to prove my point.
Do you remember a funny video of Phil Baroni in the parking lot where he jokes about how he does not have money, and that he should be sponsored by Glade?
That displays exactly that despite being a big name in the sport, he received a fraction of how much people though he did.

I find refreshing some people do discuss grammar.
For I find that it's been beaten too often and too much.

It's nice to know others dislike words typo-ed on purpose to be considered "in" like "werd!"
Maybe there's hope after all...

sorry, but you don't always need it all.
There are plenty of examples around.
moreover, one can make himself understood with shorter sentences.
If you need 100% correct sentences & verbs in order to understand something, you must be confused all the time.
Because as languages evolve, the rules are broken and people still are able to communicate. See the new music around for example...

Jim, let me ask you this: Do you get a raise every time your company makes a bigger profit? No.
The best you get is a raise every year that has nothing to do with how much money your company makes.

People does not get "participation" money. This is not capitalism. I don't know where you learned about it, but the people's company as you think of happens only in socialist countries...

moreover, I don't know if you noticed, but Zuffa is not a restaurant or a shoe company.
They are more like the music world.
And like Bono (U2) said about people downloading music because they don't want to buy the full CD for one good music, if the singer would make better music, people would buy the CD. "just don't make crappy music". And I agree with it.

Good cards: I bet most people that can pay buy it.
Crappy cards: Many people who can afford will stream it.

Jim, note that I am not fighting you.
Nor even the Rolex guy.
The funny thing is that I point exactly to capitalism where knockoffs can exist and everyone is happy. The rich who can afford the real thing and the poor.

Moving to your point about Corporation, I don't know why you are going out on a tangent and dismissing the point.
Fighters will NOT get paid more just because the company makes more money. So the added PPV money would not go to the fighters.
So your point about how much money CEO or CFO or the higher-ups is a moot one.

And it is out of greed that he is going after people who watch from streams.
1 - They will allienate people who can't pay, as they won't be able to watch it.
2 - The sport is growing in popularity. Why take away the tool that is helping most?
3 - is this realy nescessary? They are growing. Profit is skyrocketing. If they were hurting and on the red, I can see your point. but they make enough as it is. And as you are living proof, you buy even though you could be streaming. Most people that can buy, they do. it is easier, more convenient, etc.

it is the same thing we speak bout people downloading music... Didn't you record a K7 tape when you were young? Copied a Longplay to K7 ? Taped from Radio? This is EXACTLY the same thing. Business evolves. they learn to deal with it. They actually USE the Internet as a tool to help reach people that otherwise they would never get access to. Look at Kimbo as a living example of it.
So it all boils down to greed. it is greed that makes Dana go after the little people to squeeze the last dimes out of them. Eve if it allienates a lot of MMA fans.

ok, let's make one thing clear. I never said I stream or watch from stream.

I took exception of your friend and his Rolex having a fit over some kid a MC D's for having a fake one that looked like his.

Second. You make me laugh at how naive you are.
As a business, UFC pays as little as possible to their fighters. It is just what they do.
More PPV's will go only for the big stars who get a share of the PPV's. And those guys get enough already.
More PPV's mean basically more for Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta & Dana. Not the fighters.
Most have contracts with the numbers in them. will not change until the contract renew or renegotiation.

You should teach your kids that greed is also bad.

Jim, do you know the word symbiosis ?
This is what it is.
Internet is progress. Companies should adapt. Same as the music world did, same as anything else did.
If they stop the Internet, more than some washed-out PPV's that most people wouldn't buy, most followers would stop watching most events and pick a few to watch lessening their interest in the product as a whole. Streaming helps UFC keep those fans hooked. They might not buy the PPV, but they help UFC's bargaining point for sponsorship.
Sponsors don't care how many people bought PPV. They care about the exposure they get.
So a popular product will get the return not only directly from their customers. This is capitalism 101.

They get short on PPV money, but sure get it back form their sponsors because they have a popular product.

It is funny that it's known UFC pays it's fighters the least possible, less than 20% of their money goes to the fighters and yet you blame the PPV streams as the reason for it? You know better.

funny!

apparently you are the dumb one.
I never said the poor should get Rolex. but that is why there are cheap alternatives that looks like you Rolex. And if someone poor wants to have a shinny piece that resembles your golden piece then why not?
If you wish to have something only rich people can have, maybe you should go to those imperial countries where the casts are set in stone.
And please, don't make me laugh. Internet was here in 1993. Sure wasn't popular.
Neither was the UFC.

Just so you learn, UFC was bought by Zuffa in 2001 and the turnaround came after 2004. And yes, unless you were living under a rock, Internet was already popular by 2004.

We can see who is ree-tart-ED!

this remarks are as dumb as they are stereotyped which reeks of your ignorance.
So only rich people should have Rolex and "the rest" should suck it up? Why? you probably think poor people should die and spare you of their dirt-ridden filthy existence...

Dana should listen to his own employees (like Rogan) who always says "You can't stop the internet".

how does he think UFC got popular? free streaming. Watching old fights on the web, watching shows for free, etc.

117 is the best yet to come this year (so far).

this is the very reason. Who has he fought that was relevant?
Since his loss to Gonzaga, his only name fight was Kongo & Santos, which he lost.
Now they are feeding him cans so he can win some more. he lost his heart. he should quit after his contract ends.

forgot Coleman...

Tito.
Chuck
Wanderlei
Rampage
Cro Cop
Nog
Mir

can't disagree with Kurt Angle. he would be my pick too.

Fedor
- Beat Nogueira - was on a 5 fights win streak and was 24-2 at the time
- avenged Kohsaka - was on a 3 fight winning streak, but was the only one to "defeat" Fedor
- Beat Cro Cop - 7 fights win streak and was 16-2-2 at the time

All in 8 months.

Sokoudjou took him down and was reversed.
Machida will be too elusive & fast for Rampage.
he does not have the pressure he had against Rua. he won't commit to Finnish Rampage unless he is 100% sure.

Do you think Heat even wants him?

it's a slippery road for Dana to say that.

one way or another, we'll find what both are made of.

Sexyama will win trhis one...