Bellator General Discussion and Info

Cammo101 · Post #741 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 8:10 pm

http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2014/1/14/53 ... ran-straus

Looks like Bellator's dumb decision to give Curran an immediate rematch has Pittbull all kinds of upset. This is the problem when you sell yourself as a place where you win tourneys to "earn" title shots, and then start to pick and choose random title fights on top of that.

Bellator needs to decide what they are, because they can't have it both ways.

cowboyronnie · Post #742 » by **cowboyronnie** » Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:26 pm

Cammo101 wrote:http://www.bloodyelbow.com/2014/1/14/5307526/patricio-pitbull-bellator-title-shot-curran-straus

Looks like Bellator's dumb decision to give Curran an immediate rematch has Pittbull all kinds of upset. This is the problem when you sell yourself as a place where you win tourneys to "earn" title shots, and then start to pick and choose random title fights on top of that.

Bellator needs to decide what they are, because they can't have it both ways.

Sure they can.

cowboyronnie · Post #743 » by **cowboyronnie** » Mon Jan 20, 2014 11:59 pm

Reports that Alvarez is talking about the trilogy fight between he and Chandler being a PPV. Further suggestion is that it might be in Eddie's contract. Cos as a business and market plan it's a TERRIBLE idea. They escaped the last one by the skin of their teeth.

skflives · Post #744 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 1:58 am

Bernman wrote:Bellator announced their 2nd card of next season for March 7th: http://www.bellator.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=23600&ATCLID=209368570

and supposedly they have a bombshell to announce later in the day. Putting a bunch of pieces of info together, I feel fairly strongly it'll be a one night kickboxing tourney involving Rampage and Spong, with an MMA event surrounding that includes Pitbull/Curran vs. Straus and maybe a LHW tourney.

I wish they wouldn't recycle losers in their tournaments as much as they do. I understand why they would put Lavar Johnson in again because he's got a name known to casual fans due to his experience in the UFC and Strikeforce. But Mark Holata. The guy has lost 2 of his last 3 fights by first round stoppages. Surely there was someone new and more worthy of a position. Hell, I would have settled for Bobby Lashley for the hell of it.

skflives · Post #745 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:05 am

cowboyronnie wrote:Reports that Alvarez is talking about the trilogy fight between he and Chandler being a PPV. Further suggestion is that it might be in Eddie's contract. Cos as a business and market plan it's a TERRIBLE idea. They escaped the last one by the skin of their teeth.

A Bellator PPV isn't inherently a failure. It just depends upon how much they are going to charge for it and how they do it. There are plenty of smaller organizations that do their occassional little PPV. The way I see it they should do PPVs at the end of every season. They can stack the card with all the tourney finals with a title fight thrown in there. This way they will have the entire season to build up this one event. Then they should recognize that they aren't the UFC and don't have the cache to charge $65 bucks. Limit the price to like 30-40 bucks and they should be able to sell enough to stay in the black. As long as they make money on the PPV its worthwhile. But if they try to do the Affliction thing and stack their ppvs with expensive names its doomed to fail....especially if they are building the card around washed up has beens like Rampage vs. Tito Ortiz.

cowboyronnie · Post #746 » by **cowboyronnie** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:10 am

No one is dying for MMA content... the UFC has countless events, very few average fans are going to pay any amount for non-UFC competition. Alvarez vs Chandler /Tito vs Rampage / Mo vs Newton...these certainly aren't going to compel the average MMA (UFC) consumer to put down $29.99. Why would they? The UFC will likely counter-program the event anyway, and will likely have had 3 or so other events that month anyway. Who is looking to pay?

Cammo101 · Post #747 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 6:25 am

cowboyronnie wrote:No one is dying for MMA content... the UFC has countless events, very few average fans are going to pay any amount for non-UFC competition. Alvarez vs Chandler /Tito vs Rampage / Mo vs Newton...these certainly aren't going to compel the average MMA (UFC) consumer to put down $29.99. Why would they? The UFC will likely counter-program the event anyway, and will likely have had 3 or so other events that month anyway. Who is looking to pay?

