UnderGround Forums
 

UnderGround Forums >> The COLLAPSE of the UFC's PPV Model


2/9/14 11:24 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Chromium
108 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/09/14 11:24 PM
Member Since: 5/30/11
Posts: 2519

Haulport: MMAFighting's numbers for UFC on Fox 5-10 are the overnight ratings only (aka Fast Nationals), probably because those were the only ones TVByTheNumbers had actual indexed articles for, since on a weekly basis they only rank the Top 20-25 shows. Those were not the final viewership numbers. I don't know where FOTN got his numbers but they correspond with the numbers supplied by SportsBusinessDaily.com.

I've included a new version of your graph adjusted for accuracy:

http://i.imgur.com/uSoA2bQ.png

I'm just putting this here for the sake of objectivity.

2/10/14 12:47 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
slamming
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/28/08
Posts: 12589
Haulport - 
FOTN - 
Haulport - 

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 


Apparently not as big a disaster as your chart producing skills.

You've conveniently fudged the numbers by mixing in the final numbers for the first few events with the (significantly lower) overnight numbers for the others.

Here's the real figures for all the one's you got wrong.

UFC on Fox 5: 4.4 million viewers
UFC on Fox 6: 4.2 million viewers
UFC on Fox 7: 3.7 million viewers
UFC On Fox 8: 2.4 million viewers
UFC On Fox 9: 2.8 million viewers
UFC On Fox 10: 3.2 million viewers

Yeah, really? Where did you get your "real" numbers?

I got mine from:

http://www.mmafighting.com/2014/1/26/5347334/ufc-on-fox-10-pulls-2-55-million-and-1-1-rating-in-key-adult-demo

And they are all avg viewership numbers. So please link to the "real" numbers you pulled.
 

 


You appear to have used overnight numbers, rather than final numbers for those selected events.

 

 

2/10/14 12:48 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
slamming
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 5/28/08
Posts: 12590
Chromium - 

Haulport: MMAFighting's numbers for UFC on Fox 5-10 are the overnight ratings only (aka Fast Nationals), probably because those were the only ones TVByTheNumbers had actual indexed articles for, since on a weekly basis they only rank the Top 20-25 shows. Those were not the final viewership numbers. I don't know where FOTN got his numbers but they correspond with the numbers supplied by SportsBusinessDaily.com.

I've included a new version of your graph adjusted for accuracy:

http://i.imgur.com/uSoA2bQ.png

I'm just putting this here for the sake of objectivity.


Thank you.

2/10/14 1:19 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
tenchu
11 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 12703
As if Haulport's pre-conceived post couldn't get any worse... Now we have the true final viewership numbers.

Don't get me wrong, I hate the PPV model and have been saying they need to get rid of it, but your extreme bias doesn't help your credibility.
2/10/14 1:40 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
idsmashit
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/13/08
Posts: 3986
To many midgets on cards
2/10/14 1:56 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PhuckfaceMcGee
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/9/13
Posts: 173
You haven't included the massive increase in illegal downloads. Not a lot of people used torrents more than 5 years ago, and in some countries did not have the required Internet speed. The sport is getting bigger but with the prevalence of illegal downloads the numbers are skewed.
Show my the stats on downloads by year...
Maybe downloads are hurting the growth in PPV the most? Phone Post 3.0
2/10/14 1:58 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PhuckfaceMcGee
4 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/9/13
Posts: 174
Haulport -

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 

Why does this graph start at 2 mil. Lol Phone Post 3.0
2/10/14 3:42 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Donoghue88
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/11/12
Posts: 293
While OP's conclusions are a little uneducated, he does make a great point, there hasn't been a drastic rise in PPV buys since the FOX exposure.

You would think with such a popular channel promoting the UFC numbers with increase 200-400K average, but it just hasn't happened.


