"Sky blocking AJ by paying him more" - Eddie Hearn

Eddie Hearn should take a look at himself in the mirror.

 

“Eddie Hearns says…”

 

Eddie has always preached that he works for the fighters and not the other way around and his job is to get biggest and best deal for his client. So what's the difference with this fight broadcast deal?

What are Sky doing wrong apart from offering the most money to the fighters which should be in line with Eddie's objectives?

 

Sounds like sour grapes

 

brilliant.

Joshua will be delighted the fight is on Sky.

 

Sky might lose money on the fight, but given the way DAZN were chucking money about in the US he’s not really in a position to talk. He left Sky with nothing and now they’re showing everyone that they’re still the biggest broadcaster, he needs to suck it up and offer a product that can compete.

 

very strange statement of the Eddie Hearn.
i have memory of not so long times ago Eddie Hearn says he is to quit before he become the bitter old man of boxing. but it look like it too late now!

 

What am I not grasping here?

 

They aren’t paying him more. They are on a flat fee.

what has happened is Sky have outbid DAZN by £6m which means they need to sell 1.8m buys at £20 or 1.4m at £25. This fight does circa 900k-1.1m buys which mean Sky are willing to lose £5/6m on this event just for the sake of having it.

I get both sides in that Skynare going out of their way to lose massive money for a fight with no Upside for them given the fighter has left their platform.

whilst now Eubank who is there biggest name fight has been removed from their platform they have been left with poor content for atleast the next 6 months bar Marshall vs shields which they are also doing money on and hopefully a taylor vs caterall rematch. They have very limited content on their platform and could be looking very low rate.

However from matchrooms point of view Sky have literally just thrown £5/6m down the drain just to have a fight on their platform that they no longer have association with. Surely that £5m would have been better spent making big fights for their guys. Paying a champ for riakporhe, keeping Eubank or bringing in US guys for their roster.

 

Tell me you work for Matchroom without telling me you work for Matchroom.

 

Or tell you as it is. Sky digging it out as they have no content of value. Whilst putting it ok Hearn for big money and Hearn not being happy with it.

the big question for me is why Sky couldn’t throw this kind of money around when they had the Matchroom deal. They got too comfortable but in fairness with the budget they have spent this year. They could have got some really decent fights 2/3 years ago like BJS vs Eubank for example yet it was like getting blood out of a stone just to get smith vs Ryder on non PPV as Sky didn’t want to fund it.

 

You talk a lot of sense here. Do you think Sky just created a sort of artificial monopoly during the peak Matchroom partnership, and given the lack of serious competition, didn't want to inflate boxers' pay for the sake of it? Hearn seemed obsessed with boxers earning fortunes but forgot that someone has to pick up the tab - and Sky didn't have to play ball.

But then, like in any industry, if you've got new competition and want to stay in the market, you have to spend; Matchroom are presumably upping their spending (whilst rationing the shows a little bit) and Sky will have to outbid them to stay in the game...

 

Is a half upside that dazn’s cash cow gets knocked out on sky and sent back to dazn and matchroom to fight dross like war chisora