The exclusivity clause is the worst part, because it would negatively affect all MMA promoters regardless of size. If a smaller show stretched their wallet to take a risk on a big name/upcoming fighter hoping it would pay off with lets say a 5 fight contract, the UFC or even a different small promotion could come in and snatch him after just 1 or 2 fights basically destroying the investment of the original promoter.AB 2100 authorizes the State Athletic Commission to revoke or refuse to renew the license of any mixed martial arts (MMA) promoter in California that participates in coercive and unfair contracting practices.
Because the bill implicates contracts, it would have a much broader effect than just California fight. HP Pavilion officials declined to comment, but provided a letter they'd sent to Alejo protesting the bill.
In it, HP officials said MMA events contribute $6 million to San Jose' economy and contribute to the California State Athletic Commission, which currently regulates MMA fights, boxing and other sports. General manager Jim Goddard and chief financial officer Charles Faas said the bill may prove too onerous to fight organizers.
"As a consequence, promoters could very easily choose not to hold their events in California," they wrote.