On Tuesday night, ESPN's E:60 investigative reporting show profiled UFC President Dana White, behind the central question: "Can UFC get to the next level with Dana White being Dana White?"I have a question, too: At what point can we all just admit UFC has already reached "the next level" while corporate America was sleeping on the job?
The fallacy these days is that UFC somehow needs to be legitimized by mainstream media or major advertisers. The fact is that either or both would enhance their position rather than validate it.
ESPN pointed out in the piece that the UFC had seven of the top 10 pay-per-view events of 2008. They didn't mention that the company also had seven of the top 10 events in 2007 after breaking the all-time pay-per-view revenue record in 2006.
By any statistical measure, the UFC is big business. As stated in the piece, it's already a $1 billion company, and White and the Fertitta brothers accomplished that growth in less than a decade. The UFC has also successfully entered many international markets, draws athletes from throughout the world and boasts a desirable demographic. In a horrific global economic climate, they are still growing, yet some still see the need to question his leadership?
This particular time, the question stems from White's recent rant against Sherdog reporter Loretta Hunt, a diatribe which also included an offensive gay slur for which White later apologized. As someone who has faced White's ire in the past -- although admittedly nowhere near the Defcon-1 level Hunt faced -- I can say that it is an uncomfortable place to be.
Not to excuse his behavior, but I'm not sure people realize how dedicated to the UFC he is. He keeps a schedule that would make most drop of exhaustion, constantly traveling, planning and executing plans, sacrificing time from his family in the process. I once asked him what he liked to do in his spare time and he kind of laughed as though the question was ridiculous. After a few seconds he offered up an answer but the point was made.
Most of the people I know close to White marvel at his work ethic and tenacity. When motivated, he applies a singular-minded focus that is unshakable, and it's because he has a true passion for his company. In some ways, he values his company on the level of a close family member, which is why he defends it passionately and yes, sometimes crosses the line. Business is personal to him, and the UFC is part of his identity.
The ESPN piece was fairly even, except for the inclusion of New York State Assemblyman Bob Reilly, who is the UFC's top adversary in getting the sport sanctioned in the state. Reilly seems like a decent man; he donated his entire government salary to charities including community centers, family services programs and homeless shelters. But regarding the sport, he is blissfully ignorant. I recently read his report "The Case against Ultimate Fighting in New York State" which is littered with serious factual errors and leaps of logic so terrifying you might need a Dramamine to read through the whole thing. Still, he has become the figurehead for opposition to the sport in New York, and so gets a forum he doesn't deserve.
He tells Farrey, "If the state legislature and the government were to accept 'Ultimate Fighting', they have to realize this is who we're getting in bed with: Dana White. He mirrors very well the violence that happens with 'Ultimate Fighting." I'm not quite sure what he means, but I've been to UFC events in multiple states, and every athletic commission representative I've spoken to has been thrilled with hosting the UFC product. In fact, Ohio State Athletic Commission executive director Bernie Profato -- clearly thrilled with the UFC's success in the Buckeye State -- recently awarded White with a lifetime matchmaker's license. White also was recently given the Armed Forces Foundation Patriot Award for raising millions on behalf of American troops. It's unfair to paint him or the organization he represents with a broad brush. Sure he's capable of making mistakes, but he also has millions of satisfied customers behind him.
In the end, White will always be a polarizing figure. So are many corporate CEOs and leaders. They have difficult decisions to make, whether dealing with the livelihoods of the people underneath them or finding ways to grow their companies. And White certainly puts an extra target on his back by never holding his tongue. Maybe this makes him a 21st Century leader, or maybe it makes him a maverick. Or maybe it just makes him interesting.
In some ways it's fair to question who's running the show in any business, but the fact that White got the UFC this far is the only argument necessary for those who believe in him, while those who don't will likely will never be swayed.
















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
5-13-2009 @ 1:09PM
Frederick said...
I recently found an interview with Big John McCarthy on youtube
He was saying the whole NY thing as alot to do with Fertita being a non unionized Casino and NY being very Union influenced.
Do you feel there is any thruth to that?
Could that be more what Reily implies. The way they conduct business is not very acceptable to them? I am just wondering it was an interestng interview
Reply
5-13-2009 @ 1:22PM
fehcdekcuf said...
