UFC media-rights discussions heat up with streaming platforms increasingly likely to play a part.
UFC CEO and President Dana White has said it is “likely” the MMA promotion will end up with multiple partners following the end of its deal with ESPN.
The eight-year deal, worth around $300m annually, is entering its final stretch. Disney-owned ESPN’s exclusive negotiating window expired in April, opening the door for rival bidders. Speaking to Sports Business Journal, White said talks were progressing and hinted at a shift in strategy.
“Everything is going well — we’re happy with all the discussions we’re having,” he said. Asked whether multiple rights partners were on the table, White replied: “I don’t know — I don’t know yet, but yes, it’s likely.”
UFC’s parent company, TKO Group Holdings, is reportedly seeking $1bn per year for its next US media rights deal.
While it’s a significant jump from the current $300m deal with ESPN, the demand isn’t without justification. UFC has grown dramatically in global reach and digital engagement, with its pay-per-view events consistently ranking among the most profitable in sports.
Who’s in the running?
According to recent reports, there are four main names: ESPN, Amazon, Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery. Each broadcaster brings something different to the table, but the fact the UFC is an attractive product with a year-round calendar and global audience remains the same.
A move to streaming appears increasingly likely, especially with Netflix. TKO Group already has a strong relationship with the platform, recently signing a $5bn deal to bring WWE’s flagship show RAW, to Netflix in 2025.
This partnership is expanding. Zuffa Boxing, White’s new boxing promotion under the TKO banner, will debut on Netflix this September with a fight between Canelo Alvarez and Terence Crawford.
While a move to streaming may have been viewed as a gamble a couple of years ago, now it increasingly looks like the way forward.
Netflix’s entrance into live sports hasn’t been flawless. The Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson fight last year suffered from buffering issues, but the platform has bounced back.
When RAW premiered on Netflix, it pulled in 4.9 million global views. In the US alone, the show averaged 2.6 million households, more than doubling its 2024 TV average, according to VideoAmp.
If Netflix were to secure exclusive rights to the UFC, it would mark a massive step forward in its bid to become a serious player in live sports. Alongside existing deals for WWE’s RAW and Zuffa Boxing’s debut fight, the addition of UFC would put the streaming giant at the heart of combat sports globally.
However, exclusivity might not be the best move for either party.
A split-rights model is likely
Splitting the rights between multiple partners could maximise revenue. With several major platforms bidding for different content packages, UFC can create a more competitive environment and drive up the total value of its rights.
It’s also a strategy which could boost audience expansion. While ESPN still has a strong foothold among traditional sports fans, platforms like Netflix and Amazon appeal more to younger, digital-native viewers.
A large reason for streaming platforms’ success is their ability to attract a younger audience. The RAW debut saw viewership double in the key 18-49 demographic compared to the year prior.
There’s also a strong risk management case. Relying solely on one distributor leaves the UFC exposed to the pitfalls of that single platform, whether it’s technical issues, declining subscriber bases, or changes in programming strategy.
Finally, with competition comes innovation. Different platforms might push to improve fan engagement with camera angles, interactive stats and exclusive fighter content. These changes could help the UFC evolve its product in ways a single partner might not think or need to deliver.
Fragmentation has challenges
This strategy doesn’t come without risk, with fan fragmentation one of the most likely consequences.
If UFC content becomes split across multiple platforms, fans could face higher subscription costs or confusion about where and how to watch specific events. This may result in declining engagement or a push toward illegal streams – a timely problem in European football.
Also, managing several media partners adds layers of negotiation. UFC would need to balance competing interests, sync broadcast windows and ensure all partners meet technical and promotional standards.
