Thread Tools

Display Modes

**No_Mercy** · 02-22-2013, 04:11 PM

It's corporate downsizing without the benefits. The infrastructure is now becoming bloated so it's beginning to contract especially after the SF buy out. I sincerely hope the UFC has not peaked cuz they're one of the companies that are on an upsurge during the recession.

Look at Best Buy, Blockbusters video, Circuit City, JC Pennys, Sears, etc. They're all closing shops entirely cutting out thousands of jobs.

This is the first time we're seeing it on this scale and unfortunately any minute reason gives them a cause. If you miss a deadline you're reprimanded, but if you miss work and underperform then it's cause for dismissal. In the UFC it boils down to the W's and L's that's it.

It's a three tiered plan.

1.) Make the company roster leaner. Sports teams do this all the time. They've reached a tipping point.

2.) Use Fitch as a martyr to show that anybody is capable of being cut if you under perform even for one fight.

3.) Don't bite the hand that feeds you. (refer to #3. Randy is on this list as well after the fact.)
- not wanting to fight Kos
- video game disagreement
- with the exception of the E. Silva fight, fighting in a non-fan friendly manner

If you really think about it, it's not just them. When Chuck, Tito, BJ started losing what did Dana say. Granted they got more opportunities to fight, but the results were the same, but worded differently. The business can NOT run without drawing seats. If you're losing and you're not drawing then how can they justify paying out said purse fees. It's a losing venture.

*Note* UFC 151 played a catalyst. Any other org would have shut doors after that fiasco.

**locnott** · 02-22-2013, 04:22 PM

Dana might be testing the waters, he should realize that MMA are not necessarily UFC fans, they are fans of fighters, not the organization that puts them on. If fighters that have lots of fans leave the UFC the fans could go away also. Don't really matter if you lost your last fight or not if you have fans and people are willing to pay to see you fight its good business to keep you. The opposite is also true and I think thats what happened to fitch, he was a top talent but Im sure Dana felt that what they were paying him compared to what people will pay to see him fight was upside down.. Its a profit/loss thing..
I dont agree with the fitch move but a previous poster has already covered it, Dana wants fitch in the UFC but for CHEAP MONEY ONLY.

GrappleRetarded · 02-22-2013, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No_Mercy

It's corporate downsizing without the benefits. The infrastructure is now becoming bloated so it's beginning to contract especially after the SF buy out. I sincerely hope the UFC has not peaked cuz they're one of the companies that are on an upsurge during the recession.

Look at Best Buy, Blockbusters video, Circuit City, JC Pennys, Sears, etc. They're all closing shops entirely cutting out thousands of jobs.

This is the first time we're seeing it on this scale and unfortunately any minute reason gives them a cause. If you miss a deadline you're reprimanded, but if you miss work and underperform then it's cause for dismissal. In the UFC it boils down to the W's and L's that's it.

It's a three tiered plan.

1.) Make the company roster leaner. Sports teams do this all the time. They've reached a tipping point.

2.) Use Fitch as a martyr to show that anybody is capable of being cut if you under perform even for one fight.

3.) Don't bite the hand that feeds you. (refer to #3. Randy is on this list as well after the fact.)
- not wanting to fight Kos
- video game disagreement
- with the exception of the E. Silva fight, fighting in a non-fan friendly manner

If you really think about it, it's not just them. When Chuck, Tito, BJ started losing what did Dana say. Granted they got more opportunities to fight, but the results were the same, but worded differently. The business can NOT run without drawing seats. If you're losing and you're not drawing then how can they justify paying out said purse fees. It's a losing venture.

*Note* UFC 151 played a catalyst. Any other org would have shut doors after that fiasco.

So what you're saying is that this is all Jon Jones' fault

**Purgetheweak** · 02-22-2013, 04:50 PM

Didn't care when Fitch was cut... Care even less about Nunes...

**No_Mercy** · 02-22-2013, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrappleRetarded

So what you're saying is that this is all Jon Jones' fault

Heh...heh...subtlely. :P That was a wake up call for the org that they weren't invicible. All other orgs shut down after cancelling fights or putting on poor substitutes. IE: Affliction's Fedor vs Barnett fiasco and Elite with Kimbo Slice vs Ken Shamrock then Seth coming in last minute knocking out their "star." Of course the Calgary show with the injuries. That show may have sold out, but it effected sales of other regions.

Coupled with the fact they've invested money in buying out SF and consolidating their roster they have to lean out the herd. So my question to all is this. Thereotically you are now in charge of a billion dollar company. You have the option of firing long time employees, extricating fighters from their contract, continue to bleed hoping it'll work itself out, or take a personal pay cut. It's not as simple as that, but it's the just of it.

So now that you've narrowed it down to extricating fighters from their contracts, the question is who? That's where we're at now. Some are easy choices, others' are not. Favoritism plays a part just like anything else in the world. Nepotism has always been a part of society as well.

Kill excess.

Joabbuac · 02-22-2013, 07:30 PM

I always let out a sigh when i see Nunes on the card, i hate watching him fight. All that showy shit he does is just flapping around in the wind to me.