there is already another thread on this subject anyway I think it is worthy of PPV good fight, should be good purses for the boxers, needs to be PPV IMO. we will have to pay the extra if we want the big / mega fights, I think it is worth it, I will be getting it
Have you clicked on a forum about Mayweather Canelo by mistake, lol 20 million each wont get 10% of that between them i'd say Froch around 1m and groves a little less then half that, 20m lol Hatton didnt earn that in his day and his fights where about 3 times as big then Froch fights
If Groves beat Stieglitz and defended the title a few times, i could justify PPV, but as it stands he just isn't a PPV fighter. If the "powers that be" insist on this being PPV then it will need one hell of a undercard; Brook v Khan Bellew v Stevenson (etc)
Would have to disagree their Billy, if this is the standard for Box office then surely Burns vs Mitchell should have been, the fight was between to fighters of similar quality to Froch vs Groves, Nope the only fights i would pay PPV for is Froch vs Ward/ Golovkin, Haye/ Fury or Khan/ Mayweather
Fury-Haye will out sell it guaranteed. More people know Fury than Groves and more know Haye than Froch. Also see above.
This is borderline PPV in my opinion. How many PPVs can Eddie get away with a year? On current form around six it seems.
Brook and Khan isa PPV on its own. If Bellew is on it against Stevenson I'd pay the £15 happily. Tbh even if its not I'm looking forward to it and would probably pay for it.
If Brook v Khan ever comes into fruition, it should never be a PPV fight. Also, neither is any fight that involves Carl Froch, a PPV fight, unless he’s fighting Ward/Golovkin/Chavez Jr in the U.K. Khan is still rebuilding from his devastating loss to Garcia. As for, Brook, he hasn’t even fought anyone of note, with it looking likely that his next ‘big’ opponent is Senchenko, it’s blatantly obvious he won’t be stepping up anytime soon in the near future.