(Jon…erg…just hear me out…*duff*…if we make it to round 2 *duff**duff*…I promise you no less than 20 thousand more buys. Jon?) 

At first glance, the pay-per-view numbers that just came in for UFC 159 don’t seem all that terrible. Truth be told, it would be near impossible to declare the event’s 550,000 estimated buys anything less than a success. However, when you realize that the sole reason the fight was booked in the first place was to cash in on the Chael Sonnen circus act, that 500k kind of pales in comparison to the 925,000 UFC 148 pulled in. In fact, it’s pretty much in line with the average Jon Jones-headlined pay-per-view, save his 700k-earning fight with Rashad Evans at UFC 145. MMAFighting’s Dave Meltzer reports:

Preliminary estimates for UFC 159, headlined by Jon Jones’ successful light heavyweight title defense against Chael Sonnen, indicate pay-per-view buys coming in between 520,000 and 550,000.

There was hope for bigger numbers in the days after the fight, due to the strong ratings of UFC 159 shoulder programming. The weigh-ins were the second-highest rated since Fuel began airing. The event also drew the highest ratings for post-fight coverage of a pay-per-view on Fuel. Prelim match ratings on FX were 32 percent above average.

The number would be the company’s second largest of 2013, trailing UFC 158, with Georges St-Pierre vs. Nick Diaz, but ahead of the now No. 3 event of the year, UFC 157, headlined by Ronda Rousey vs. Liz Carmouche.

So yeah, the event was a success by most standards, yet it only managed to pull in 70,000 more buys that Jones’ UFC 140 title defense against Lyoto Machida, who Jones once begrudgingly referred to as “my lowest pay-per-view draw of the year.” For some reason, this image seems to sum things up nicely.

(“We will open the bidding for a UFC 149 pay-per-view purchase at $49.95. Do I hear $49.95? What if I said I’d thrown in this *authentic* jersey, completely free of charge? $49.95…anyone? OK, how about ten bucks?”) 

By Oliver Chan

Recently, after reading 12OzCurl’s article (well, just the opening paragraph) I came to a realization that the only reason why I’m here is because I’m Asian and Benny figures that must mean I’m good with numbers. So break out your abacuses…this shit is about to get real.

Today’s class? Variable pricing and whether or not this system should be adopted by the UFC in regards to the pricing of pay-per-view events. I’ll wait for everyone to decide whether or not to skip this article and go straight to the “Hot Potato” links.

Still with me? Probably not. But anyways, here we go.

For those that don’t know, Variable Pricing (or Dynamic Pricing as it is called) has been the main pricing strategies for airlines and hotels on how they price their own inventory.  Recently, the San Francisco Giants adopted this form of pricing in order to better optimize ticket sales for their events. The strategy is similar to that used by the hotel and airline industry where prices go up and down depending on current market conditions and historical trends. Did it work? Hell yeah it did. By using sell-out history from past games based on opponents, starting pitchers, weather, day of the week, evening versus afternoon, and of course, current supply, the Giants were able to significantly increase their ticket sales revenue to such a degree that other franchises are looking to adopt similar methods to pricing their games.

(Do women in the UFC represent a new path to the future, or business as usual? Photo via Esther Lin/MMAFighting)

By Brian J. D’Souza

There have been many landmark events in MMA history — the inception of the UFC in 1993, the debut of The Ultimate Fighter in 2005, the fall of PRIDE in 2007, and the acquisition of Strikeforce in 2011. As 2013 gets underway, it’s already becoming apparent that the sport is undergoing a series of events that will change it forever.

THE DISSOLUTION OF STRIKEFORCE

On March 12, 2011, Zuffa acquired Strikeforce. Although the San Jose-based promotion was subsequently stripped of many of its best fighters, television network Showtime opted to renew their broadcast deal with the promotion — until now. The January 13, 2013 show headlined by Nate Marquardt vs. Tarec Saffiedine will be the promotion’s death knell, as the name “Strikeforce” takes its final resting place in the cemetery next to Affliction, WEC, PRIDE, Elite XC, BodogFight, and the IFL.

There were obvious benefits in Zuffa stringing Showtime along as a broadcast partner of the increasingly-diluted Strikeforce brand: It kept Showtime from seeking a new promoter, independent of Zuffa, to partner with. Currently, promotions like Shark Fights, Legacy Fighting Championship, Invicta FC, and Xtreme Fighting Championships are in the running as potential broadcast partners for Showtime. For the winning promotion(s), mainstream television exposure on CBS might also be possible, just as CBS aired Strikeforce events in the past.

However, no matter which promotion Showtime airs, the most significant component of the deal comes down to what brand-name fighters can be acquired to get better ratings and more subscribers for Showtime.

