Jump to content

Sponsors


UDONNO

Recommended Posts

Doesn't anyone else think it's odd to watch the UFC with all these fighters who try to make money with different sponsors and then you see Ronda with only UFC LOGOS. To me when I see that it feels like she makes enough to only represent and brand the UFC, but other fighters have to try ang get other SPONSORS...just to make a living. Maybe I'm the only one that finds it very strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ufc should have cloths, health shakes, and work out gear made and sold by them. In doing such a thing they can afford to pay the fighters properly. As it is now fighters are getting what citizens get, taxation without compensation/representation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the UFC sponsor their own fighter? Isn't the benefit to sponsoring to get your brand out there? the only people that will see Ronda in UFC gear are people who already know about the UFC

 

Because she wears the gear, it becomes more appealing for others to wear the gear? Do you think millions of gym-rats around the country spontaneously decided in unison to wear TapouT gear all the time? Affliction shirts? No. They saw stars wear the merchandise, thought it looked cool and/or legitimized them as tough guys, and began buying anything and everything with those logos on it. Same thing for UFC. It's established it's brand as a promotion, but in terms of merchandise, they still lag behind Tapout and other brands. So, they want to increase sales of UFC gear. How better to do that than have the two most publicized and media present fighters (Rousey and Jones) sporting the gear.

 

I highly doubt you'll ever see someone on the under card walking out with official UFC sponsored gear, because they are attempting to create a status symbol with their brand. If they sponsor you, you're legit, top of the heap, and subconsciously that sends the message fans looking for a new shirt, if I want to be elite, I should dress like Fighter X who's got the UFC official merch.

 

That, and because I believe UFC is trying to cross brand with Nike the way Michael Jordan did with the Airman campaign. It's cliche and obviously everyone who watches UFC knows the product already, but I'm sure they want to big money that comes from being able to sell UFC gear to people who don't even watch the sport based on the perceived cool factor or elite quality of the brand. Trust me, in a few years, just like guys who never watched a single MMA event were wearing Tapout shirts, you'll see soccer mom's wearing UFC yogo pants and UFC sneakers on their morning jogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the UFC sponsor their own fighter? Isn't the benefit to sponsoring to get your brand out there? the only people that will see Ronda in UFC gear are people who already know about the UFC

 

Because she wears the gear, it becomes more appealing for others to wear the gear? Do you think millions of gym-rats around the country spontaneously decided in unison to wear TapouT gear all the time? Affliction shirts? No. They saw stars wear the merchandise, thought it looked cool and/or legitimized them as tough guys, and began buying anything and everything with those logos on it. Same thing for UFC. It's established it's brand as a promotion, but in terms of merchandise, they still lag behind Tapout and other brands. So, they want to increase sales of UFC gear. How better to do that than have the two most publicized and media present fighters (Rousey and Jones) sporting the gear.

 

I highly doubt you'll ever see someone on the under card walking out with official UFC sponsored gear, because they are attempting to create a status symbol with their brand. If they sponsor you, you're legit, top of the heap, and subconsciously that sends the message fans looking for a new shirt, if I want to be elite, I should dress like Fighter X who's got the UFC official merch.

 

That, and because I believe UFC is trying to cross brand with Nike the way Michael Jordan did with the Airman campaign. It's cliche and obviously everyone who watches UFC knows the product already, but I'm sure they want to big money that comes from being able to sell UFC gear to people who don't even watch the sport based on the perceived cool factor or elite quality of the brand. Trust me, in a few years, just like guys who never watched a single MMA event were wearing Tapout shirts, you'll see soccer mom's wearing UFC yogo pants and UFC sneakers on their morning jogs.

Add dolce inspired ufc ultimate work out shakes for beginners, intermediate, and advanced athletes. ZUFFA sells BRO let me enroll in marketing school and zuffa BRO.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

Ronda is 1 of a kind in time you will see just how much she changed the sport. In the long run fighters will benefit in more ways than 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

There does seem to be a conflict of interests there. The UFC should probably exclude itself from sponsoring its fighters.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

There does seem to be a conflict of interests there. The UFC should probably exclude itself from sponsoring its fighters.

