Dana White overrated?

belge boy

I keep hearing he's some promoting god but all he ever did was steal ideas from Don King and Vince Mcmahon, I mean any hack could do this. I respect what he done with UFC like, nobody watched that ****, and it wasn't succesful but he turned it around with the ultimate fighter but i think a lot of people don't watch ufc and prefer better mma promotions like in japan that stay true to their origins. opinions? i really dislike ufc even tho i'm trained in mma and pretty good.

rovert

What scale are we using? Likert

belge boy

well the way i hear my friends speak, they think dana is like some type of genius but really he's just a hack who copies other peoples ideas. as well as being a downright ****.

i just want to know does anyone else dislike ufc but like mma or hate dana white.

rovert

Are you going to do a I love Strikeforce gimmick like your TNA one on the ProWres board?

You remind me of Candystripes btw.

belge boy

dude i just want to know what people opinions are?

Mellor

What did he steal from Don King or Vince McMahon (btw King is the biggest prick in the business, Dana is not even close)

Bodhisopha

Overrated with regards to what exactly?


He is quite clearly a great businessman.

rovert

Mellor wrote: »

What did he steal from Don King or Vince McMahon

Boxing and Wrestling, both cases are making there way through the courts :pac:

consultech

I've always seen Dana as a straight up, no-bull****, great businessman. Liddell's book tells some good tales of his down to earth nature. Not sure exactly what "ideas" he stole from King and Vince McMahon (lmao) btw.

Actually what am I replyin to here...

roo1981

He's taken a half functional debt riddled promotion and turned it into a billion dollar market leading beast.

He's crushed, then bought to add insult to injury, most other promotions that have tried to oppose him (Pride, Affliction etc).

He's argueably done more than anyone else to legitamise the sport of MMA in the US-it was very close to being outlawed when he purchased the UFC.

He's responsible for the fact that to most people and even some fans, MMA is not MMA, its UFC.

Regardless of business practises, abbrasive personality and treatment of some fighters, you have to give him that much. So to answer your question, no, I dont think he's overrated, I think he's done quite a good job.

DeadlyByDesign

It's very easy to slip into the "I am anti corporate/Dana White bracket". A lot of people will say he is a tyrant and has ruined the face of MMA, then immediately jump on the "it's cool to like the underdog promotion bandwagon-ie strike force". it's clear to see that he is a ruthless business man and has a very keen instinct on marketing and generating hype.

I am thankful he is. Without Dana I think we would have no interest, albeit cult interest in MMA today.

AARRRGH

Bodhisopha wrote: »

He is quite clearly a great businessman.

Is he really?

I get the feeling it's the Fertitta brothers who are the great businessmen, and Dana is more of a spokesperson.

RNCFAN

I'm not sure where to even start with that comment.

rovert

RNCFAN wrote: »

I'm not sure where to even start with that comment.

Station Casinos?

scudzilla

Dana is a fcukin genius for what he's done for MMA/UFC, if it wasn't for him we wouldn't be getting quality UFC fights every month.

I've met the guy a few times and he's so fcukin cool, totally got time for people and will actually listen and is interested in what ya have to say, could ya say that about other millionaire promotors of a huge company like this?

Sure he gets carried away sometimes and says the wrong thing (when he called that woman from sherdog, loretta i think, a lesbian was fcukin hilarious) btu don't we all.

AARRRGH

RNCFAN wrote: »

I'm not sure where to even start with that comment.

You can start here:

Tell me what Dana does for a living, and provide some sort of proof for your answers.

AARRRGH

And bear in mind he's not the CEO, so don't list the things a CEO does.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

You can start here:

Tell me what Dana does for a living, and provide some sort of proof for your answers.

Well his own current job as well what Lorenzo does now ever since prior to June 2008 when Lorenzo joined UFC full time. One of the reasons why Lorenzo resigned from Station Casinos is that it was felt that Dana was over worked. Dana is said to be very hands on and it is his nature to mirco management everything.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

Well his own current job as well what Lorenzo does now ever since prior to June 2008 when Lorenzo joined UFC full time. One of the reasons why Lorenzo resigned from Station Casinos is that it was felt that Dana was over worked. Dana is said to be very hands on and it is his nature to mirco management everything.

