Complete Gareb Shamus interview

CBS Sportsline: There were reports several weeks ago that MyNetworkTV has renewed IFL Battleground for the fall season. Are those reports correct?

Gareb Shamus: Yes, that’s correct. When we first did our initial deal with them signed on for 22 shows, two hours a show in primetime TV on Monday nights with a re-airing on Saturday nights from 8-10 p.m. ET.

Our shows are going to coincide with the full season of the events ending in mid-September, which is going to be our championship. We’re going to be doing another series of shows for the fall, which will be great because it will up it to 30 with an additional eight episodes that will be broadcast at the end of this year.

The show has really been able to get them (MyNetworkTV) into the male demographic. Prior to us, not only has the network been trying to get an audience, but now they’ve shifted from a female focus to a more male focus. We’ve been that transition show for them and it has worked out incredible in terms of our ability to get a lot of guys that would typically not have watched that network to now being watching that network.

Q: There had been some talk that due to low overall ratings that MyNetworkTV’s future was uncertain. Is it safe to assume that with the renewal of IFL Battleground that MyNetworkTV will be back for a second year?

GS: Yes. We have a three year deal with them. As the seasons come about they’ll make forthcoming announcements. But literally in the first year out we went from what was originally going to be just a 22 show season to now what’s going to be 30. So I think that’s the really great sign of things to come for us with these guys.

What people don’t realize about MyNetwork is that it’s not a cable station, it’s a network so there are 170 affiliate stations out there that are broadcasting our show so we get a lot of local promotion that you wouldn’t get through a normal cable operator. So you have a lot of there guys in local markets promoting our show, whether it’s on their own shows, whether it’s on their billboards, whether it’s radio station ads, so you’ve got a lot of major station groups out there supporting our show in a big way.

Q: The IFL is a publicly traded company and as such you have to make regular filings with the SEC. During your most recently filing there was a warning that the company might not have enough capital to make it through the fourth quarter. Will the IFL be able to complete its current season and can you say with total certainty that the IFL will be back for a third season?

GS: It’s critical that we make sure that we always let everybody know what the potential risks for the business are. And I think literally since the day we started that one of the risks has always been a capital risk, which we’ve always disclosed since the day we started the company. In the era of public companies today, it’s critical that we do that.

Being a public company gives us access to the capital market, which is the kind of access that is usually very difficult for startup companies and early-stage companies to get. To have that access to the marketplace is one of the benefits to being a public company. There’s an enormous amount of interest in the sport now that didn’t exist a year or two or three years ago. Luckily, being a public company that puts us out there in a way that people have an opportunity to be involved in our organization where they might not be able to be involved in other organizations.

Q: But the filing has basically indicated a shortfall and if I read the filing correctly then there might not be enough capital to get through the season. How do you intend to make up for that shortfall?

GS: Again, if you look at our past we’ve been very successful at raising capital for the company when we first started. We raised an initial amount of capital that wasn’t enough to build the business the way we wanted to. So we raised some additional capital after that, which again wasn’t enough to build our business the way we wanted to. Fortunately, over time we’ve been putting in the right amount of capital that we need to build our business the way that we want to do that.

In some cases there are certainly some negatives to being a public company in the sense that there is an expense associated with it and the fact that you need to disclose a lot of things about your business. But we also think that’s positive for us in that people know we are trying to run a legitimate business and that we are trying to make sure that we’re in a position where we have a structure that enables us to have access to the capital market.

Q: You have a very good relationship with FOX. MyNetworkTV is owned by FOX and of course they own Fox Sports Net, in which you also have a TV deal with. Has there been any talk about getting FOX involved as an investor?

GS: Absolutely. If you look at some of our statements, we’re working on a digital joint venture with them where FOX would be investing $6 million in the company. So yes, we anticipate in the future at some point in time for FOX to be a strategic investor with us as well.

Q: There are some big name free agents available in MMA right now. Brock Lesnar fulfilled his one fight deal with FEG/K-1 several weeks back and several companies are reportedly engaged in talks with Pride heavyweight champion Fedor Emelianenko. Can the IFL be a player when it comes to signing big name fighters?