2/10/14 11:44 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
TARRat
12 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/25/12
Posts: 467
For some reason, I can't quote right now. But in regards to why the graph starts at 2mil? It's likely because the numbers don't drop below 2mil. It's quite common to start graphs at numbers such that you don't have more wasted space than necessary.
2/10/14 12:16 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Lazer MMA
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/24/12
Posts: 10697
Haulport - 
Lazer MMA - 
Haulport - 

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 



We all knew they blew it with that first FOX show. They've yet to try to put on some sick shows on Fox (stacked cards).

Not putting on monster cards on Fox = penny wise & pound foolish X 999999999 (about)

That lack of vision on Frank and Lorenzo's part is pretty astounding. Just when you think something is just staring them in the face they do the wrong thing anyway convincing themselves that their reasoning is really what's right.............

I just wish someone with money, a brain and some stomach for this industry starting competing with these guys. They have nothing and you could gut them pretty easily if you COMMITTED to it........



It's so strange as these are guys who were taking a bath and got much richer, they know how to gamble. There were red flags all over the place in putting on Cain (out one year) and JDS alone for the first event.

They should have said F it (and they still should) and go ape shit, putting on the best card possible. Yea they'll lose a lot on the PPV business in the near term, but they'll collect much more moving forward.
2/10/14 1:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19505
Chromium - 

Haulport: MMAFighting's numbers for UFC on Fox 5-10 are the overnight ratings only (aka Fast Nationals), probably because those were the only ones TVByTheNumbers had actual indexed articles for, since on a weekly basis they only rank the Top 20-25 shows. Those were not the final viewership numbers. I don't know where FOTN got his numbers but they correspond with the numbers supplied by SportsBusinessDaily.com.

I've included a new version of your graph adjusted for accuracy:

http://i.imgur.com/uSoA2bQ.png

I'm just putting this here for the sake of objectivity.


Thanks for the updated data. The numbers are still dogshit, but it's good to have apples to apples.

2/10/14 1:10 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19506
PhuckfaceMcGee - 
Haulport -

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 

Why does this graph start at 2 mil. Lol Phone Post 3.0

Because no viewership numbers go below 2 mill and leaving a lot of deadspace underneath your line obfuscates your trends and is considered a faux pas.

2/10/14 1:14 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19507
nobones - 
PhuckfaceMcGee -
Haulport -

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 

Why does this graph start at 2 mil. Lol Phone Post 3.0
Haulport sees a drop from $5 million to $2 million and he calls it a collapse...well what was FOX expecting? The way I see that graph is that the UFC created a 'B card' product for these FOX shows to distinguish them from their PPV cards. But the numbers are still good overall just not reaching the high of Cain vs JDS 1 but that was an 'A card' main event that the UFC never really gave away for free again. And the casual fans realized this and so either just DVR the FOX cards or skip them.

Let's also not forget that the UFC did FOX the giant favor of basically carrying FS1 and FS2 for them. The relationship with FOX is one where I would say FOX is very pleased with the UFC, the UFC is not as pleased with the results that this relationship with FOX is yielding. Phone Post 3.0

What I actually see is lost OPPORTUNITY. The UFC had a ton of new eyes on those first two cards and people were ready to embrace their product and the fucked the pooch without an ounce of lube...

IMO the UFC should have GROWN from 5.75 not shrunk over the past 2+ years. having that much exposure and then most of the new possible conversions seeing your product and saying, "Eh. That wasn't very good" and not coming back is beyond pathetic.

2/10/14 1:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19508
Lazer MMA - 
Haulport - 
Lazer MMA - 
Haulport - 

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 



We all knew they blew it with that first FOX show. They've yet to try to put on some sick shows on Fox (stacked cards).

Not putting on monster cards on Fox = penny wise & pound foolish X 999999999 (about)

That lack of vision on Frank and Lorenzo's part is pretty astounding. Just when you think something is just staring them in the face they do the wrong thing anyway convincing themselves that their reasoning is really what's right.............

