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 01-28-2013, 04:29 PM   #76
AndyPaterson
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 475
vCash: 625
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMo View Post
Definately, Campbell would be massive at the weight & facing a good level of opposition in a near-professional environment.

As a gold medalist he can probably earn more elsewhere though.
true but at least with WSB he will had a monthly wage with medical insurance.
AndyPaterson is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-28-2013, 04:30 PM   #77
ashedward
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Devon
Posts: 1,981
vCash: 1000
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
How so?

We're talking bout a fight that was undoubtedly a PPV-calibre battle. Two guys, undefeated, in their primes, in and around the same weight. Number one in each of their respective divisions, with one of them the best fighter in the world. Both men were established PPV sellers.

Froch/Kessler II is none of those things. The only reason it's PPV is because that's the only way Eddie can afford to get Kessler over. If Froch was going back to Denmark, do you think this would be on Sky PPV?
If ppv gets Froch home advantage then so be it.I would of gone to Denmark to watch this fight because i genuinly believe it`s a great fight with two top 15 pound for pound fighters who put on a war last time and will do so again,however you`re opinon is that it`s not a meaningful fight with one of the fighters near shot and that it`s not worth 15 ,we`re never going to find common ground on this.

Hearn should make the undercard as stacked as possible through,but no one should have any complaints about the main event,because i seriously doubt there will a better fight in the uk this year.
ashedward is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 04:49 PM   #78
dftaylor
Writer, fanatic
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,432
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashedward View Post
If ppv gets Froch home advantage then so be it.I would of gone to Denmark to watch this fight because i genuinly believe it`s a great fight with two top 15 pound for pound fighters who put on a war last time and will do so again,however you`re opinon is that it`s not a meaningful fight with one of the fighters near shot and that it`s not worth 15 ,we`re never going to find common ground on this.

Hearn should make the undercard as stacked as possible through,but no one should have any complaints about the main event,because i seriously doubt there will a better fight in the uk this year.
I do think it's a good fight, just not PPV worthy. If the dates and venue work out, I'll be going in person. Just because I don't think it's an important or especially meaningful fight doesn't mean it won't be fun.

Personally, I don't want to subsidise Froch or any fighter's ego. But my reasons why this isn't PPV are well-established. When you need PPV to pay the bills rather than turn extra profit, your fight doesn't belong on PPV.
dftaylor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 05:35 PM   #79
ashedward
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Devon
Posts: 1,981
vCash: 1000
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Fair enough,I disagree but i understand where you're coming from
ashedward is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2013, 09:20 PM   #80
USA Rob
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,808
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
I don't think that's entirely right. Kessler-Froch II could have been made in Denmark. It's because Eddie and Carl want it over here that it's on ppv.
you keep saying this and it makes no sense.

In terms of TV revenue, the fight being in the UK or in Denmark makes literally no difference. If anything its easier for international broadcasters such as HBO to get a team over to London and therefore there more inclined to purchase the fight. Whether the fight was in the UK or Denmark, it would be PPV in the UK, Denmark.

In terms of the venue, and sponsorship, the fight will make significantly more money in the UK. Bigger venue, higher ticket prices, more corporate opportunities, and more revenue from sponsors.

You have never had a big name come to Denmark to face Mikkel Kessler. You have had big names come to the UK to face Carl Froch.

Theres allot of things we don't really know about firstly, how the deal for the fight works, and secondly how many PPV buys a fight needs to generate before it makes more than Sky would have paid for Froch vs Kessler on regular Sky. You made up a figure of 3 based on nothing and then made up how you beleive a contract works based on nothing. So excuse me if I don't take you seriosly when you discuss the financial side of things when it comes to this fight.

Like I said, Hearn is smart, a good promoter and he is good at making money. I can't see him making a big fight that wouldn't turn a profit. Either way it doesn't matter to us. Most of the fans i see on here are happy to pay 15 to watch this fight.

Also you can't get pissed of at Hearn for making a PPV, and then defend Wazza for tucking his fights away on Box Nation.
USA Rob is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 01:38 AM   #81
BUSTER
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 643
vCash: 75
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGuinty View Post
Have you never seen a boxer that looks like he's afraid to get hit? His style is amateur boxing, he's too wimpy for the pro game.
your just making yourself sound even more stupid i know luke iv known him for around ten years i was in sheffiels when he beat maguire and trust me the kids tough enough to be pro
BUSTER is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 02:15 AM   #82
Lilo
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Hong Kong via Sunderland
Posts: 3,498
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack View Post
I'm not suggesting that Hearn has never made mistakes or that Frank has never done anything right. That'd be absurd. However, at this stage, Hearn is the one who is delivering a better product and he rightly gets praised for it. Frank is delivering far more 'poor' shows and mismatches, not to mention many other things, so the criticism he gets is deserved.

