boxing
Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-26-2010, 07:55 AM   #46
Losfer_Words
★★★ 2 TONE EXPRESS ★★★
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bristol, England
Posts: 5,701
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by kosaros View Post
I didn't even buy it and I know you didn't either

The best thing about Primetime was Buncey and Kerr being back on telly.
By 'let down' I mean the reported number of buys and also the amount of technical problems people on Sky had with it.
Losfer_Words is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-26-2010, 08:08 AM   #47
TheGiftedOne
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 444
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losfer_Words View Post
Mick was offered a deal on regular Sky Sports for a fee less than they would have got for their debut on Primetime- instead, Mick chose the money instead of an investment in the future. In the long-term it would have been beneficial to take the Sky offer as fights between Froch and Kessler would most probably have ended up on SBO after Sky had had the chance of hyping Froch. SBO is a channel everyone in the UK is familiar with and also has a proven track record in selling PPVs. Also consider that Sky have a proven track record in hyping their own events. Haye was never even mentioned on Sky prior to signing with them and in two months the whole country was talking about his fight with Valuev. Meanwhile, no-one hardly mentioned Froch being involved in one of the biggest events in boxing in many years: the Super Six.

How many people do you know who bought Froch-Dirrell? In fact, how many people do you know who have heard of Primetime? Primetime was an utter let-down and Mick should blame no-one but himself.

I'd also point out that during the recession Hatton (a promoter with nowhere near as much experience as Hennessy) got a TV deal no problems and didn't blame any situation on ITV- there were other options available to Mick and he didn't take them up, Hatton has been shrewd enough already to take advantage of this in order to build a profile for his own fighters.

Remember the Taylor fight as well? ITV and Setanta were interested (according to Buncey at least) but the event was overpriced by Mick and eventually ended up an internet stream for 10. See a pattern here?
Have you got any proof of the bolded statements? As I've not seen this info anywhere, plus terms like 'most likely' ("Froch and Kessler would most probably have ended up on SBO") are of little use to Mick. I'm sure if Mick would have been guarenteed by Sky that Froch Vs Kessler would have gone out on SBO (when he was negotiating TV for Froch-Taylor) then he'd have took it, but the fact remains that we don't what was on offer and what Sky were willing to guarentee

I think it's irrelevent how many people I know that bought Froch-Dirrell, but I'd say about 10.

Hatton was already 'well in' with Sky before he got the TV deal with them and the fact that Hatton got the TV deal with Sky obviously means there was less room at the Inn (i.e. in the Sky boxing budget) for Mick. At the time Ricky got the deal ITV were happy with boxing and their withdrawal wasn't in the pipeline

ITV weren't interested in showing Froch-Taylor live, because the fight started at 3-4am and is of little use to a station that generates it's revenue from advertising. ITV did however show the epic fight on a less than 24 hour delay.
TheGiftedOne is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 08:16 AM   #48
Losfer_Words
★★★ 2 TONE EXPRESS ★★★
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bristol, England
Posts: 5,701
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGiftedOne View Post
Have you got any proof of the bolded statements? As I've not seen this info anywhere, plus terms like 'most likely' ("Froch and Kessler would most probably have ended up on SBO") are of little use to Mick. I'm sure if Mick would have been guarenteed by Sky that Froch Vs Kessler would have gone out on SBO (when he was negotiating TV for Froch-Taylor) then he'd have took it, but the fact remains that we don't what was on offer and what Sky were willing to guarentee

I think it's irrelevent how many people I know that bought Froch-Dirrell, but I'd say about 10.

Hatton was already 'well in' with Sky before he got the TV deal with them and the fact that Hatton got the TV deal with Sky obviously means there was less room at the Inn (i.e. in the Sky boxing budget) for Mick. At the time Ricky got the deal ITV were happy with boxing and their withdrawal wasn't in the pipeline

ITV weren't interested in showing Froch-Taylor live, because the fight started at 3-4am and is of little use to a station that generates it's revenue from advertising. ITV did however show the epic fight on a less than 24 hour delay.
Ishy, someone who I have no doubt tells the truth given his posting history (apart from one incident anyway), made a thread. posted on it a while ago. He said Hennessy turned down an offer from Sky Sports. Hennessy also told the London Boxing Hour that he was talking to '3 TV companies' before he signed with Primetime.

