March 9th Wembley card only does 63,000 viwers

It was an unusual card and Sky was unlikely to promote it when it was so poor. Jeez, I'm defending Eddie...

Anyway, this isn't rocket scientist. Giving promoters a set amount of dates to fill is a terrible business model. Giving fighters guaranteed dates is an even worse one. It burned HBO several times over the years and it seems Sky, for all its business acumen, has made the same mistake.

As soon as it was two weeks out and the main event wasn't of a significant standard, Sky should have been able to pull the plug. It's just not good enough for any promoter to do that.

 

:deal what Al Haymon does over in the US with his fighters getting paid well just to beat a bunch of average fighters on network tv, Eddie will be doing similarly on Sky Sports with his stable.

 

As you've said yourself though, Rob, boxing is not like any other sport. With football, you've got a single agency to deal with when negotiating the TV rights and you know that the best teams will face each other throughout the season. You can invest on that basis.

This isn't a direct criticism of Eddie either, I think he tried his best to put a good card on. But Sky should have been able to turn it down at that stage. Why pay to put on substandard product that no one will watch? Why damage the brand to the few people that do? It was a lousy card.

It's great for promoters to know they've got a platform for their fighters, but with that needs to come a higher standard of fights to justify the dates. If Sky wants to grow the sport and make it a viable part of its output, then it needs to have a tougher approach.

I still think the mid-2000s Showbox approach was the best: great fights, no rights. They got great cards, solid ratings and didn't spend a fortune. And if a fighter didn't perform? They cut them. We're seeing that same mentality from Hershman now he's at HBO and GBP have absconded because he was allegedly refusing to pay what they wanted on the terms they demanded.

I hope not. That would be a shame when he's got the deal if it fails. Eddie doing well on Sky could open the door to other promoters coming back in on the same model. But I fully believe Sky should be vetting the cards as they're made.

 

All true, but then sky shouldn't have shown the card, imo. It was below the standard it claims to want.

That's a worrying article. One party claims he needs to go through a third party to get on Sky, the other claims he doesn't. Not healthy.

Also, **** for Hobson

 

You have stated that boxing doesnt work on terrestial TV and best place is Sky because they can provide a PPV platform.:good

 

Glad you now agree.
And as you point out the 63k viewers for the Wembley card was indeed **** poor, and that example shows the Sky platform isnt the panacea that you regularly trumpet.:good

 

That's not good

 

Just saw Jon-Lewis Dickinson vs. Dave Dolan only did 3,000. It deserved more imo.