THE RISE OF BELLATOR

(We’re sorry, Stephan, but unless those things are actual guns, you’re getting your ass kicked tonight.) 

In the days leading up to UFC 153, many of you (and by you, we mean the entire MMA Interwebz) had some less than favorable things to say about the pairing of Stephan Bonnar and Anderson Silva. As if the bookies hadn’t told us all we needed to know, the general consensus among fans seemed to be the evening’s main event was a “travesty, a sham, and a mockery” that “blasphemed the great sport of MMA” and was a “completely meaningless squash match” whose “insulting pairing” would be reflected in “the abysmal pay-per-view numbers it receives.” And those were the favorable comments.

But for every fifteen of you complaining, there were apparently five or more of you who were forced to stifle your true excitement over this matchup like a pedo at a tee-ball game, because if the early numbers are any indication, squash matches featuring unstoppable killing machines are the new superfights. According to several reports, the pay-per-view numbers for UFC 153 are in the range of 340,00 to 410,000 buys. These numbers not only exceeded expectation, but are not that far below September’s squash match of the month featuring Jon Jones and Vitor Belfort, which managed to clear over 450,000 buys despite having those little guys that no one cares about fighting in the night’s co-main event.

(“Sorry Frankie, but based on the terms of your pay-per-view bonus scale — as clearly stated in your contract — you actually owe us $10,000.“)

It wasn’t just UFC 150‘s live-gate that fell way below expectations. According to a new report from Dave “Doom ‘N’ Gloom” Meltzer, last weekend’s Edgar vs. Henderson 2 card pulled in an estimated 190,000 pay-per-view buys. Judging by the MMAPayout.com Blue Book, that would make UFC 150 the second worst-performing UFC PPV since February 2006. And what’s the #1 worst-performing card of the last six years? The UFC 147: Silva vs. Franklin 2 show from just two months earlier, which took in only 175k buys. (UFC 149: Faber vs. Barao didn’t fare much better last month with a modest 235k buys.) Sorry Fric and Frack, Christmas has been canceled this year.

A couple caveats:
Keep in mind that there was a technical issue on Saturday night where DirecTV subscribers were unable to order the UFC 150 broadcast by phone or computer, although they could still order it via their remotes, according to reports. Plus, Bendo vs. Frankie ran up against the penultimate night of the 2012 Olympics, which may have stolen a few more viewers.

That being said…

(Video courtesy of YouTube/FightHubTV)

It’s official. The world must be ending soon. How else can you explain the fact that we actually agree with something Gary Shaw said regarding MMA?

In this interview Shaw did with FightHubTV.com about Zuffa’s purchase of Strikeforce, Shaw detailed who the winners and losers are in the deal and his viewpoints were all valid ones.

“Great for the UFC [and the] Fertittas. Brilliant, brilliant move. For the fighters, terrible move because they don’t really have another place to go and bargain. So, if you ask me as a businessman, I think it’s brilliant on the part of the UFC, Shaw said. “I’m not even sure that when Strikeforce’s contract is up with Showtime, that they just don’t fold [the promotion] into the UFC at that point and just make it a pay-per-view. For the fans it’s bad, for the fighters it’s bad and for the UFC it’s terrific.”

(You know that fight we let you see for free last October? Any interest in paying a lot of money to see it again? Photo courtesy of ESPN.)

After threatening the move for a year-and-a-half, the WEC announced today that it will officially be putting an event on pay-per-view in April, seriously, for real this time. WEC 48 (April 24th, Sacramento), will be headlined by the featherweight title fight between reigning champion Jose Aldo and former champ Urijah Faber, with the lightweight title rematch between Benson Henderson and Donald Cerrone in the co-headlining spot; also, Mike Brown will continue his path back up the 145-pound ladder with a scrap against Manny Gamburyan.

In return, the WEC is boldly asking that you shell out $44.99, or four cents more than the standard price for a UFC PPV show – which feels a little presumptuous, considering the promotion is low on genuine stars and it’s the first time that a WEC broadcast hasn’t been free. Of course, if there’s any WEC event that’s worthy of your money, it’s this one, and hardcore MMA fans know that the WEC may put on the most consistently entertaining events on the planet. Still, is that enough to justify a $45 reaming? In this economy? Check out the poll on the right side of the homepage, and let us know how you feel. Any predictions for how many buys this card will take in?

(Whaddaya say, Baby Face, feel like taking a pay cut and burning some bridges?)

According to FiveOuncesofPain, Affliction is looking at holding their third event on July 11, 2009.  If you’re thinking that this date sounds familiar for some reason, congratulations, you are an astute observer!  Yeah, July 11 is when UFC 100 is.  And it’s kind of a big deal to the UFC.  So why would Affliction guarantee that their event gets counter-programmed by scheduling it on the same night as one of the biggest UFC cards ever?  Possibly because they know they’re done and want to hurt the UFC however they can on the way out.

