By Pramit Mohapatra

TwinCities.com has an illuminating revelation regarding local taxes at UFC 87.

From the article:

A little birdie says Ultimate Fighting Championship officials weren't pleased about the 10 percent tax on their show that drew 15,082 to Target Center on Saturday, and if they return to the Twin Cities next year, the Xcel Energy Center could be the site.

MMAPayout.com expands on this with another interesting tidbit:

Most states place a tax on PPV revenues when a live event that yields a PPV broadcast originates from their state.

Both costs are probably not factored in by fans when they see live gate and PPV revenues and wonder why UFC fighters make what they make. And, there's no doubt that these are only some of the costs that eat into UFC's profits before it can consider paying its fighters.

So, while fighters and fans alike would like to see fighters make more money, we have to remember that the UFC has considerations beyond fighter pay. The numbers above don't even speak to the cost of renting an arena, costs of live event and television production, and the fact that the UFC must split PPV revenue with the PPV provider.

So, while I'm not an apologist for UFC management practices, I also believe we have to be realistic about how much profit the promotion is actually raking in before condemning its fighter pay. And, the lessons learned regarding the demise of Bodog and the IFL are cautionary indeed as are the words of Affliction's VP Tom Atencio regarding the promotion's financial losses at its debut event.

In other words, the UFC may still be years (or a monster network TV deal) away from being able to pay out the gigantic salaries we see in the major sports (which, incidentally, MMA is not.)