UFC 150: Worst gate since 2007

Excerpt:

Quote :

"Worst gate since 2007, for a pay-per-view, without a doubt. We've been talking about it. The shootings here, the fires that have been going on here. It's been a really bad summer for this place. Once all that stuff started going down, we felt it was not gonna be a good gate here. We know it's not the [marketability]. Everywhere we go, the least of our problems are always the gate. DirecTV went down tonight. We couldn't have been kicked in the balls worse than we did tonight. The entire system went down. Black. That's a big number. Huge number. Fun night."

Wow...

Is it really that surprising when the top 2 fights are all but gauranteed to go to a decision? There was no way in hell I was going to purchase this card.

I'm not shocked that it was low, but on it's own as far as being a bad card or whatever, it wouldn't have been anywhere near the worst if it wasn't for all of those other intangibles that hurt it.

I kinda wonder if Dana is outsmarting himself. In creating a product that is so homogenous, taking out the speedos, the Mayhems, the freak fights, the old fellas, is he making cards too bland.

Sure the purity of MMA, the fighting the technicality the art, the blah blah blah. I donno.... every so often I wanna see a BJ Penn vs Hong Man Choi.... or Mayhem vs Dan Severn.

My examples may be a bit over the top but hopefully you get my point.

Just a thought.... maybe Woman's match ups on the odd card puts more bums in seats. Dana has to open up a bit more, drop the tunnel vision.

i agree with krieger

wait, what?!

What they need to do is start punishing guys that do not entertain. You either offer them less money in their contract, keep them in the udnercards, or make them win a lot more before getting a title shot. Start offereing lower contracts but make up for it with "finishing" bonuses.

This is no different than other sports. You take two pitchers with identical ERAs, but one pitcher strikes out 12 guys a game, he is going to get paid a shit ton more money since he brings fans to the game.
Same with two guys with 100 RBI seasons, but one guy has 40 HRs and the other guy has 6 HRs. Whose going to get the big contract?

Fans want to be entertained. I don't think you need the freak show fights, although having ONE as the first fight doesn't hurt every once in a while. There are still a ton of great fighters that are also entertaining.

For me it's all about the frequency. It's honestly pushing me away, there's a damn PPV event almost every 2 weeks it seems. I'm overwhelmed, there's just too damn much to keep up with and too many fights. I want it the way it used to be...a PPV every 6-8 months at most.

I think the frequency is causing too many fighters that nobody has heard of to get main event PPV slots...with one or two fights that contain big name guys...many people don't want to pay for small timers they've never heard of.

A PPV every 6-8 months would kill me. But every ones wallets would be much happier.

A PPV every 6-8 months would make me cry. I almost just did by only thinking about it.

But I could handle one a month....... as long as there's a free card somewhere else in that month.

My problem is the feast or famine. You have some cards that kick ass and them some cards that are filled with a bunch of filler fights.
Perfect world for me, have all your filler fights on the free cards and then have a PPV every 4 or 5 months with 2-3 title fights and other #1 contender fights and charge $100.

As it stands today, I will probably never purchase a PPV again. $60 is too damn much, especially when the cards are so inconsistant.

Another thing that bugs me is how infrequently title holders fight. If title holders fought only 2.5 times a year, that would be 20 title fights a year. If you had a PPV every other month, you could have 3 title fights on every PPV.

Yeah that's another thing...if you're trying to charge a PPV fee, there should be a title on the line...this crap of asking us to pay to watch gatekeepers fight is BS.

stock wrote:

My problem is the feast or famine. You have some cards that kick ass and them some cards that are filled with a bunch of filler fights.
Perfect world for me, have all your filler fights on the free cards and then have a PPV every 4 or 5 months with 2-3 title fights and other #1 contender fights and charge $100.

As it stands today, I will probably never purchase a PPV again. $60 is too damn much, especially when the cards are so inconsistant.

Another thing that bugs me is how infrequently title holders fight. If title holders fought only 2.5 times a year, that would be 20 title fights a year. If you had a PPV every other month, you could have 3 title fights on every PPV.

Spot on.
It's kind of odd seeing one card headed by some guy fighting some other guy who was a TUF runner-up, and then seeing another card like the Fox 5 card coming up where the main card is crazy stacked, including a title fight and a #1 contender match-up.
It's kind of insulting, IMO.