Evolution MMA(Now recruiting)

[Scottfutile]

I have abandoned the performance related plan as there really was no interest in it.  Moving forwards we will be working as a traditional org.

[KingofConsent]

Honestly this sounds like a great idea... but can I suggest maybe pushing the 30pt contract to 5,000 ?
I believe this org will contend with other high tier orgs... good concept.

[Scottfutile]

2 hours ago, KingofConsent said:

Honestly this sounds like a great idea... but can I suggest maybe pushing the 30pt contract to 5,000 ?
I believe this org will contend with other high tier orgs... good concept.

Thank you for your positive feedback.  

Do you mean just raise the 30pt by $500, or raise every level by $500?

[Daudy]

Some cool ideas, it'll be interesting to see it play out.

 

Are you aiming to be an ID org or an open org? I'm assuming maybe openish given a bit seems to weigh on having previous fight results. Any particular weight classes you're aiming for?

[Scottfutile]

37 minutes ago, Daudy said:

Some cool ideas, it'll be interesting to see it play out.

 

Are you aiming to be an ID org or an open org? I'm assuming maybe openish given a bit seems to weigh on having previous fight results. Any particular weight classes you're aiming for?

At the moment I'm truly open.  Obviously if I was going to go restricted it would have to be something like 385k, so fighters would have some form.  Alternatively it might be a case of keeping it open and trying to balance the divisions fairly.

Really I'm trying to gauge people's reactions and go from there.

Regarding weight classes, I will eventually look to have all but Super-Heavyweight.  For now I am taking fighters details for a waiting list(obviously if they get a good deal somewhere I will absolutely encourage them to take it. I just ask they let me know so I can take them off the list.) Once I have a few fighters for a division I will open it.  Really priority will be given to the divisions which fill up quickest.

[KingofConsent]

On 8/6/2022 at 12:41 PM, KingofConsent said:

Honestly this sounds like a great idea... but can I suggest maybe pushing the 30pt contract to 5,000 ?
I believe this org will contend with other high tier orgs... good concept.

Just the 30pt contract... make it like, a big deal... yknow ?

[Scottfutile]

1 hour ago, KingofConsent said:

Just the 30pt contract... make it like, a big deal... yknow ?

Done. I will add it on.

[Carciofi]

What constitutes a winning/losing streak? 2…3…5?

[Scottfutile]

3 hours ago, Carciofi said:

What constitutes a winning/losing streak? 2…3…5?

2.

[KingofConsent]

On 8/6/2022 at 6:50 PM, Scottfutile said:

At the moment I'm truly open.  Obviously if I was going to go restricted it would have to be something like 385k, so fighters would have some form.  Alternatively it might be a case of keeping it open and trying to balance the divisions fairly.

Really I'm trying to gauge people's reactions and go from there.

Regarding weight classes, I will eventually look to have all but Super-Heavyweight.  For now I am taking fighters details for a waiting list(obviously if they get a good deal somewhere I will absolutely encourage them to take it. I just ask they let me know so I can take them off the list.) Once I have a few fighters for a division I will open it.  Really priority will be given to the divisions which fill up quickest.

Either this or you have some divisions open and some divisions restricted ? if that's even possible ? I'm new to the game so i don't know. just a random idea.

[Scottfutile]

4 hours ago, KingofConsent said:

Either this or you have some divisions open and some divisions restricted ? if that's even possible ? I'm new to the game so i don't know. just a random idea.

I certainly have been considering restricting divisions individually, once I had an idea of the general interest.  Unfortunately the idea is looking unlikely to work as the level of interest just isn't there.  I don't know whether it's a case of making things too complicated, or really that people simply prefer what they know.  Still, it was worth a try.

[Carciofi]

I think once you drop below $1000 (ish) in contract pay, the incentive is lost to sign. I don’t see anyone signing up with an Org for QFC type pay. It might be difficult to jump in as an open ID because right off the bat you’re squaring off with established Orgs who are able to send out higher contract values. Just my 2 cents.

That being said, you have obviously put some thought and time into this, which should help alleviate any concerns that you’ll be a fly-by-night owner. I’d send a newer fighter your way once you iron out your plan. 
 

