I think your assumption that a casual observer can make any kind of accurate assumptions about a private companies financials is incorrect.
Originally Posted by Tyler Dirten
There is no way to quantify the UFC's profit. Valuation isn't necessarily related to revenue - it also takes into account the value of fighter contracts, broadcast rights, video library, trademarks, etc...
Yes, Dana seems to be making a ton of money, but there is no way to determine the source of that revenue. It may be that his personal brand is worth enough that it eclipses what he makes from the UFC (the UFC ran in the red for a long time, that stake was worthless then).
You assume that the UFC profits from the advertising during a broadcast, there is some truth to that, but the percentage is something like 1% - 10%.
You mention the video game being $60 a copy, but fail to mention that the I.P. holder's typically make 1%-3% on their properties. The publisher makes the majority of the money, not the developer, and not the IP holder.
You mention PPV numbers, what's the COST to put on the PPV. That has to be factored into your calculations also (The gate at the arena usually covers the fighter's pay).
Also, as mentioned before, there is the general cost of doing business (employees, properties, etc...).
I'm not saying that the UFC isn't turning a profit, I just don't believe that it is as profitable as you are assuming.
You know why people have eyes in the front? Because they have to move forward to see the landscape in the distance. If you had eyes in back all you could see is your home town getting farther away; you can't move forward like that. If your eyes are in front what you see in the distance keeps getting closer. That's what lets people move forward.