Don't believe me if you don't want to- I honestly don't give a ****. I know I'm not lying. As for your assertion that Hatton was given a promotional deal simply for 'being in with them', how come Haye hasn't got a TV deal with them then? I think it has more to do with how well Hatton has done in his short promotional career to date.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Sky would have promoted a fight between Kessler and Froch on PPV either- FFS, Hatton-Lazcano was on PPV and Haye's first fight made it to PPV! It all comes down to one thing: Sky know how to promote fights and also know the market value of what they are dealt.

For Hennessy to have been talking to '3 companies' and then end up with a channel no-one has even heard of sums the whole situation up, IMO.
Losfer_Words is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 08:53 AM   #49
TheGiftedOne
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 444
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Losfer_Words View Post
Ishy, someone who I have no doubt tells the truth given his posting history (apart from one incident anyway), made a thread. posted on it a while ago. He said Hennessy turned down an offer from Sky Sports. Hennessy also told the London Boxing Hour that he was talking to '3 TV companies' before he signed with Primetime.

Don't believe me if you don't want to- I honestly don't give a ****. I know I'm not lying. As for your assertion that Hatton was given a promotional deal simply for 'being in with them', how come Haye hasn't got a TV deal with them then? I think it has more to do with how well Hatton has done in his short promotional career to date.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Sky would have promoted a fight between Kessler and Froch on PPV either- FFS, Hatton-Lazcano was on PPV and Haye's first fight made it to PPV! It all comes down to one thing: Sky know how to promote fights and also know the market value of what they are dealt.

For Hennessy to have been talking to '3 companies' and then end up with a channel no-one has even heard of sums the whole situation up, IMO.
So you're basing all this 'knowledge' you have on what Sky offered Mick from a poster on here....... that sums up this thread IMO. Do you know what the relative offers were fom the 3 TV companies? if not I struggle to see how you can make your bold predictins

Ricky Hatton has been a Sky fighter throughout his career, he's been their cashcow for years, Hayes latest fights were shown on Skys ex-main rivals Setanta. The situation is completely different.

Micks chose the path that he thinks will earn him and his fighter the most money and Mick is obviously in a better position than us to judge as he's privvy to the offers he's had
TheGiftedOne is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 09:04 AM   #50
ScouseLad
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,540
vCash: 75
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGiftedOne View Post
So you're basing all this 'knowledge' you have on what Sky offered Mick from a poster on here....... that sums up this thread IMO. Do you know what the relative offers were fom the 3 TV companies? if not I struggle to see how you can make your bold predictins

Ricky Hatton has been a Sky fighter throughout his career, he's been their cashcow for years, Hayes latest fights were shown on Skys ex-main rivals Setanta. The situation is completely different.

Micks chose the path that he thinks will earn him and his fighter the most money and Mick is obviously in a better position than us to judge as he's privvy to the offers he's had
You have to be part of Mick's team or his family, you're relentless!

Do you think its acceptable the Jermain Taylor fight wasnt even televised?
ScouseLad is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 10:15 AM   #51
TheGiftedOne
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 444
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScouseLad View Post
You have to be part of Mick's team or his family, you're relentless!

Do you think its acceptable the Jermain Taylor fight wasnt even televised?
I've got no affiliation to Micks team, I'm just a realistic boxing fan who's putting across a different point of view to the rest of the forum.


The Taylor fight was shown on a less than 24 hour delay on terrestrial TV (I just avoided the result for 12 hours), it wasn't ideal, but going on the current relationship between tv broadcasters and boxing it could've been alot worse. Sky were the only other broadcaster who could've shown the fight live and they either weren't interested or didn't put in a competitive price for the fight.