Sure, but what is his current job. What does he actually do on a daily basis, apart from huge amounts of PR stuff.

Lorenzo is the CEO so he is the business guy.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

Sure, but what is his current job. What does he actually do on a daily basis, apart from huge amounts of PR stuff.

Lorenzo is the CEO so he is the business guy.

He is the President of the company he would perform the more day to day activities. Again Lorenzo took duties of Dana when he started working full time in a company I might add who has a very lean level of staffing. Lorzeno isn’t the only "business guy", Dana has a lot of influence on the decisions UFC makes. CEO is a macromanagement role.

I don’t if you are being contrary here or trolling or something but what are you trying to proof or get at here?

AARRRGH

I am simply saying if he is supposed to be a brilliant business person than surely people can tell me some of the things he does on a daily basis.

Saying he is "President" is not sufficient evidence that he is the business brains of the company, as the company already has a successful business person as the CEO. Maybe the CEO is the brains, the talented one?

Lorenzo just happens to have a low profile. The loudest one is not necessarily the talented one!

markfightie

i think you need to look at how a company hierarchy works:

http://searchcio.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid182_gci214459,00.html#



dana would be involved in the day to day running of the business reporting back to the corporate directors. hes only a 10% stakeholder in the company so he answers to the Fertitta brothers before anyone else.

markfightie

just to add, dana is also the zuffa corp puppet, if they want to get a message out that influences their business or helps sales they get him to say it.... people listen when dana speaks.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

I am simply saying if he is supposed to be a brilliant business person than surely people can tell me some of the things he does on a daily basis.

Saying he is "President" is not sufficient evidence that he is the business brains of the company, as the company already has a successful business person as the CEO. Maybe the CEO is the brains, the talented one?

Lorenzo just happens to have a low profile. The loudest one is not necessarily the talented one!

You dont seem to understand how businesses operate here

markfightie wrote: »

just to add, dana is also the zuffa corp puppet, if they want to get a message out that influences their business or helps sales they get him to say it.... people listen when dana speaks.

A puppet who has 10% of the business and major influence over the company :rolleyes:

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

You dont seem to understand how businesses operate here

That's the thing: I do, hence my opinion. I was the financial controller of a very large company and I own businesses in Ireland and Spain.

Just because someone is loud, is seen in the media a lot, and has a nice title, it doesn't mean they are a business great.

There are many people working for the UFC.

My point is we do not know if the UFC's success is because of Dana. It could EASILY be because of Lorenzo since he is the CEO.

But of course, you don't see him on TV that often so people would rather be in awe of the colourful peacock.

rovert wrote: »

A puppet who has 10% of the business and major influence over the company :rolleyes:

I don't doubt he has major influence, but does major influence mean he is a great business person? Come on, think about it, don't just let his personality overawe you.

I accept of course it is possible he is a great business person, but I'm not going to blindly believe it based on his TV presence.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

That's the thing: I do, hence my opinion. I was the financial controller of a very large company and I own businesses in Ireland and Spain.

Just because someone is loud, is seen in the media a lot, and has a nice title, it doesn't mean they are a business great.

There are many people working for the UFC.

My point is we do not know if the UFC's success is because of Dana. It could EASILY be because of Lorenzo since he is the CEO.

But of course, you don't see him on TV that often so people would rather be in awe of the colourful peacock.


I don't doubt he has major influence, but does major influence mean he is a great business person? Come on, think about it, don't just let his personality overawe you.

I accept of course it is possible he is a great business person, but I'm not going to blindly believe it based on his TV presence.

This getting rather tiresome between your "President" comment, accusations of me being over awed by him, your statement that apparently many people work for UFC etc.

Ill leave it up to Lozenzo himself to set you straight:

“It took somebody like Dana who’s got street smarts, who doesn’t pull punches, who speaks his mind, who never [expletive], to do this,” Lorenzo Fertitta, one of UFC’s co-owners, told Yahoo! Sports’ Kevin Iole. “At the end of the day, if we had taken a Harvard MBA and hired him in 2001 to run this company, we’d probably be bankrupt right now. There are so many things that are unconventional about this business. This isn’t something you can read about and learn in a textbook. I truly believe that Dana was put on the Earth to run the UFC.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=dw-white070209&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Im going to guess that this isnt good enough for you either....