Pretty much this. The UFC and WWE are having a hard time selling PPVs. Why anyone would attempt to movie into that space right now is beyond me.

Bellator got bailed out last time. But, it seems they are intent on moving into PPV.

REDDzone · Post #748 » by **REDDzone** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 2:15 pm

cowboyronnie wrote:No one is dying for MMA content... the UFC has countless events, very few average fans are going to pay any amount for non-UFC competition. Alvarez vs Chandler /Tito vs Rampage / Mo vs Newton...these certainly aren't going to compel the average MMA (UFC) consumer to put down $29.99. Why would they? The UFC will likely counter-program the event anyway, and will likely have had 3 or so other events that month anyway. Who is looking to pay?

I agree. UFC ppv isn't even doing well. Hendo was talking last week about how they are trying to cut pay because their numbers are going down. Unless its a big event, why not wait a week and watch the next fs1 or fox show that is sure to be popping up. Very few is going to pay to watch the likes of Rich/Wand, Rashad/Hendo headline ppvs anymore. So for bellator to take something that has previously been free and try to charge for it...I just can't see it.

skflives · Post #749 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 6:54 pm

Once again, to be a success a PPV doesn't need to have 10 million buys. It just needs to have enough buys to justify the cost.

Just look at the math. A peak of 1.4 million people watched Eddie Alvarez vs. Michael Chandler #2 on Spike with an average viewership of 1.1 million. If Bellator can convert just 10% of those people to PPV buyers for Alvarez/Chandler 3 that would mean between 110,000 and 140,000 ppv buyers. If we're talking only $30 bucks for the ppv we're talking between $3.3 and $4.2 million in revenue before sponsorships deals and arena ticket sales are counted. There are costs associated with running ppvs but Bellator's should be a little less than the UFC considering Viacom is a majority stakeholder. Viacom owns Spike and several other networks which means Bellator won't have to pay to run commercials spots promoting the PPV. The UFC has to pay for all their commercial time. As long as Bellator can keep the budget for fighters down to around a million dollars, a feasible goal considering how much less they pay their fighters than the UFC, their ppv should post a profit. At the end of the day that is what matters. That is what determines the success of the PPV. Not every PPV needs to have Mayweather or De La Hoya type numbers to make money.

REDDzone · Post #750 » by **REDDzone** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:35 pm

It wouldn't be between 3.3 and 4.2 million in revenue for belleator alone though, don't ppv companies take exactly HALF right off the top?

Cammo101 · Post #751 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 7:47 pm

Also, the idea that you can bring 10% of people who watched a free card to a $30 PPV seems like a very generous number.

skflives · Post #752 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:16 pm

Cammo101 wrote:Also, the idea that you can bring 10% of people who watched a free card to a $30 PPV seems like a very generous number.

That's a load of crap. 10% is not a very generous number its a reasonably low expectation.

skflives · Post #753 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:18 pm

REDDzone wrote:It wouldn't be between 3.3 and 4.2 million in revenue for belleator alone though, don't ppv companies take exactly HALF right off the top?

True but that's why it works if they keep the payroll for the event low. If they put Ortiz and Rampage in as they originally planned the PPV would be doomed to fail. Ortiz and Rampage cost too much relative to the amount of pay per view buyers they'd bring to the table.

REDDzone · Post #754 » by **REDDzone** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:22 pm

I swear I remember reading something in the past to the effect of ppv price doesn't really matter, just costing anything in general is a barrier for people. What is the difference in buyers from $45 to $65? I have no idea. IDK if it'd be huge though.

Cammo101 · Post #755 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:22 pm

skflives wrote:
Cammo101 wrote:Also, the idea that you can bring 10% of people who watched a free card to a $30 PPV seems like a very generous number.

That's a load of crap. 10% is not a very generous number its a reasonably low expectation.

Based on what?

skflives · Post #756 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:37 pm

Cammo101 wrote:
skflives wrote:
Cammo101 wrote:Also, the idea that you can bring 10% of people who watched a free card to a $30 PPV seems like a very generous number.

That's a load of crap. 10% is not a very generous number its a reasonably low expectation.

Based on what?

