Al Haymon has taken over. Completely

Let's do. Before that, though, what's the benchmark for a "good" rating in your opinion?

What was the top boxing rating on HBO last year? The very best boxing rating?

What about Showtime? What was Showtime's HIGHEST rated boxing show last year?

What's a good boxing PPV rating for anyone who is not Floyd Mayweather? 700,000 homes?

Now what would be a "good" rating in your mind for a Saturday night boxing telecast on NBC featuring Keith Thurman in the main event ...

Since yesterday you seemed to doubt the viewership would even get in the millions and you said NBC didn't care how many people watch ... and you said boxing was just a niche sport and this was going to be a like a cable access show... and today you said the target audience wouldn't stay home to watch it?

You're the biggest pessimist regarding this whole deal. What would be good in your mind?

Would 800,000 homes be "good" for NBC's Saturday night show?

 

A manager playing the role of promoter is illegal in the USA No? How does this fit with muhammad Ali act?

 

Reptillian.

 

So today you expect it get three to four million viewers ... and yesterday you didn't think we should use the word million when it came to viewers?

I see you're weakening.

But I agree.

I expect it will get between three and four million viewers.

Any more than that, Haymon's going to be running the entire sport for years to come.

If the numbers are around 1 million, he'll be broke by the end of the year.

 

He's using other promoters.

I think he's avoiding the manager or promoter tags because the title he's angling for is "Commissioner of Boxing."

 

Here we go.

So now it's got to be one of the top rated shows on television to be success?

It can't just TRIPLE THE CURRENT BOXING viewership?

FREE BOXING ON TV + TRIPLE THE AVERAGE BOXING VIEWERS = GOOD FOR BOXING.

Quit complaining already.

 

The average NFL game took 60 years on network television to get the ratings it gets.

Don't be an idiot. The NFL is the number-one sport in the nation BY FAR.

Boxing hasn't been on NBC prime time since the Larry Holmes-Carl Williams fight 30 years ago.

Give it a couple months before you write it off.

Jesus Christ.

atsch:roll:

Do you even live in the U.S.? I get the feeling I'm talking to a Canadian.

 

Big Al and TMT are an unstoppable force.

 

Haymon hasn't taken over anything. He has just put his collection of mediocrity on free tv in the hope it makes money, which is questionable.

 

On HBO the roof is about 7 or 8 million. On NBC or the majors it's usually around 20 million. But that's for really hot shows like American Idol or House. Haymon couldn't buy the timespots they put those shows on in. He's probably bought one of the ones where they run an informercial or sell gold coins in the commercials. 2-4 million would probably be good ratings there, which I think is what the UFC gets on Fox. I don't know what the other mma shows get but it's less than that. On Spike the UFC used to get only a couple of hundred thousand viewers, but that was considered good for Spike, the same as ESPN get's between 400-700k viewers for FNF.

My expectation is that on CBS or NBC the shows will pull between 1.3-4 million viewers and on the secondary channels they'll pull 500-800k viewers, depending on time slots and lead ins.

Probably a tad above 2 million, maybe 3.

Probably about the same. Maybe, a little less.

About 300k. That's what Floyd and Manny did before they fought De La Hoya. That's also about what Marquez draws too.

Keith Thurman might be a name to fans but the casuals don't know him yet. His presence shouldn't effect things one way or another.

NBC will draw a million viewers if people just forget to turn their televisions off. I'm expecting a couple of million for this one like back when Ray Mancini, Livingstone Bramble, Bobby Czyz, Jorge Paez, or heavyweight contenders used to fight. No way it breaks ten million without the stars though.

That's probably the break even point for Haymon.

 

Ummmmmm HBO has Kovalev, GGG, Wladimir, Pacqioua, Cotto, Canelo, Lomachenko, Crawford, Algeri, Provodinikov, Rios, Sanchez Ramirez, Bradley, and Ward.
Not counting their non-star fighters who are consistently taking big fights with the exception of Ward.
While Ward is not an altogether exciting fighter, he's still a p4p elite, and so long as he gets busy, he could still be the centerpiece of an HBO SMW/LHW type tournament which could actually include Bute, Froch, BHop, Kessler, Sanchez Ramirez, Ward, Chavez Jr, Kovalev and a few others not on long term deals with CBS/Show.

Let's not forget that Haymon has damned near bankrupted Showtime by not making quality fights, whereas HBO has taken the Eastern Euro approach and shown the world where the TRUEST HIGHEST quality fighters are at.thumbsupdeal:deal

 

I knew it. :happy (I really like Canadians, by the way, I was in Victoria and Vancouver last year) I also get the feeling you're just winging all this because you don't remember boxing on network TV 30 years ago.

And that's fine, too.

It's difficult for people who grew up with something to let it go.

There are a lot of reasons why boxing isn't on network television. It was a long, slow fade. It began when the WBC and WBA replaced Ring as the source for ratings. And Mancini killing Kim, and Howard Cosell - the voice of boxing in States - calling for its abolition after the Holmes-Cobb fight. It had to do with Ali - the face of boxing - becoming essentially a walking corpse. And people being unable to name who the champ was because there were three and then four champs in each division. It had to do with women's sports (particularly figure skating) taking over and in some cases dominating the U.S. landscape in the early 90s. One thing snowballed on the other.

But take it from someone who grew up watching boxing on network television ... it was better then than it is now with a paltry 700,000 viewers on a "good" night and ridiculous PPVs.

What's going to be really interesting in this network launch is the number of female viewers.

Boxing is really big right now with women - particularly women who box as part of their workout routines. If you go on Twitter, half the people talking about boxing on fight nights are young women.

I think Haymon's doing the right thing by bringing back some of the announcers who were regulars when boxing was on the networks. (That appeals to people like me.) I think he's doing the right thing by working with both CBS and NBC and the stations they own. He's not putting all his chips on one channel. I think he's doing the right thing showcasing fighters to a wider audience who can view for free.

I was against him forming a league with its own champs, but what is there about the WBC, WBA, IBF or WBO to defend? They are worthless. All worthless.

Arum gave up on the U.S. market. De La Hoya thinks the U.S. borders run from California to Nevada, and if you aren't Mexican you don't have a future in the sport.

Don King thinks it's 1986.

I'm rooting for Haymon to succeed. This nonsense going on now is unbearable.

With that, I've got to go. See you when the ratings come out.

 

lol "these fights have to do 15 million viewers or they're a bust" :rofl

These fights can easily get 3 million viewers and I expect Guerrero/Thurman with Adrien Broner/Molina to at least do what Cunningham/Adamek did.

If it reaches that mark, it's a huge success. I hope they give a good backstory on each fighter so that new viewers can gain a connection with the fighters. Fans can enjoy a sport or a match much better when they have a connection to a fighter/team/player etc

 

I've worked in the communication industry for 27 years. I'm well aware of all things media.

But thanks for reading up on it.

 

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/20...natural-new-girl-the-mindy-project-up/364405/

The Mindy Project, Parks & Rec, and New Girl all get low ratings but remain on the air because of the audience they reach.

You don't know what you're talking about. But I've picked that up in the last 24 hours.