I'm not sure why you mentioned the Christmas Cr*cker show though. That was a great card on paper, which only got spoiled because of injuries. You can't fault Hearn for that.

Haye/Chisora and Burns/Mitchell both had terrible undercards. Burns/Mitchell only had one 10 rounder on the undercard and no other championship fights, which says a lot. Frank's last PPV on Sky was DeGale/Groves, which was another card which revolved around a good main event and nothing else.

The Magnificent Seven show was very good though. It's just a pity we have to go back to 2010 to cherry pick good Frank cards.
I'm playing devil's advocate to a degree here as it seems to be an Eddie love-in most of the time. Frank gets a very raw deal. I feel there's not much between them, their rivalry is healthy to an extent but Frank delivers bigger fights and Eddie has to respond with a slightly better undercard.

Recent PPVs:

Eddie - Khan/McCloskey & Haye/Harrison are the only two he's been involved in, I believe. (Does he get a free pass for these? Would Frank get a free pass if he'd been involved in the two shittest PPVs of the last few years?)

Frank - Magnificent 7 & Groves/Degale, Cleverly/Braehmer were his last two I believe.

'Stacked cards' - What exactly are these great undercards that Eddie has put on? Look at the Burns/Vasquez bill, Chisora will likely be fourth from top! Look at Frank's Xmas bill; BJS was scheduled to be 3rd top. He does put good undercards on but the majority is local ticketsellers which is precisely what Hearn does.

Again the reason why Hearn's are better but certainly not "great" is because he doesn't make as many top notch main events as Frank does. Froch's undercards have been poor because he doesn't need to stack the undercard.

To me they are two peas in a pod.
Lilo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 02:53 AM   #83
dftaylor
Writer, fanatic
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,432
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by USA Rob View Post
Theres allot of things we don't really know about firstly, how the deal for the fight works, and secondly how many PPV buys a fight needs to generate before it makes more than Sky would have paid for Froch vs Kessler on regular Sky. You made up a figure of 3 based on nothing and then made up how you beleive a contract works based on nothing. So excuse me if I don't take you seriosly when you discuss the financial side of things when it comes to this fight.
A) I said it was an estimate based on what Haye got for the Valuev fight, which was considered a high deal
B) I asked a colleague who used to work in Sky's marketing department
C) My life is in tatters knowing you don't take me seriously
D) Revenue splits have long been the way I described in boxing. Co-promotion does NOT mean the profits are being split 50-50
E) Remind me what you do for a living that gives you any expertise in this field?
dftaylor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 02:55 AM   #84
dftaylor
Writer, fanatic
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,432
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilo View Post
I'm playing devil's advocate to a degree here as it seems to be an Eddie love-in most of the time. Frank gets a very raw deal. I feel there's not much between them, their rivalry is healthy to an extent but Frank delivers bigger fights and Eddie has to respond with a slightly better undercard.

Recent PPVs:

Eddie - Khan/McCloskey & Haye/Harrison are the only two he's been involved in, I believe. (Does he get a free pass for these? Would Frank get a free pass if he'd been involved in the two shittest PPVs of the last few years?)

Frank - Magnificent 7 & Groves/Degale, Cleverly/Braehmer were his last two I believe.

'Stacked cards' - What exactly are these great undercards that Eddie has put on? Look at the Burns/Vasquez bill, Chisora will likely be fourth from top! Look at Frank's Xmas bill; BJS was scheduled to be 3rd top. He does put good undercards on but the majority is local ticketsellers which is precisely what Hearn does.

Again the reason why Hearn's are better but certainly not "great" is because he doesn't make as many top notch main events as Frank does. Froch's undercards have been poor because he doesn't need to stack the undercard.

To me they are two peas in a pod.
I'm with you, Lilo. And, for the record, the Mag7 card is better than ANYTHING Eddie has put on so far.
dftaylor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 03:32 AM   #85
USA Rob
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,808
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilo View Post
I'm playing devil's advocate to a degree here as it seems to be an Eddie love-in most of the time. Frank gets a very raw deal. I feel there's not much between them, their rivalry is healthy to an extent but Frank delivers bigger fights and Eddie has to respond with a slightly better undercard.

Recent PPVs:

Eddie - Khan/McCloskey & Haye/Harrison are the only two he's been involved in, I believe. (Does he get a free pass for these? Would Frank get a free pass if he'd been involved in the two shittest PPVs of the last few years?)