IMO, I think it goes without saying that Sky and Mick H don't have good relationship. Sky knew Micks back was against the wall due to it not being feasible for JT Vs CF to be shown live on ITV due to the start time and Sky tried to get the fight on the cheap (in fairness Sky will have budgets they have to keep to as well). Mick obviously decided he thought he could make more by not going with Sky.
TheGiftedOne is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 12:24 PM   #52
calumbo
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 570
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGiftedOne View Post
I've got no affiliation to Micks team, I'm just a realistic boxing fan who's putting across a different point of view to the rest of the forum.


The Taylor fight was shown on a less than 24 hour delay on terrestrial TV (I just avoided the result for 12 hours), it wasn't ideal, but going on the current relationship between tv broadcasters and boxing it could've been alot worse. Sky were the only other broadcaster who could've shown the fight live and they either weren't interested or didn't put in a competitive price for the fight.

IMO, I think it goes without saying that Sky and Mick H don't have good relationship. Sky knew Micks back was against the wall due to it not being feasible for JT Vs CF to be shown live on ITV due to the start time and Sky tried to get the fight on the cheap (in fairness Sky will have budgets they have to keep to as well). Mick obviously decided he thought he could make more by not going with Sky.
Its ok saying "Sky were not putting up a competitive offer" as an excuse but as other have said, had mick taken the short term cash(especially with the drama of the taylor fight) Froch would be huge.
Hatton was big because he was in exciting fights and had a big football fan base. I think a certain Mr Froch has both in abundance too.

Had mick taken the small sum from sky for that fight Froch would be as big as haye. Hed be on SBO, SSN, people would know who he was.
Short term loss for a long term gain.

Im sorry if youre mick or his friend but that was a **** business plan.

You can argue all you like about the lack of money being offered but when you look at Haye, coming from nowere to earn millions against Valuev without an official promoter. You have to wonder what the hell mick is doing!!
calumbo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 12:55 PM   #53
TheGiftedOne
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 444
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by calumbo View Post
Its ok saying "Sky were not putting up a competitive offer" as an excuse but as other have said, had mick taken the short term cash(especially with the drama of the taylor fight) Froch would be huge.
Hatton was big because he was in exciting fights and had a big football fan base. I think a certain Mr Froch has both in abundance too.

Had mick taken the small sum from sky for that fight Froch would be as big as haye. Hed be on SBO, SSN, people would know who he was.
Short term loss for a long term gain.
I don't know where to start with this crock of ****e, but here goes....

... so you reckon if Mick had give the Taylor/Froch fight to Sky it would have got more viewing figures than when it was on ITV1??? Look into viewing figures

If Mick had have give Froch/Taylor to Sky, they still wouldn't have guarenteed future slots on SBO IMO

Quote:
Originally Posted by calumbo View Post
Im sorry if youre mick or his friend but that was a **** business plan.

You can argue all you like about the lack of money being offered but when you look at Haye, coming from nowere to earn millions against Valuev without an official promoter. You have to wonder what the hell mick is doing!!
No need to apologise, as I've repeatedly said I've got fcuk all to do with BIG Mick or Froch for that matter. I've never met either bloke and I probably never will

I don't see why you're using Haye as a stick to beat Froch with. Haye's done extremely well, the way he publicised the Valuev fight was a thing of beauty. Haye is the exception rather than the rule. Haye's also in the flagship division and he was fighting a 7 foot freak, it's a promotional and TV broadcasters dream. Froch is fighting Kessler who whilst he is an excellent fighter, he's coming off a loss where he looked poor and aged and lost his title. IMO - It's the equivalent of critisicing Frazier for not being as good as Ali
TheGiftedOne is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 01:19 PM   #54
Bodysnatcher
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,156
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

edit

Last edited by Bodysnatcher; 02-15-2013 at 04:13 PM.
Bodysnatcher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 01:25 PM   #55
ishy
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 22,619
vCash: 500
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

This is just my opinion but I think ITV were put off by the Froch-Pascal viewing figures. It was on at primetime on a Saturday night but it got just over a million viewers. That's pretty ****ty for terrestrial telly.