GS: If we chose to be. The reality is that right now we’re in the process of building our league and building our organization that way. Unless you can get those guys and have a long-term plan for them, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. So you have all these guys with win/loss efforts with no follow through. Now you have Monday morning and these guys have fought after their weekend and what value are they to those businesses? Once their fight is over they’ve got to then re-sign them and you don’t know when they’re going to fight and who they’re going to fight.

So it’s very difficult to build a one-off business and what we want to do is build a consistency to our business and our broadcast where we can be on week after week with an extraordinary high level of talent. For what it takes to maybe get one guy, we can have a lot of great fighters out there.

Q: I interview Kurt Angle several months back and he had mentioned that he had been contacted by the IFL about possibly fighting for you guys. Does the IFL have any interest in signing Kurt Angle?

GS: The reality is that we want to be friends with everybody. There’s no reason why we can’t have a relationship with all the talent out there in the marketplace. At the end of the day we do provide an alternative opportunity for guys and if it’s now, then it’s now or if it’s in the future, then it’s in the future.

We treat the athletes very well. We treat them with respect and we try and take care of them as much as we can and that goes a long way. So I think we have a lot of athletes out there that would love to fight with us. It’s just a matter of creating the right structure or the right environment for them to be able to work with us.

Q: So it’s true that you’ve contacted Angle in the past?

GS: We’ve spoken to everybody. Like any business, it’s a small business. Everybody wants to evaluate their options out there and fight out who’s who. So the reality is that it’s a small business and you go to one show where you have a ton of guys that show up. We had a show in LA and Joe Rogan was there, Quinton Jackson was there, Dan Henderson was there. It’s such a small industry that it’s easy to be friends with everyone.

Q: You talked about building around the team concept in the IFL. It’s a very unique concept that has sort of polarized the MMA community. Some fans love it and there are some fans that aren’t big fans of it. Has there been any serious discussion at any point about changing the business model of the IFL?

GS: No, because quite frankly, if you look at the history of sports, what wins? The league wins. The league model wins over time. We’re very committed to building the league and the organization. With the consistency to a league we benefit from having the hometown cities and we benefit from being able to take advantage of the athletes that are from those towns. We had a big event in Seattle where we had almost 7,000 people and the crowd was roaring for their hometown team and the athletes we had competing.

You don’t really understand the team format as much until you’ve actually been to an event. You certainly get it and see it on TV but when you’re there — a fight that might be on a pay-per-view, you care about one fight — when you’re involved on a team, you care about every fight. Even if it’s about a guy you might not care as much about, it’s important for that guy to win because if he loses it will affect the guy you care about, the coach that you care about, the city you care about, and or the style of fighting you care about.

There are so many other touch points in what we do where people care about the performance and the results of every fighter out there. It adds a dynamic that until you’re there live people don’t just get. But here’s the flipside, people are getting it so even though there might be people on a message board that might not like it, that’s the minority. The majority of people love it. We’re getting over 2 million people a week watching our shows on TV. It doesn’t take a long time for our guys to become superstars.

If you look at what made the UFC successful, it wasn’t the champions out there, it was The Ultimate Fighter show. It was Chuck Liddell and Randy Couture training these barely professional guys on free television that got to know who Randy and Chuck even were. It’s really that broadcasting on free television that really got these guys any kind of recognition out there. And it didn’t take a long time. That show was on for what? Thirteen episodes?

It’s not taking us a long time for us to be able to generate a large audience. If you think about where we were a little over a year ago — you never heard of us. We didn’t even put on a fight until April 29 (2006). In slightly one year we will have over 100 hours of original programming on television this year; one on a cable network and the other on network television. Both in 80 million and 100 million homes. We’ve got 12 teams that are competing on a schedule of 13 events around the country. Almost 100 athletes will have fought in our organization in these 12 months. I think that’s spectacular. And that’s our first year!

Q: You mentioned the Seattle show and the strong attendance figures. I wanted to discuss the live shows with you. While reading the financials, it looks like the IFL loses a lot of money on some of its live events. Now that the IFL has not one, but two TV contracts has there been any thought to maybe just running primarily in a few cities at smaller venues and focusing primarily on TV?

