News Wrap

• UFC Tackles Long Term Growth Issues - The last five pay-per-view events have produced three of the company's top ten events according to Dave Meltzer. UFC 79, 81, and 83 all drew between 525,000-650,000 buys and at $44.95. UFC 79 and 83 also produced the second and third largest gates in company history.
  
• Golden Boy Sticking to Boxing - Oscar de La Hoya recently said that Golden Boy will stick to boxing when asked about MMA.
  
• Viacom CEO Praises Iron Ring - Q1 profits for Viacom were up 33%. CEO Philippe Dauman said, "content creation is our central mission and our ongoing investments in programming are paying off as we see our television ratings continue to improve. Successful new programming across our networks during the first quarter included MTV's Randy Jackson Presents: America's Best Dance Crew, TV Land's High School Reunion and BET's Iron Ring among others, which joined new seasons of several proven audience favorites."
• Another Affliction Deal Falls Through - Negotiations with HDNet have reportedly fallen through. The promotion is now less than two months from its proposed first show and without a venue or television partner.
• UFC Targets Show for Latino Audience - El Octagono will debut on Galavision as the UFC attempts to expand MMA's demographic reach outside of 18-34 white males.
• WWE Q1 Results - Wrestlemania XXIV produced $31.3 million in revenue and $7.1 million in profits ($4.6 million net). The event drew 1,058,000 buys (including international).
  

HBO Leading Boxing's Resurrection

PhillySportsline.com has a feature on boxing's renaissance under the leadership of Mark Taffet, Senior VP of Sports Operations and Pay-per-view at HBO. Key quotes from Taffet:

"Through the past 18 months there has been a very conscious effort by everyone in any position of responsibility in the sport to do everything possible to keep it on top and restore it to its rightful place in the sports world... TV executives, boxers, promoters, they all made the commitment. There was no specific incident that caused it. It was a confluence of factors that made us all realize, though we weren't taking for granted the position of our sport, things were out of equilibrium."

"The catalyst for the resurgence of 2007 and 2008 in the sport of boxing was the De La Hoya-Mayweather fight. It began a string of fights where the best fought the best month after month after month... Everyone felt so good about that fight, and it felt so good to be a part of the sport where an event that big was taking place, that it became the catalyst and the motivator for the string of fights that followed and continue throughout 2008."

"Whatever the reason, the prevailing mindset used to be that, in a big fight, the winner won big and the loser lost big, but that was an obstacle to promoters continuing to make big fights... The last few years, the guys who don't win in the big fights are still able to get right back in line because the quality of the fights have been so high... You can see an endless series over the next 12-18 months involving some of the top pound-for-pound fighters in the world. The quality is there, and the desire to keep putting guys together to make the best fights is higher than it's been in years."

WWE No Way Out Draws 381,000 Buys

WWE is off to a hot start on pay-per-view in 2008. On the heels of drawing 561,000 for the Royal Rumble, the company drew 381,000 for No Way Out, up from around 200,000 last year. The company is averaging 431,000 buys per show heading into what could be a record setting WrestleMania.

Pacquiao-Marquez Draw 400,000 Buys

The preliminary estimate for Manny Pacquiao's March 15 victory over Juan Manuel Marquez is 400,000 domestic buys for $20.2 million according to the Wrestling Observer Newsletter. The number is an all time record on pay-per-view at any weight below 147 pounds. The event also drew a $3.3 million live gate in Las Vegas.

Pavlik-Taylor II Posts 250,000 Buys

The Kelly Pavlik-Jermaine Taylor rematch on 2/16 did 250,000 buys on pay-per-view. The number was considered disappointing, especially in light of speculation by HBO officials the day before the show that the fight could do 350,000-415,000 buys. Bob Arum blamed Taylor's management for exercising an immediate rematch rather than taking an interim fight.

“[HBO] got what they deserved. They keep dealing with a guy (Haymon) who doesn’t have a manager’s license. He’s a so-called adviser. We begged them: Let’s do a tune-up fight (with) both guys on (the same card) and then we’d go in together... You don’t have a fight where one guy gets knocked out on regular HBO and then come back on pay-per-view and ask people to buy it. You don’t do that," Arum told Yahoo! Sports.