I think ITV and Hennessy both ****ed up the promotion for Froch-Pascal. People I know didn't even know that there was going to be a world title fight on ITV1 at a reasonable time!!
ishy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 01:44 PM   #56
Beeston Brawler
Comical Ali-egedly
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: trying to increase my overdraft....
Posts: 23,329
vCash: 75
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

If Hennessy had given Froch/Taylor to Sky, the Dirrell fight would DEFINITELY have been PPV.

And why not?

It was a great fight, with a dramatic ending.... would certainly have given Froch a very big profile. Despite the fact that ITV would have given more viewers, Sky are brilliant at promoting, he'd have been a star.

As it was, the Dirrell fight went on a brand new PPV channel with **** poor coverage, with no viewing figures announced. By the sounds of it, most people bought the online stream, but it was so **** they ended up finding an illegal one which was much better quality..... whilst many prospective TV viewers were unable to buy because they have Virgin.

Hardly a brilliant business decision, that.

He needs to wake up and smell the coffee. He is WAY out of his depth and needs to give it up and do something else, before he makes an even bigger tit out of himself. Has he actually successfully promoted anyone - or did he just get lucky with Froch?
Beeston Brawler is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 03:00 PM   #57
calumbo
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 570
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeston Brawler View Post
If Hennessy had given Froch/Taylor to Sky, the Dirrell fight would DEFINITELY have been PPV.

And why not?

It was a great fight, with a dramatic ending.... would certainly have given Froch a very big profile. Despite the fact that ITV would have given more viewers, Sky are brilliant at promoting, he'd have been a star.

As it was, the Dirrell fight went on a brand new PPV channel with **** poor coverage, with no viewing figures announced. By the sounds of it, most people bought the online stream, but it was so **** they ended up finding an illegal one which was much better quality..... whilst many prospective TV viewers were unable to buy because they have Virgin.

Hardly a brilliant business decision, that.

He needs to wake up and smell the coffee. He is WAY out of his depth and needs to give it up and do something else, before he makes an even bigger tit out of himself. Has he actually successfully promoted anyone - or did he just get lucky with Froch?


Couldnt have said it better myself..well i did try!
calumbo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 03:11 PM   #58
hagman1989
the boxing site , try it
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: england
Posts: 4,143
vCash: 75
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

look primetime isnt ideal but for 6 quid its ok

the only problem is they dont have a virgin media or freeview channel so they can only target sky viewers

also if paying 6 quid for not massive but till very good fights is going to be the norm it will be difficult to make money
hagman1989 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2010, 03:39 PM   #59
DON1
ICEMAN
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,518
vCash: 1000
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Its the 'ony; option because thats all he can deliver. **** Promotor

Golden Boy, ****** or even Maloney would have Froch on mainstream TV or Sky. Even when Calzaghe was fighting Tomato Cans that **** was on TV!
DON1 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2010, 04:11 AM   #60
The Blackout
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Leeds
Posts: 887
vCash: 350
Default Re: 'Froch's promoter says pay-per-view TV is only option'

Quote:
Originally Posted by DON1 View Post
Its the 'ony; option because thats all he can deliver. **** Promotor

Golden Boy, ****** or even Maloney would have Froch on mainstream TV or Sky. Even when Calzaghe was fighting Tomato Cans that **** was on TV!

Exactly.

Name me another British fighter that wouldnt be on tv if he was fighting Jermain Taylor to defend his WORLD TITLE!

Hennessey is a joke. Froch is a world champion, nobody outside of boxing has a clue who he is and his mega fights in the super 6 are being shown on some budget PPV channel that nobody's heard of.

I just don't believe that Sky were unwilling to show Froch v Taylor. They could have easily built that fight up to generate enough interest to get decent figures. With what happened in the fight and the spectacular finish, Froch would be a household name now and all his super 6 fights would be on Sky.

The only thing i can think of is that Hennessey maybe thought Froch would lose against Taylor, so he took the best offer available, at the time, if the worst happened?
The Blackout is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015