GS: There’s no question we could benefit from being in less cities more often. There’s no question that there is a benefit to taking advantage of the marketing clout that you have. But when you only have an existing organization that only has fights in Las Vegas then you really don’t know how some of these other markets will perform.

What we really wanted to do was make sure we got out around the country and find out where the real pockets of MMA fans are. I think we’ve done a great job of getting out there in a grass roots way. Now that we’ve seen what the landscape is we can make more informed decisions about what people think are real MMA fans out there that are willing to buy tickets versus the reality of them.

Also, we’ve made it clear right from the start that at the end of the day we have to make sure we produce a great show for TV. We have to make sure that our television broadcast is fantastic because we want to cater to the 7,000 people in the arena but we also want to make sure that the 2 million or more people at home have a great experience watching it on TV. Those are the people that are going to be coming out to our shows in the future. Those are the people that are going to buy our merchandise in the future. Those are the guys that are going to make sure that we get a lot of sponsors out there. It’s not the 7,000 people that are going to get big companies interested in sponsoring the IFL, it’s going to be the millions of people we reach on television that will get them interested.

Q: Might it make more sense though because there isn’t an abundance of capital right now to maybe scale back a little more on the live shows and focus a little more on the TV and then once you have more sponsorship revenue coming in then go out and do more live events?

GS: But the live events create the television. With us, even though we might be in some larger arenas, we scale down appropriately. We had an event in the forum and even though it seats 18,000 we scaled it for 5-6,000 people. We made it a very intimate show relative to the size of that place. So it’s not as if we had 5,000 people sitting on the floor and all the stands are empty. We dropped the curtain halfway down the place and the place was packed for the way we scaled it.

We’re trying to come up with the right mixture of the place and the size of the place but it’s not as if people have built these arenas for fights out there. They’ve built them for hockey, basketball, baseball, football, or concerts. It’s not as if people have built these arenas for fighting so in a lot of cases we have to scale these places appropriately for us.

Q: Even if you scale the buildings down aren’t you still on the hook for the same overhead?

GS: This is an instance again where the IFL bringing in a great partner to help us. You know whose doing our arena deals? William Morris. William Morris is the largest concert producer out there in terms of them managing a lot of the talent for their concert tours. So when we go into these arenas it’s not the IFL going in, it’s the William Morris agency that’s going to book 20,30,50 dates a year in some of these places. We went to a lot of the places that William Morris does a lot of business with so we’re getting the benefit of deals that you only get with being in business and being successful over a long period of time.

The reality is that the deals that we’re cutting relative to our history is actually very, very good.

Q: Are there any plans to expand the amount of teams as well as any plans to start doing pay-per-views?

GS: We’re going to take the league as it comes in the sense that if the league warrants getting more teams in there, then absolutely. We have a lot of people that want teams and we’ve got a lot of coaches from all over the world that want teams so we’re definitely eyeing that opportunity.

About pay-per-view, we’ve said it from the start that at some point in time we do want to be in the PPV business but that we’re not going to jump in just for the sake of being in the PPV business. We want to do it the right way. I think a lot of these companies that do it because they think they’re going to hit a home run, they typically fail. When you look at some of these organizations outside the UFC that have put on pay-per-view events, they’re disasters.

Q: Such as “Dynamite USA!!?”

GS: Yes, Dynamite USA. And you know, Bodog. You look at these pay-per-view events and they are utter failures because they are one-off events and that’s not what works. What works is having a business that is sustainable where you have marketing and promotion machine in place and the UFC has been very effective and they’ve done a great job of promoting their shows on Spike leading up to their PPVs. And the WWE does the same thing. They spend a lot of time, energy, and money being able to promote their shows on a day-to-day basis on free television so that they can sell a pay-per-view. When the time is right for us when we’ve got that business plan in place when we go to do a pay-per-view we want to be successful because you’re not going to get too many bites out of that apple when it doesn’t work.

Q: During conference calls with the media reporters have asked UFC president Dana White about the IFL and he’s not only been very critical but very disrespectful of the IFL, going so far as to call the team concept “retarded” leading up to UFC 71. What’s your response to the scathing remarks he issues in reference to the IFL?

