Discussion in 'Cageside - MMA Discussion' started by Wild, Sep 30, 2015.
There's no point in having this conversation with you, it's clear you're a fan of the corporation
So you are unable to answer my question and it's much easier to go the Ad hominem route then to actually have a grown up discussion about it.
No, I can go through an systematically make points like @Rob Maysey did... Or I can not waste my time because it's clear to most that no one is going to sway you. You're a zuffa fan boy, and if you're OK with that then that's all that matters.
Layout out a strategy to increase money to fighters (without a lawsuit and/or union), to the degree the fans and fighters want. We'll then critique your suggestion.
If you've not several alternatives, then your flat out rejection is based in a complete lack of thoughtfulness
It's beyond my expertise to solve the problem (as it is everyone's reading this). I don't have an inside knowledge of what goes on.
You can say my opinion lacks thoughtfulness, I can say charging forward with this lawsuit as a solution shows a lack of thoughtfulness. It's all good in the hood, as they say.
Can you? I don't think you can. You seem quite content to just try to insult and discredit me because I have a differing opinion, which is cool.
Flame on, bro.
No one's flamed or called anyone names. Please, where did I insult you? Are you insulted by people saying you're a zuffa/Dana fan?
i always wondered who bought these things
Ok. Explain how, in your opinion, this solution shows a lack of thoughtfulness then, please. I'm really trying to give you a chance to express a thoughtful post that is more than just "shits stupid, and that's my opinion"
I've already done that in this thread, sir. Several times. You can go back and read them if you want. I'll wait for you.
lawsuit money could be spent on paying fighters more money...calling plaintiffs disgruntled ex employees...you agree shit money but not the monopoly part...again confused at the monopoly part...dont know how this will help the fighters get paid...saying the plaintiffs are fighters who can't hack it on the UFC...contract talk..."I'm skeptical, but if the end result gets the fighters paid more money I'm all for it"...defending calling the fighters hacks..."we just have different opinions on to how we can get there."...questioning the fighters motives...contract talk...you don't think there will be a union...UFC deserves monopoly...sport vs company talk...Reebok deal bad...low-mid end guys get paid fine...you admit defeat...denying being a shill for a couple of posts...make point that UFC has made the MMA landscape it is today...pride..japan..japan..japan...conspiracy theory...you think Rob is a nice guy...ask where your facts were wrong at...reject a union/lawsuit as the only solution...ad hominem...
I just summed up every post you made in this thread. I didn't see one post explaining how this lawsuit shows thoughtlessness. I bolded the comment where you imply you have an opinion on how to get to better fighter pay. But you didn't actually tell us that opinion. You've only said the Reebok deal sucks and shouldn't have been signed, the low end/middle guys get paid fine but the top guys should get paid more. I didn't see any mention of HOW to accomplish that. Maybe I'm a retard and missed over that part. Can you elaborate now that I've gone through all of you posts and still dont have an answer?
One point to clarify in this debate is that the issue is not fighter pay as a baseline with flat amounts. It's fighter revenue share. The goal of a union or association is typically to increase the % of labor's share of revenues to be proportional to their contribution vs. Management.
Because Zuffa does not share any revenue information with individual stars or camps, but still engages in the use of protectionist contracts, it's impossible to have good faith negotiations.
Now over the past decade or so, a lot of tactics have been tried to increase the level of transparency in negotiations or to make contracts less restrictive, but Zuffa has made each of these methods impossible. So the lawsuit and association are methods of last resort @DannyNL not first attempts.
As I said above, I agree that there will be some short term consequences as Zuffa pursues a desperate divide and conquer gambit to avoid anyone in management taking a pay cut, but at this point, internal pressure has been insufficient. I laud you for making a case against these tactics on the basis of worries over that near term pain, but it's difficult to see what else can be done at this point when the UFC is acting so differently from other regulated sports leagues and promotions.
So what other tactics do you think might be more productive? If somehow you think things will become fairer by osmosis, what incentives do you think the UFC will need to move in that direction? As regards revenue sharing and transparency, do you believe Zuffa has no obligations to make an adjustment as ownership? If so, how do you believe fighters should negotiate in the absence of that information?
I'll give you major props for taking the time. The only issue I'd take in your summary is the "UFC deserves monopoly" part (I don't feel that the UFC has a monopoly), but it's all good.
I'll start off by acknowledging the fact I'm not a lawyer, I'm not privy to the backroom goings on at Zuffa, and most importantly I'm not a fortune teller. I can't come out and say for sure that this lawsuit and/or a union/association would be bad or what it would look like in the future. I don't have the expertise to make that assertion.
What I do have, as an outside party - as a layman, are concerns.
I have concerns when I hear that (according to what Dana told Joe Rogan), the UFC is going to have to part ways with over 100 million dollars to fight this lawsuit and the effects that money loss could have on future productions and ventures that would be used to grow the sport.
I have concerns, based on my experience with/research of associations/unions and my opinions of human nature, that an association/union could flip things around too far the other way and effect Zuffa's ability to run an efficient business. Effects that might lead to less productions, ventures, services, ect offered by Zuffa and the UFC to the fans.