 

[Scottfutile]

55 minutes ago, Carciofi said:

I think once you drop below $1000 (ish) in contract pay, the incentive is lost to sign. I don’t see anyone signing up with an Org for QFC type pay. It might be difficult to jump in as an open ID because right off the bat you’re squaring off with established Orgs who are able to send out higher contract values. Just my 2 cents.

That being said, you have obviously put some thought and time into this, which should help alleviate any concerns that you’ll be a fly-by-night owner. I’d send a newer fighter your way once you iron out your plan. 
 

 

Thanks very much   Unfortunately I don't think it is going to work.  I sent out 200 invitations and only 3 managers responded.  Maybe I'm trying too hard to be different?

I had sent the idea to a few people that I trust and they all said it was going to be impossible.  Annoyingly, it looks as if they are going to be right.

I was playing around with the idea of a PFL style fight league before.  10 managers.  18 year old new builds only, a 9 fight season with playoffs and a prize pot.  I sent that to a few people and got the same response.  It is really hard to try and be different from the norm as most managers are comfortable as they are.

It is frustrating because I have just been trying to find ways to engage managers more.  I think maybe it's just me that wants that.

I would love to find a way of solving the problem with middle-aged fighters that get released and can't get a deal anywhere.  I have two at the moment myself and it is quite sad because you put time into develop them and then suddenly they get blasted into the void.  I wondered about the idea of forming a kind of dog pound org for fighters without a home, like those fighters who have been released and been contractless for at least 6 weeks.  No signing bonuses, instead immediate release if you get offered a better contract somewhere else.  And maybe callouts only.

That's enough of me rambling anyway.  I need to think things over and work out what to do next.  At least it's taught me a valuable lesson.  I'm not as clever as I think I am :S

 

[Scottfutile]

Breaking news - after consulting with a number of people I have decided to restrict the org to 390k.

[Curix]

1 hour ago, Scottfutile said:

Breaking news - after consulting with a number of people I have decided to restrict the org to 390k.

Great decision!

Org looks really interesting!

Good luck!

[Scottfutile]

6 hours ago, Curix said:

Great decision!

Org looks really interesting!

Good luck!

Thanks very much.  Fingers crossed this will help persuade people to give it a try.

[Daudy]

I think the move to an ID org is a good idea particularly with the pay scale. Does this mean you will then have to adjust the base/floor for contracts? I'd imagine you probably will have a few 0-0-0 types starting out.

[Scottfutile]

1 hour ago, Daudy said:

I think the move to an ID org is a good idea particularly with the pay scale. Does this mean you will then have to adjust the base/floor for contracts? I'd imagine you probably will have a few 0-0-0 types starting out.

I may have to.  I have room for a $500 starting contract and then increase from there.  Alternatively, I may have to wait for people to have a couple of QFC fights to see if they can earn bigger contracts.  TBH I haven't decided yet.  What would you suggest?

[Daudy]

48 minutes ago, Scottfutile said:

I may have to.  I have room for a $500 starting contract and then increase from there.  Alternatively, I may have to wait for people to have a couple of QFC fights to see if they can earn bigger contracts.  TBH I haven't decided yet.  What would you suggest?

It's a tricky situation because you won't be the only one after freshly created talent that is willing to fight straight away.

Subsequently, you realistically have to:

A) Probably offer a bit more base than you're thinking of right now to compete with other smaller orgs that will also inevitably pop up. This will let these new fighters realistically have enough money to train at a reasonable gym given they'd fight only every 3-4 weeks with training in between to develop since win bonus money is definitely not guaranteed.
and
B ) Probably not wait around too long for too many QFC fights - because by the time guys have had a couple, they've probably already got eyes on them from other orgs and already been hoovered up.

For frame of reference, the absolute lowest contract I've currently signed is a 1.5k/1.5k/1.5k contract that is for 1 fight for a guy with 1 QFC fight in his career, and that was specifically after I mentioned I absolutely do not care about the cash because I just wanted a short contract for him. I've got a number of other guys or had other guys recently in a variety of different smaller orgs who fit the mould of your new target audience (in that they were newly created and off they went to fight at 18 or 25) and most of them have contracts in the 15-21 point range of your scale (which is approaching the mid-upper end).

If cash flow is a bit of an issue because of this, then I'd suggest maybe concentrating on a few weight classes at a time (maybe close some initially) so you don't spread too thin with your roster - particularly when you keep inactivity or sacking in mind (which is a real possibility at every level but even more pronounced at lower/newer levels).