Based upon logic.

skflives · Post #757 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:01 pm

REDDzone wrote:I swear I remember reading something in the past to the effect of ppv price doesn't really matter, just costing anything in general is a barrier for people. What is the difference in buyers from $45 to $65? I have no idea. IDK if it'd be huge though.

I think the argument was that the price doesn't matter as much as the content. For example, most wouldn't pay $45 for a pay per view with a card like that recent UFC card headlined by Safferdine. But many would gladly have paid $65 for Silva/Weidman 2.

But in this case we're talking about a $30 price point. I think more people would be willing to take on shot on a PPV if it was headlined by a bout like Chandler/Alvarez 3 and only cost $30. What Bellator should do is:

1)scrap the Spring PPV

2)build up the Alvarez/Chandler rubber match by letting them fight other people. Let Alvarez fight recent tournament winner Will Brooks so that the tournament thing means something :lol:

. Let Chandler fight a respected but entirely beatable opponent like Ricardo Tirloni. Assuming both win those fights and come away without an injury announce the rematch for late May or early June.

3)use the finals of the tournaments (heavyweight, lightweight, light heavyweight, welterweight) that have been the focus of much of the preceding 3 months as the undercard. Especially if the King Mo vs. Rampage match works out the way Bellator clearly hopes.

4) Televise the prelims on Spike. I know it won't move the needle much in terms of PPV buys but it would certainly have a better chance of pushing buyers towards the ppv than streaming the prelims on spike.com. Plus it allows Viacom to get extra money from commercials because the target demographic will be more likely to watch the prelims than whatever terrible crap would normally be on at the time.

Of course they don't seem to be interested in something as carefully planned as I proposed so we shall see.

Cammo101 · Post #758 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:05 pm

skflives wrote:Based upon logic.

I have a real hard time believing that Bellator can take 10% of of their viewing audience and get them to shell out $30 dollars for a PPV card. There is just way too much free, high quality MMA programing for that. Stars sell PPVs, and it has been that way a long time for both UFC and non-UFC. I don't see what stars and what fights they can put on to get people to pay.

skflives · Post #759 » by **skflives** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:07 pm

Cammo101 wrote:
skflives wrote:Based upon logic.

I have a real hard time believing that Bellator can take 10% of of their viewing audience and get them to shell out $30 dollars for a PPV card. There is just way too much free, high quality MMA programing for that. Stars sell PPVs, and it has been that way a long time for both UFC and non-UFC. I don't see what stars and what fights they can put on to get people to pay.

Once again, its all about turning a profit. You don't need a card headlined by George St.Pierre to have a profitable ppv. Bellator can't have a successful ppv if its looking to get 1 million buys. They don't have the stars to pull it off. But they do have the stars to pull together 100k-150k at a reasonable price point. With a low fighter payroll they can have a successful pay per view without needing a million buys. Hell, Invicta does their ppvs online and they don't have any stars. They don't seem to be doing that badly.

Cammo101 · Post #760 » by **Cammo101** » Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:11 pm

skflives wrote:
Cammo101 wrote:
skflives wrote:Based upon logic.

I have a real hard time believing that Bellator can take 10% of of their viewing audience and get them to shell out $30 dollars for a PPV card. There is just way too much free, high quality MMA programing for that. Stars sell PPVs, and it has been that way a long time for both UFC and non-UFC. I don't see what stars and what fights they can put on to get people to pay.

Once again, its all about turning a profit. You don't need a card headlined by George St.Pierre to have a profitable ppv. Bellator can't have a successful ppv if its looking to get 1 million buys. But if they do between 100k-150k at a reasonable price point with a low fighter payroll they can have a successful pay per view. Hell, Invicta does a lot of their ppvs online and they don't have any stars. They don't seem to be doing that badly.

I think you are right that if they plan on doing a PPV, they should keep it cheap, and hope to break even. I just don't think 150K is remotely reasonable.

Invicta charges like $10 for their cards and only a handful of hardcore fans actually pay it. They are not making money off of it, simply using it as a loss leader and a way of advertising their product. Also, Invicta has been raided twice now and sold off an entire division to the UFC. I'd argue they are not doing all that well.