AARRRGH

Rovert, you have a horrible communication style. I don't understand why you have to be so difficult/argumentative all the time.

rovert wrote: »

This getting rather tiresome between your "President" comment, accusations of me being over awed by him, your statement that apparently many people work for UFC etc.

Ill leave it up to Lozenzo himself to set you straight:


http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news?slug=dw-white070209&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Im going to guess that this isnt good enough for you either....

That's nice praise from Lorenzo, but he was hardly going to say he's ****e at his job.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to assume Dana is a business great, although obviously I accept he could be. For all we know the people he works with think he is a moron... I've worked for very successful companies where the boss was a total moron.

Basically I don't have enough information to know for sure.

If people were being truely honest they would admit their opinion is influenced by his media presence. My proof for this is the fact that there are no threads about Lorenzo being a business great.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

Rovert, you have a horrible communication style. I don't understand why you have to be so difficult/argumentative all the time.

Likewise any bit of evidence I give you disregard. All because it doesnt suit your agenda.

AARRRGH wrote: »

That's nice praise from Lorenzo, but he was hardly going to say he's ****e at his job.

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to assume Dana is a business great. If you were being truely honest you would admit your opinion is influenced by his media presence. My proof for this is the fact that there are no threads about Lorenzo being a business great.

****ing knew it dude give it up. If Dana was ****e at his job they would have gotten rid of him by now. You have a quote attributing most of the success of UFC to Dana according Lorenzo. If Dana was so-so at his job would he give Dana such a high praise? In case you dont know it was Dana who first saw the potential of UFC and it was him who convinced the skeptical Fertittas to buy the company in the first place.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

Likewise any bit of evidence I give you disregard. All because it doesnt suit your agenda.

The only bit of evidence was the quote from Lorenzo. It's a nice quote but again he was hardly going to say he's not good at his job. Come on, you know that.

At no point have I been rude or ignorant to you.

rovert wrote: »

****ing knew it dude give it up. If Dana was ****e at his job they would have gotten rid of him by now. You have a quote attributing most of the success of UFC to Dana according Lorenzo. If Dana was so-so at his job would he give Dana such a high praise? In case you dont know it was Dana who first show the potential of UFC and it was him who convinced the skeptical Fertittas to buy the company in the first place.

I think you're misinterpreting my posts.

My argument has been I do not know if he is a business great as I do not have enough proof. I do not consider his high media presence as any sort of sign that he is a business great.

Yes he could be, but most successful companies do not have "business greats" as their leaders.

For example, George Bush was the president of a successful country, and I could find a million quotes which state how brilliant he was. But you and I know better.

The reality is we don't know if he is a business great. Certainly he helps run a successful organisation, but that does not make him a business great.

AARRRGH

But you know what? Let's agree to disagree. We don't have to have the same opinion on this (insignificant) matter.

rovert

*facepalms*

I give you a glowing statement by Lorenzo about Dana's performance and influence on the company which he did not have to make and come out that strong not matter many times you make that lame reply of "was hardly going to say he's not good at his job. "

I explained Dana's position and amount of work he does

The fact it was he who spotted the potential of UFC, when very few if any did

Acquired funding

In addition to:
Helping turn a company bought for what $9 million into a company which is/was valued at a $1 billion

(Re)establishing a brand

But you continue to shrug all that away and claim none of it is proof. Making up these ill defined requirments as you go.

So what is the point arguing with you?

Mellor

AARRRGH wrote: »

The only bit of evidence was the quote from Lorenzo. It's a nice quote but again he was hardly going to say he's not good at his job. Come on, you know that.

He could of said nothing at all about his ability??

My argument has been I do not know if he is a business great as I do not have enough proof. I do not consider his high media presence as any sort of sign that he is a business great.

no body said media presence was proof. It was the turn-around of the UFC that people referred to.

For example, George Bush was the president of a successful country, and I could find a million quotes which state how brilliant he was. But you and I know better.

First of all. the USA under G.W. Bush (I assume you refer to the younger) was hardly sucessful. In fact it was a pretty terrible period.

Secondly, I doubt you could find many quotes saying he was great. At lest not from people who could be doing so for political means. There would be more bad quotes, and its not even close.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

But you know what? Let's agree to disagree. We don't have to have the same opinion on this (insignificant) matter.