GS: Anytime he mentions our name, it’s good for us. If he’s going to say something that’s going to be shocking then that’s great for us because people are going to pay attention. Clearly he is thinking about us. It’s impossible to ignore us in the sport, especially since we’re on the free television each week and all you need to do is flip on the TV in order to see us.

The good thing is that we’ve built a business that doesn’t revolve around them, whereas everyone else is trying to compete with them or trying to steal from them. We haven’t done that. We’ve got our own business model, we’ve got our own resources, and we’ve got our own ability to get to the marketplace. At the end of the day, what he thinks about us is really not relevant to our business. It’s really what the millions of fans think of us that matters to us.

Q: But looking at it from a personal standpoint, you and Kurt (Otto) came up with this unique concept and you’ve put a lot of energy into this. This is a passion for you guys; you guys didn’t get into MMA just to make a buck. You really want to make the sport better and here he goes and he’s trashing your concept… I mean, from a personal standpoint that does have to affect you on some level, doesn’t it?

GS: Not really. At the end of the day he runs his organization for himself, by himself. What he does works for him. He’s only interested in the UFC and his success and his success only. But that’s his prerogative. He can do that and they do a great job. I think the UFC does a great job, we’re just doing things different.

If we lived our lives based on what other people think about us, I’d be home by myself in my room every day. You don’t make big things happen by worrying about what other people think. You’ve got to do what you know is right regardless of who thinks about what you’re doing.

I started a comic book magazine 16 years ago and everyone thought I was some 21-year old kid out of college that didn’t know what he was talking about. Well, what were the biggest movies this summer? It’s Spiderman, it’s Transformers, it’s Fantastic Four, it’s going to be Harry Potter. It’s all character-based films.

So for me, I see this industry as an unbelievable marketplace and I’ve been able to sit and analyze the way sports and businesses and entertainment-businesses have been structured for 16 years. Dana White has only been catering to guys 18-34 for five years. I’ve been doing it for 17 years so I know what guys want. What he does works very well for his organization but we’re building a different business because it leverages off the things we know how to do best, which isn’t how to get $40 out of someone. But rather trying to get millions of people trying to watch it for free because we know how to leverage millions of people into making money.

Q: The IFL has garnered raves from its own fighters in regard to how they are treated. Not only are they getting health benefits but I’ve heard from fighters who have said they were still paid even when pulling out of a fight due to injury. But with the company losing money will the IFL continue to be able to offer its employees such great perks?

GS: What we’re doing is treating our guys with the right respect. Both the way we treat them and in the way we treat them financially. We’ve made commitments to these guys and we’re going to honor our commitments to these guys. But as new talent comes in we’ve set up a structure that works for the way we’ve launched the league. As time continues, as new guys come into the league, as the league evolves the way we pay people will evolve. Whenever you start a business you go into it one way and you hope to continue to do things that way. So yes, we’re going to continue to make sure we take care of our guys and that’s the bottom line. How we take care of them as demands change, we’ll change. But right now we have no plans to change how we compensate our guys and how we treat our guys.

Q: So some cutbacks might be made with newer fighters that are brought in?

GS: No, we’re going to pay guys appropriately which we’ll continue to do and we’ll continue to take care of our guys appropriately. We have no intent to change the way we treat our athletes, both in the way we compensate them and how we treat them. We’re going to continue to treat them fairly.

Q: In the UFC there doesn’t seem to be a middle class. It seems as though if you’re a PPV main eventer you make a ton of money and if you’re not then you’re basically getting paid entry level. The IFL seems to have more of a middle class. What’s your feeling about the disparity in certain MMA promotions in how they pay their fighters?

GS: It’ all based on business model. When you look at the UFC or anybody that’s into pay-per-view — take a look at the Mayweather/De La Hoya fight, you’ve got two guys who probably made over $40 million each but then you’ve got boxers who are probably lucky to make $200 a piece. So when you’re in the pay-per-view business there’s always going to be the headliners who get paid exponentially more than everyone else. If you look at where those exponential guys come from, where do they come from? They come from the middle class guys who work their way up to the upper class. We’re developing a system and a league such that our middle class — and you kind of classified them as that, but I don’t — but these guys are the future champions out there. These guys are the guys that are going to be the ones that are the superstars of the now and the future. And they’re in our league and they’ll get the benefit of the stardom we create for them.

