Mailbag: What does UFC's deal with Paramount mean for fighter pay and UFC champs on PPV deals?

Yahoo

3 days ago

It's become the big question about the UFC's $7.7 billion broadcast rights deal with Paramount: What will this mean for UFC fighter pay?
In this week's mailbag we'll explore that question for both the rank-and-file fighters and the UFC champs currently receiving pay-per-view points. We'll also look at where the excitement over this news leaves UFC 319 headliners like Dricus du Plessis and Khamzat Chimaev, who've gotten a lot less attention so far this week than they might have otherwise.
To ask a question of your own, hit up @BenFowlkesMMA on X.
@ProFightsInfo: Did ESPN's annual PPV price increases eventually lead to less people paying for PPV's, thus a drop in PPV buys and their eventual loss of the UFC product on their platforms or was it always inevitable that the UFC would eventually leave them for greener pastures?
One thing to remember is that, historically, the UFC has always jumped ship for a new broadcast partner whenever its deal ends. It left Spike TV for Fox. Then it left Fox for ESPN. Now it's leaving ESPN for Paramount. Re-upping with the same partner just isn't in the UFC's DNA.
Of course, every deal is bigger than the last — by a lot. So while it keeps hopping around, it's always moving up, at least financially. But it also does seem like TV partners tend to be not all that sorry to see the UFC go by the end, which makes you wonder. The UFC really seemed to be phoning it in by the end of the Fox deal, especially when it came to the quality of the cards it offered for those UFC Fight Night events on the main Fox network. Same with ESPN, which voiced some discontent with the quality it was getting from the UFC at times.
But also we have to acknowledge ESPN had a lot of shortcomings on its end. For one thing, the ESPN+ app just flat out doesn't work the way it's supposed to a lot of the time. I know user experiences differ on that, but for me it has been, from a technical standpoint, consistently the worst streaming service I subscribe to — and I have two kids, so I subscribe to approximately 150 different streaming services.
Also, those price increases kept hitting like a Max Holloway punch combo. Just relentless, one right after another, until you're suddenly asking fans for $80 on top of the monthly subscription fee. That's brutal, especially at a time when the UFC is hurting for must-see stars.
In other words, a lot of factors contributed to this split. One that we also have to acknowledge is that Skydance Media has been trying to push through this merger with Paramount for a while now. Getting that across the finish line seemed to involve a lot of cozying up to the Trump administration. Since the UFC is by far the most openly pro-Trump major sports brand, not to mention the one he personally appears at the most, getting into business with the UFC could be interpreted as another step in that process.
@ChrisKirk_ASP: Which UFC fighter do you think will display the most impressive mental gymnastics to convince themselves that no longer getting PPV points is really a good thing for them?
Say you're Ilia Topuria. You're a champion and probably the biggest star with a UFC belt around his waist right now. You've got a contract that says you get a piece of every UFC pay-per-view event you fight at. And if you do your job right (which he has every single time so far), that piece will end up being far more lucrative than your actual purse for the fight.
Now those pay-per-views are gone. Unless you squeeze in one more fight in 2025, you've made your last dime from UFC PPV. Meanwhile, the UFC has doubled its money from broadcasting these events, in part by agreeing to ditch pay-per-view. So basically the UFC took money you were getting and rerouted it to the TKO coffers. Wouldn't you be asking for some extra compensation to make up for that loss?
So far, UFC CEO Dana White has downplayed the loss of PPV money for UFC champs. For instance, on Tuesday night he told reporters: 'We've got a bunch of smart kids over there in the accounting department that figure out how to make all this stuff work.' Then he started talking up how much more exposure and promotion fighters will get with Paramount.
Which, if you'll recall, was basically what we've been told about every new deal the UFC has made, from Fox to ESPN. It's what we were told when Zuffa sold the UFC to Endeavor (which later spun it off to TKO Group Holdings). All those entertainment industry connections were supposed to make UFC fighters into big stars via regular appearances on late-night TV talk shows or whatever. That didn't really happen. The UFC has fewer stars now than it did when that sale first happened.
