Comments on: How to Actually Interpret the Strikeforce Numbers http://www.total-mma.com/2009/03/04/how-to-actually-interpret-the-strikeforce-numbers/ Completing the perspective on Mixed Martial Arts Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:42:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Alan Conceicao http://www.total-mma.com/2009/03/04/how-to-actually-interpret-the-strikeforce-numbers/#comment-23982 Alan Conceicao Thu, 05 Mar 2009 00:22:44 +0000 http://www.total-mma.com/?p=598#comment-23982 It is worth millions of dollars. Its among the most lucrative deals in the history of all combat sports, much less MMA. They make money now: They will make millions more then. Plus, not only does it fund them for the foreseeable future, it means that it can fund any prolonged attempts at breaking the PPV market. They're doing this without EXC's absurd spending on social networking sites or purchases of Korean MMA promotions. It is worth millions of dollars. Its among the most lucrative deals in the history of all combat sports, much less MMA. They make money now: They will make millions more then. Plus, not only does it fund them for the foreseeable future, it means that it can fund any prolonged attempts at breaking the PPV market. They’re doing this without EXC’s absurd spending on social networking sites or purchases of Korean MMA promotions.

]]> By: Steve Barry http://www.total-mma.com/2009/03/04/how-to-actually-interpret-the-strikeforce-numbers/#comment-23974 Steve Barry Wed, 04 Mar 2009 23:22:20 +0000 http://www.total-mma.com/?p=598#comment-23974 The impression I got reading the MMA Weekly post was that they were passing off the deals as these huge money makers for Strikeforce, "worth millions" as the headline read. My point was that the monetary value attached to the deal, when spread out over 3 years, isn't as impressive as it seems in the context of the story. You're right, when you factor in the live gate, it should put them in a position to be profitable meanwhile setting themselves up for pay-per-view. If you're looking at the big picture, I suppose it could be considered "very lucrative," but that's not what the story was alluding to as I read it. In terms of how much revenue they bring in from the deals alone, it's not as impressive as MMA Weekly made it sound, despite whether it puts them in a good position or not. If my perspective is unintelligent, so be it, but that's how I interpreted the story. The impression I got reading the MMA Weekly post was that they were passing off the deals as these huge money makers for Strikeforce, “worth millions” as the headline read.

My point was that the monetary value attached to the deal, when spread out over 3 years, isn’t as impressive as it seems in the context of the story.

You’re right, when you factor in the live gate, it should put them in a position to be profitable meanwhile setting themselves up for pay-per-view.

If you’re looking at the big picture, I suppose it could be considered “very lucrative,” but that’s not what the story was alluding to as I read it. In terms of how much revenue they bring in from the deals alone, it’s not as impressive as MMA Weekly made it sound, despite whether it puts them in a good position or not.

If my perspective is unintelligent, so be it, but that’s how I interpreted the story.

]]> By: Alan Conceicao http://www.total-mma.com/2009/03/04/how-to-actually-interpret-the-strikeforce-numbers/#comment-23970 Alan Conceicao Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:22:54 +0000 http://www.total-mma.com/?p=598#comment-23970 How could it be more lucrative in the space of reality? They're being paid more than probably 3/4 of the promoters will be for HBO's top flight boxing cards, which is the platinum standard by which combat sports is compared. Obviously it isn't PPV money, but no one, not the UFC, not Oscar De La Hoya, no one is going to get PPV money from a network. Nor can this be compared to the UFC's deal, which differs in that they are the producers of the programming (Showtime Sports will undoubtedly do Strikeforce's) *and* provide weekly television for Spike, thus not needing to be added into the price tag. So, to make this even shorter, Strikeforce has a deal in which it pays nothing, gets paid more than anyone in a comparable spot in the industry, keeps the live gate, and can hype up future PPVs on network TV, in prime time. I would say its pretty damn lucrative. How could it be more lucrative in the space of reality? They’re being paid more than probably 3/4 of the promoters will be for HBO’s top flight boxing cards, which is the platinum standard by which combat sports is compared. Obviously it isn’t PPV money, but no one, not the UFC, not Oscar De La Hoya, no one is going to get PPV money from a network. Nor can this be compared to the UFC’s deal, which differs in that they are the producers of the programming (Showtime Sports will undoubtedly do Strikeforce’s) *and* provide weekly television for Spike, thus not needing to be added into the price tag.

So, to make this even shorter, Strikeforce has a deal in which it pays nothing, gets paid more than anyone in a comparable spot in the industry, keeps the live gate, and can hype up future PPVs on network TV, in prime time. I would say its pretty damn lucrative.

]]> By: Steve Barry http://www.total-mma.com/2009/03/04/how-to-actually-interpret-the-strikeforce-numbers/#comment-23958 Steve Barry Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:27:55 +0000 http://www.total-mma.com/?p=598#comment-23958 Ok, Alan, so what exactly is unintelligent about what I said? Did I say it was a bad deal? No. All I said was it wasn't as "lucrative" as the MMA Weekly post made it sound. Ok, Alan, so what exactly is unintelligent about what I said? Did I say it was a bad deal? No. All I said was it wasn’t as “lucrative” as the MMA Weekly post made it sound.

]]>