That’s what Sam Caplan thinks, anyway.  According to his report Affliction is offering “restructured” contracts to their fighters (read: asking them to fight cheap) in the hopes of lowering overhead costs and getting the event on network TV or basic cable.  They know that no pay-per-view distributor wants to go head to head with the UFC, but if they can offer their show up for free they figure it might hurt the UFC’s PPV buys just a little, and what the hell, Affliction isn’t looking to promote any events after this one anyway.

(The first taste is free, but the second dose is going to cost you.)

Taking full advantage of his position at Versus.com, Ariel Helwani just posted an interview with WEC Vice President Peter Dropick where they discuss the future of the organization and rumors of a move to pay-per-view.  Dropick was all too eager to confirm those rumors, telling Helwani that the first WEC pay-per-view will be headlined by the much-anticipated rematch between Urijah Faber and WEC featherweight champ Mike Brown, and it could happen as soon as this June.

If you’re worried about how you’re going to afford all the MMA this summer, you’ll be glad to hear that Dropick also promised the price of a WEC pay-per-view would be less than a UFC event, though he didn’t specify by how much.  As for what else might appear on that card, he wouldn’t rule out an appearance by Miguel Torres, saying he wants the pay-per-view to be “stacked.”

Obviously, the WEC is considering Sacramento, where they’ve done extremely well in the past, as a potential venue for this event, but Dropick said there were “three or four different cities” they were considering as well.  He also commented on the status of the lighter weight classes in the WEC, and the potential for Gina Carano to head up a women’s division at some point in the near future.  The whole interview is worth a read, so give it a look.

(When Bob got stood up by the captain of the football team on prom night, it was simply more than he could bear.)

With crazy freak show fights mixed in among legitimately interesting real fights at K-1 Dynamite on New Year’s Eve, we were more than a little disappointed when we heard that the event might not hit airwaves in the U.S.  This is the type of thing that usually airs on HDNet, but because Dynamite is technically not covered under HDNet’s contract with FEG it may not get shown on American TV’s at all.

Never fear, though, as MMA Payout has passed along a press release from Event Magic TV suggesting that the fight may be available via streaming online video for $29.95 on pay-per-view.  

Yippee.  Nothing quite like paying money to watch fights on the computer, especially when those same fights are likely to be available for free on the internet a day or so later.  

Look, I’m not going to judge you.  I won’t call you a loser for staying home on New Year’s Eve and paying money to sit in front of your computer and watch Bob Sapp fight a guy in a mask while the rest of the world is out partying and kissing strange girls.  I’m not going to do that, because if that’s your plan I assume you already know what a loser you are, and me pointing it out would just be mean and unnecessary.  All I’ll say is that streaming video is a crapshoot to begin with, and Bob Sapp will still be there tomorrow.  So let’s leave it at that.  I know you’ll do the right thing.   

(“Screw it, nobody’s watching anyway.”)

I know, I know, you’re all antsy to learn how many pay-per-view buys UFC 91 took in, and whether Dana White’s estimate of 1.2 million was either strongly optimistic or batshit delusional. You’ll have to be patient, because numbers from UFC 90 are just coming out now — and they aren’t too encouraging. Says the Wrestling Observer Newsletter:

The trending patterns as a prediction of the buy rate continued to be right on as the 10/25 show in Chicago headlined by Anderson Silva vs. Patrick Cote did 300,000 buys.

Silva has never been a big main-event draw, PPV-wise. His headlining appearances at UFC 82, 77, and 67 all translated to buys in the 330,000-350,000 range. But in the run-up to last month’s Chicago show, the UFC had been trying extra hard to push him over as a fan-favorite, frequently repeating the talking point that UFC 90 was your chance to see the world’s greatest pound-for-pound fighter in action. The Spike TV special Countdown to UFC 90 brought in a record number of viewers, which was seen as a great sign for the event’s performance on pay-per-view, though MMA Payout points out that the strong viewership could have been due to having a high-rated TNA wrestling show as a lead in.

(Let’s try this again, “Ace”, this time with a little enthusiasm.)

Despite the fact that UFC 93 and 95 are taking place in Dublin and London respectively, they will not air for free on Spike TV, reports MMA Rated. Does that mean you’re going to have to pay more of your rapidly dwindling cash to see an event that goes live in the middle of the afternoon? Either that or wait until the videos hit the internet, and for some reason it’s considered “troubling behavior” for me to drink in front of my computer at ten o’clock on a Sunday morning, even though it’s perfectly acceptable to do it in front of the TV on a Saturday. I blame this Puritanical society.