WWE Royal Rumble Buy Rate

Preliminary pay-per-view estimates for WWE Royal Rumble 2008 project 561,000 buys according to a report released by the company last week. The number represents a roughly 10% increase over last year's event which drew 508,000 buys. In 2006 the event posted 575,000 buys.

The Royal Rumble is traditionally one of WWE's four biggest events of the year, along with Wrestlemania, Summer Slam, and Survivor Series.

New Era?: UFC Debuts on Yahoo! Pay-per-view

UFC 82 may ultimately be remembered as a milestone in the MMA industry, the first pay-per-view event distributed online by Yahoo! Sports. As part of a clever promotional campaign, and convenient beta testing program, Yahoo! made the online feed available for free to members of the online media. The results, at least based on my personal experience, were sterling.

I consider myself somewhere in the middle of the great technology divide that separates the tech savvy from the technophobe. Two simple cable connections, one quick scan of a randomly Googled (my apologies to Yahoo!) how to guide, and ten minutes later my television was broadcasting the Yahoo! internet feed in picture perfect quality.

At the risk of sounding like a cheap shill whose opinion was bought and sold for $44.95, the quality of the feed was impeccable and the experience was surprisingly painless. Outside of the fact that I was unable to take advantage of my full television screen, which I presume was the result of own ineptitude and/or personal technological limitations, there was no discernible difference between the standard pay-per-view experience and the Yahoo! pay-per-view experience.

That said, there is also no discernible benefit to buying the online version, at least for now. Yahoo! touted that the replay is available for 24 hours following its conclusion and it can be viewed by fight/chapter, but noticeably missing is the greatest promise of internet pay-per-view, a lower price tag.

Assuming that the basic assumptions about internet pay-per-view are true, then theoretically Zuffa has every incentive to drive business online by offering a lower price point. In theory the move would be more than compensated by a more favorable revenue split (with Yahoo! as compared to cable distributors, although as Zuffa's stature has increased, so has its leverage with distributors) and increased buys as a result of a lower price point.

But that will not happen anytime soon because Zuffa (or WWE or HBO Boxing) simply cannot risk raising the ire of the traditional television pay-per-view industry by aggressively driving consumers online with more attractive price points and a value added product. While the balance of power is shifting, the online revolution is simply not mature enough to sustain the company.

The traditional pay-per-view industry would retaliate against any move that threatened to cannibalize it. The UFC product could be deemphasized by cable and satellite distributors with dire results for Zuffa's bottom line. Put simply, the current dominant pay-per-view distributors could literally run Zuffa out of business by cutting the marketing, specifically direct targeted marketing, and placement of UFC events before Zuffa could successfully convert its audience online.

As an example, assume that Zuffa began offering UFC events on Yahoo! for $23, roughly half the price of what traditional cable or satellite providers currently charge. It is likely that those providers have most favored nation status when it comes to UFC pay-per-view, meaning they have first right of refusal on price point. They would likely balk at a significantly lower exclusive online price point.

Zuffa has already experienced a mild rebuke from the traditional distributors after it experienced early success with online streaming, thanks at least in part to a heavy promotional push for UFC.com and UFC on Demand during its pay-per-view broadcasts. As a result of pressure from the distributors, Zuffa stopped marketing its online pay-per-view steam in 2006, but maintained the product on its own website.

So if prices cannot be reduced, at least in the near term, what can Yahoo! offer that traditional pay-per-view cannot or will not? That is the (multi) million dollar question and one that the online world is waiting for the answer to.

One likely value added feature is exclusive content in the form of extra fights that cannot be shown on cable/satellite because of maximum time commitments. Yahoo!’s greatest advantage as a distributor might be its unlimited platform, in terms of time, allowing it to provide virtually endless extra content. It remains to be seen what other tricks Yahoo! may have up its sleeve in the pending pay-per-view arms race.

A new era may be dawning in the MMA industry in the form of online pay-per-view streaming, but its zenith is years away. Until then Yahoo! will spend its time refining the logistics of the new platform and quietly exposing consumers to its possibilities. The future is coming, but its not here yet.

UFC Partners with Yahoo! For Internet Pay-per-view

Today the UFC announced Yahoo! as its new online pay-per-view distributor:

"This relationship with Yahoo! is an important step for the UFC to build its global distribution platform for live pay-per-view events,” said Dana White, UFC President. “We are looking forward to working with Yahoo! Sports to expand our reach and bring the sport of mixed martial arts to fight fans in every corner of the world in every possible language.”

