the grounds of the U.S. District Court of New Jersey, its white letters standing proudly over the red brick. That was where Alvarez wanted to be in three months time, in the middle of that arena, in the center of the fight world, with everyone watching. The site was supposed to house his UFC debut, as the co-main event of UFC 159. But it won't happen. Not now, not after a ruling by U.S. District Judge Jose L. Linares denied a request for an injunction that would have paved the way for Alvarez to fight in the octagon.

Instead, the relentless UFC schedule will march on, from Chicago Saturday night, eventually to the Prudential Center and right past Alvarez while his legal fight continues.

Bellator CEO Bjorn Rebney declined to comment on the ruling.

Alvarez did not have much to say, either.

"I've just got to digest this whole thing," he told MMA Fighting after being informed of the decision.

There was weariness in his voice. The ruling did not come until six hours after the hearing ended. Six hours to be hopeful and anxious and nervous. Six hours to ponder everything that had come before and everything that would come after, and how he even got there in the first place.

Alvarez's fate was determined in a 75-minute hearing in courtroom 5D at the Martin Luther King Building & U.S. Courthouse, and he never had a chance to say a word besides thanking the judge in the final moments. Sitting with his wife Jamie in the first row of the courtroom, his case was made by his three-man legal team, which argued that he would be irreparably harmed if he was unable to fight for Zuffa during his pending litigation.

Lead attorney Steven R. Klein laid out a case that centered on what Alvarez would lose out on if he could not participate on the April 27 card, citing endorsements, career advancement, superior audience demographics and widened exposure that in their estimation the UFC provides.

The pay-per-view match was also at issue. When the UFC signed Alvarez to an offer sheet in December, they guaranteed he would share in event revenue under a tiered system that would offer payouts based upon the number of pay-per-view units sold. Specifically, he would receive $1 for each buy from 200,000 to 400,000, $2 for each buy rom 400,000 to 600,000, and $2.50 for every buy after 600,000.

Klein argued that the UFC's track record of pay-per-view success was a far different scenario than that of Bellator, which has to date never produced a pay-per-view.

"For Bellator to say they're matching a contract where the UFC is going to provide Mr. Alvarez with pay-per-view events and everything that comes with it: the money, the viewership the fame, it's impossible," he said. "They can't do it."

"How do you get 200,000 pay-per-views on an initial pay-per-view? It's unheard of," echoed co-counsel Frank Smith. "I don't doubt anything can happen. But wouldn't it have been incumbent upon them today to show up with an affidavit from somebody? They could have asked the court to seal the record. There's way to handle this. Here's our date. Here's our venue. They haven't put anything before this court other than, 'Yes, we're going to do it, and we have a plan. A secret plan."

Working alone, Bellator counsel Patrick English attempted to refute the notion the Bellator could not successfully promote pay-per-view events, pointing out that Bellator's new home Spike and ownership team Viacom were the same corporate entities used by the UFC to propel its ascent as a sports property.

"The UFC left Spike/Viacom and Bellator enters Spike/Viacom," he said. "They have retained people who know pay-per-view. They know the business. Viacom has had a very successful pay-per-view division -- million and millions of buys -- and suddenly it's suggested that Bellator can't do a pay-per-view?"

English even suggested that Alvarez would gain greater benefits under Bellator's banner, because while he was only promised a co-main event slot at UFC 159, he would be the main event and star of a Bellator pay-per-view.

English said that Bellator offered to Alvarez a major fight under a confidentiality agreement, and that the offer was ignored.

"Are you representing to the court that you have a fight lined up for him, vs. [Michael] Chandler, on a pay-per-view?" Judge Linares asked him.

"I am representing to the court, yes," he said. "Subject to all the things that can happen. Injury, etc. But yes, I am representing that."

Klein used a sports analogy, citing the difference between the NFL and the short-lived USFL of the 1980s, in explaining the gulf between the UFC and Bellator. How many USFL players could anyone name, he asked. When the judge named Herschel Walker and Doug Flutie, Klein countered that was because of what came after.

"Most of them [are famous] because they went to the NFL and were able to capitalize," he said. "Just what Mr. Alvarez is seeking to do, to go from the minors to the majors here."

But in his decision, Linares wrote that Alvarez failed to satisfy the burden of showing a reasonable probability of success and irreparable harm.

"It is speculative to suggest, as Alvarez does, that an inability to compete in the April 27 event will result in irreparable harm in the form of a lost opportunity to obtain notoriety, endorsements, and a wider exposure to viewers," he wrote.

Linares did note that Alvarez had at least one potential battleground issue in his ongoing litigation, acknowledging that the difference between broadcast network FOX and cable channel Spike could lead a court or jury to find that the Bellator has not matched Zuffa's contract.

But that is for another day, and another time. Alvarez came to court on Friday with hopes of soon inhabiting the center of the fight world, with everyone watching. Instead, he left a sparsely inhabited court room with only his wife Jamie and his doubts. Leaving the Martin Luther King Building & U.S. Courthouse, they walked out into the cold, with the Prudential Center so close, yet unreachable.

[LefthookStcrook]

Man Eddie would've made out damn good...hope it all goes well for him.

[tucker50]

So he goes back to Bellator and fights Chandler, maybe sets up a trilogy and then what? He goes back to fighting overmatched tournament winners once or twice a year, maybe throw in some even more 1-sided non-title fights here and there? If he gets stuck in Bellator it'll be a shame because he has clearly outgrown them.

[Fe1]

I give it a year before Zuffa shuts down Bellator

[MIZjitsZOU]

Originally Posted by Fe1

I give it a year before Zuffa shuts down Bellator

How do you figure? They have been putting on fights for about 4 years or so. Give them a chance. The tourney format is awesome. They are different and have a place in this sport.