The explanation for why this is happening centers around Spike TV’s production budget. Broadcasting these overseas events is costly, and since both UFC 93 and 95 take place within the first two months of 2009, that would mean blowing a big portion of their budget in the first quarter. This, my friends, is a side effect of the UFC going global.

So now we’re looking at three pay-per-views in the first sixty days of the new year from the UFC, plus another one on January 24 from Affliction. I don’t know what your disposable income looks like these days, but it sure seems like someone’s got to lose in this scenario. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that you could only afford two of these events without being forced to make extra money by letting your creepy neighbor install that webcam he keeps talking about. What’s it gonna be: Fedor-Arlovski (Affliction), Franklin-Henderson (UFC 93, with a side order of Coleman-Rua), Penn-St. Pierre (UFC 94), or Liddell-Silva (UFC 95, hopefully)? As a bonus question, how important will the undercards of said events be in your decision-making?

(Randy refuses to look Brock in the eyes! BET LESNAR! BET LESNAR! Photo courtesy of Flex Magazine.)

The UFC’s heavyweight grand prix, pay-per-view buys, Tamdan McCrory’s AFC status — we discuss it all in the latest installment of Ben vs. Ben. FYI, Fowlkes is currently a -170 favorite to win this argument.

How exactly will the main event end, and how will the winner fare in the heavyweight “tournament” as a whole?

Fowlkes: As big and powerful as Brock Lesnar is, his chances to win this fight diminish the longer it goes. He has the classic wrestler-turned-MMA fighter problem. He can get a guy down and hold him there, but aside from some inefficient ground-and-pound, he struggles to put people away.

So you’re all impressed by Lesnar’s win over Heath Herring? Great. You know who else outwrestled Herring for a decision win? Jake O’Brien. My point is, it’s not such an impossible feat. He’s never gone five rounds with someone as savvy and resilient as Couture. While Lesnar’s best hope is a decision, Couture can win several different ways.

Couture might have to take a beating in the first couple rounds. He might get pushed around more than he’s used to. But by the third he’ll turn the tide. He’ll take Lesnar’s back, discover that the man has no discernible neck to choke, then unleash a torrent of punches and satisfy himself with a TKO finish due to ref stoppage at the 4:10 mark. And still…UFC…heavyweight champion…until he’s submitted by Nogueira in the finals of this so-called tournament.

Goldstein: I say Couture takes the UFC 91 main event in a unanimous decision. We’re going to see a very methodical Randy on Saturday night, working his clinch game when he can, and doing his best to stuff takedown attempts and keep out of Brock’s punching range. He’ll go with the low-risk Machida approach, in other words, because one mistake, leading to one unfortunate position, could bring about a painful loss. I’ll agree that Randy will have Brock figured out by round three, but I’m going to give Lesnar the benefit of the doubt and say that Randy won’t be able to finish him — though Lesnar will definitely take more abuse than he ever has in his short real-fighting career.

(If Dana is right, Jack Link’s Beef Jerky is about to get their money’s worth.)

UFC president Dana White appeared on ESPN First Take today (thanks to our friends at MMA Fanhouse for the heads up) to talk UFC 91, and it seems he isn’t backing down from his earlier prediction that this event would do over a million pay-per-view buys. This time White got even more specific with his figures:

“We think it’s going to be the biggest pay-per-view draw in UFC history,” White said. “We think we’re going to do 1.2 million buys on this fight. It’s a big fight, the WWE cross-over for this fight, a lot of WWE fans are going to tune in to see if their former wrestling champion can win in a real fight. Vince McMahon might even buy this fight.”

One hopes that White is relying on some kind of consumer research, as he has claimed in the past, and not just spouting off a number. But 1.2 million buys, in the midst of a recession? That’s the kind of claim that makes me want to call ‘shenanigans,’ as the kids say.

The shakiest part of this logic is the dependence on the curiosity of the WWE crossover audience, especially the portion of that audience that typically passes on buying UFC events. This is Brock Lesnar‘s third UFC fight. Granted, it’s his biggest one yet, but only fans who follow the UFC enough to realize the importance of Randy Couture appreciate that.

To the casual WWE fan that White is depending on, isn’t this just another Brock Lesnar fight? And if these WWE fans are so eager to see Lesnar in a real fight, wouldn’t they have been just as willing to pay for his first big fight against Frank Mir?

(Props: MMA Scraps)

It’s kind of creepy to hear Dana White and Lorenzo Fertitta say almost exactly the same thing when asked by Fox News how the economic meltdown will affect their business. It’s as if they’re reading off the same cue cards. Clearly, this is a conversation they’ve had before, and most likely pretty recently as they’ve tried to figure out whether a piss-poor economy means they should cash in their chips and start hording gasoline and ammunition in the Nevada desert somewhere.