Perhaps in a sign of where the industry is heading, the title of the press release is simply "UFC Announces Yahoo! As New PPV Provider," with no qualifier such as "internet" or "online."

SEE ALSO:

• The Growing Importance of New Media
• Dana White on Internet Pay-per-view
• First Success Story in Internet Streaming?
  

The Next Big Thing?: Preliminary UFC 81 Buy Rate

Dave Meltzer reports in this week's Wrestling Observer Newsletter that 600,000 buys is the preliminary estimate for UFC 81. Regarding Lesnar's worth, Meltzer wrote:

That show was not going to do more than 325,000 buys with the Tim Sylvia vs. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira match and a semifinal of Nathan Marquardt v. Jeremy Horn. In fact, that would be an optimistic expectation. So if this holds up, Lesnar was worth $12.36 million in overall revenue (f0r UFC he would be worth about 40% of that as UFC would probably only see a little over $5 million of that increase).

600,000 is an impressive number, likely good enough for top five all time in gross buys and top three in revenue (because of the $44.95 price tag), but the story of Lesnar's true value to the company is yet to be told. His first fight was guaranteed to move the buy rate, particularly in light of the company targeting a new audience in the form of pro wrestling fans.

Now the easy fruit has now been picked. The questions moving forward are:

1. How sustainable is Lesnar's drawing power? Did fans view him as a one time novelty, especially in light of his loss, or was his performance promising enough to leave them wanting more?
2. More importantly, how much of the new pro wrestling audience that sampled the show to see Lesnar can the company retain as regular viewers? The show was reportedly expected to draw a heavy percentage of new viewers, as high as 50% according to some sources.

The final number usually shows significant growth from the early estimates, however, there have been reports that this show did an unusually high number of advance buys which could temper the usual growth.

In Focus: The WEC

The WEC is live on Versus tonight from Albuquerque, New Mexico in the brand's first venture outside of the friendly confines of Las Vegas since being acquired by Zuffa. The card is strong from top to bottom with three title fights. The only thing missing is star power, specifically the brand's golden boy Urjah Faber. Our friend Sam Caplan has a full rundown of the card at ProElite.com.

In a familiar situation, Spike is counter programming with UFC Unleashed at 9 & 11PM. I recently had the opportunity to speak with Brian Diamond, Vice President of Sports at Spike, for an upcoming FIGHT! magazine piece on the relationship between the UFC and Spike. Diamond indicated that he stays in touch with his counterpart at Versus to make sure they don't get in each others way. However, it appears that cooperation doesn't go much deeper than not going live head-to-head, something Zuffa wouldn't allow anyway, as both have chosen Wednesday night as the home of their respective MMA brands and consistently go head-to-head.

Despite the fact that it produces an entertaining product and is arguably the second best brand/promotion in the industry, the WEC's future is not entirely clear. The stated goal, at least for public consumption, is to build a brand on par with the UFC, something that I don't believe will ever be allowed to happen. It is possible to envision the brand becoming, if it isn't already, the premier 145 pound and below promotion in the world, but what that's really worth remains to be seen. I could see a future in Japan and Latin America for the brand given the lighter weight focus.

The WEC is scheduled for six shows in 2008 with plans to take the brand on the road with California, Texas, Okalohoma, New Jersey, and Florida mentioned as possible destinations by Vice President Peter Dropick. The brand is also eying its first pay-per-view event, most likely built around Faber v. Jens Pulver.

It is hard to see the financial payoff for Zuffa of promoting a second pay-per-view brand. WWE, with a legitimately equal second brand, ultimately found diminishing returns in its experience with multiple pay-per-view brands. WWE currently maintains three television brands, but has shifted from separately branded pay-per-views to tri-branded pay-per-views.

Furthermore, as the UFC continues to expand its live event schedule, the pressure will become greater to use the WEC as a farm system for the UFC, plucking the top talent for "the big show," or to merge the brands outright.

For now, it seems the only practical reason for the brand's existence is ultimately its television deal with Versus. The brand was explicitly purchased by Zuffa in order to allow it to enter into an agreement with Versus, thus blocking a competitor from a relatively strong television clearance. Until that contract expires and the network loses interest in UFC-lite, the WEC appears set to wander on producing some of the most exciting shows in MMA, but ultimately facing the glass ceiling of being Zuffa's B-brand.

