TKOTKO Group Holdings

date. The excess of the purchase price over those fair values is recognized as goodwill. During the measurement period, which may be up to one year from the acquisition date, the Company may record adjustments, in the period in which they are determined, Goodwill attributable to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed Acquired Businesses was recorded on the basis of EGH’s reporting units. The goodwill amounts carry with them the corresponding offset results of EGH’s impairment tests, akin to goodwill. Upon the conclusion a reorganization of the measurement period or final determination reporting units of the values of assets acquired or liabilities assumed, whichever comes first, any subsequent adjustments are recognized in the consolidated statements of operations. Goodwill Goodwill is tested annually as of October 1 EGH for impairment and at any time upon the occurrence of certain events or substantive changes in circumstances that indicate the carrying amount which GAAP does not require retrospective testing of goodwill may not be recoverable. The Company has the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine if an impairment is “more likely than not” to have occurred. If the Company can support the conclusion that the fair value of a reporting unit is greater than its carrying amount under the qualitative assessment, the Company would not need to perform the quantitative impairment test for that reporting unit. If the Company cannot support such a conclusion or the Company does not elect to perform the qualitative assessment, then the Company must perform the quantitative impairment test. When the Company performs a quantitative test, it records the amount of goodwill impairment, if any, as the excess of a reporting unit’s carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. Charges resulting from an impairment test are recorded in impairment charges in the consolidated statements of operations.‌ reorganized structure. Intangible Assets Intangible assets consist primarily of trade names and customer relationships. Intangible assets with finite lives are recorded at their estimated fair value at the date of acquisition and are amortized over their estimated useful lives using the straight-line method. The estimated useful lives of finite-lived intangible assets are as follows:‌ Years Trademarks and trade names 7 2 - 25 26 years Customers relationships 1 2 - 18 years Internally developed technology 1 - 8 22 years Other (includes internally developed software) 2 - 4 15 years For intangible assets that are amortized, the Company evaluates assets for recoverability when there is an indication of potential impairment or when the useful lives are no longer appropriate. If the undiscounted cash flows from a group of assets being evaluated is less than the carrying value of that group of assets, the fair value of the asset group is determined and the carrying value of the asset group is written down to fair value and an impairment loss is recognized for the difference between the fair value and carrying value, which is recorded in impairment charges in the consolidated statements of operations.‌ Identifiable indefinite-lived intangible assets are tested annually for impairment as of October 1 and at any time upon the occurrence of certain events or substantive changes in circumstances that indicate the carrying amount may not be recoverable. The Company has the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine if an impairment is "more likely than not" to have occurred. In the qualitative assessment, the Company must evaluate the totality of qualitative factors, including any recent fair value measurements, that impact whether an indefinite-lived intangible asset has a carrying amount that "more likely than not" exceeds its fair value. The Company must then conduct a quantitative analysis if the Company (1) determines that such an impairment is "more likely than not" to exist, or (2) forgoes the qualitative assessment entirely. The impairment test for identifiable indefinite-lived intangible assets consists of a comparison of the estimated fair value of the intangible asset with its carrying value. If the carrying value of the intangible asset exceeds its fair value, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess and is recorded in impairment charges in the consolidated statements of operations. Investments For equity method investments, the Company periodically reviews the carrying value of its investments to determine if there has been an other-than-temporary decline in fair value below carrying value. For equity investments without readily determinable fair value, the Company performs a qualitative assessment at each reporting period. A variety of factors are considered when determining if an impairment exists, including, among others, the financial condition and business prospects of the investee, as well as the Company’s investment intent.