When it comes to pay-per-view buys, their logic holds up. You get six or seven guys together to split the cost of a UFC pay-per-view and it’s cheaper than going to a movie. Live ticket sales might be another matter, but big shows like UFC 91 in Las Vegas will still sell out, especially when they can count on the casinos to snatch up the ridiculously-priced tickets at Octagon-side.

MMA Payout recently broke down Lorenzo Fertitta’s claim the UFC has seen a “double-digit increase” in pay-per-views buys this year. Turns out it’s true, but just barely. 10.8% growth is technically double-digits, even if most of it is a result of holding two pay-per-view events in the UK in 2008, as opposed to just one in 2007. Domestic pay-per-view growth was at a meager 3.3%, but that’s still not cause for panic.

As we’ve discussed before, for some reason pro fighting is one of the sports that typically does well during hard economic times. Ballet, on the other hand, straight up tanks when the going gets tough. That’s right. Fuck you, ballet.

(Dueling highlights, via MMA Scraps. And yeah, there’s some WWE action in there.)

Ever since yesterday’s announcement that Randy Couture would be facing Brock Lesnar in his return to the UFC, you’ve been wondering: Okay, okay, but what does Kim Couture have to say about this? Fortunately, she didn’t keep us in suspense for long. “Sugar Free” went on ESPN radio with Steve Cofield to talk about the match-up and express her deepest sympathies for poor, poor Brock Lesnar:

“It’s surprising to me, shocking that they’d throw a guy in there with only three fights. I kind of feel sorry for the guy. He poses some interesting problems but that’s what Randy is good at, is taking care of those problems. He’s no bigger or tougher than (Gabe) Gonzaga or Tim Sylvia.”

‘Sup, Sable? You going to let her talk about your man that way? Better represent.

Couture seems to be parroting a line that’s already been worn out in the less-than twenty-four hours since this fight has been official. That is, how does a guy with only three fights expect to hang with “The Natural”? Of course, perusing message-boards and MMA websites yields no shortage of people wondering how a 225-pound, forty-five-year-old man can hang with a physical monstrosity like Lesnar, who knows a thing or two about wrestling himself.

In other words, there’s more than one angle to come at this fight from, which means Dana White probably knew what he was talking about when he predicted over a million pay-per-view buys. The UFC has taken some heat for a lackluster heavyweight division since the departure of Couture, but to quote Dana White from yesterday’s conference call: “Our heavyweight division looks pretty damn good now, doesn’t it?”

Point taken.

There’s plenty to love about the WEC. Zuffa’s brand of minor league MMA features competitive bouts between lesser-known fighters, including the lighter weight classes that get so little love in other organizations. But does that mean MMA fans are willing to pay extra for it?

Dana White seems to think so, as he told Yahoo! Sports that he plans to put on a WEC pay-per-view event, possibly in 2009. Yahoo! says it could go down “as early as May,” and also says that Zuffa will follow through on plans to absorb the WEC’s light heavyweight and middleweight divisions into the UFC. That means even fewer fighters will be available for the WEC cards that fans will soon be asked to pay for.

Asked how many events the WEC would stage in 2009, White replied, “We’re still figuring that out, but I can tell you this: It’s not going to go down.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t one of the WEC’s main selling points the fact that it was always free on Versus? Why go and screw with that? There’s been a clear dichotomy even in the UFC between fight cards that are good for free TV (i.e. Spike TV) and those that are of pay-per-view quality. As great a year as the WEC has had, asking fans to pay premium prices means expectations go up too. With so many UFC events already stretching the pay-per-view budget of many fans, it could also mean a decline in overall WEC viewership.

I think I speak for all non-independently wealthy MMA fans when I say, damn.

(‘You dance very good, little woman. You are negative for the STD’s, yes?’)

Poor Anderson Silva. The UFC middleweight champ just can’t find enough playmates in the UFC middleweight neighborhood. Yes, there’s that nice Patrick Cote boy, but then what? Silva is basically being forced to go door to door and ask, in broken English, if there are any middleweights or light heavyweights who can come out and play. Next up could very well be Chuck Liddell, according to Silva’s manager, Ed Soares:

“I think he wants to fight those big mega fights because that’s the kind of fight we want to be involved with right now,” he said about Silva’s future fights. “I think it’s a combination of seeing what the potential opponent is and also seeing what the UFC wants to do. At the end of the day, this is a business, and they need to sell fights. They need to sell a lot of pay-per-views, and they need to sell tickets. So, we want to be involved with those types of fights.”

“We’re not looking past Patrick Cote, but I think we’ll take one step at a time and see what happens. But yeah, if a Chuck Liddell fight came up, we’d take it,” stated Soares. “Whoever the UFC wants to put in front of us, he wants to fight the best, and whoever that may be at the time, that’s who he wants to fight.”