Frank - Magnificent 7 & Groves/Degale, Cleverly/Braehmer were his last two I believe.

'Stacked cards' - What exactly are these great undercards that Eddie has put on? Look at the Burns/Vasquez bill, Chisora will likely be fourth from top! Look at Frank's Xmas bill; BJS was scheduled to be 3rd top. He does put good undercards on but the majority is local ticketsellers which is precisely what Hearn does.

Again the reason why Hearn's are better but certainly not "great" is because he doesn't make as many top notch main events as Frank does. Froch's undercards have been poor because he doesn't need to stack the undercard.

To me they are two peas in a pod.
Hearn had nothing to do with the Promotions or undercards for Haye vs Harrison & Khan vs McCloskey.

The Froch vs Bute undercard was a very good for me.
USA Rob is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 03:33 AM   #86
USA Rob
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,808
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
I'm with you, Lilo. And, for the record, the Mag7 card is better than ANYTHING Eddie has put on so far.
Did you think the Mag 7 was PPV worthy?
USA Rob is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 03:48 AM   #87
icemax
Indian Red
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 13,619
vCash: 664
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by USA Rob View Post
The Froch vs Bute undercard was a very good for me.
You have exceptionally low standards
icemax is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 03:55 AM   #88
USA Rob
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,808
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
A) I said it was an estimate based on what Haye got for the Valuev fight, which was considered a high deal
B) I asked a colleague who used to work in Sky's marketing department
C) My life is in tatters knowing you don't take me seriously
D) Revenue splits have long been the way I described in boxing. Co-promotion does NOT mean the profits are being split 50-50
E) Remind me what you do for a living that gives you any expertise in this field?
you go from guessing...

Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
You're also working on the basis that Hearn is keeping a large proportion of the PPV money. But he probably isn't. Running the production costs Sky a good chnk of money and it will make sure it recovers all of of that before Eddie makes anything. The split, at best, will be around the 5 per sale.

Even with your estimate of 250,000 buys, that's not going to cover all of the costs for Eddie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
I don't even need a source - that's how these deals work. Hearn wants the fight in the UK, he's paying a price for that. You need to show me where Kalle or Eddie confirms this is a 50-50 split.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
But he doesn't keep that much of the 15 - only around 3 or something, so I haven't a clue how he's going to put on a solid card without running serious losses - which is just so wrong-headed for a "ppv-quality" fight.
to having a concrete source. which your prepared to discuss on a boxing forum where you use your real name

Quote:
Originally Posted by dftaylor View Post
WOW! An unattributed person who emailed you sharing an opinion based on ****-all knowledge of me or TV. You, Rob, have often claimed insight into the sport and the TV world. What is it you do again?

I don't work for Sky or in the broadcast industry, but luckily for me one of its ex-marketing managers is in my team. So I asked her what the standard deal on a PPV is and that was the number she gave - she worked on the promotion of Hatton-Maywether, FYI. It's also based on what Haye reportedly took from the Valuev PPV. You said that was 50%, which knowing Sky's business model seems very high. That's fine - neither of us has a confirmed source - I'm open-minded on it.

Unfortunately for you, I actually do work in marketing and communications, alongside people who have worked for Sky, WB, Virgin, BBC, ITV, STV, the Mirror, the NOTW, etc. And I talk to them about this stuff all the time and constantly need to know what's going on - otherwise my consultancy in my role would be worthless.
who after years on this forum and 1000s of discussions, debates and arguments about PPV and the financial side of boxing, you never once cared to mention until now. forgive me if I smell bullshit.

If you wanna know what I do PM me.
USA Rob is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 03:57 AM   #89
USA Rob
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,808
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by icemax View Post
You have exceptionally low standards
for a regular Sky card it was very good. Hope vs Prozska rematch, Frampton vs the Mexican. Both were good fights.
USA Rob is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2013, 03:58 AM   #90
Lilo
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Hong Kong via Sunderland
Posts: 3,498
vCash: 500
Default Re: luke campbell to matchroom

Quote:
Originally Posted by USA Rob View Post
Hearn had nothing to do with the Promotions or undercards for Haye vs Harrison & Khan vs McCloskey.

The Froch vs Bute undercard was a very good for me.
Aside from supplying a main event fighter in each bout? Did he get a cut? Yeah he had nowt to do with it.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Come on Rob, its poor. The chief support was a mismatch featuring a prospect. No Proksa/Hope either, as I've said he didn't need a good undercard just as VVarren didn't for Haye/Chisora or Burns/Mitchell.
Lilo 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 01:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013