‌ intent. Content Costs The Company incurs costs to produce and distribute film and television content, which are either monetized on a title-by-title basis or as a group through subscriptions from customers. These costs include development costs, direct costs of production as well as direct negative costs incurred in the physical production of the film. From time to time, the Company acquires films to distribute exclusively through its UFC Fight Pass subscription network. The Company also licenses films for distribution exclusively through its UFC Fight Pass subscription network. Content costs are included in other assets in the consolidated balance sheets. Depending on the predominant monetization strategy, content costs are amortized over the estimated period of ultimate revenue subject to an individual-film-forecast model or over the estimated usage of the film group. Such amortization is recorded in direct operating expenses in the consolidated statements of operations. The Company produces live sports and taped content, which represent content costs predominantly monetized on a title-by-title basis that has a limited life to sell in secondary markets. As such, the Company recognizes all of the revenue associated with film and television costs when the programs are delivered and made available for telecast in the initial market resulting in simultaneously expensing all of the related film and television costs. Costs incurred in acquiring, licensing, and producing content for distribution on UFC Fight Pass FIGHT PASS are predominantly monetized as a film group, and are amortized straight-line over the shorter of the license term or the estimated period of use, which is currently three years. These estimates are reviewed at the end of each reporting period and adjustments, if any, will result in changes to amortization rates. Unamortized content costs are also tested for impairment based on the predominant monetization strategy whenever there is an impairment indication, as a result of certain triggering events or changes in circumstances, whereby the fair value of the individual film and television content or collectively with others as a film group may be less than its unamortized costs. The impairment test compares the estimated fair value of the individual film and television content or collectively with others as a film group to the carrying value of the unamortized content costs. Where the unamortized content costs exceed the fair value, the excess is recorded as an impairment charge in the consolidated statements of operations. No impairment charges were recognized during the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 or 2023.

A key component of our success is our relationships with television and cable networks, satellite providers, digital streaming and other distribution partners, as well as corporate sponsors. We are dependent on maintaining these existing relationships and expanding upon them so that we have a robust network with which we can work to arrange multimedia rights sales and sponsorship engagements, including distribution of our events and media content. Our television programming for our events is distributed by television and cable networks, satellite providers, PPV, digital streaming, and other media. We have depended on, and will continue to depend on, third parties for many aspects of the operations and distribution of WWE Network. We have an important relationship with ESPN as they are the exclusive domestic distributor of all UFC events. Because a large portion of our revenues are generated, directly and indirectly, from the distribution of our events, any failure to maintain or renew arrangements with distributors and platforms, the failure of distributors or platforms to continue to provide services to us, or the failure to enter into new distribution opportunities on terms favorable to us could adversely affect our business. We regularly engage in negotiations relating to substantial agreements covering the distribution of our television programming content by carriers located in the United States and abroad. We have agreements with multiple PPV providers globally and distribute a portion of our events through PPV, including certain events that are sold exclusively through PPV. Beginning January 2025, We have important relationships with (i) Paramount, as the exclusive distributor for all UFC Numbered Events and UFC Fight Nights throughout the U.S. and Latin America and as exclusive distributor of UFC Fight Nights in Australia, as well as the exclusive distributor of Zuffa Boxing throughout the U.S. and distributor of certain PBR programming, (ii) ESPN as the exclusive distributor for all WWE PLEs in the U.S., (iii) Netflix became as the exclusive global home to Raw. Additionally, since January 2025 and for RAW (and, as rights become available globally, distribution for all WWE content outside the U.S., including premium live events, is events) and other WWE library content, (iv) USA Network as the exclusive distributor for SmackDown in the U.S., (v) The CW, which carries NXT on Netflix. its cable network stations, and (vi) Peacock as the exclusive distributor of WWE Saturday Night’s Main Event in the U.S. Our agreement with Netflix relating to WWE has an initial 10-year term, with an option for Netflix to extend for an additional 10 years and to opt out after the initial five years. Our failure to maintain the Netflix agreement, including through Netflix exercising its opt-out rights, could adversely affect our ability to distribute WWE content, which could adversely affect our operating results. We also have substantial relationships with NBCU, which carries SmackDown on USA Network, and The CW, which carries NXT on its cable network. WWE Network is distributed exclusively via Peacock in the domestic market. These relationships are expected to continue to constitute a significant percentage of our revenues. We anticipate that we will be involved in negotiations to renew or replace our domestic television distribution rights agreements for UFC content and WWE Network with our current licensee or others before their expiration in December 2025 and March 2026, respectively. These domestic licenses together account for a very significant portion of our media segment revenues and profitability. No assurances