The very idea of a Silva-Liddell superfight is probably enough to give Dana White an erection, and for good reason. The pay-per-view numbers on this would likely be record-breaking, and no matter how it goes someone gets a big boost. Liddell, however, is probably a little less enthusiastic.

For one, he recently made known his belief that a victory over Rashad Evans should be enough to net him a title shot. Chances are he didn’t mean the middleweight title. For another, beating the champ from a lower weight class is sort of like being the toughest kid in eighth grade after being held back a year. There’s always a ‘but’ attached to that victory.

Silva has more to gain from this fight than Liddell does, but if there’s one thing we know about “The Iceman” it’s that he’ll do the UFC’s bidding, whatever it happens to be. He’ll also probably make a ton of money to do it, and everyone can go home fat and happy if this fight materializes on a pay-per-view at year’s end.

(If you won’t pay to watch Fedor beat up this man, what will you pay for?)

The quest to figure out how much money Affliction made off their first event continues, and in the latest installment Dave Meltzer revises some of his earlier figures. You may recall that Meltzer first reported that “independent estimates” had pegged the number at 50,000-85,000 pay-per-view buys — far from the “well over 100,000″ that VP Tom Atencio was claiming. In a recent issue of his Wrestling Observer newsletter (via MMA Payout) he says the organization may have done six figures after all:

It’s been hard to narrow down a buy rate for the Affliction show. Promoter Tom Atencio has claimed the figure was more than 100,000. Updated cable sources we’ve checked with have estimated from a low of 65,000 to a high of 100,000. Either way, the number is both excellent by the standards of a promotion with no television (it beats anything TNA has done with 2 million weekly TV viewers), but as noted over and over, it’s a substantial money loser.

A high of 100,000 isn’t so bad for a first pay-per-view event, really. If the reports keep changing at this rate maybe they’ll crack 200,000 some time around Christmas. Though by then we’ll all be speculating about the success of their second show, and Tom Atencio will be claiming they did well over 500,000 buys. Thus the circle of life goes on.

Slightly related: There’s some speculation that recently-signed Affliction fighter Chris Horodecki may face Dan Lauzon (Joe Lauzon’s brother) at “Day of Reckoning” in October. Like Horodecki, Lauzon is also just twenty years old and yet looks like he’s fourteen. Maybe after they fight they can both go hang around out in front of a liquor store together and try to convince someone to buy them beer.

From The Adam Carolla Show via MMA Mania:

I’d love for the UFC to step up and make the fight [with Fedor Emelianenko] happen. It has the potential to be the biggest mixed martial arts fight to date…It has the potential to do 700,000+ pay-per-view buys which is a helluva lotta money. I think 6-10 [million should be the salary] for each of us and they’re still gonna make a boatload of money on top of that.

Generally speaking, cable operators take half of the revenue for PPV events, which would mean that the UFC gets $22.495 per buyer these days. Though it’s been suggested that the UFC has been able to work out a slightly better deal with its distributors, multiplying that figure by Randy’s estimate of 700,000 buys would mean that the UFC would take in about $15,746,500 from a PPV card headlined by Couture vs. Emelianenko. “Boatload” may not be the right word if you’re taking at least $12,000,000 off the top to pay the headliners. Pay Randy and Fedor $8 million apiece or more, and the UFC’s profit from the broadcast is eliminated altogether. Of course, the equation changes completely if the fight does Liddell/Ortiz-caliber numbers, but its hard to predict if Couture vs. Emelianenko will mobilize the casual UFC fan like UFC 66‘s grudge match did.

In other words, there’s no way the UFC is going to cave to Couture’s asking price. I’d imagine they’re still interested in negotiating — if for no other reason than to take Affliction’s hope of a big-drawing superfight away from them — but they won’t agree to a situation where they’re only breaking even financially. Just as importantly, paying headliners that much money for a single fight sets a precedent that could have even more of their contracted fighters giving them grief about “respect.” We just hope the two sides can eventually come to terms, because if the UFC can’t afford to put this fight on, it’s doubtful that anybody else can.

(Next big thing, or MMA’s Ryan Leaf?)

With a blockbuster UFC 87 lineup as our fodder, it’s time again for Cage Potato’s editors to argue like an old married couple that only got hitched because of an unexpected pregnancy. We don’t love each other and yet we don’t know enough to expect better from our lives, so here we are. In this edition we debate topics such as what’s to become of Brock Lesnar on Saturday night and beyond, who will be the number one lightweight contender when the dust finally settles, will Rampage Jackson be back in the UFC any time soon, and more. Let’s grimly get it on.

Will Brock Lesnar revive his MMA career with this fight, or will he officially be a bust once UFC 87 is in the books?