The Presidents of other large companies put on a friend of the community face while they rob the public blind, feed them poison, poison the environment and then demand that we support their failing business with public funds, At least Dana white lets every one know where he stands. Dana and a team of fighters should be allowed let loose a barrel of whoop-ass on congress, the senate and wall street.
Reply
5-14-2009 @ 11:02AM
Apaco16 said...
Dana White is a "no-nonsense" down-to-earth hard-nosed guy. He says how he sees it and doesn't pull punches. He's not the prototypical CEO/President of a company and that makes people uneasy. Let's face it, the PPV numbers down lie. The Nielsen ratings for TUF don't lie. The fact that my friends and I keep in touch JUST to get together and watch the next UFC event is proof that Dana's model should be studied by "industry experts". I find MMA consuming my thoughts and I'll strike up conversations with strangers about almost anything and it will almost always end up being excited talking about the next big main event... Controversial? Yeah. UN-filtered? Yeah. One of the most successful businessmen in the world...? You bet.
Reply
5-20-2009 @ 3:12PM
7-Litre said...
oh, so now to be a "sport", all you need do is throw enough money at it, right?
golf as a "sport" is bad enough--what next, toilet bowl cleaning?
skid mark erasing?
MMA is most certainly NOT a sport--all it is is sanctioned barroom brawling without the bottles or barflies or chicken-wired CW band;
i've not seen much in the way of martial arts being used save as an afterthought after a bull rush;
a true martial artist would dispense with the trash that i've seen in fight after fight with little effort, because that is the entire point of martial arts, not incessant barroom brawling;
which one of these clowns could withstand the famous one-inch punch or the original iron palm or lay hands upon the author of Aikido or get close enough to the author of Kenpo to and live?
even if money is used to "legitimise" these talking pit bulls into a "sport", it will not cover for the fact that MMA is nothing but a long infomercial on brawling and should more rightfully be called Mish-Mash Altercations;
Reply
5-20-2009 @ 8:33PM
robertthefishguy said...
There are a lot more styles of martial arts then I think you want to admit. I will take the most popular guy...Bruce Lee. He took the best of EVERY fighting style and combined them, much like today's MMA do. There are a lot of rules implied nowadays with the UFC. The flowery, dance around stuff serves no purpose in any ring. Wrestling and grappling have been around a lot longer then some of the styles you proposed. You have to be a well-rounded mma to compete in the UFC and other venues, but it is not, by a long shot, taking away from the more pure styles. It is more of a compliment to them.
5-20-2009 @ 3:15PM
JLWINNAPA said...
We need more people like Dana White in this world no BS in your face tell it like it is or how he thinks it should be BRAVO..
Reply
5-20-2009 @ 5:40PM
bing bing said...
Dana white and the UFC are not going to go any farther to legitimize themselves, They are manager promoter and governing body all in one.By doing this thay can controle every aspect of their product. This means low pay for fighters and high revenues for UFC. Thier rating system is a joke if not nonexistant. One of thier vice presidents, former Nevada athletic commision head fought against all these types of monopolies, but now for the right paycheck pushes just the opposite. Dana white is promoting his product strictly to make money not because of a love for the sport. I hope his arrogance and ignorane catch up to him.
Reply
5-20-2009 @ 3:35PM
ksteele513 said...
7-Litre - You are an idiot who obviously think CRICKET is a sport?...and you're obviously an author on said "skid mark erasing" but my question is what do YOU call a sport? there was NO money in the early years and Dana was the one who realized that the early days it WAS barbaric and nothing what it resembles now. He has done everything to appease athletic commissions and now is reaping the reward of his work. You're a hater who should stick to the laundry where you belong.
Reply
5-20-2009 @ 4:30PM
gonzo1 said...
ksteele513 , BRAVO!!!! WELL SAID .
5-20-2009 @ 4:21PM
gonzo1 said...
reilly states that dana white " reflects " the violence of the sport he represents . well mr. reilly , have you ever walked the streets of new york city my dear man ? i would venture to say "NOT!" . there's more violence on the streets of new york city than in the past ten years of the ufc . so i contend that your city is too violent for the sport , and the ufc has more class than your city .
Reply