In 2017, UFC CEO Dana White’s policy was to not disclose a fighter’s pay unless they misrepresented it, but he admitted in a deposition for an antitrust lawsuit that the company had likely worked to keep salary information private, with fighters’ pay becoming a central part of the case against UFC for alleged antitrust violations.
Dana White, UFC’s CEO, had a policy back in 2017. It was simple – don’t disclose a fighter’s pay unless they’ve misrepresented it publicly.
Randy Couture, a UFC Hall of Famer, found himself in hot water in 2007. He revealed his earnings during a retirement dispute. White shot back, claiming Couture “completely lied”. He even went to the UFC’s accounting department to get the real number for a public counter.
Behind the scenes, things were different. White didn’t want certain figures making the rounds. He admitted the promotion had “probably” worked to keep salary info under wraps. This was revealed in a 2017 deposition for the UFC antitrust lawsuit, recently unsealed by federal judge Richard Boulware.
But that didn’t mean paydays were private among fighters. “All the fighters know what other fighters are making,” White said. “They all talk. They all know. Even guys who say they don’t want their number out there, they tell.”
Sometimes, this led to flareups among talent. White recalled a professional wrestler who’d signed with the UFC without any professional fights. Four weeks out from Floyd Mayweather vs. Conor McGregor, White struggled to remember the name. “It just happened recently again, too,” White said. “We had some guy that was — that was paid a certain amount of money and never — oh, the professional wrestler that we brought in. Not Brock [Lesnar], the other one.”
“CM Punk?” the attorney asked. “Oh, yeah,” White replied. “People went crazy when they saw what he got paid. … Even the women.”
According to a contract unsealed in the lawsuit, Punk, real name Phil Brooks, jumped straight to the top of the UFC’s declared pay scale. His payout: a flat $500,000; any money owed him through a separate letter of agreement; and for his first fight and “if and only if” he defended a UFC title, a tiered pay-per-view bonus that kicked in at 200,000 buys.
The promotion has worked publicly and privately to keep salary info out of the public eye. In 2014, it lobbied the Florida legislature to limit disclosures required by promoters, which include fighter purses. Individuals linked to the promotion have also pushed hard to keep financial info secret.
The group of UFC vets suing the promotion for antitrust violations have made fighter pay a central part of its case. They argue the promotion conspired to lower fighter pay as part of a scheme to monopolize the market for elite MMA fighters.
Behind the scenes, former matchmaker Joe Silva and current matchmaker Sean Shelby have also worked with UFC execs to manage perceptions about what fighters were being paid. They paid close attention not only to compensation, but perception about that compensation among fighters.
The antitrust suit could go to trial in April. The UFC faces damages of over $1 billion if the fighters can convince a jury that the promotion broke the law in its meteoric rise.
Fighters’ outrage over Punk’s payday was in abundant supply after his octagon debut. “CM Punk made $500k on his entry fight while the rest of us pay to fight?” tweeted then-UFC bantamweight Cat Zingano. “Y’all should be ashamed UFC.”
According to an expert report released in the antitrust lawsuit, even that half-million figure was likely an underreporting of Punk’s true take-home. The pro wrestler actually took home $1,042,736 for his loss to Gall, the likely result of his pay-per-view bonus and other sweeteners.
One thing is beyond dispute: Punk’s drawing power helped push the UFC 203 to greater success. The reported buyrate for the event was 450,000, generating $26,995,500. Punk’s pay represented about 4 percent of those earnings.