Fowlkes: Clearly the UFC isn’t interested in giving Brock Lesnar a lay-up to help jumpstart his MMA career, and you have to respect that. Heath Herring is tough and experienced and, had a couple things gone differently for him, he could easily be the top heavyweight contender right now instead of Frank Mir, who won all of two straight fights to achieve that distinction.

Lesnar is a physical specimen who is athletically gifted, this we know. But what else do we know about him? He hates airplanes and gays, prizes staying home, and is vulnerable to submissions. Basically, we don’t know what he’s really capable of as an MMA fighter. Strength won’t be enough against Herring (who will have spent the last couple months drilling his wrestling if he has any sense at all) and strength is about all we can count on from Lesnar at this point.

Herring is too crafty a veteran to get overwhelmed by pure power. He’s going to pick Lesnar apart on the feet and submit him late in the second or early in the third, and when he does you should turn up your TV so you can actually hear the air going out of Lesnar’s hype balloon. The UFC will give him a young up-and-comer next, just to see what he has left, but this is the point where he goes from a top prospect to another guy fighting for contract survival.

Goldstein: Yeah, Herring’s probably been drilling his wrestling. You know who else has been drilling his wrestling? Brock Lesnar. I wouldn’t be surprised if either fighter pulled a win out of this match, but there’s one thing that’s guaranteed: At some point, Herring will be taken down and put on his back. Seriously.

(“I’d like to say fuck you to all my fans, fuck you to everyone at Cesar Gracie Jiu-Jitsu who helped me train for this fight, a huge fuck you to my brother, fuck you to my sponsors Chase Chevrolet and Stagr…” Photo courtesy of Sherdog.)

If CBS’s latest “Saturday Night Fights” card proved anything, it was that the EliteXC brand isn’t strong enough yet to pull in viewers without its marquee fighters. “Unfinished Business” drew 2.62 million sets of eyeballs according to f4wonline.com, and while that’s not a ratings disaster, it does represent almost a 50% drop from the “Primetime” show in May, which was headlined by Kimbo Slice and Gina Carano. Getting the ratings back on track will be priority #1 for EliteXC’s next show; during Saturday’s broadcast, it was announced that “Saturday Night Fights III” (actual title TBA) will go down October 4th at the BankAtlantic Center near Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and Mr. Ferguson and Ms. Carano have been booked to fight.

Now the question is, who will they be fighting? We previously mentioned that Kelly Kobald was being discussed as the next opponent for “Crush/Conviction,” but Cristiane “Cyborg” Santos had a star-making performance this weekend with her double-homicide of Shayna Baszler, and a Carano/Cyborg matchup would probably be the biggest fight in women’s MMA right now. As for Kimbo, who freakin’ knows. Brett Rogers is still the most obvious choice for Ferg’s next opponent, but EliteXC has been cagey about confirming it, leading some to wonder if Rogers is being saved for Antonio Silva’s first heavyweight title defense. Regarding a Slice/Rogers match, EliteXC’s Head of Fight Operations Jeremy Lappen said “I’m not sure if that’s the fight fans want to see right now,” telling Sherdog that EliteXC is now looking at four or five potential candidates for Slice’s next opponent. He wouldn’t name names.

The big question we’ve been waiting to hear an answer to this week is, what of Affliction’s pay-per-view numbers? VP Tom Atencio claimed they did “well over” 100,000 buys. He also said, in the post-fight press conference, that he’d be releasing the numbers on Thursday or Friday of this week. And yet, so far nothing official. Subscribers to Dave Meltzer’s “Wrestling Observer” relayed the following tidbit from the latest issue via the Sherdog forums:

“As far as the numbers went, the big number everyone is looking for is the Affliction PPV number. Based on independent estimates we’ve heard, the number has been estimated at between 50,000 and 85,000 buys. Atencio claimed the number as being higher, saying it topped 100,000, although at press time, any numbers could only be considered rough estimates. Atencio told us that since UFC doesn’t release numbers, he’s not going to either (I know, after saying it was more than 100,000). Keep in mind that Pride claimed 150,000 buys for its first U.S. PPV in 2006, and the real number ended up being 40,000 (we know that because Nevada taxes on PPV revenue so you can get a real number; California does not so getting real numbers will be more difficult).”

“Independent estimates” is a vague phrase to begin with, but with all this speculation floating around the only way for Affliction to silence it is to release the numbers. If they don’t, we’ll have to assume that they probably didn’t hit that golden number of 100,000 buys as Atencio claimed.

It’s a big week for Affliction and dubious numbers. Next you’re going to tell me that the Tim Sylvia Signature Series Affliction t-shirt doesn’t really cost $58. No, that one checks out actually. At least there are some things you can still depend on.

