It's well known that Dana White and Jason Miller don't see eye to eye, and this has become more apparent in recent times. White took to his Twitter account to announce that New York would once again oppose the legalization of MMA, and the backlash from Mayhem has been nothing short of insane.

Check out what Mayhem had to say to DW:

Now these are certainly serious allegations, but I would not put it in to the realms of truth or lies before seeing any hard evidence. White can be an incredibly difficult person at times, and has certainly made plenty of enemies, including his own mother, during his lifetime.

The question remains, would Dana put the legitimacy and profit margin of the UFC in jeopardy due to personal feelings?

Since the UFC's acquisition of Strikeforce/WEC/Pride FC, the word 'monopoly' has certainly been thrown around a whole lot. But does it hold any relivance here? Obviously any companies objective is to grow, create bigger profits and reach bigger audiences. Is it fair though, when this growth and profit means dissolving competition?

Ok, time for a 'HYPOTHETICAL' question. A local business man, who has owned the grocery store on your block for 30 years, is losing custom to a big name company. The company holds promotional days on the same dates as the small grocer's, tempts his employees away with bigger wage offers, publicly slanders and condemns the grocer's brand/product and eventually the grocer caves. All his staff have gone, he can't even sell a measely stick of brocolli.

He eventually takes a check, moves his family out of town, and is never heard from again. Is that fair? Now that hypothetical question has passed, anyone think that the UFC is monopolizing the market?