AJ vs Pulev £24.99

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by TBC-ASAP, Nov 20, 2020 at 4:40 AM.

  1. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    A fight in the UK that can be at a sensible time, with a fighter, who relatively to the era we live in, is as popular as any, is going to fight on PPV if the opposition is top 10 rated too.


    And I suggest that has applied for at least the last 15 years. (the fights you mention happened outside the UK), indeed if memory serves me right (Unforgiven chuckles), Lewis/RahmanI was brought by the Beeb when they dipped their toes back in the sport at the turn of the millennium.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2020 at 10:50 AM
  2. Safin

    Safin Active Member Full Member

    804
    1,116
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Aug 3, 2019
    Yes, the first Lewis Rahman was, the second was on Sky and was not pay-per-view.

    Ricky Hatton was as popular as anybody and he fought on Sky Sports against Kotsya Tszyu in Manchester and that was in 2005.

    Things have changed in the last decade and the prevalence of the pay-per-view model is increasing exponentially. As I've said, let the mugs pay for it, no problem.
     
    Wizbit1013 and TBooze like this.
  3. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    I would respect the fancy, without them you do not get the fights we all want to see.
     
  4. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    I have no evidence, but I would suggest that was down to a bit of geographical prejudice.


    SKY were still not convicted they could get big numbers watching a Northern fighter. This fight proved otherwise and thus Hatton became a PPV fighter.
     
  5. Jurgen

    Jurgen Pay Per Pudding Advisor Full Member

    8,032
    9,486
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Sep 30, 2016
    We all want to see Dubois v Joyce next week - the fights would happen without PPV.

    PPV Mugths suffering from Solvent Abuse - they are solvent and EH Day, Fighters and Broadcasters abusing their lack of intelligence.
     
  6. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    52,458
    12,092
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Nov 24, 2005
    I don't buy that argument.
    Boxers will fight without PPV if people didn't fall for that line.

    And, we don't "all want to see" Pulev challenge Joshua.
    It's a so-so fight at best.
    If it never happened it wouldn't represent a sorely missed 'fight that never was', it's a bog standard heavyweight title fight.
     
    Wizbit1013, Noel857 and Safin like this.
  7. channy

    channy F937 Full Member

    3,864
    3,198
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 2, 2015
    These so called PPV stars wouldn't last 2 minutes in the sport, fighting when fighting needed doing, and all they got was nobbins.
     
  8. Dancoyr

    Dancoyr New Member Full Member

    66
    44
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Sep 10, 2016
    Tbag reeled in by Hearn. Feel sorry for the ones spending 25 quid, this day and age no need to pay for it.
     
    Safin and Jurgen like this.
  9. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    But that is myth, that will not happen.


    You would need structural change in the way pro boxing financed.


    In the economic systems we live it in at the moment, I cannot think of any other way of funding the sport.


    What is the secret I am missing?
     
  10. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    Fair enough if you are not a fan, you do not need to buy it.


    I understand there other ways of getting it, but I am for my many flaws a fan, I do not resent paying my very small part in the fight happening. The same as when I would go to a local show a pay a lot more overall for less quality.
     
  11. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    Come on channy, we both know there were always fighters above the level of nobbins, even in the harshest of times, back in the day!
     
  12. TBooze

    TBooze Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,939
    1,212
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Oct 22, 2006
    You would need a new model to finance the sport without PPV, what is that?


    Just because you maybe able to manipulate fighters into signing contracts that undervalue them does not mean it is right.
     
  13. Jurgen

    Jurgen Pay Per Pudding Advisor Full Member

    8,032
    9,486
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Sep 30, 2016
    The worst economic recession in our history that we are about to enter should mean a huge reduction in boxing purses and rightly so.
     
  14. channy

    channy F937 Full Member

    3,864
    3,198
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 2, 2015
    I know, but todays lot think it is beneath them to accept less.

    Sometimes less is better is a lesson some should learn.
     
    TBooze and Jurgen like this.
  15. Safin

    Safin Active Member Full Member

    804
    1,116
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Aug 3, 2019
    Yes. I'm not trying to be snarky, but you are failing to understand the concept of supply and demand. You have it the wrong way around - it is demand (Matchroom FC) which has enabled "the way pro boxing is financed" and "the sport is funded" in the context of the Sky pay-per-view model. No "structural" change is at all necessary for boxers and corporations to be earning such handsome purses.

    Corporate partners, which largely enable the event to go ahead, would still exist and would perhaps offer even greater remuneration due to increased viewing figures without a pay-per-view barrier.

    Therefore, it is not the pay-per-view revenue which enables an event to exist. Boxers and their promotional outfits would simply have to live with less. Do you expect them to sit and home and do nothing until the demand for a pay-per-view market returns? Of course not, a considerable net profit would still exist - especially for the boxers.

    All you have to do is to look at sports which have experienced peaks and troughs regarding the financing. Of course, these are not the sports you are viewing on Sky Sports Main Event (or Sky Sports, generally). Look at 9 ball pool, for example. From 1999 until 2007 it was broadcast on Sky Sports (via Matchroom sports) and then Bazza ceased its affiliation, for whatever reason. The sport failed to secure a partner for a couple of years, clearly with bad management at the helm who failed to secure the future of the sport in advance. To cut a long story short, the winner of the WPA World 9 ball Pool Championship of 1999, Efren Reyes, won $100,000 US. The winner of the same event in 2019 earned $30,000 US.

    If all demand were to cease for the pay-per-view model, Hearn and Joshua could go on strike - see how that turns out. Other networks would innovate (in a sense) in order to capitalise upon the fragmentation in the market.
     
    TBooze likes this.