With news that ESPN+ will now be the exclusive provider of UFC pay-per-views in the U.S., there are bound to be some questions as to how and why and to the benefit of whom – and some of the early answers from UFC President Dana White only invite more questions.

Here are five we ought to be asking ourselves as the UFC and ESPN deepen their connection in ways that will affect fans almost immediately.

1. Increased flexibility makes savings possible, but does that make them inevitable?

In touting the benefit of this deal from a fan perspective, UFC President Dana White pointed out the difficulty of offering discounts or bundles when multiple pay-per-view providers are involved. Now that everything runs through ESPN, he said, the company has more freedom to cut fans a deal in various ways.

This makes some sense. Now that the UFC and ESPN are the only two parties involved in selling residential pay-per-views in the U.S. (which is historically the biggest market for UFC pay-per-views by far), they could conceivably charge less and make more.

But just because the UFC can pass that savings on to the fans, it doesn’t necessarily mean it will. For new subscribers to ESPN+, there’s already an offer to get a year of ESPN+ with a free pay-per-view thrown in. That’s a step in the right direction, but it’s not exactly a game-changer. If the UFC wants us to believe that it’s making our lives better by limiting our choices on how we buy and watch pay-per-views, it will need to come with a noticeable drop in price.