Initial UFC 80 Pay-per-view Estimate

Dave Meltzer reports that the initial pay-per-view estimate for UFC 80 is 225,000 buys. In 2007, only UFC 72, another tape delayed international event featuring a relatively weak lineup, fared worse.

As MMAPayout.com wrote leading into the show, running ever more frequent pay-per-views, at ever increasing price points, with shallower lineups and less star power does not seem to be a recipe for success.

WWE Survivor Series Buy Rate Down 16%

WWE Survivor Series 2007 posted 320,000 buys on pay-per-view for an estimated $5.54 million in revenue according to The Wrestling Observer Newsletter. In 2006, the event posted 383,000 buys for $6.64 million in revenue.

The event was expected to do better based on a stronger lineup than the year before, but may have been hurt by UFC 78 which aired on pay-per-view the night before.

Trinidad-Jones Posts 500,000 Buys

Last Saturday's Felix Trinidad-Roy Jones Jr. fight beat expectations, posting 500,000 buys on pay-per-view for HBO Boxing's first event of 2008. The show had been ridiculed, by UFC Vice President Marc Ratner among others, as being several years too late. Jones had been inactive for the better part of three years coming into the fight, while Trinidad had been retired for two and half years.

Similar complaints were raised in 2006 when Royce Gracie fought Matt Hughes and both times Ken Shamrock fought Tito Ortiz. At the time the hardcore fan base blasted the booking as one sided, asking "who wants to see that?" The events went on to do 620,000 and 775,000 buys respectively, not to mention a then record 5.7 million viewers for the final Ortiz-Shamrock fight on Spike.

The lesson is clear: casual fans like to see stars, even if they are past their prime.

EliteXC Update

Dave Meltzer recently reported in The Wrestling Observer Newsletter that EliteXC is expected to focus on Showtime this year as opposed to pay-per-view. The company's contract with Showtime is structured in such a way that it needs 60,000 pay-per-view buys to match the money generated by airing an event on Showtime. Under the terms of a new contract, Showtime pays the production costs and a rights fee for EXC events aired on the premium network as opposed to last year when EXC paid Showtime.

There had been some speculation that Showtime's commitment to EXC was waning, however, Meltzer reports that the network seems to be solidly behind the MMA product, but wants more communication between it and EXC.

The company is also embroiled in a dispute with Gina Carano over her involvement in American Gladiators and reportedly is involved in conversations for a late late Friday night slot on NBC.

Dana White on International Expansion, Internet Pay-per-view, and Network TV

Pramit Mohapatra interviewed Dana White for SI.com on the eve of UFC 80. White addressed several topics that MMAPayout.com has covered in the last week, including international expansion, internet pay-per-view, and network TV.

White dodged the timing question of international expansion, but did emphasis that the company never canceled UFC 83 from Manchester because it was never officially scheduled. White did offer some insight into where the company sees the industry heading in the big picture and how that relates to international expansion:

We want to get out there, get the brand known, get people into mixed martial arts. We're taking the show around and traveling it to introduce it to people because the bottom line is if you've never seen mixed martial arts and you think, "Oh god, I wouldn't like it -- it's barbaric," all I have to do is get you inside that arena and you're converted. It's the most exciting combat sport in the world and it's probably the greatest live sporting event you'll ever see. I really believe that when this thing goes to the Internet, we're going to be global.

The promise of internet pay-per-view is nothing new to readers of MMAPayout.com. This is the first time I've seen White publicly endorse the medium, however, the UFC has been an aggressive proponent of digital content with UFC on Demand.

On the topic of network television, White was again optimistic and surprisingly candid. He admitted that UFC 80 was originally a candidate for network TV and seemed to confirm talks with NBC in addition to CBS as MMAPayout.com reported earlier this week:

It will be ready when we cut a deal that works for us. I'm not going to go out there and cut any stupid deals. I use boxing as the blueprint of what not to do with this sport. And, no matter what, we're out there, we're working hard, we're trying to grow the UFC and expose it to more people, and get it into other countries. But, we're not going to cut any deals that don't make sense for this business long-term.