I have concerns about the motives of the plaintiffs, who are "MOSTLY" (and I stress the word MOSTLY) disgruntled ex-employees who's days in the sport have passed. I have concerns that they may just be looking to take a piece out of Zuffa out of spite. I have concerns about Rob Maysey, a guy who's attempt at creating an association already fell flat. A guy who (from what I've read) pumped a ton of money into producing an MMA documentary "The Last Fight" that was supposed to outline all of the problems in MMA he's fighting against... but failed to have it completed (just what I read, if that's wrong Rob can certainly refute that).
I have concerns that there are concerns that I'm not even thinking of.
It seems to me that the majority of the people posting here have this idea that if Zuffa is beaten in the lawsuit, if an association for fighters was formed, everything would be business as usual, only the fighters would be getting more money. I don't think most of you are thinking of the potential consequences of these things, and to me that constitutes thoughtlessness.
All my concerns could be for nothing. Who knows. But whether or not you agree with my concerns, I think it's dangerous that so many people are not at least considering them.
Exactly, and that's something I'm 100% against.
From the start, I've been about increasing the base pay for certain fighters on the card. I don't believe any business should be forced into some kind of % share to it's employees.
This is a good rebuttal, but I disagree with the notion that most people here think it will be business as usual. Most people here know there will be retaliatory action and also know that a more equalized system will probably come at a cost, at least for awhile.
The contention of most in this battle has been that the sport needs widespread systemic reform. The lawsuit and the organizing efforts (alongside a Department of Justice investigation that is flying beneath the radar) are pieces of this struggle. There is both a structural and a moral problem with the way things are being run.
Losses for Zuffa in either of these battles likely could result in the company being broken up or sold and then we could go back to the days of lots of small and midlevel promotions and the best not fighting the best and maybe even an industry wide depreciation in fighter pay. Or we could go into an era where it becomes more like boxing and organizations disappear in favor of promoters. If a promoter simply can't put on a show without guaranteed minimums and coverage, then there is no show. If this sport can't survive without adequately compensating the people who shoulder the most risk, maybe it doesn't deserve to.
We may be thoughtless, I just type all day and am pretty thoughtless between the hours of 8 am to 2 pm esp when I don't have my coffee. BUT that's not what you said. You said the lawsuit itself was thoughtless. Waiting to hear how you believe that to be so.
All of your other concerns you outlined are completely reasonable having a limited knowledge base to work from, so I won't dispute them or try and dissuade you from them.
That's my bad, I meant to say charging forward supporting it/blindly supporting it, but chose my words wrong.
I'm not a lawyer so I really can't pick apart a lawsuit, it's beyond my expertise.
And we're all working on that limited knowledge base, brother, with the exception of Rob.
That's cool with me, bro. If people have though about these things, are fine with the potential consequences and want to support the lawsuit, more power to them.
I can only speak for myself and my feelings/concerns.
But how does this get accomplished without a Fighters Association? Serious, I'd love to hear some ideas because so far, no one that I've spoken with that opposes the lawsuit offers anything besides the UFC doing so out of the kindness of their hearts.
And lets assume for a second that they decided to give everyone on the roster a 25% raise. Now what about likeness rights, travel expenses for more than 1 cornerman, retirement, etc. How do those things get addressed?
I'm more of a fan of public pressure in this case. The issue about fighter pay is out now, there have been voluntary changes made by the UFC. I think guys talking about it and complaining in a public forum will force the UFC to address it, and I think it's a fighter's responsibility to negotiate to get what they want.
You say 25% raise for everyone... I don't agree with that. You say likeness rights, travel expenses for more than 1 corner man, retirement... I don't believe they need to be addressed, personally. I don't think the UFC owes it to them. I can't stress enough that I don't support any of that stuff. I support guys getting paid bigger purses as indy contractors.
We're on opposite ends of this discussion @DannyNL , so I'm going to bow out but I appreciate you remaining respectful with your responses my dude.
Quite amazing isn't it.
History does not bear it out that unaffiliated individuals are sufficiently empowered to negotiate against management and the National Labor Relations Act gives workers the right to organize (among other legislation and judicial precedent).
Calling these issues complaints is reductive as they could also be considered violations of the Occupational Safety and Health Act since having additional corner support and adequate coverage for damages can have a direct corollary with fighter safety.
There has never in history been an industry reformed solely due to public pressure in isolation. Typically there was an organized internal movement that through direct action, legal challenges and massive public awareness campaigns was able to CREATE public furor. Unfortunately these efforts get papered over or forgotten and reduced to "public pressure" after the fact. The pressure comes from grass roots action, not just fan/product user empathy.
I laugh whenever someone compares the NFL with the UFC. They are run completely different. Should we have profit sharing among mma organizations as well to make sure all of them are playing on an even field and can go after those lucrative free agent fighters?
I don't have an opinion about the lawsuit. I still don't know what the hell it's about but I can recognize the people signed on to this lawsuit are disgruntled ex fighters who wouldn't be saying anything if they were still in the UFC's good graces.