twitter google

Hayabusa newest casualty to UFC banned sponsor list

hayabasuHayabusa Fight Wear has become the latest brand of fight apparel that has been banned by the UFC.

Fighters sponsored by Hayabusa include Patrick Cote and Denis Kang.

The news of this most recent sponsor ban from the UFC comes courtesy of a report on

Sam Caplan was the first to report the recent banning of Dethrone, One More Round, and Rolling Stone as sponsors for the company on June 24.

Prior sponsors that have recently been forced out of the octagon are Full Tilt Poker, Ultimate Bet, and Party Poker.

  • mac wilson says:

    This is getting a little crazy.

  • The UFC started with grass roots marketing and word of mouth and that seems to be the first thing that they’re cutting off. I don’t support anything that takes money out of fighters’ pockets.

  • ohody says:

    all i know is that the hayabusa shirts i have are p i m p!!

  • Davey D says:

    Can someone please tell exactly why all these sponsors keep getting the boot. I figure it comes down to MONEY like all things usally go. Hayabusa has some sweet as fack gear and now they’re gone…why? Seriously, someone needs to make a list & show us just how many sponsors are currently banned, what the time period’s are and just exactly WHY they’ve been shown the door.

    Look…I’m all for logic and reason but with the UFC having come out with their own Magazine. Will a fantastic publication like Fight! get the rug treatment soon??? I sure hope not.

    At the end of the day, Zuffa/UFC can do whatever the hell they want, no? Their way or the highway. It is their business that all these companies are having their own likeness seen all across the far reaching UFC spectrum so…it is what it is, yes?

  • munche says:

    This is a bit more curious than the other sponsorship news, since Hayabusa is pretty prominently featured in UFC 2009 the video game. You would assume that meant they have a good relationship with the UFC>

  • Kamakosmo says:

    The UFC is trying to put themselves up there with the NFL. This is getting a little nuts with the clothing. I could care less what these fighter wear. Wear whatever the hell you want, and let these fighters make an extra buck. Everyone knows they are marginally paid. Keep it up and you’ll lose all sponsers that matter. Lock it in!!!

  • mu_shin says:

    5 oz. of pain recently reported on an e-mail that was sent to sponsors wishing to work with fighters being promoted by the UFC requiring a payment of $100,000 to the UFC for the right to sponsor a UFC fighter. My guess would be that the companies that have been listed as “banned” by the UFC are those companies that have declined to pay this $100K fee.

    I’m sure most real fans would agree that fighters who put their bodies on the line for their livlihood and for the fan’s entertainment should be more generously compensated than almost all but the most well known fighters are at present. I read that Uriah Faber, former WEC featherweight champion, and perhaps one of the best known MMA fighters active outside the UFC (WEC also being owned and operated by Zuffa, parent company of the UFC) was paid $25,000 for his second fight with Mike Brown. Sorry man, but that’s chicken feed when it’s common knowledge that Zuffa’s UFC pay-per-view revenues have eclipsed the $200 million mark annually. Many lower and mid-level UFC fighters receive what seems like minimal compensation for their efforts in the cage.

    I can understand the UFC/Zuffa not wanting to just give away the kind of exposure a product can receive when a fighter wears a product that will be seen on PPV or network/cable television, but perhaps a sliding scale fee would be more equitable to smaller up and coming companies that might want to sponsor an emerging fighter whose fees as a professional MMA athlete are not even enough to pay training and coaching costs. Just a thought…

  • meatloaf says:

    The fact that people can get so worked up over who’s number 1 in a P4P list and aren’t outrage with what Zuffa is doing with sponsorships is a sad commentary on what people think is important and why they’re always dictated to by the upper 1% in society.

  • Angry Mike says:

    What’s the criteria for the “upper 1%”? Money? Political power? Media influence? How do they control the remaining 99%? Guns? Psychoactive chemicals? Lots of interesting questions on this one.


You must be logged in to post a comment.