These two: Cost Affliction too much moneyWhen the third Affliction event, Affliction: Trilogy was abruptly cancelled immediately following an announcement that one of the main-event fighters had tested positive for anabolic substances, some wondered what the fiscal fallout could yield for those who’d invested time and money with no hope of return in the event’s procurement. Announcements that Affliction has resumed their position as an official UFC sponsor soon after the event’s cancellation lead to further speculation into an already controversial situation.

Today, Affliction attorney Michael Bassiri spoke with well-known MMA new site Sherdog.com regarding the unfortunate situation that has Emelianenko’s management as well as M-1 Global seeking more than $12.5 million in damages. Three separate agreements are outlined in the lawsuit, two of which the Affliction brass states have been expired for months, and one upon which they’ve returned no comment regarding their position.

M-1 Global and Fedor Emelianenko attorney Marc Hines was not immediately available for comment.

The three contracts, referred to as a “Fight Agreement” with Affliction Entertainment, a “Consulting Agreement” with Affliction Entertainment, and a “Letter Agreement” with Affliction Clothing. Statements made both on and off the record by either side clearly indicate the disagreements present in all aspects of what is now being legally debated. All sides agree that the business relationship at the time that the event was scheduled were governed by two contracts. However, this is where the agreements end.

Details regarding each are outlined as follows:

The Fight Agreement: A contract between Affliction Entertainment and Emelianenko. This contract detailed that Fedor was to receive a guaranteed $300,000 per fight, in addition to “substantial payments” to be paid by M-1 Global, for a determined three fights. The agreement also granted him extraneous international promotional and distribution rights in Russia and parts of Asia regarding his likenesses and certain perimeters of conduct while contracted with the organization.

Affliction argues: This agreement is expired March 31, 2009, and therefore could not have applied to any scheduled event. However, M-1 and Fedor Management personnel are quick to indicate that the event was promoted as though there was an existing contract in place.

The Consulting Agreement: A contract between Affliction Entertainment, Fedor’s management and M-1 Global. The agreement indicated that consulting fees would be paid to M-1 and Fedor’s management, the third installment of which was never paid.

Affliction argues: Again, Affliction states that this agreement is one of two that expired March 31, 2009, and therefore could not have applied to any scheduled event.

The Letter Agreement: A contract between M-1 Global and Affliction. This contract detailed an ongoing obligation by Affliction clothing, withstanding the Fedor fights, to continue promoting M-1 Challenge events beyond the scope of the scheduled Affliction MMA events.

Affliction has offered no word on this statement.

All parties appeared in court on Monday before a Los Angeles federal judge, where Affliction’s motion to dismiss several of the claims levied against them, based on lack of existing supporting evidence in two instances, was denied. Affliction’s counsel stated that at this early stage in the litigation process, the motion was denied, as the judge was bound by law to accept Fedor’s allegations as true per court process. However, the judge stopped short of committing any decisions or opinions regarding the authenticity of Fedor’s claims in her eyes.

Ulterior Motives

M-1 and Fedor both express open wonderment in regards to the news that Affliction had rejoined the ranks of UFC sponsorship shortly following the cancellation of the event. This move might’ve been perceived as a gesture that everything for Affliction would continue to be just peachy, following their move to dump right around $30 million dollars into three overblown MMA productions.

Allegations in regards to when the talks between Zuffa and Affliction started up have also been discussed, with particular allegations in regard to the Fight Agreement claiming that Affliction did not pursue “all reasonable efforts” to find Fedor a replacement opponent on two-weeks’ notice. They also allege that Affliction seemed to lose interest in promoting the event following the positive Barnett test, mainly because they may have been discussing a competing effort with Zuffa.

The Trilogy event was cancelled July 24, 2009. Affliction announced a return to UFC sponsorship almost immediately afterward.

Both Emelianenko’s management and M-1 are seeking “no less than $10 million in damages for breach of the Fight Agreement, $2 million in damages for breach of the Consulting Agreement and $500,000 in damages for breach of the Letter Agreement.”

It’s questionable whether or not Affliction even has that much left in the bank.

Affliction’s counsel indicates that their client’s side of things “will all come out,” as contracts are scoured and depositions occur over the next few months. All parties will convene on November 16, 2010, when the case is set to go to trial.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

  |    |    |