I think your idea for a structured and transparent approach has legs, but I feel like for some of the reasons above and your own sanity/amount of work, you might need to consider making it a bit broader. I like the idea of a formulaic approach to contracts based on results to an extent, though you'd have to be aware of the very real possibility of cherry picking particularly since you are for no consequence fight rejections for any reason. I'd suggest if you want to stick with a similar system to just make them point ranges instead - e.g. Guys on 0-10 points earn $X, 11-20 points earn $Y, and 21-30 earn $Z. Much less work, still embraces the idea, and may help somewhat with cherry picking a little since there's more wiggle room and it's not a situation where literally every point under your current system equals more cash. Additionally, completely ignoring things like hype+popularity (although maybe massive differences at this level maybe won't exist) in contract considerations may be an error especially if you're trying to bring in new talent that has fought elsewhere. Higher hype and popularity helps the org out more, so why shouldn't that be considered? Generally it'd probably have some correlation to your point scale, but not always, so it may be worth still thinking about what you'd do if you want to lure a highly hyped/popular guy who has a couple of losses in his last 5 over.

I also don't mind the transparent matchmaking criteria. People may not agree whether that's the best approach or whatever, but it's there for people to see, so that's a plus.

[Scottfutile]

12 hours ago, Daudy said:

It's a tricky situation because you won't be the only one after freshly created talent that is willing to fight straight away.

Subsequently, you realistically have to:

A) Probably offer a bit more base than you're thinking of right now to compete with other smaller orgs that will also inevitably pop up. This will let these new fighters realistically have enough money to train at a reasonable gym given they'd fight only every 3-4 weeks with training in between to develop since win bonus money is definitely not guaranteed.
and
B ) Probably not wait around too long for too many QFC fights - because by the time guys have had a couple, they've probably already got eyes on them from other orgs and already been hoovered up.

For frame of reference, the absolute lowest contract I've currently signed is a 1.5k/1.5k/1.5k contract that is for 1 fight for a guy with 1 QFC fight in his career, and that was specifically after I mentioned I absolutely do not care about the cash because I just wanted a short contract for him. I've got a number of other guys or had other guys recently in a variety of different smaller orgs who fit the mould of your new target audience (in that they were newly created and off they went to fight at 18 or 25) and most of them have contracts in the 15-21 point range of your scale (which is approaching the mid-upper end).

If cash flow is a bit of an issue because of this, then I'd suggest maybe concentrating on a few weight classes at a time (maybe close some initially) so you don't spread too thin with your roster - particularly when you keep inactivity or sacking in mind (which is a real possibility at every level but even more pronounced at lower/newer levels).

I think your idea for a structured and transparent approach has legs, but I feel like for some of the reasons above and your own sanity/amount of work, you might need to consider making it a bit broader. I like the idea of a formulaic approach to contracts based on results to an extent, though you'd have to be aware of the very real possibility of cherry picking particularly since you are for no consequence fight rejections for any reason. I'd suggest if you want to stick with a similar system to just make them point ranges instead - e.g. Guys on 0-10 points earn $X, 11-20 points earn $Y, and 21-30 earn $Z. Much less work, still embraces the idea, and may help somewhat with cherry picking a little since there's more wiggle room and it's not a situation where literally every point under your current system equals more cash. Additionally, completely ignoring things like hype+popularity (although maybe massive differences at this level maybe won't exist) in contract considerations may be an error especially if you're trying to bring in new talent that has fought elsewhere. Higher hype and popularity helps the org out more, so why shouldn't that be considered? Generally it'd probably have some correlation to your point scale, but not always, so it may be worth still thinking about what you'd do if you want to lure a highly hyped/popular guy who has a couple of losses in his last 5 over.

I also don't mind the transparent matchmaking criteria. People may not agree whether that's the best approach or whatever, but it's there for people to see, so that's a plus.

Thank you very much for your awesome response

First up I'm not overly-concerned by competing orgs because if managers sign with me, it will be because they want to try a new way of playing.  There will be a proportion of managers that wouldn't sign with me regardless.