 

Why? Have you ever heard the UFC claim they are anything other than an entertainment company designed to sell PPVs, collect commercials on TV, and sell merchandise? People seem to think the UFC should act like a non-profit organization designed to insure the best fighters always get a chance - they are a for profit company and lives and dies on the names of a few people who they can put on the marquee. They are already biased, how else do you explain Chael Sonnen getting a shot against Jon Jones in a weight class higher than he was, coming off a loss? He garners viewers, he's entertaining to see hype events, and he stepped up in a pinch so he as rewarded. Not based on accomplishment or merit, but based on marketability.

 

That's what the UFC is, that's what Dana has always said they are. WWE with real fighters. No more, no less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

There does seem to be a conflict of interests there. The UFC should probably exclude itself from sponsoring its fighters.

 

Why? Have you ever heard the UFC claim they are anything other than an entertainment company designed to sell PPVs, collect commercials on TV, and sell merchandise? People seem to think the UFC should act like a non-profit organization designed to insure the best fighters always get a chance - they are a for profit company and lives and dies on the names of a few people who they can put on the marquee. They are already biased, how else do you explain Chael Sonnen getting a shot against Jon Jones in a weight class higher than he was, coming off a loss? He garners viewers, he's entertaining to see hype events, and he stepped up in a pinch so he as rewarded. Not based on accomplishment or merit, but based on marketability.

 

That's what the UFC is, that's what Dana has always said they are. WWE with real fighters. No more, no less.

 

They also claim to be a sport, and in a sport, impartiality is required for legitimacy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

There does seem to be a conflict of interests there. The UFC should probably exclude itself from sponsoring its fighters.

 

Why? Have you ever heard the UFC claim they are anything other than an entertainment company designed to sell PPVs, collect commercials on TV, and sell merchandise? People seem to think the UFC should act like a non-profit organization designed to insure the best fighters always get a chance - they are a for profit company and lives and dies on the names of a few people who they can put on the marquee. They are already biased, how else do you explain Chael Sonnen getting a shot against Jon Jones in a weight class higher than he was, coming off a loss? He garners viewers, he's entertaining to see hype events, and he stepped up in a pinch so he as rewarded. Not based on accomplishment or merit, but based on marketability.

 

That's what the UFC is, that's what Dana has always said they are. WWE with real fighters. No more, no less.

 

They also claim to be a sport, and in a sport, impartiality is required for legitimacy.

 

MMA is a sport, UFC is a promotion. The UFC only cares about who they can and who they can't make money off of. Legitimacy be damned. That's why Gilbert Melendez isn't employed there anymore. UFC doesn't claim to be a sport, they claim to promote MMA fights, hype them, and then clean up as much cash as possible. It's why Jon Fitch never got his GSP rematch despite a 5 win streak and consensus he was the #2 welterweight at that time. It's why UFC puts finishers towards the top of the card, and decision fighters towards the bottom. Their entire business structure is designed to maximize marketability.

 

And by the way, boxing does this too. You think boxing promoters give a damn about who's the best? No. It's who's most marketable. Now the difference is in boxing the titles are controlled by sanctioning bodies and not the promoters...but considering the history of governing bodies and promoters being in bed together, I'd say that's a fine line of distinction anyway.

 

MMA is a sport. UFC is a promotion. Understanding the difference is going to make a lot of choices the UFC make much more clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

There does seem to be a conflict of interests there. The UFC should probably exclude itself from sponsoring its fighters.

 

Why? Have you ever heard the UFC claim they are anything other than an entertainment company designed to sell PPVs, collect commercials on TV, and sell merchandise? People seem to think the UFC should act like a non-profit organization designed to insure the best fighters always get a chance - they are a for profit company and lives and dies on the names of a few people who they can put on the marquee. They are already biased, how else do you explain Chael Sonnen getting a shot against Jon Jones in a weight class higher than he was, coming off a loss? He garners viewers, he's entertaining to see hype events, and he stepped up in a pinch so he as rewarded. Not based on accomplishment or merit, but based on marketability.

 

That's what the UFC is, that's what Dana has always said they are. WWE with real fighters. No more, no less.

 

They also claim to be a sport, and in a sport, impartiality is required for legitimacy.

 

MMA is a sport, UFC is a promotion. The UFC only cares about who they can and who they can't make money off of. Legitimacy be damned. That's why Gilbert Melendez isn't employed there anymore. UFC doesn't claim to be a sport, they claim to promote MMA fights, hype them, and then clean up as much cash as possible. It's why Jon Fitch never got his GSP rematch despite a 5 win streak and consensus he was the #2 welterweight at that time. It's why UFC puts finishers towards the top of the card, and decision fighters towards the bottom. Their entire business structure is designed to maximize marketability.