The Untold Story of Zuffa's Purchase of the UFC

One of the most dramatic moments of the recent CNBC special, From Bloodsport to Big Time, was the scene in which Bob Meyrowitz claimed that Lorenzo Fertitta, a member of the Nevada State Athletic Commission at the time, blocked regulation of the UFC, essentially forcing Meyrowitz to sell the company to the Fertittas and Dana White. Lawyers for Zuffa immediately contacted CNBC and got the segment pulled from subsequent airings.

In The Wrestling Observer Newsletter, Dave Meltzer recently offered what he believes to be the accurate version of the story, partly based on his first hand knowledge, as well as the story of the early history of Zuffa. The highlights according to Meltzer:

A hearing concerning sanctioning the UFC was scheduled before the NSAC on April 23, 1999. Meyrowitz had been told that NSAC sanctioning was a prerequisite to returning pay-per-view. As the hearing approached, Meyrowitz believed that he had the votes (3-2) for sanctioning, but the night before the hearing he was informed that one of the commissioners had switched his vote. Meyrowitz withdrew his request for sanctioning because he was told that he could only ask for one vote and a negative result would doom the company's future on pay-per-view.

"I don't know which commissioner it was, but the commissioner who had the 11th hour change of mind that caused Meyrowitz to pull out was not Feritta," Meltzer wrote. It is interesting to note that one of the other commissioners during this period was Gina Carano's father, Glenn.

More than one year later the New Jersey State Athletic Commission under Larry Hazzard did sanction the Meyrowitz-owned UFC. At that point Dana White contacted Meyrowitz about purchasing the company with the Fertittas, including Lorenzo who had subsequently left the NSAC, as his backer. Meyrowitz was interested in retaining an interest in the company, however, the Fertittas were only willing to buy outright. Meyrowitz decided to sell for $2 million because he was under the impression that sanctioning from the NSAC was unlikely, which meant no pay-per-view.

Meltzer noted that while in the CNBC piece Meyrowitz claimed no regrets about the way things worked out that in reality he has always thought he was treated unfairly and has been working to return to MMA for several years. Shortly after the special aired Meyrowitz did announce a new MMA project in association with Live Nation, a subsidiary of Clear Channel and the leading promoter of live events in North America.

NSAC sanctioning and pay-per-view didn't turn out to be the immediate saviors as expected. The first Zuffa promoted show on pay-per-view did 75,000 buys behind a strong marketing campaign, however, following that "horrible show," according to Meltzer, subsequent events settled in the 30,000-50,000 buy range until Ortiz-Shamrock I did 150,000. Following that pay-per-view numbers returned to the former range.

To make matters worse, in order to get back on pay-per-view the company signed an unfavorable distribution deal which guaranteed the cable companies a certain amount of money. The early buys weren't even close to what they needed to meet the guarantees and they lost a lot of money as a result.

The other revelation from the CNBC piece was that at one point the Fertittas were ready to get out and had White shop the company. One of the people White approached was Shane McMahon, believing that all the UFC needed was a television partner and the WWE could get it on Spike TV with RAW as a lead in. Ultimately, White got a $7 million offer and the Fertittas declined because they'd lost over $30 million at that point.

The rest as they say is history. White reached his own deal with Spike (only after agreeing to pay all production costs), The Ultimate Fighter was born, and the UFC exploded. However, none of that could have happened if Vince McMahon and the WWE hadn't signed off on the deal, a decision which McMahon may or may not regret today.

UFC Pay-Per-View Business in 2007

The pay-per-view picture for the UFC in 2007 has came into focus in recent months with the release of official pay-per-view numbers from Randy Couture's two fights in 2007, the latest S&P report from November and a comprehensive report in the Wrestling Observer Newsletter. When all the buys are counted it appears as though the company will finish the year around 4.9 million buys, down roughly 5% from last year's estimated 5.2 million buys.

UFC PAY-PER-VIEW BREAKDOWN - 2007 / 2006

• UFC 67 - Silva v. Lutter - 400,000
  
• UFC 57 - Liddell v. Couture III - 400,000
• UFC 68 - Slyvia v. Couture - 540,000
  
• UFC 58 - Franklin v. Loiseau - 300,000
• UFC 69 - St. Pierre v. Serra - 400,000
• UFC 59 - Ortiz v. Griffin - 425,000
• UFC 71 - Liddell v. Jackson II - 675,000
  
• UFC 60 - Hughes v. Gracie - 620,000
• UFC 72 - Franklin v. Okami - 200,000
• No June pay-per-view event in 2006
  