I just wish someone with money, a brain and some stomach for this industry starting competing with these guys. They have nothing and you could gut them pretty easily if you COMMITTED to it........



It's so strange as these are guys who were taking a bath and got much richer, they know how to gamble. There were red flags all over the place in putting on Cain (out one year) and JDS alone for the first event.

They should have said F it (and they still should) and go ape shit, putting on the best card possible. Yea they'll lose a lot on the PPV business in the near term, but they'll collect much more moving forward.

I'm not sure if they would even lose PPV numbers. If they just put on better cards all around I think FOX #'s and PPVs go up.

2/10/14 1:51 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dabigchet
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/10/07
Posts: 12823
Haulport - 
Tad Ghostal - Gut them? How?

I figure with about a 3 year, $85mm investment you can steal a good chunk of top PPV draw guys from them and generate a solid PPV base that would give you a 20% margin. Just on putting out a better product alone you would draw a ton of fans who have become disenchanted with the sport or who are not into the weak, boring product the UFC offers..


lol
2/10/14 2:20 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19510
dabigchet - 
Haulport - 
Tad Ghostal - Gut them? How?

I figure with about a 3 year, $85mm investment you can steal a good chunk of top PPV draw guys from them and generate a solid PPV base that would give you a 20% margin. Just on putting out a better product alone you would draw a ton of fans who have become disenchanted with the sport or who are not into the weak, boring product the UFC offers..


lol

At $25 a pop (after rev share) 250,000 PPV per event for 6 events a year for three years is a 24% margin on $85mm. I don't think that hitting 250k by spending $2mm per event on production and marketing (not including any personnel salaries) with name MMA fighters is anything that is so wildly unachievable, especially if your product GREATLY DIFFERS than the UFC and appeals to MMA fans and other sports and pro wrestling fans.

But then again you are just a contrarian and Zuffa apologist.

2/10/14 2:21 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19511
nobones - 
Haulport -
nobones - 
PhuckfaceMcGee -
Haulport -

Here's a chart of the disaster that is the UFC on FOX ratings

 

Why does this graph start at 2 mil. Lol Phone Post 3.0
Haulport sees a drop from $5 million to $2 million and he calls it a collapse...well what was FOX expecting? The way I see that graph is that the UFC created a 'B card' product for these FOX shows to distinguish them from their PPV cards. But the numbers are still good overall just not reaching the high of Cain vs JDS 1 but that was an 'A card' main event that the UFC never really gave away for free again. And the casual fans realized this and so either just DVR the FOX cards or skip them.

Let's also not forget that the UFC did FOX the giant favor of basically carrying FS1 and FS2 for them. The relationship with FOX is one where I would say FOX is very pleased with the UFC, the UFC is not as pleased with the results that this relationship with FOX is yielding. Phone Post 3.0

What I actually see is lost OPPORTUNITY. The UFC had a ton of new eyes on those first two cards and people were ready to embrace their product and the fucked the pooch without an ounce of lube...

IMO the UFC should have GROWN from 5.75 not shrunk over the past 2+ years. having that much exposure and then most of the new possible conversions seeing your product and saying, "Eh. That wasn't very good" and not coming back is beyond pathetic.

Well giving away their 'A cards' for free/$10 million licensing fee would have set a precedent with FOX where their 'A cards' would have never been worth more than that. Now, they can always tell FOX that if they are willing to pay they can possibly get those high numbers again. But that would be closer to $30-40 million per live show.

I think the UFC played it smart with not giving everything away for free. Where things didn't work out and FOX sort of screwed them was moving all UFC content off FX/Fuel and to FS1/FS2. They were building a good following with the move to Wednesday nights for TUF on FX and that got ruined with the move to FS1/FS2. I think the weekly programming was and still is the key to building up PPV stars and this was sort of beyond the UFC's control after they decided to leave Spike. I think they may now realize that they might have been able to grow nationally better with Spike than with FOX although I think FOX gave them opportunities for international growth that Spike/Viacom could not.

