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 asDana Whiteframes the same deal as a broad upgrade for fighters.

“This is why I 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.To see how highly [Dana White] values people outside the sport that kind of built…pic.twitter.com/nDDpoPWh4R

Under the Paramountagreement, 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 $100,000each, 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.

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.

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 theOctagon. 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.

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.

Source: LowKickMMA.com