(Tom’s the guy standing second from the right, stunned by Tim Sylvia’s body odor. Photo courtesy of Combat Lifestyle)

Speaking with Yahoo! Sports’s Kevin Iole, Affliction VP Tom Atencio claimed the final number of pay-per-view buys brought in for the company’s debut MMA card last Saturday would “definitely” be over 100,000:

“I don’t have everything on that yet, but for the people who felt this was going to be a total flop in that regard, I have news for them. It’s already done a lot better than what I’ve heard people speculating. I’m not going to release the (official) number, but it’s already well beyond what people have been saying. Well beyond.”

We’ll take that claim at face value for now, but Atencio could be blowing smoke, obviously. Iole reports that $500,000 of the event’s $2.1 million live gate haul came from tickets purchased by Affliction itself. Atencio also admitted that the show’s ridiculous payroll was intended to grab attention:

“We had to come out swinging and make a big splash and we did. Having said that, we realize this is a business first and that if we don’t turn a profit, we’re not going to be around. We need to have the guys understand that. We know (fighters) want to be treated well and we’re willing to work with them, but they have to be willing to work with us. We just can’t go out there and throw money around without thought. The guys have to be willing to work with us and can’t simply look at us as a cash cow.”

Of course not, Tom — they’re interested in you because of your mind.

(He’s so money. Photo courtesy of Men’s Fitness.)

MMA Payout has an interesting article about the newest S&P credit rating for Zuffa, which has been upgraded from negative to stable. It turns out that the UFC is pulling in more money these days, though it’s not because more people are buying their pay-per-views. Instead, it’s due to their strategy of putting on more shows and charging more for them:

“Overall pay-per-view (PPV) revenues, which represent nearly 75% of total revenues, have trended up in recent quarters, albeit largely due to an increase in the number of events, higher pricing, and more favorable contract terms, rather than an increase in the number of buys.”

By more favorable contract terms, they’re referring to Zuffa’s deal with pay-per-view distributors. Apparently the UFC is big enough now to negotiate better deals for themselves, which is an encouraging sign for the future of he company and the sport. But what’s really interesting is a note near the bottom that relates to the UFC’s plans for expansion.

The high costs of the start-up in the UK may color how they approach international expansion going forward. The UFC UK division required a high level of initial costs (like personnel, office space, legal and regulatory costs). Such high costs had a detrimental effect on the company’s margins and therefore dragged down the bond rating. The company may be reticent to do such a large scale effort in the future, with the accompanying yo-yo effect on margins.

(Photo courtesy of UFC.com.)

Breaking into the U.K. is still a battle, and they’re just starting to dip their toes south of the border, but the UFC’s foray into Canada can now be considered a big, fat, stinking success. Dave Meltzer estimates that UFC 83 brought in as many as 650,000 pay-per-view buys — which would tie it for the third best-selling PPV event in UFC history — on the strength of a record number of Canadian buyers (estimated at about 100,000).

Expect the UFC to return to the Great White North on a recurring basis; and expect those events to be The Traveling Georges St. Pierre Roadshow. You thought Marcus Davis was typecast as “the guy who always fights in the U.K.”? Ho baby. GSP is a true star in Montreal now, and the UFC will be giving the new fans what they want. Now if they can only find a couple of other Canadian fighters to give a marketing push to, because right now they’re stuck with that one guy, and the other one, and what’s-his-face, and the dude with the crazy hair.

Somewhat related: Travis Lutter thinks Matt Serra should be worried about his job security after UFC 83. In an interview with FightHype, he said:

“I would guess Serra will have a similar fate as me if he loses the Matt Hughes fight…I mean, he was in the same locker room with me, Kalib and I think there were five other fighters that shared a locker room with him that night. Usually, the main event guys and the guy that has the belt get the nice locker room and stuff like that and here he is with one of the most crowded locker rooms. It’s really strange. They wanted GSP to get that title back so bad and he is marketable, but so is Serra. Serra is as funny as they come, but I’m sure there is a rhyme and a reason in their eyes behind doing everything; it’s just unfortunate.”

Dave Meltzer of the Wrestling Observer reported today that the preliminary estimate of pay-per-view buys for UFC 81 was a big, girthy 600,000. As 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.

Adam Swift of MMAPayout explains that the figure may put UFC 81 among the all-time top-five UFC shows in terms of gross buys, and thanks to the $45 price tag, #3 in revenue after Ortiz/Liddell and Ortiz/Shamrock III. As Swift points out, the final number is usually significantly higher than the early estimates.

Swift also calls into question the sustainability of Lesnar’s drawing power, and the show’s success in taking wrestling fans who were first-time UFC buyers and converting them into regular fans. We’re of the opinion that Lesnar’s wrestling fans will keep paying for UFC events whenever he’s on the card — and only those events — meaning that Lesnar’s appearances will continue to translate to a spike in UFC PPV buys, but not an overall bump of the average buyrate. But hey, we don’t need those yokels anyway.