However, your point about base salary is spot on.  As much as I sell the idea about being on a fighters side, the lower rungs on the system are harsh, and were designed intentionally so for a number of reasons.  The first one being that fighters must earn their place from their first fight. The second is that it encourages aggressive game planning as not only to finishes earn you much better contracts, but they drive you up the rankings too.  I have no issue with waiting for fighters and no great desire to compete for the 0-0's.  The 15-21 point range is essentially 3 wins by finishes.  It was intentional on my part as that is exactly the kind of fighter I want to try and attract from the beginning.

I absolutely understand the issue with the low pay.  Ideally I would want to begin on a 4k/4k/4k to allow everyone access to the same standard of training, the problem is that it compromises financial viability.  I could potentially offer 4-7k a fighters, but it would impact the companies future considerably, and it would reduce the number of events I have to get it right.  My intention long-term is to offer fighters a 50% revenue split so certainly the numbers will grow as the company does.

At this point cash flow is no issue, I have saved quite the nest egg from writing for other orgs and my businesses.  It is more my determination to build something sustainable.  I know it is incredibly easy for new orgs to go under in double quick time so I need to be prudent in my decision making.  Under this financial model I have enough cash to last 24 months.

It's a good point about the inactivity that I need to consider more closely and perhaps I need to add a clause to my rules.  I understand the relationship with managers can, at times, be challenging, which is why I'm trying to approach it from a different angle.  I am absolutely 100% behind no consequence-free fight rejections because I want to see the end of gulagging.  It is a stupid business decision that harms everyone.  By being upfront about the matchmaking process, managers(hopefully)will understand that in most cases, if they decline a fight or more specifically, two fights in most cases, they will likely have to wait until after the next event for the new rankings.

I think points ranges is definitely worth considering, especially if I find I need to rejig the model if I am struggling to sign fighters.  It is certainly something to be considered alongside the base pay question and could be useful if I have to narrow the financial variation between the points ranges.  In terms of hype and pop, I believe it is organic.  If you are putting on exciting fights(Something the points system encourages)they will grow.  The fact that as fighters gain more points they get offered better contracts they will hopefully stay.  The fact that if you make it all the way to the title, you could earn double, should be a huge temptation.  With an org starting out hype and pop will be low.  However, I'm confident in the idea that the concept will actually encourage hype growth.  And regarding the question about the hype/pop guy in poor form.  I don't want him.  The entire concept of the org is built on the idea of 'knowing your value', and being transparent in the way it operates.  I want to reward fighters for their acheivements and the focus on the sport and not the individual. 

Thank you so much for your feedback as you have given me an incredible amount to think over.  And I'm sure my thinking will evolve as time goes by.

P.S. The reason for the formulaic approach is my autistic brain.  Order in chaos soothes me 😛

[Daudy]

34 minutes ago, Scottfutile said:

First up I'm not overly-concerned by competing orgs because if managers sign with me, it will be because they want to try a new way of playing.  There will be a proportion of managers that wouldn't sign with me regardless.

This might be true for established managers who know what is going on (and for them money is probably less of an issue), but there is a non-insignificant chunk of newer or more casual managers who will just sign whatever is in front of them that's reasonable without looking too deeply (e.g. ones that never even look at the forums). It's also these kinds of managers who tend to also provide a non-insignificant pool of the types of fighters that your org would be after (at least initially). I understand that you want people there who are invested in the project from the get-go, but if you truly believe your system has merit, then getting people in the door initially and THEN convincing them after they've experienced it should be no issue.

It's just my opinion that a top priority, particularly if you want to make the org sustainable, is to establish a roster with depth. It makes everything easier - dealing with inactives/cuts, matchmaking headaches, etc. And if you're just cutting the already sometimes small available talent pool into fractions beforehand for whatever reason, you are setting yourself up for a hard time. It's also why I suggested maybe considering focusing on a few weight classes at first.  10 quality fights on a card from one division with good hype for the main+co-main will do much better than 10 so-so matchups from lack of depth across several weight classes.

$4k/$4k/$4k isn't particularly necessarily either. Just a mix of 2-3k+ options will still be matching competitors. If a wage able to support a developing fighter is the goal, you can maybe try a higher base and lower win bonus. People will still be incentivised to win, because it literally affects their next contract as per your system, but it also means their fighters will be tempted to sign and fight with you because even if it all goes bad, they get a salary they can still mostly train with. I will say however, that my experience has seen most people do the opposite if it's not matching - it goes higher win bonus compared to lower base.