In other words, always be suspicious of anyone who promises to pay you in exposure. And if they tell you not to worry because the eggheads over in accounting will sort it out, ask for more details in writing, please.
One thing that White did commit to was increasing UFC performance bonuses. The question is, by how much? Because those have been stalled at $50,000 for years now. Considering that they used to be $60,000 or $70,000 back in 2012, when the UFC itself made far less money (and when the actual money was worth more in U.S. dollars) anything short of doubling them would be a joke.
@Beastin364: All this talk about Paramount and PPV being dead and it's UFC 319 this week. If i were DDP I'd be pissed. Think all this hurts his money for this fight?
It does seem like, shortly after TKO president Mark Shapiro went on CNBC and declared PPV to be an 'outdated, antiquated model' that was now 'a thing of the past,' someone at the UFC remembered, "Oh crap! We still have several more of these to sell this year, including UFC 319 on Saturday night."
That's probably why White jumped in quickly thereafter to insist pay-per-view is totally not dead. But come on, look around. Killing off pay-per-view has gotten UFC fans way more excited than any recent move by the company.
If you're UFC middleweight champion Dricus du Plessis, you probably can't feel great about that, especially since the big news about the Paramount deal has dominated the headlines this week, leaving very little attention for your next title defense.
That's OK, though. It's not like you're heading into what's likely to be the toughest fight you've ever had, right? It's not like Khamzat Chimaev was anointed as the champ of the future years ago or anything, right? Nah, it's just you headed into probably the most important night of your entire career, as far as money and legacy are concerned. And, at least so far, it's been pretty thoroughly overshadowed by a TV deal that doesn't start until next year.
@jaypettry: Do you think Paramount will build an MMA coverage team cherrypicked out of various members of the MMA media?
I expect the UFC broadcasts will look very, very much the same. As far as on-air talent, the UFC has a great squad as is. People like Megan Olivi, Jon Anik, Paul Felder, Laura Sanko, John Gooden, Brendan Fitzgerald — I could go on but you get the point — all do an excellent job. Plus, they are all very much the UFC's people and not really ESPN's, so it makes sense to bring them over to the new home.
As far as online coverage, CBS Sports already has writers who really know this sport. Guys like Brent Brookhouse and Shakiel Mahjouri and Brian Campbell have all been covering this sport a long time and they do a great job. I'd expect CBS to keep that team and maybe fill it out with a couple more hires.
@nickj812: In the wake of the new UFC fights deal, if you were a competing organisation, got any ideas how to make your product stand out / watchable / more interesting?
PPV's used to be special. Do we need #UfCmania or #ufcrumble to bring back real interest?
The rumblings I've heard this week suggest PFL sees this shakeup as a good thing. As the UFC leaves ESPN, that leaves PFL as the only MMA brand left on the platform. I'm sure the hope is ESPN will push its events more now that there's no 800-pound gorilla taking up all the space.
Will that make a big difference in PFL's success? We'll see, but I don't think the answer is to lean into pay-per-views with the UFC abandoning that role. Shapiro is right. Pay-per-view is an outdated model.
@justlikelasagna: Any chance we can get just a little tiny section on Aaron Pico. Where does he rank in guys coming over?
Aaron Pico might be the Bellator acquisition most worth getting excited about, just because of his age. He's only 28 and seems like his prime is still ahead of him. His early years in Bellator saw a lot of undermatching him and then overcompensating in the other direction, but at 13-4 he's proven to be a solid, consistent fighter with a ton of athletic ability.
But as we've seen, these UFC debuts are tricky. Even seasoned fighters can freeze up or just underwhelm the first time out. We're going to find out more about how Pico deals with the pressure. But whatever happens against Lerone Murphy on Saturday, I'd argue we should give Pico time to get comfortable in the UFC before we leap to any conclusions.