The UFC antitrust case settles, kind of — again. Ex-UFC stars Cung Le, Nathan Quarry, Jon Fitch, Brandon Vera, et al. acted as plaintiffs (Case No. 2:15-cv-01045-RFB-BNW). Le, Kajan Johnson/C.B. Dollaway later proposed a UFC Athlete-class suit with some 1,214 fighters. UFC CEO Dana White and the TKO bosses of the bossman can presumably rest easier now.
On Thursday, TKO Holdings announced a $375m settlement with the claimants. MMA journalist John Nash first broke the news. However, the settlement will be subject to approval by US District Court Judge Richard Boulware. The judge previously rejected a combined $335m settlement for the lawsuits pending against UFC operators for violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
On September 26, 2024, TKO reached an agreement with the plaintiffs to settle all claims asserted in the Le case for an aggregate amount of $375 million payable in installments over an agreed-upon period of time by the Company and its subsidiaries following the court’s denial of an earlier proposed settlement agreement…The terms of the Updated Settlement Agreement have been memorialized in a long form agreement, which will be submitted to the court for approval. The Company anticipates that the settlement amount will be deductible for tax purposes.
TKO Holdings and UFC in a press release statement
The TKO takeover has only increased stock points and talking points, but it’s not over yet. Per reports – this $375m settlement is strictly for the Le case. This represents a $75m increase over the original had Boulware approved it.
John Nash has touched this on in his special two-part “Hey Not The Face” Podcast; What Every Fighter Should Know about the Antitrust Settlement, pt. 1 | Ep. 65 for a while now. A bigger payout for plaintiffs remains a far cry from billions. Not everybody runs on that “Connie currency” for superstars.
BREAKING: UFC says in a statement they’ve reached a “revised agreement” with the plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit.
Deal is for $375 million and still subject to judge’s approval: pic.twitter.com/Dw2CSFUfTv
— Luke Thomas🏋️♀️ (@lthomasnews) September 26, 2024
This leaves out the most recent 2021 action by Kajan Johnson. Johnson made waves in early 2017 for the boot out of the UFC’s fighter retreat for his views on Reebok. This was a little oddity at the time given that even Demetrious Johnson appreciated sponsorship payments. With chump change for the TKO billionaires in the part-deal, the matter has gone viral.
New proposed settlement: A Yaysayer or a Naysayer?
Plaintiffs and TKO announced an initial settlement in March. The claims sought damages in the range of $894 million to $1.6 billion. But Boulware rejected the settlement in July. The judge said that the monetary damages payable against the UFC were not large enough. Consequently, this has mostly been true.
Dana White and TKO Umbrella tout tax deductions (Source: es.agfight.com/heavy.com)Even now, a glance through chatboards and X-Space sees most people commenting that let them just settle the Le case. As it is the corporate litigators are the ones getting paid big bucks for milking this out! Much to the woes of Dana White and Co. (TKO), Boulware subsequently billed that some class members would receive as little as $3,000 in compensation!
The UFC’s defense has been that it has invested in the sport, not cut corners with anti-competitive conduct. However, Dana White and Co’s alibi is also their biggest Kryptonite. UFC had a mammoth revenue record with a staggering $1.3 billion up to Q3 of 2023! That’s without biggest superstars Conor McGregor and pay-per-view title draw Jon Jones.
That is even without the more lux venue-based MSG ‘Sphere’ before a more restrictive pause. TKO billionaires have clear dough to spare; as proven by Dana White admitting to gimmicky superfights in global locations. The promotion was up 13 percent, with adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization) stacking 11 percent to $756 million. Only in 2023!
UFC live events revenue has been bigger than any in these past few. It has enough to give out, even if not from a tactile ground. Yet, the spiteful promotion touting ‘Deductible For Tax Purposes’ instead of proper payouts in claims for injunctive relief is bothersome. So no, the common consensus says it needs to do more, awaiting approval from the presiding judge.