• UFC 73 - Ortiz v. Evans - 425,000
  
• UFC 61 - Ortiz v. Shamrock II - 775,000
• UFC 74 - Couture v. Gonzaga - 520,000
  
• UFC 62 - Liddell v. Sobral II - 500,000
• UFC 76 - Liddell v. Jardine - 475,000
  
• UFC 63 - Hughes v. Penn - 400,000
• UFC 77 - Franklin v. Silva II - 325,000
• UFC 64 - Franklin v. Silva - 300,000
• UFC 78 - Evans v. Bisbing - 325,000^
• UFC 65 - Hughes v. St. Pierre - 500,000
• UFC 79 - Liddell v. Silva - 600,000*
  
• UFC 66 - Liddell v. Ortiz - 1,050,000
  

^ = reportedly did 325,000 buys at a minimum
* = MMAPayout.com's projected minimum

YEAR TO YEAR COMPARISON [2007 / 2006 (% Change)]

• Q1 - 940,000 / 700,000 (+34%)
  
• Q2 - 1,275,000 / 1,450,000 (-12%)*
• Q3 - 1,420,000 / 1,675,000 (-15%)
• Q4 - 1,250,000 / 1,800,000 (-31%)
• TOTAL - 4,885,000 / 5,200,000 (-5%)

* - three events in '07 compared to two events in '06

NOTE: In October of 2007, with the pay-per-view picture beginning to take shape, MMAPayout.com forecast that the UFC would do roughly 5.1 million buys. While what we thought we knew has changed greatly in that time span, the forecast still ended up being only 3% off.

CROSS INDUSTRY COMPARISONS [Buys (Estimated Gross Revenue)(# of events)]

• UFC - 4,885,000 ($194.5 million)(11)
• HBO Boxing - 4,795,000 ($239.75 million)(8)
  
• WWE - 2,797,000* (13 events included, 2 outstanding)
  

* price points vary on WWE pay-per-view events

Complete analysis and commentary on these numbers and the state of the MMA industry generally as 2008 begins coming to MMAPayout.com in the coming days and weeks. For now you can read Dave Meltzer's analysis of the Business of MMA in 2008 at Yahoo! Sports.

MMAPayout.com's 2007 Power Rankings

MMAPayout.com's 2007 Power Rankings are based on the following formula: gross pay-per-view revenue ($40 per buy) + gross live gate revenue. Fighters are credited only for pay-per-view events headlined in 2007. A minimum of two main events is required in order to appear on the list, resulting in the exclusion of Tito Ortiz, Quinton Jackson, Tim Sylvia, Georges St. Pierre, Michael Bisbing, Travis Lutter, Matt Serra, Yushin Okami, Gabriel Gonzaga, and Keith Jardine, as well as Dan Henderson.

MMAPayout.com's 2007 Power Rankings:

1. Chuck Liddell - $81.1 million (3 Events)*
2. Randy Couture - $48.7 million (2)
   
3. Anderson Silva - $38.3 million (2)
   
4. Rashad Evans - >$33.7 million (2)**
   
5. Wanderlei Silva - $32.5 million (2)***
   
6. Rich Franklin - $24.7 million (2)
   

*NOTE - Includes UFC 79 at an estimated 600,000 buys.
**NOTE - A complete pay-per-view estimate for UFC 78 is not yet available, however, it is believed to have done in excess of 325,000 buys. Therefore, Evans grossed is credited with at least $33.7 million in gross revenue.
***NOTE - Includes UFC 79 estimate as well as Pride 2/24 show which did 40,000 buys and a $2 million gate.

For comparison, here are the 2006 Power Rankings using the same criteria. Excluded from the list are Couture, David Loiseau, Forrest Griffin, Renato Sobral, BJ Penn, Anderson Silva, and Georges St. Pierre.

MMAPayout.com's 2006 Power Rankings:

1. Tito Ortiz - $102 million (3)
   
2. Chuck Liddell - $89.9 million (3)
3. Matt Hughes - $67.4 million (3)
4. Royce Graice/Ken Shamrock - $62.1 million (2)*
5. Rich Franklin - $27.6 million (2)

*NOTE - Gracie and Shamrock would not qualify for the list, but were so significant to business and so similar in drawing capacity that it seems to make sense to include them as a pair.

