A federal judge has cleared a class-action lawsuit against the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), potentially including over 1,200 fighters, alleging that the company conceived an illegal scheme to lower athletes’ pay and create a monopsony among fight promoters.
The eight-year tussle of former UFC fighters against the organization seems to be coming to a climax. The suit, filed in California, has finally been certified as class-action by a federal judge in Nevada, more than eight years to the day. This sets the stage for a trial possibly exposing UFC’s alleged illegal scheme to engineer a monopsony among fight promoters and depress the wages of its athletes.
Judge Richard Boulware on the previous Saturday filed an 80-page ruling explaining his decision to sanction the “bout” class of the lawsuit. The class potentially includes upwards of 1,200 fighters who have had bouts in the UFC between December 16, 2010, and June 30, 2017. The UFC’s business practices were the subject of the judge’s examination which is supposed to offer insights into the fighter’s prospects in court and their next steps.
The effects of the ruling might be quite significant on the sport and may usher in a drastic alteration of the very skeleton of its commerce. Despite the dense legal jargon, an underlying message seems worryingly clear for the UFC – the class-action lawsuit now perhaps wields the potential to annihilate any investments in WME-IMG stock, should it go to the trial and end with UFC’s loss. Judge Boulware’s stern critique of the UFC’s business practices points at the likelihood of this outcome. Although it starts as a silent bell, it can evolve into a tolling gong that spells the end of UFC’s current contract model.
In terms of precedents, multi-fight deals binding fighters with a promotional gig had been dubbed anti-competitive in the 1950s. This was criticized by a federal judge in the context of International Boxing Club’s attempt to monopolize Madison Square Garden and hamper rivals. In the 80s and 90s, the growing monopoly over a large number of champions by Don King fuelled anti-trust concerns in boxing. The UFC’s contracts, therefore, are nothing new, being part of a legacy ridden with questions around their fairness to fighters, promoters, and fans. Presently, UFC fighters are virtually chained for life under some conditions, unfairly curtailing their career aspirations and rival promoters’ competitiveness. This puts the sector’s health under question.