Q: And there have been some fighters out there — Eddie Alvarez of Bodog Fight comes to mind — guys that have been offered contracts by the UFC but have turned them down because they can make more money elsewhere. Are there any fighters in the IFL that you can name that have drawn interest from the UFC but turned them down in favor of you guys because of better pay?

GS: Well, there are a couple of things. Number one, our guys are exclusive. We’ve had a number of our guys approached by everybody out there and our guys are exclusive to us and they’re very happy with us and they’re very happy with where they’re at. And they see not only that do we treat them with respect, where else are any of these athletes getting the kind of television time that we provide for them?

And the experience that they get and being a part of something and that they feel like that they’re just not out there by themselves. They’re a part of their team and they’re a part of the guys that they train with and probably live with and probably eat with and compete with. Where else do you have that kind of support system? This is the kind of life that these guys are used to when you’re growing up in collegiate wrestling and all of these different areas out there, you’re growing up in those support systems and guys actually like that. So when you talk to these guys, they like the format that we do. Number one it’s something that they’re used to and number two they’re not just out there by themselves, they’re with their team.

We’ve had guys approached by other organizations but they’re happy where they at.

Q: Have you ever been in a situation where you were talking to a fighter who had other offers on the table and had a choice and chose the IFL over another promotion based on how you treat the fighters?

GS: Yeah, look at Josh Neer. He was top notch UFC and Pride fighter and he fought in our Chicago show. And you know what happened to him?

Q: He got knocked out, didn’t he?

GS: Yep, he got knocked out in the first round. That’s where people who describe our talent level, we have an extraordinary level of talent in our organization. I mean, it’s really tough.

Q: Looking at the competition level in the IFL and going back to the TV time, you’re creating some real stars in guys like Chris Horodecki, Ben Rothwell, and Bart Palasiewicz — these are guys that can definitely compete anywhere in the world. Is there a concern that as their contracts come to term that you might lose them to other organizations? In short, can the IFL retain the talent that they develop?

GS: As long as we can create a format that’s appropriate for our guys and create opportunities for our guys to do well, then they’re going to continue with us. We have a mutual respect for what we’re trying to do together. These guys understand the value of what we’re providing for them in their careers in their career management. If they go to another organization and they lose one fight, that’s it. They’re out, they’re done. They’ll never get another shot and then where is their career?

We’re going to help build these guys careers so that we can help them become long-term professional athletes so that they’re not judged on a one shot promotion, which is what happens to a lot of these guys. How many guys can you point out that have gotten their one shot and they lose and they’re gone and then nobody wants them. And then where is their career? So when you look at the pay-per-view model you’re in the one shot business. They’ve got one shot to make it. You make it, you move on. You lose, and you’re out. Just look at the last list — and I’m not just singling out the UFC, just look at any one of those other organizations — it’s either the same guys getting regurgitated over and over again or guys lose and then they never get another shot, or they just work their way down an organization.

Q: I think one of those guys that’s a good example of that just recently signed and fought for the IFL and that’s Maurcio Cruz. The addition of Cruz to the IFL roster is interesting because it raises the issue of how talent acquisition works in the IFL. Is it solely up to coaches to bring in fighters; was that a Renzo Gracie decision? Or, what does IFL management do when they see a fighter that they like?

GS: It’s a combination of both. It’s a combination of Kurt (Otto) working with the coaches on acquiring talent. So talent comes from a couple of different places. Number one, it comes from our coaches because they’re certainly on the forefront of where all the talent comes from. And then you have guys that will come to us directly that want to fight with us. In those situations we’ll say “We know this team needs a lightweight” or “This team needs a heavyweight” and we figure out where’s the appropriate place to fill in the gaps. So it’s really is a combination, we’re involved in all those decisions because we certainly don’t want someone fighting in the league that’s not the right person to represent us, because the athletes and who they are is certainly a reflection of who we are.

Q: Let’s talk about some more positive news. Chris Horodecki defeated Shad Lierley at your Seattle event and many called that a match of the year candidate. When will IFL fans get to see that match on TV?