Your opinion isnt backed up by anything. Merely you are being a contrarian about the particulars of a unique job in a private company in a fairly unique industry.

Find me evidence on anything which Ive said about Dana that isnt true.

My opinion isn’t influenced by Dana’s media presence merely by the statements made those in the company and those who deal with the company on a regular basis. I do follow the industry a great deal Im less swayed by Dana's public persona then you think.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

So what is the point arguing with you?

Exactly, you don't need to constantly argue with people. It's not very nice.

Mellor wrote: »

no body said media presence was proof. It was the turn-around of the UFC that people referred to.

I agree the UFC turnaround has been impressive.

Mellor wrote: »

First of all. the USA under G.W. Bush (I assume you refer to the younger) was hardly sucessful. In fact it was a pretty terrible period.

Secondly, I doubt you could find many quotes saying he was great. At lest not from people who could be doing so for political means. There would be more bad quotes, and its not even close.

In fairness, George Bush was leader of the US during many years of amazing economic success, and the US is a very successful country.

There are many good and bad quotes about George Bush, just like there are many good and bad quotes about Dana White.

I really don't think we have enough proof to give the "business great" title to Dana. If he was a one man band, maybe, but he is part of a very large organisation, and he isn't the decision maker, Lorenzo is.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

Exactly, you don't need to constantly argue with people. It's not very nice.

Well done on ignoring the rest of my posts.

AARRRGH wrote: »

he is part of a very large organisation, and he isn't the decision maker, Lorenzo is.

Source please on all of this, please.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

Your opinion isnt backed up by anything.

I don't know anything about you, but I have been quite senior in the business world, so I know from experience that successful companies are not necessarily (and oftentimes aren't) run by people with good business skills.

We don't work within the UFC, so we just don't know how good or bad he is. And he's not even the decision maker. Yes, he's not even the decision maker. You need to think about the significance of that fact.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

Well done on ignoring the rest of my posts.

Source please on all of this, please.

Couldn't be bothered. I have better things to do with my time than argue with you. I assume you do too.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

Couldn't be bothered. I have better things to do with my time than argue with you. I assume you do too.

You havent for the past hour or so, why now when Im asking you for proof? Please tell me how UFC is a large organisation and that Lorenzo is the decision maker.

Roper

What have the operations of a company got to do with MMA? Do I come on here and talk about who owns and manages the Fairtex factory?

This is why this board is clogged with rubbish.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

I don't know anything about you, but I have been quite senior in the business world, so I know from experience that successful companies are not necessarily (and oftentimes aren't) run by people with good business skills.

We don't work within the UFC, so we just don't know how good or bad he is.

Despite Lorenzo's glowing statement about his performance and influence on the success of the company.....

AARRRGH wrote: »

And he's not even the decision maker. Yes, he's not even the decision maker. You need to think about the significance of that fact.

This statement continues to amaze me.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

Please tell me how UFC is a large organisation and that Lorenzo is the decision maker.

UFC had a quarter of a billion revenue in 2006.

Dana has stated on TUF that Lorenzo is the decision maker and has the final say on things.

Dana has also stated that his "only" job is to promote fights.

It is a fact that UFC is a large organisation, and it is a fact that Lorenzo is the boss.

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

This statement continues to amaze me.

Why?

Do you know what decision maker means?

AARRRGH

Roper wrote: »

What have the operations of a company got to do with MMA? Do I come on here and talk about who owns and manages the Fairtex factory?

This is why this board is clogged with rubbish.

The title is "Dana White overrated". It's pretty obvious what the thread is about. You didn't have to read it.

Roper

yes but I do want to read about MMA on an MMA board. I come here to read about MMA not who does what job on a board of management.

AARRRGH

Roper wrote: »

yes but I do want to read about MMA on an MMA board. I come here to read about MMA not who does what job on a board of management.

Yeah, I agree it's a silly thread, but it was just a bit of fun until the usual suspect got angry, as usual.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

UFC had a quarter of a billion revenue in 2006.

But what does this got to do with size of the organisation itself. You are confusing terms here.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Dana has stated on TUF that Lorenzo is the decision maker and has the final say on things.