Well we will see what will happen but giving all/most of their best PPV cards away on FOX for free would have been an awful move under their current licensing structure. Phone Post 3.0

I would rather have gone all out and be at 7.5 million viewers so that I could negotiate from a power position when the time comes instead of promising to get back to 5.75. All the additional new fans would prop up the PPVs in the interim.

2/10/14 2:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Tomato Can
22 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 49234
Haulport - 
dabigchet - 
Haulport - 
Tad Ghostal - Gut them? How?

I figure with about a 3 year, $85mm investment you can steal a good chunk of top PPV draw guys from them and generate a solid PPV base that would give you a 20% margin. Just on putting out a better product alone you would draw a ton of fans who have become disenchanted with the sport or who are not into the weak, boring product the UFC offers..


lol

At $25 a pop (after rev share) 250,000 PPV per event for 6 events a year for three years is a 24% margin on $85mm. I don't think that hitting 250k by spending $2mm per event on production and marketing (not including any personnel salaries) with name MMA fighters is anything that is so wildly unachievable, especially if your product GREATLY DIFFERS than the UFC and appeals to MMA fans and other sports and pro wrestling fans.

But then again you are just a contrarian and Zuffa apologist.


You are essentially advocating for the Affliction business plan here.

How exactly would this product "GREATLY DIFFER" from the UFC product? You said yourself the fighters would be poached from the UFC. Plus it would have near zero brand recognition compared to the UFC. Who exactly is going to put this money up?
2/10/14 3:47 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19516
Tomato Can - 
Haulport - 
dabigchet - 
Haulport - 
Tad Ghostal - Gut them? How?

I figure with about a 3 year, $85mm investment you can steal a good chunk of top PPV draw guys from them and generate a solid PPV base that would give you a 20% margin. Just on putting out a better product alone you would draw a ton of fans who have become disenchanted with the sport or who are not into the weak, boring product the UFC offers..


lol

At $25 a pop (after rev share) 250,000 PPV per event for 6 events a year for three years is a 24% margin on $85mm. I don't think that hitting 250k by spending $2mm per event on production and marketing (not including any personnel salaries) with name MMA fighters is anything that is so wildly unachievable, especially if your product GREATLY DIFFERS than the UFC and appeals to MMA fans and other sports and pro wrestling fans.

But then again you are just a contrarian and Zuffa apologist.


You are essentially advocating for the Affliction business plan here.

How exactly would this product "GREATLY DIFFER" from the UFC product? You said yourself the fighters would be poached from the UFC. Plus it would have near zero brand recognition compared to the UFC. Who exactly is going to put this money up?

No, because Affliction was run by a drunken lunatic who wildly overpaid for fighters and put on weak shows production-wise. Getting a few good names from bellator and the UFC, growing others through excellent scouting like Bellator has done and putting on a real, legit looking show that encouraged all out wars, along with a few other ideas I will not reveal here, would create a very solid org. Even Affliction broke the 100k PPV mark and was run like a third world country.

And klnowing Dana and Lorenzo, I'm sure all a well-financed org would have to do is run a non-unified rules show and say that the UFC is for pussies and not really MMA and that kind of marketing alone would get you 50k PPVs - especially since Lorenzo and Dana would spend most of their time talking about you : )

2/10/14 4:14 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dabigchet
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/10/07
Posts: 12824
affliction: banned had $3M in disclosed fighter payouts ALONE. what do you think the total cost was for affliction to set up their promotion to that point? $6M? $10M? and they got what, 100K buys for that investment?

i would love to hear who the main event is for the first PPV that is going to get 250K buys - something no promotion outside of zuffa has been able to get anywhere CLOSE to. keep in mind, for you to get a UFC draw you have got to be prepared to spend FAR more than what zuffa does in guaranteed money over a long term. that's the only way you are going to get their talent.

literally, no promotion outside of zuffa has been able to do 1/2 of that 250K number, and you are saying that it should be no problem for you to do it 6 times a year on the cheap. how can you not see how ridiculous that is?

