luke campbell to matchroom

you have 'heard' wrong

 

He's got a Gold medal from the olymic games your move

 

hel suprise a few ppl class boxer hit but dont get hit is the name of the game and the most decorated amatuer boxer in gb history 'he doesnt have a tough bone in his body' dont be a clown

 

:huh

Froch vs Mack
The Christmas ******* card
Prizefighter

Haye vs Chisora
Burns vs Mitchell
Mag 7 (VVarren's last PPV)

 

Matchroom have an exclusive boxing deal with Sky and a much wider deal that covers a huge amount of content. (Darts, fishing, snooker, poker etc.) The odd event or show that loses money would be viewed as a cost of doing business and maintaining that deal. If they're losing money here, it's more than likely in the knowledge that they're getting it back somewhere else. Sky clearly are going to demand the odd major event.

I'm not the Hearn's biggest fan, but they didn't get to where they are by being idiots.

 

People have drawn lines when it comes to Eddie and Frank, it seems. Unwilling to see a balanced view. The only reason this fight is on ppv is because Hearn has overpaid. Froch is barely a name in the UK.

As a fan, you should want ppv to fail.

 

Then Eddie shouldn't complain about not making much profit. I also doubt that Sky is looking to put its biggest events away from its general viewership.

I thought St Eddie was trying to grow the sport? This seems a contradictory approach. If this was the cost of doing business, then why not speculate the accumulate?

 

The financial reality is that certain fights cannot/will not happen without PPV & the income it generates. If no PPV= no big fights for British fighters & fans then that cant be a good thing.

Nobody wants to see the return of **** PPV fights like Khan-Salita but if its the only way to bring a big star to the UK for a major fight then I'll support it with my £15.

 

Eddie trying to grow the sport? Eddie's trying to make money. Sometimes the two go hand in hand, sometimes they don't, but it will always be profit first.

On Sky not wanting to put it's biggest events away from customers... that ones a bit more difficult. Only thing I can think is they know time's up on Froch. He's got 1 or 2 more big nights left in him and his stock isn't going to get dramatically bigger. Cash in now. Someone like Brook would get treated differently as he's so much younger. You have time to build up his following and cash in over a longer period. Sky have also had some changes at senior management level since the Matchroom deal was done - it's not inconceivable that they're softened their attitude to PPV.

 

I might be wrong but wasn't franks last ppv groves-degale which had no credibility as a ppv event

 

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.

I'm fine with ppv like Hatton's mayweather and Manny fights. Those are huge and well worth it. This is a rematch with very little on the line where one if the fighters has been looking very faded.

 

That was a farce and had no place on ppv. But it got a lot more media attention than Froch/Kessler II is...

 

yes:good

 

personally felt that Campbell would have been more suited to the WSB.

 

Fair enough but I think you're selling this fight a little short, Froch-Kessler 1 was by far the best fight of the super6. What the rematch lacks in significance it makes up for in terms of entertainment.

Froch has a belt & Kessler has a paper one, Mikkel is a little faded but this fight will almost certainly be an entertaining, competitive & all action affair between 2 very good, evenly matched world class operators. The winner will probably get another fight with Ward.