Cumulative rankings for the current boom period look like this:

MMAPayout.com's 2006-2007 Combined Power Rankings:

1. Chuck Liddell - $142.1 million (5)
2. Tito Ortiz - $120.6 million (4)
3. Randy Couture - $68.1 million (3)
   
4. Matt Hughes - $67.4 million (3)
5. Royce Graice/Ken Shamrock - $62.1 million (2)
6. Rich Franklin - $52.3 million (4)
7. Anderson Silva - $52.1 million (3)
8. Georges St. Pierre - $40.9 million (2)
   
9. Rashad Evans - >$33.7 million (2)
10. Wanderlei Silva - $32.5 million (2)*

*NOTE - Not including Pride PPV events from 2006.

Fertitta Speaks Out in Rare Interview

Lorenzo Fertitta recently granted a rare interview to Kevin Iole of Yahoo! Sports. Iole receives a lot of criticism in some quarters, but deserves praise for putting Fertitta on the defensive with some tough questions about the MMA industry. Fertitta was aggressive in advocating the strength and success of Zuffa and the UFC.

When asked whether or not he would consider 2007 a down year because boxing beat MMA on pay-per-view, Fertitta replied:

We've shown we have staying power. We had a big year in 2005, a bigger year in 2006 and a big year in 2007. Boxing is always going to have its big fights. It's kind of like horse racing. There's always that Kentucky Derby, where one or two times a year everyone is going to watch. That's great. But in general, if you look at the consistency of our performance, I have been very happy with it... One of the greatest successes that we've had, for instance, is the last show we did in New Jersey (UFC 78 on Nov. 17). We had a fight being headlined by two guys who had never fought for a championship and, relatively, had never been proven to be pay-per-view draws. But we basically sold out the arena in New Jersey and we did very strong, above average, pay-per-view. So to me, while it wasn't Liddell-Ortiz, that said more to me than one of what you might call one of our bigger fights did. It showed that our UFC brand can carry a whole show.

The latter comment on UFC 78 is hard to reconcile with recent reports. Dave Meltzer wrote in the most recent edition of the Wrestling Observer Newsletter that the event is believed to have been one of the top 15 pay-per-view events of the year (including boxing and pro wrestling), which would put it somewhere North of 325,000 buys. While perhaps above expectations given the weak lineup, that certainly is not a strong, above average pay-per-view number, not if the company is averaging roughly 400,000 buys per show as believed.

Fertitta also addressed the disparity between boxing and MMA pay scales, echoing the same sentiments MMAPayout.com has in the past (here and in the new edition of MMA Sports):

You have to understand that the UFC has a completely different business model than boxing. We are in a situation where we're not only the promoter, but we pay
for all of the production, where as in boxing, the promoter doesn't pay for any of that stuff. HBO or the network does. We pay for all of the advertising and the marketing. If you're a boxing promoter, you don't do that. You don't come out of pocket. Boxing promoters take no risk up front. They get guarantees from the venue and from the networks, so they take no risk. We underwrite the entire thing. And like I said before, we invest into the sport to try to grow it by doing things like going to Europe. We took major losses in Europe (in 2007). We didn't make money on any of those European shows. But looking forward five years, we realize that Europe is going to be bigger than the U.S. and a lot of those fighters are going to benefit from the way we've cultivated the European market. The boxing way is to take a short-term approach, but we're focused on the long term, both for the brand and for the sport.

Perhaps the boldest statement to come out of the interview was found in Fertitta's answer to what is probably the most important question facing the "industry" as it is, are we experiencing an MMA boom or just a UFC boom?

A lot of people talk about the growth of MMA. I don't believe in that. I don't know where anybody can show me there is this great success in MMA outside of the UFC. There has been explosive growth for the UFC, but MMA in general, nobody is making a breakthrough. The biggest non-UFC pay-per-view, you might know better than me, but it's something like 25,000, maybe 30,000 buys. There is a bit of a misnomer there. It's not the growth of MMA. It's the growth of the UFC.

The entire interview is well worth reading, including statements on mainstream sponsorships and a strong endorsement of Dana White.

Flash: Early Mayweather-Hatton Numbers Well Below Expectations

Dave Meltzer is reporting that the preliminary numbers for the Mayweather-Hatton pay-per-view came in at 850,000 buys, well short of the 1.5 million buys projected by Golden Boy Promotions.