Wilder vs Fury hasnt been signed yet.

If you think fish-eyes is willing to risk his own potential cash-out fight vs AJ you are either:

a) stupid
b) a deluded Wilder "fan"
c) very stupid

 

Nope. Most think it would do 250k or more in ppv buys. At 50/50, that would ensure a purse close to 10 mil. AJ is offering 15. Then the winner has an established record on ppv, and it makes the us a legit option for an AJ fight. Since AJ will want to stay in the UK, it likely means he has negotiating leverage to get 50% of the purse. Plus the AJ fight would be even bigger than it would have been. Let's say it makes 60 mil, so the Wilder fury winner gets 30 of that. I.e. makes 40 mil overall in the two fights. So, by taking this fight, the winner stands to make over 2.5 times as much as he would just by accepting ajs current offer.

Granted, there is the possibility the Wilder fury fight pulls a Ward kovalKo and dissappoints. But the winner will still be alot better off than just accepting ajs current demand. And the loser go the mandatory route and get similar money to what AJ is offering anyway.

You may not want to think this fight will happen, for whatever reason. And maybe one of them chickens out for non financial reasons, they both have a suspect track record with that. But on strict finances, there is no question this fight makes sense.

 

I lean towards this fight not happening, but there's one factor which I've not seen mentioned which may tip the balance in its favour, Showtime....

Espinoza is at the helm of a very big operation which has a longstanding and sizeable investment in boxing. He will be very aware of the threat that DAZN and SIMILAR* projects could pose to that. If he's going to take them on the time to do it is before they reach critical mass. We've already seen one example of this in the '$50m doe' offer, because that would've potentially separated AJ from the DAZN project.

Maybe this fight is being bankrolled by Showtime to a sufficient level that the two fighters are willing to abandon their previous risk free approach. Maybe there's some guarantees for each man about future showtime dates etc as as well? Each of them are good talkers after all.





*before some of you start foaming at the mouth about how rubbish DAZN is, that's not really the point. They could be Amazon prime, Netflix etc. The point is a new entrant to the market with a disruptive funding model is a big threat to the status quo and it's logical to expect a reaction.

Note I also think you can see this response in certain decisions from WBC, Ring magazine, UFC et al. Must be my tinfoil hat.

 

How in the world would it benefit either guy to get word out there that they are going to fight and then not fight?

In what world is that good marketing to create an expectation and not meet it. It would hurt both guys to have people think it’s going to happen and then it not to come off.

That doesn’t mean it’s going to happen — they could reach an impasse on a rematch clause or many other things or Fury could get cut or break his hand or a number of other things that might result in it not going forward — but to think someone in a marketing meeting came up with the idea to float the fight to help their bargaining power ... in what way do they benefit at the bargaining table if they DON’T fight? Only if the fight takes place does either enhance his position.

 

Not necessarily, as long as there was a plausible reason for it not happening which didn't play negatively with their respective audiences. Training camp injury, clash over broadcasting / commercial rights which neither side had envisaged etc. Should that happen each could use the coverage, online discussion etc. as signals of their commercial pulling power whilst not having to go through with the fight itself.

 

Have you paid any attention to Wilders career, calling people out and not fighting them is pretty much what he does.

 

You nailed it.

Who wouldn't want to see this fight. It happening in Vegas at the end of the year is too much of a stretch. Fury not fit enough and coming off an undercard in Belfast, seems highly unlikely.

The loser potentially loses a shot at Joshua and that's where the money is. Although Fury might be happy to take a few mill before disappearing again.Hope I'm wrong but can't see the fight happening before Joshua in April.

 

It aint gonna happen ...All promotion for future fights..

 

He fought Ortiz ... rearranging the fight after Luis tested positive btw. His people made a $50M offer to fight AJ in the USA and AJ did not accept — his words — because he wanted to fight in the UK “for the fans.” Wilder agreed to fight AJ in the UK on two conditions — that the fight was next (as in this year) and that the rematch clause was equal (or no rematch clause if it wasn’t) ... and AJ/Hearn turned away rather than meet two reasonable conditions.

Earlier, he agreed to fight Dillian Whyte on Eddie’s offer of $4M with one demand — if he won, he got AJ next. Eddie’s exact words, captured on video: “Well, it doesn’t work that way.”

So whoever you think is ducking, explain to me how, as the thread-starting post suggests, it would be good marketing for Wilder and/or Fury to say they’re negotiating on a fight if they have no intention of fighting if the deal can be worked out ... in what world, and in what way, would that benefit either of them as a marketing ploy?

 

If that happens, there will be a hundred threads on forums like this saying they never intended to fight, that one or the other or both is ducking, not to mention countless YouTube videos and posts on Twitter.

How does that market either fighter? How does it make it possible for either to go to the table with AJ and say they demand better than a flat fee?

 

All such traffic will be used as evidence that their fighter is making a splash in the market place and remains 'relevant'. Of course they'll be counting all the pre-fight buzz as well, all the headlines, all the videos, threads like this etc. They know that all of this indicates the size of the potential market for an AJ fight and they'll argue that the fight is bigger than Hearn's predictions indicate and therefore his flat fee equates to an unfair share of the fight and a percentage share is required. I happen to think they'll be right on that too.

You think Hearn is furious every time someone starts a negative thread about him and his fighters? How do you think Mayweather made all those millions? By being liked? Much of the revenue in boxing comes from people that hate you (or the confected image of you) enough to pay to watch you and your fighters lose.

When AJ v Wilder is finally signed do you think that Hearn is going to treat the dollars from all those half-wits that have convinced themselves that, despite the hard evidence of his career to date, AJ is a 'paper champion' that's been 'shook' and trying to 'duck Wilder' all this time and that, despite the hard evidence of his career resume to date, Wilder's goal has been, in his own hypocritical words: "I want to make the sport about ‘who is the best’." any differently? No, he won't. They'll all be part of the fight revenue and if there are enough of them the fight will make a fortune because a UK fighter in the US will usually make more revenue from being hated as the 'other'.

 

Please provide source for Wilder agreeing to fight Whyte and not just a YouTube vid of him talking shite.

 

IF the fight goes ahead I can't wait to see fury box wilders head off for him