lawsuit, Johnson Five related class-action lawsuits were filed against Zuffa between December 2014 and March 2015 by a total of eleven former UFC fighters. The lawsuits, which were substantially identical, were transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada and consolidated into a single action in June 2015, captioned Le et al. v. Zuffa, LLC et al., LLC, No. 2:21-cv-1189-RFB-BNW 2:15-cv-1045-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.) (the “Johnson” case), was filed “Le” case). The lawsuit alleged that Zuffa violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by monopsonizing an alleged market for the services of elite professional MMA athletes. The fighter plaintiffs claimed that Zuffa’s alleged conduct injured them by artificially depressing the compensation they received for their services. The plaintiffs sought treble damages under the antitrust laws, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs, and, in some instances, injunctive relief. On August 9, 2023, the district court certified the lawsuit as a putative damages class of former UFC fighters and covering action, encompassing the period from July 1, 2017, December 16, 2010 to the present. June 30, 2017. The Johnson case alleged substantially similar claims to fighter plaintiffs in the Le case and abandoned their claim for injunctive relief, so the only relief the fighter plaintiffs would have sought injunctive relief. at trial was damages. On September 26, 2024, following the court's court’s denial of an earlier proposed settlement agreement, the Company reached an agreement with the plaintiffs to settle all claims asserted in the Le case for an aggregate amount of $375.0 million payable in installments over an agreed-upon period of time by the Company (the “Updated Settlement Agreement”). The terms of the Updated Settlement Agreement have been memorialized in a long-form agreement, which the court were preliminarily approved by the district court on October 22, 2024 and finally approved 2024. The Updated Settlement Agreement was granted final approval by the district court on February 6, 2025. In connection with the Updated Settlement Agreement, the Company recorded charges of $375.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2024, which are included as a component of selling, general and administrative expenses in the consolidated statements of operations. The Company paid $125.0 million of the aggregate $375.0 million settlement amount into escrow in late October 2024, shortly following receipt of preliminary approval, and another $125.0 million into escrow in February 2025 shortly following receipt of final approval, in accordance with the terms of the Updated Settlement Agreement. The Company expects to make an additional made the third and final payment covering the remaining $125.0 million in the second quarter of June 2025. The Company anticipates that the settlement amount will be deductible for tax purposes. No trial date has been set in the Johnson action.

•WWE contributed revenue of $1,398.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 as compared increased by $311.3 million, or 22%. This increase was primarily due to $382.8 million for the period from September 12, 2023 through December 31, 2023 following its acquisition. This incremental revenue was driven by $616.0 $135.1 million of higher media rights rights, production and content primarily revenue associated with domestic and international media rights fees for WWE’s flagship programs, Raw, SmackDown and NXT, which was attributable to the new global content distribution agreement with Netflix that became effective in January 2025 and premium live event the expansion of WWE’s SmackDown programming, including WrestleMania XL events, as well as $250.8 rights fees associated with WWE’s premium live events, including the new content distribution agreement with ESPN that became effective in September 2025. This increase was also driven by $76.6 million of live event higher partnerships revenue which was primarily driven by hosting additional events with live ticketed audiences, including WrestleMania XL events, from new sponsors and increases in fees from renewals, as well as site fees associated with certain international premium live events compared to the prior year. The additional revenue was also due to $83.5 $74.3 million of increased live event revenue, which was the result of higher ticket sales revenue, driven by WrestleMania 41 in Las Vegas and the first ever two-night SummerSlam in New Jersey. Additionally, WWE generated $25.3 million of increased consumer products licensing revenue related to the sale of WWE-branded products products, including video games, merchandise and $65.0 million of sponsorship revenue from toys sales, compared to the sale of advertising. prior year.