 

And by the way, boxing does this too. You think boxing promoters give a damn about who's the best? No. It's who's most marketable. Now the difference is in boxing the titles are controlled by sanctioning bodies and not the promoters...but considering the history of governing bodies and promoters being in bed together, I'd say that's a fine line of distinction anyway.

 

MMA is a sport. UFC is a promotion. Understanding the difference is going to make a lot of choices the UFC make much more clear.

 

Basketball is a sport.....NBA IS an organization

Tennis is a sport....ATP etc is an organization

Hockey is a sport.....NHL is an organization

Golf is a sport.....PGA is an organization

Etc etc etc. what ifTiger Woods was the only one sponsored by the PGA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is that strange? UFC has chosen to sponsor her. Others seek out sponsorship elsewhere - although that topic has become a highly debated point around here lately. Fighters are paid based on how valuable their presence on a card is to prospective buys of the event. They are paid accordingly. Some fighters will need additional income to supplement them at the early stages of their careers, like many people who work in highly competitive industries that are lead by a few stars, and strived for by many many more.

 

I find it strange because when ALL the fighters work for ONE organization, why is only one or a few fighters sponsored by that organization? It just seems that would lead to bias especially in terms of marketing, etc. The BIAS is already evident when it comes to DANA and his relationship with Ronda.

 

 

I feel like I covered that pretty well in my second post in this topic. UFC will only sponsor it's elite fighters because they want their clothing brand associated with winning and being the best. Not simply everyone.

 

Lol I understood what you said, but actually each fighter represents the UFC, and is associated with their brand....still doesn't discount the BIAS

 

There does seem to be a conflict of interests there. The UFC should probably exclude itself from sponsoring its fighters.

 

Why? Have you ever heard the UFC claim they are anything other than an entertainment company designed to sell PPVs, collect commercials on TV, and sell merchandise? People seem to think the UFC should act like a non-profit organization designed to insure the best fighters always get a chance - they are a for profit company and lives and dies on the names of a few people who they can put on the marquee. They are already biased, how else do you explain Chael Sonnen getting a shot against Jon Jones in a weight class higher than he was, coming off a loss? He garners viewers, he's entertaining to see hype events, and he stepped up in a pinch so he as rewarded. Not based on accomplishment or merit, but based on marketability.

 

That's what the UFC is, that's what Dana has always said they are. WWE with real fighters. No more, no less.

 

They also claim to be a sport, and in a sport, impartiality is required for legitimacy.

 

MMA is a sport, UFC is a promotion. The UFC only cares about who they can and who they can't make money off of. Legitimacy be damned. That's why Gilbert Melendez isn't employed there anymore. UFC doesn't claim to be a sport, they claim to promote MMA fights, hype them, and then clean up as much cash as possible. It's why Jon Fitch never got his GSP rematch despite a 5 win streak and consensus he was the #2 welterweight at that time. It's why UFC puts finishers towards the top of the card, and decision fighters towards the bottom. Their entire business structure is designed to maximize marketability.

 

And by the way, boxing does this too. You think boxing promoters give a damn about who's the best? No. It's who's most marketable. Now the difference is in boxing the titles are controlled by sanctioning bodies and not the promoters...but considering the history of governing bodies and promoters being in bed together, I'd say that's a fine line of distinction anyway.

 

MMA is a sport. UFC is a promotion. Understanding the difference is going to make a lot of choices the UFC make much more clear.

 

Obviously, I know the difference between a promotion and a sport. It is in the UFC's stated interest to grow MMA because it grows the UFC. Therefore, the two are not mutually exclusive as you seem to be claiming. Gilbert Melendez in not employed because he has a stupid manager that allowed the deal to fall through. If Pettis said he wanted to be paid 50 million a fight, that deal would fall through as well and has nothing to do with the UFC believing that he didn't belong under the UFC banner. Fitch never got a rematch because he was fighting cans to fluff his record, which is something he is well known for. Defeating Gono, Thiago, Pierce, Saunders, and Alves does not make you worthy of a title shot. With the exception of Alves, none of the other fighters were even top ten.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...