GS: That’s going to be on in a couple of weeks. We’re getting that on the schedule right now. But that was the fight of the year. There’s no doubt about it. You know when you see these movies and guys go at and you’re like “That’s not real, guys could never go at it like that at that pace for so long” or “That guy would be down in two seconds after a punch like?” Well, it was like a scene out of a movie where it just back and forth for 12 minutes straight. It really was incredible. I mean, and these are not pushover guys out there and they’re probably future champions, if not current champions of our league. It was just an unbelievable fight. We have had people that have been to a lot of fights, non-IFL fights, you know, UFC fights, all of them. And they thought that the event in Seattle was probably one of the best MMA events they’ve been to in their lives.

Q: IFL Battleground has drawn mixed reviews and I watch it on a pretty regular basis and from what I can see it’s undergone quite a few format changes. Does the IFL have a vision of what formula of what’s going to resonate best with MMA fans? What’s the direction going to be for the show?

GS: When we got the Battleground show it was literally with six weeks notice of producing a weekly, two-hour show 22 weeks in a row. That is a major order to fill and I think as we started it was how can we do as best of a show we can just to get it on the air? And over time we’ve able to continually fine tune these shows to get to the point where people see the show we have planned for June 25, we’re going to have a lot of new things for the show that I just think is going to take it to a while different level.

We’ve switched producers on the show but we’ve gotten a major television producer with us now on that show and they’ve got some of the best hit reality shows on TV. And now we’re working together on putting that show together and they’re going to be doing all of our production moving forward.

Q: Can you talk some of the changes that are in store that we’re going to see?

GS: One of the things we’re going to do on the show is make sure that you constantly feel the pressure of the impact of the fight. By that I mean we need to convey more to the audience that if this guys wins the fight, his team will win and the other team will lose. And if his team loses then they’re out of the playoffs and if they’re out of the playoffs all of the guys don’t get paid more money.

There’s more than just the pressure of this guy going out and fighting for himself. And there’s also the pressure of the guy if he loses, he’s not going to get a chance to fight in the Grand Prix and a chance to win the belt. If he wins, he has a shot but he’s got to get a knockout in the first two rounds in order to do that. There’s a huge amount of pressure on a guy to not only win, but he’s got to win a certain way in order to make the Grand Prix and make that pay day.

What we need to do is really help create that string throughout the show of the impact of each fight has on the individual and on the team and you feel it a lot more. And then you go behind the scenes and you see a lot more of what it takes to get there and what these guys are going through to get there. And then also some more insight as to the league and what goes on behind the scenes with the league. So there’s going to be a lot more of those kind of elements to the show and then also Bas and Tiffany and people like that are associated with the show and they’re going to play increasing roles for us throughout the broadcast.

Q: Has the idea of doing live telecasts ever been discussed and is it something that’s feasible?

GS: We actually did one on FSN when it was the Pitbulls vs. the Wolfpack from the Mohegan Sun. But for us, especially where we are, it’s so much more important to create a consistency to our broadcast so that people can check us out week after week then to create a live event and be off the air for four weeks.

When you’re looking at the kind of people that are getting into mixed martial arts, these people have never seen it before. They haven’t experienced it before. They don’t understand everything about the sport and what’s happening. What we want to do because we’re appealing not to the hardcore people, because they’re going to watch us since it’s free MMA on TV, so we’re not concerned about getting the hardcore. We’re marketing to them, we’re doing a lot to reach the hardcore guy. What hardcore fan isn’t going to want to see Chris Horodecki fight? And which hardcore fan isn’t going to want to watch Ben Rothwell fight?

So for us, what we want to appeal to is a mass market audience. We want to make sure we have a product that’s appropriate for people to watch. By appropriate, I mean making sure we deliver the kind of material within the show that gets them to understand the sport, who we are, what we’re doing, the athletes, what’s involved with the athletes.

So 95 or more percent of the people that are into the sport today didn’t even know who Chuck Liddell was three years ago. So you can’t expect somebody to instantly say “Oh, we know everything about the sport.” Someone who doesn’t train in Jiu-Jitsu won’t understand what’s going on. They just see two guys laying on the mat. They may not understand that a guy is trying to work a submission. It’s really important to make sure we produce a product that’s appropriate for the audience that’s watching it. So we’ve got all the action and the athletes that are appropriate for the hardcore but that it’s packaged properly for all the new fans that are coming into the sport. And over time we can start doing a lot more live events.

