'The article I chose to write about for my current development breaks down the promotion strategies of UFC and boxing, how they are different and what we can learn from them. Both UFC fighting and boxing have been popular for a while and may seem similar but their marketing strategies are vastly different. UFC is one large entity that has control over all aspects of the business such as fighter promotions, regulations, contracts, broadcasts and bonuses. They also coordinate who fights who. Instead of placing emphasis on specific events, UFC works to build up the personas of fighters. Fighters from UFC are more engaged with their fans online. UFC gets a lot of younger viewers, so a lot of their marketing and promotion efforts are on social media. UFC fights are broadcasted on ESPN+ and fans will have to pay $70 on top of their monthly subscription fee to view the fight.

When it comes to boxing, it consists of several different entities. Promoters scout for boxers and pitch them to sign with them. Once they are signed, promoters will coordinate fights for boxers. Their goal is to protect the boxers legacy, therefore major fights happen rarely. Boxing promotes fights in a more traditional way using print like newspapers, magazines as well as radio and talk shows. Boxing is broadcast on Showtime PPV, ESPN+ by pay-per-view and they also hold in-person seats.

The article believes that the traditional promotion strategies of boxing makes it more stable and suggests that UFC should explore additional marketing outlets. What do you all think? I believe UFC is ahead of the game, and boxing will eventually have to switch to their marketing strategy to keep up with the quickly digitalized world."

Please respond the comment above in a summary (please don't answer this question by copying from the web or just copy from another Chegg expert answer, thanks!)