“They’ve Just Brought In A Lot Of Money For Themselves” Michael Venom Page Talks UFC Brass And Paramount Deal

Michael “Venom” Page has put the UFC’s new $7.7 billion seven‑year media rights deal with Paramount in sharp perspective, framing it less as a victory for fighters and more as a win for the organisation and its executives.

Speaking in a recent interview, Page said this is why he “wasn’t initially excited about [the Paramount deal], because for me, [the bonus increase] doesn’t do enough compared to the amount of money they’ve just brought in for themselves.” His comments cut directly at the tension between UFC’s skyrocketing revenue and what it chooses to pay athletes, even as Dana White frames the same deal as a broad upgrade for fighters.

The new bonus structure and UFC’s revenue

Under the Paramount agreement, UFC’s average annual media rights income nearly doubles, moving from roughly $550 million per year under ESPN to about $1.1 billion per year on paper. Dana White has repeatedly stated that “bonuses are obviously going up,” presenting that change as the first tangible benefit fighters will see. In practice, that has translated into Performance of the Night and Fight of the Night awards doubling from $50,000 to $100,000 each, plus a new $25,000 bonus for any finish, regardless of whether the fighter wins. At many events, that means the UFC now commits at least $400,000 in post‑fight bonuses, with some cards pushing that total much higher when extra finishes or bonuses are added.

From the UFC’s angle, this is sold as a multi‑million‑dollar annual boost for fighters, separate from their base purses and any pay‑per‑view points. White has pitched the bonus increase as “low‑hanging fruit” that can be implemented quickly, while the wider details of how the Paramount deal reshapes other parts of pay, such as PPV points and larger base contracts—remain under discussion. The structure is designed to reward aggressive finishes and exciting fights, but it still leaves base pay largely untouched for the majority of the roster.

Michael Venom Page’s skepticism about “value” versus actual pay

Page’s criticism is less about the existence of the bonus bump and more about what it signals in relation to UFC’s overall financial gains. He has pointed out that the UFC and its parent company TKO are poised to add hundreds of millions of new dollars in profit each year, while the fighter‑side adjustments so far are limited to the bonus pool. In his words, the bonus increase “doesn’t do enough compared to the amount of money they’ve just brought in for themselves,” which positions it as a relatively small concession compared with the scale of the Paramount deal.

That line of thinking reflects a broader concern among fighters: the UFC’s business model is built on star athletes, but the most direct financial rewards are directed up the chain, not down to the roster. Page’s own career has been spent in promotions where he carried main events, built global followings, and helped sell shows, yet he now finds himself in a UFC system where the organisation’s value is soaring, but the basic pay structure for many fighters remains tightly controlled. For him, the bonus jump is a visible gesture, but it does not change the underlying imbalance between how much money is flowing into the company and how much actually flows into fighters’ pockets.

How Dana White is valued versus “people outside the sport”

Page’s next line is even more pointed: “To see how highly [Dana White] values people outside the sport that kind of built his reputation is just upsetting, to be fair.” This references the way UFC and its president have increasingly aligned themselves with mainstream media, celebrity figures, and outside business partners, often at a level that overshadows the day‑to‑day contributions of rank‑and‑file fighters. White has appeared on major broadcasts, given interviews framed by corporate media, and positioned himself as a central figure in pop culture and even broader politics, while many fighters remain under relatively modest contract terms.​

The people Page is likely referring to include executives, media personalities, and external business allies who have helped elevate UFC’s brand and media appeal, sometimes without stepping into the Octagon. Fighters like him argue that, for years, it was the athletes who built the sport’s credibility and audience, yet they are now seeing the fruits of that exposure captured largely by the promotion and its leadership.

What this means for fighter pay in the UFC

Page’s comments are part of a longer-running conversation about UFC fighter pay that has intensified since the Paramount deal was announced. Sports‑business and MMA outlets have noted that UFC’s marginal profit can rise sharply with the new deal, since many of the variable costs, such as production and advertising, do not scale at the same rate as rights revenue. That means the UFC has significant room to increase fighter payouts if it chooses to, beyond the currently announced bonus changes.

However, the organisation’s approach has historically been incremental and bonus‑driven, with occasional spikes for major events rather than across‑the‑board pay raises. For fighters at the top of the sport, this can still translate into substantial extra income, especially if they finish opponents or put on standout performances. For others lower on the roster, the main economic impact is limited: higher ceiling for a few nights, but similar or only modestly higher floors in regular purses.

What gives Page’s quote weight is that he is speaking from a position of experience across multiple promotions. Before joining the UFC, he was a long‑time star in Bellator, where he carried main events and helped shape the promotion’s image with his style and personality. In interviews, he has consistently argued that fighters are underpaid relative to the value they create, and he has even aligned with figures like Jake Paul on that point, despite criticisms of Paul’s approach. That background makes his skepticism about the Paramount‑era bonus bump feel grounded in data and experience, not just frustration.

More money is entering the ecosystem, but they are watching closely to see whether UFC turns that into meaningful, long‑term pay improvements, such as higher base contracts, more transparent revenue sharing, or a larger overall share of the bonus pool, rather than one‑off bonuses that highlight stars while leaving the wider roster largely unchanged. Until that happens, comments like Page’s will continue to frame the Paramount deal as a corporate win but not for anyone else.