Q: You the UFC pretty much controls its broadcasts and I’m pretty sure Pride had the same arrangement when it was in business. But the IFL’s situation is a little different. What has it been like to work with the MyNetworkTV executives in developing the IFL Battleground format? Some of those guys may or may not have much knowledge about MMA. How much control do you have in the direction of the show?

GS: We produce the show, first and foremost. They have input because there are a lot of standards and practice issues and things like that because of the subject of it. And we are on a network that has affiliate stations and we are on in primetime at 8 o’clock so we have to make sure that they’re involved in the sense that we have to make sure that we deliver from an 8 o’clock to 9 o’clock hour a show that may not contain certain things and then between 9 and 10 o’clock we can do certain things.

They’re involved more from a technical standpoint but from an actual production standpoint we’re producing the show from start to finish.

Q: The level of production exists now, has that been there from day one or something that was gained over time?

GS: When we first started Battleground we certainly turned to the network for as much support as possible to help get those shows out but shortly thereafter we were in a position where we were ramped up so that we could make sure we could do as much as we can to put the show together and pull it in the direction we want it to go in. But the MyNetwork people have been incredibly supportive in terms of what we want to do and how we want to do it. They’ve put an enormous amount of muscle behind our show. When you think about the fact that in past weeks we’ve beaten the Stanley Cup Finals and we’ve beaten baseball games in core markets. We’re beating big sports. Pick most baseball games out there and we’re beating them in their core home markets. It’s really staggering the amount of people that are starting to watch our show.

A lot of people like to compare us to the UFC but they went through $44 million over for years before their organization turned around. It’s not as if they opened shop and everybody cared about them. That’s not what happened with those guys. A lot of people like to compare where we are with where the UFC is today and it’s not an appropriate comparison. If you want to make an appropriate comparison let’s compare where we are after our first year and where the UFC was after their first two years (under current ownership). They didn’t have a TV show. They had pay-per-views but they didn’t sell out arenas. They didn’t have athletes that people know. They didn’t have broadcast TV deals. They didn’t have big sponsors. That’s a more fair comparison of kind of where we are after only putting on fights for 13 months now. I think we’re in an incredible position.

Q: I think that that’s a valid point but I think some of the concerns that people have expressed out there — any startup company needs time — and you mentioned that the UFC went through a lot of money over the course of four years but they had the capital to go through in order to give them time to develop. And because the IFL is in a position where they have to report quarterly and let everyone know about the finances, a lot of people have questions will the IFL bring in enough capital to maintain operations so that they can develop and improve?

GS: It gets back to the prior conversation why being a public has both its negatives and positives. The positive part is the access to the capital markets and the fact that we’re fortunate enough to be on the cusp and forefront of this immensely popular sport that’s growing by leaps and bounds every single day. I think a lot of people recognize that now where they didn’t a year ago.

Q: Is another stock offering being considered as a way to bring in more capital?

GS: I can’t discuss any of that kind of stuff but again, like I said just being a public company gives you more access to the market.

Q: You guys have done a lot of grass roots partnerships including a recent deal with USA Wrestling. Has the IFL explored partnerships with other MMA promotions? And would the IFL ever be open to a potential merger with another promotion down the line?

GS: We’ve said right from the start that we’re a very open organization and I guess it’s like my prior businesses where I have magazines where we work with major competitors. So whether it’s Mattel or Hasbro or Marvel and DC or film studios or X-box, Sony, Nintendo — I have magazines that cater to all these major companies that are competitors so we kind of look at ourselves as Switzerland.

We kind of came to the IFL with the same approach that we’re going to be a media friendly company and we’re going to work with everybody and if there’s other organizations out there, whether they’re MMA or non-MMA organizations that make sense to work with, we’re going to work with them.

We know all the other MMA organizations out there and chances are very likely that we know the people over there or met the people over there, and if there are opportunities to work together with them — that’s great. And if there’s not, there’s not. It’s got to be a two-way street and it’s got to be a benefit for both organizations.

We’re not closed to working with anyone if we think there’s value there for us.