Finally, in terms of making sure you get your events right with the correct advertising and venues and so on, definitely ask around and do the research into getting the right information/scripts/calculators for the calculations and so on from experienced org owners. It makes a real difference and allows you to feasibly plan ahead with relative certainty.

[Scottfutile]

On 8/13/2022 at 8:30 AM, Daudy said:

This might be true for established managers who know what is going on (and for them money is probably less of an issue), but there is a non-insignificant chunk of newer or more casual managers who will just sign whatever is in front of them that's reasonable without looking too deeply (e.g. ones that never even look at the forums). It's also these kinds of managers who tend to also provide a non-insignificant pool of the types of fighters that your org would be after (at least initially). I understand that you want people there who are invested in the project from the get-go, but if you truly believe your system has merit, then getting people in the door initially and THEN convincing them after they've experienced it should be no issue.

It's just my opinion that a top priority, particularly if you want to make the org sustainable, is to establish a roster with depth. It makes everything easier - dealing with inactives/cuts, matchmaking headaches, etc. And if you're just cutting the already sometimes small available talent pool into fractions beforehand for whatever reason, you are setting yourself up for a hard time. It's also why I suggested maybe considering focusing on a few weight classes at first.  10 quality fights on a card from one division with good hype for the main+co-main will do much better than 10 so-so matchups from lack of depth across several weight classes.

$4k/$4k/$4k isn't particularly necessarily either. Just a mix of 2-3k+ options will still be matching competitors. If a wage able to support a developing fighter is the goal, you can maybe try a higher base and lower win bonus. People will still be incentivised to win, because it literally affects their next contract as per your system, but it also means their fighters will be tempted to sign and fight with you because even if it all goes bad, they get a salary they can still mostly train with. I will say however, that my experience has seen most people do the opposite if it's not matching - it goes higher win bonus compared to lower base.

Finally, in terms of making sure you get your events right with the correct advertising and venues and so on, definitely ask around and do the research into getting the right information/scripts/calculators for the calculations and so on from experienced org owners. It makes a real difference and allows you to feasibly plan ahead with relative certainty.

I think you are right about roster depth.  I suspect I may need 20-25 fighters in two divisions to get it going.

I was thinking over pay ranges.  I'm happy enough to have 100% win bonuses because I think the fighters deserve it.  Taking what you said about pay ranges on board I was thinking of structuring the pay like this:

0 points: $1500

1-5 points: $2000

6-10 points: $2500

10-15 points: $3000

16-20 points: $3500

21-25 points: $4000

26-29 points: $4500

30 points: $5000

I'd hope it would give me more chance of competing at the beginning.  In terms of budgeting it is no issues, as it would take at least 5 fights for fighters to pass mid range.  For company finances it is no issue.  In some ways it helps the company grow as it helps keep wages low at the beginning.  There isn't going to be a time when the entire card is made up of 20+ point fighters and it actually helps with forecasting.

In terms of projections I have done my research.  I have worst case and best case forecasts for the first 10 events.  Realistically speaking I have 25 events to turn a profit.  There are a few strategic points I need to finalise but largely I am happy with the potential of the company.

Thanks again for all of your advice, and let me know what you think of the proposed pay structure.

[Scottfutile]

My apologies guys, I have scrapped the original plan as it simply wasn't generating enough interest.  Moving forwards we will be operating as a traditional org.

[Scottfutile]

We are now recruiting all weight classes.  Looking for fighters with positive records. No mismatches, fighters will be matched on their star ratings and attributes.  No gulagging. Just fighting, fighting, fighting.

[Scottfutile]

The rebranding is complete.  I'm going to be following a Bellator style model.

Quote

Evolution MMA is an open id organisation that organises its roster into three categories. Veterans that head our cards. Mid level fighters that test themselves against one another and act as our gatekeepers. And prospects who compete against each other until they are ready to step up.

At Evolution fights are matched on the organisational star ratings. If you refuse a fight, no problem, we are a gulag-free organisation. We will simply offer you another fight as soon as we have a suitable match up.

We are currently recruiting all categories in all weight classes as we look to build towards our first event. We are very interested in fighters that are struggling financially as we look to support the growth and development of MMA.

Evolution - Where Champions are Born