2/10/14 4:33 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Tomato Can
22 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 49239
How are you going to poach the UFCs big names without overpaying? Where exactly are you going to hold this mythical non-unified rules card? Do you really think some hackneyed "the UFC is for pussies" marketing scheme will overcome the UFC's brand dominance?

I guess it's a nice fantasy for the anti-UFC crowd but don't for a minute think it has any basis in reality.

Bellator did a good job with their ground-up approach (which is really the only approach that is realistically feasible) but I'd argue that since they've gotten Viacom's backing they've made increasingly bizarre decisions that are ruining a lot of what was good about their product. They still put on some solid cards, though.
2/10/14 4:36 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
dabigchet
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 9/10/07
Posts: 12825
think about the money that bellator and now viacom has put into that product. think about the exposure that brand has had on weekly cable tv. consider that they actually had a rematch that hardcore MMA fans really wanted to see. also that they were able to sign two big names for a main event (albeit past their primes). and no one - NO ONE - thought their PPV would be anywhere CLOSE to 250K buys. so you are going to do this how, exactly?
2/10/14 10:48 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19517
dabigchet - affliction: banned had $3M in disclosed fighter payouts ALONE. what do you think the total cost was for affliction to set up their promotion to that point? $6M? $10M? and they got what, 100K buys for that investment?

i would love to hear who the main event is for the first PPV that is going to get 250K buys - something no promotion outside of zuffa has been able to get anywhere CLOSE to. keep in mind, for you to get a UFC draw you have got to be prepared to spend FAR more than what zuffa does in guaranteed money over a long term. that's the only way you are going to get their talent.

literally, no promotion outside of zuffa has been able to do 1/2 of that 250K number, and you are saying that it should be no problem for you to do it 6 times a year on the cheap. how can you not see how ridiculous that is?


The only ridiculous thing here is your response - as usual. How is $85mm over 3 years "on the cheap"? Are you a even serious?

You use the example of a joke of an org created because their drunken lunatic owner got mad at the UFC. They had a freakin metal band play live at their show. Allifction was a clown act run by a nut who eventually drank himself to death a few years after he collapsed his mma venture and was forced out of his own company.

Strikeforce was the only half well run show and they locked themselves into a not very lucrative tv deal with viacom from the get go, which was a horrible idea. The IFL was run by decent businessmen who had absolutely ZERO idea about the sport beyond being big fans of Bas and some of the old timers and had the corniest (team) concept ever. They paid A LOT for guys who never fought for them.

2/10/14 10:54 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19518

Let me ask you both a few questions:

Who buys UFC PPVs? Is it 450k - 1mm hardcore fans?

Why do they purchase the PPVs?

How is it that TUF can barely get a million people to watch for free and cards on FOX can only get 2.5mm, but they can get half a million to drop $60 for cards that are routinely panned by many hardcore fans?

Where do these people come from and what motivates them?

2/10/14 10:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Haulport
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 2/28/07
Posts: 19520
Tomato Can - How are you going to poach the UFCs big names without overpaying? Where exactly are you going to hold this mythical non-unified rules card? Do you really think some hackneyed "the UFC is for pussies" marketing scheme will overcome the UFC's brand dominance?

I guess it's a nice fantasy for the anti-UFC crowd but don't for a minute think it has any basis in reality.

Bellator did a good job with their ground-up approach (which is really the only approach that is realistically feasible) but I'd argue that since they've gotten Viacom's backing they've made increasingly bizarre decisions that are ruining a lot of what was good about their product. They still put on some solid cards, though.

I guess OneFC is "mythical" to you.

Jesus Christ..................

And don't underestimate the power of low brow marketing. The early UFCs were KILLING boxing with the "bloodsport" "somebody might die" marketing pulling 300k in friggin' 1994 (which was unheard of)!!!


Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.