Every new arrangement between an old pleasure and a new steward carries a quiet question about what is being given up and what is being gained. Dana White, standing after a night of fights in Las Vegas, found himself answering for the commercial breaks that had interrupted his promotion's broadcast on Paramount+, a feed he had never seen with his own eyes. His reply was that the money comes first, that the service is still cheaper than the pay-per-view tickets of the past, and that the parties will work things out. Whether an event once prized for its unbroken flow can hold that flow inside a
Dana White Defends UFC 324 Paramount+ Ads, Says Viewers Pay $8.99 and Paramount Needs to Earn Its Keep
The ads that frustrated subscribers were invisible to the man running the promotion.
Mark
Why did a few commercials become a story at all?
Mimi
Because UFC events have run without ads through the main card since 1993, according to the commentary. Viewers noticed the change right away.
Mark
And White's response?
Mimi
He said the price is $8.99 and Paramount has to make money too. He also said he's working with them and will figure it out.
Luke
Worth noting he didn't see the ads. He was watching the house feed at T-Mobile Arena, so his defense is of the deal, not of what subscribers experienced.
Mark
Is the price comparison fair?
Mimi
Partly. Pay-per-view was $79.99, so $8.99 is much cheaper. But the commentary says the old price bought an ad-free night.
Luke
Be careful, though. That's the writer's argument, not a finding. We don't know how many minutes of ads ran, and no figure is given.
Mark
Any sign the UFC will change anything?
Mimi
White said "I'm on it" about the fight archive, which fans also complained about. On the ads, he only said they'd figure it out.
Luke
So nothing is confirmed on ads. The Sydney card next Saturday is the first real evidence either way.
Der Puls
- Viewers at home were irritated all night by heavy ad breaks during the UFC 324 main card on Paramount+.
- Dana White admitted he was unaware of the ads because he watched the house feed at T-Mobile Arena.
- White tied the commercials to Paramount's rights payments and the $8.99 monthly price, calling it a fair exchange.
- Critics argue a live premium event should carry minimal ads, and the UFC has not yet announced any change.
- White's 'I'm on it' is the only concrete commitment so far, and the Sydney card with Volkanovski vs. Lopes will test it.
Every new arrangement between an old pleasure and a new steward carries a quiet question about what is being given up and what is being gained. Dana White, standing after a night of fights in Las Vegas, found himself answering for the commercial breaks that had interrupted his promotion's broadcast on Paramount+, a feed he had never seen with his own eyes. His reply was that the money comes first, that the service is still cheaper than the pay-per-view tickets of the past, and that the parties will work things out. Whether an event once prized for its unbroken flow can hold that flow inside a commercial bargain is a question the coming weeks will begin to answer.
After UFC 324 ended in Las Vegas, the post-fight press conference turned to a frustration that had been building on couches all night. The main card on Paramount+ had been broken up by a heavy stream of commercials, which felt like a sharp break from an event that used to run clean.
Dana White began with the money. Paramount had paid for the rights, and that was the starting point, he said. He praised the people at Paramount as easy to work with and expressed confidence the two sides would sort it out. He also admitted he had not seen the problem himself, since he watched the house feed at T-Mobile Arena, where the Paramount+ ads never appeared.
He framed the ads as part of the arrangement. At $8.99, the service costs far less than the $79.99 pay-per-view fees fans once paid, and Paramount, he said, has to earn something too.
The commentary on his remarks agreed only in part. UFC broadcasts have traditionally run without commercials since 1993, and a pay-per-view price could be justified by that uninterrupted feed. The author still acknowledged the service is cheaper than the old model, but argued that a live premium event should carry few or no ads. That view is opinion, and the UFC has announced no change.
White did respond to a second complaint, that the fight archive is hard to find on the platform. He said "I'm on it," which the commentary treats as a modest first step.
The next test is close. The UFC heads to Sydney for a featherweight rematch between Alexander Volkanovski and Diego Lopes, with the main card starting at 9 p.m. ET. Whether that broadcast carries fewer ads will show how seriously the promotion and its new partner take the complaints.
After UFC 324 wrapped in Las Vegas, Dana White sat down at the post-fight press conference and was asked about something viewers at home had been complaining about all night: the commercials. The main card on Paramount+ had been interrupted by a heavy load of ads, a notable change for an event that once ran clean.
White's answer began with the money. Paramount paid for the rights, he said, and that is the starting point. He added that the people at Paramount have been incredible to work with so far and that the two sides will figure it out.
He also admitted he had not seen the problem himself. White was watching the UFC's house feed inside T-Mobile Arena, which does not carry the Paramount+ advertising. The ad breaks that frustrated subscribers were invisible to the man running the promotion.
Still, he framed the ads as part of the bargain. The service costs $8.99, he said, and viewers are no longer paying the much larger sums they used to. Paramount, in his words, has to make some money too.
The Yardbarker commentary on his remarks agrees with that point only partly. Since 1993, UFC events have run without commercials through the three-hour window, with possible exceptions for a trailer for a new movie or a promotion for an upcoming numbered event. Pay-per-view buyers were paying $79.99, and the piece argues that price could be seen as worth it precisely because the broadcast was free of ads. Even so, the commentary concedes that watching the UFC is cheaper now than it was.
The commentary also argues the new deal was supposed to make the UFC easier to watch, along with everything else on Paramount+, not harder. Its view is that a live premium event differs from a seasonal TV show or a movie, so ads should be minimal if present at all. That is the author's opinion, not a reported finding, and the UFC has not announced any change to its ad load.
White did respond to one other fan complaint: that the full fight archive is not easy to find on the new platform. He said "I'm on it," which the commentary calls at least a start toward improvement.
The next test comes quickly. The UFC returns next Saturday from Sydney, Australia, with a featherweight title rematch between Alexander Volkanovski and Diego Lopes. The main card starts at 9 p.m. ET, 6 p.m. PT, a time that suits U.S. viewers. Whether the broadcast carries fewer ads than UFC 324 will show how seriously the promotion, and its new partner, are taking the complaints.
Bemerkenswerte Zitate
It's $8.99. These guys at Paramount have got to make some money, too.— Dana White, UFC CEO, post-fight press conference
I'm on it.— Dana White, on fan concerns about archive access
Möchten Sie die ganze Geschichte?
Das Original lesen bei Yardbarker ↗
Business