As he is the CEO! There isnt one sole decision maker in the company the way you have been talking it is that every decision goes Lorenzo which isnt true. Dana as the President decides over the day to day running of the company. There isnt one decision maker which decides every thing as you seem what to portray.

rovert

AARRRGH wrote: »

Why?

Do you know what decision maker means?

Someone that makes decisions, there is normally than just one a company btw. You make it sound like Lorzeno sits in a King's chair and decides on how many Bic pens to order.

Roper wrote: »

yes but I do want to read about MMA on an MMA board. I come here to read about MMA not who does what job on a board of management.

Go to another thread or start one.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Yeah, I agree it's a silly thread, but it was just a bit of fun until the usual suspect got angry, as usual.

Im not angry just bemused.

Roper

AARRRGH wrote: »

Yeah, I agree it's a silly thread, but it was just a bit of fun until the usual suspect got angry, as usual.

LOL.

rovert

Roper wrote: »

LOL.

Serious thread is serious

AARRRGH

rovert wrote: »

But what does this got to do with size of the organisation itself. You are confusing terms here.

I don't know anything about you, but if you have ever worked in a company with revenues of a quarter of a billion, then you can take it for granted it's a large organisation.

rovert wrote: »

Dana as the President decides over the day to day running of the company.

That's not what a president does. That's what a COO does, and the UFC already has a COO.

rovert wrote: »

Someone that makes decisions, there is normally than just one a company btw. You make it sound like Lorzeno sits in a King's chair and decides on how many Bic pens to order.

In the context of this thread, I think it's pretty obvious that "decision maker" is not referring to the person who orders pens.

If Lorenzo is the decision maker, it means he is responsible for the direction for the company, not Dana.

But saying all that, I am willing to give Dana credit, and I haven't shut the door on him being a "business great", but considering how little we know of his day to day job (and he admits himself he only promotes fights), and the fact that he is not responsible for the direction of the company, I think it is very generous to label him a business great.

rovert wrote: »

Im not angry just bemused.

Well you're coming across as very angry. And I've seen you constantly piss off people in this forum. It's bad.

And honestly I don't think you know anything about the business world. If you don't believe me, re-read this post.

I've said all I am going to say on this topic.

rovert

AARRRGH love that you were giving out about people giving out being influenced by media presence but then later cited TUF, a reality TV show as proof of something.

AARRRGH wrote: »

I don't know anything about you, but if you have ever worked in a company with revenues of a quarter of a billion, then you can take it for granted it's a large organisation.

I don’t think you understand what the word organisation means it doesn’t relate to revenue.

AARRRGH wrote: »

That's not what a president does. That's what a COO does, and the UFC already has a COO.

I guess you missed that I said Dana as the President decides over the day to day running of the company. I previously posted he micro-manages everything.

Anyway COO monitors operations he doesnt run them, there is a difference.

AARRRGH wrote: »

In the context of this thread, I think it's pretty obvious that "decision maker" is not referring to the person who orders pens.

Point still stands you make out that "decision maker" is a unitary position in the organisation. It isn’t.

AARRRGH wrote: »

If Lorenzo is the decision maker, it means he is responsible for the direction for the company, not Dana.

Never said he wasn’t,, being CEO is just the formulisation of the decision making process of the company the reality can be completely different. Generally speaking it is possible for CEO to abdicate their responsibilities onto a subordinate.

AARRRGH wrote: »

But saying all that, I am willing to give Dana credit, and I haven't shut the door on him being a "business great", but considering how little we know of his day to day job (and he admits himself he only promotes fights), and the fact that he is not responsible for the direction of the company, I think it is very generous to label him a business great.

You are throwing around the word “fact” a lot without backing it up. The label of business great is your own invention with an ever evolving criteria. No one has called him that here.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Well you're coming across as very angry. And I've seen you constantly piss off people in this forum. It's bad.

Trust me dude I’m not angry at all. You are making me lol if anything with how evasive you are.

AARRRGH wrote: »

And honestly I don't think you know anything about the business world. If you don't believe me, re-read this post.

I know what an organisation is and how to make an argument based on facts at least.

AARRRGH wrote: »

I've said all I am going to say on this topic.

And here I was waiting for you to present the AARRRGH Business Great Award 2010