Are Sky Prisoners of their own PPV Policy?

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by gasman, Mar 4, 2012.


  1. gasman

    gasman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,159
    4
    May 16, 2009
    Well, this very noble non-PPV stance was all very well after toe-gate and Audley's pitiful capitulation against Haye. There was outrage from PPV punters who felt they were ripped off. But, the worst sin of all was the **** poor under cards for both and the lack of live action for our £15. Instead, Smith went for presentation and we got those awful big touchscreens that I wanted to come loose and fall onto the assembled team of pundits.

    To be fair to Sky they tried to make amends and vetoed Khan-McCloskey PPV due to the rubbish under card. But, they watched in horror as Khan jumped to Primetime who made a bundle from Khan-McCloskey PPV. As Khan's star continued to rise and the Floyd Mayweather fight started to get mooted, they reacted by handing Khan a lucrative short term deal. But, that has been derailed since Khan's unexpected loss to Peterson.

    Now, it appears Haye will come back and face Vitali in a mega fight. This fight will sell big numbers and after all of Sky's sharp criticism of Haye and toe gate, and the relentless moralising over the Haye-Chisora incident, they face the prospect of seeing a big PPV slipping through their fingers.

    So, pending the penalties that arise from the BBBoC, there is the possibility of Haye-Vitali and even Vlad-Chisora - ending up on either Primetime or Boxnation. The Haye-Vitali fight alone is worth millions to whatever channel snaps it up and the Vlad-Chisora fight would be a massive shot in the arm for Boxnation.

    Sky know this full well and hence we have non-stop propaganda about how deplorable the Chisora incident was and cheerleading for stealth action from the Board - not for the sake of British boxing, but for their own agenda. Will Sky eat crow and roll the red carpet to Haye and once again take their place on the PPV gravy train?
     
  2. WalletInspector

    WalletInspector Obsessed with Boxing banned

    21,194
    2
    Jan 1, 2010
    Not really. It's not like they were shouting from the roof tops that they had stopped. If they put the Haye fight on then 90% of the people buying wouldn't know they ever stopped.
     
  3. roe

    roe Guest

    lol. Sky's last boxing pay per view was 8 months ago. They haven't stopped doing anything.

    But I get the feeling Haye/Vitali would be on BoxNation.
     
  4. dftaylor

    dftaylor Writer, fanatic Full Member

    20,730
    1
    May 7, 2010
    I'm not sure Khan made a bundle. if he had been he'd have stayed off Sky, where he'll get a lower cut of the PPV revenue than he would on Primetime.
     
  5. achillesthegreat

    achillesthegreat FORTUNE FAVOURS THE BRAVE Full Member

    37,070
    29
    Jul 21, 2004
    Sky have stuck to their guns and good on them. Even if that means they lose a fight or two. Sky will stick around but PT and BN could be short lived. If you want the sport juggernaut behind you then you'll go with Sky because you can build a relationship there. Otherwise you can go from place to place trying to get a deal for each fight.

    If you look at the big picture then you are better off on Sky. Does Haye want to win the heavyweight tile and have less than 100,000 people see it.
     
  6. CamR21

    CamR21 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,948
    0
    May 10, 2011
    Haye doesn't deserve to be PPV
     
  7. griff

    griff WOODDDDDDDYA Full Member

    5,548
    0
    Dec 14, 2006
    If PPV isn't an option on Sky, I wonder if Haye will offer terrestrial TV networks a deal to show the fight with Vitali.
     
  8. achillesthegreat

    achillesthegreat FORTUNE FAVOURS THE BRAVE Full Member

    37,070
    29
    Jul 21, 2004
    Terrestrial would be wise to pick up the odd big fight. Terrestrial marketing alone would be enough to make it huge. However, terrestrial TV fail in understanding how to produce a boxing show. C5 are doing quite a good job though.
     
  9. I Shot JR

    I Shot JR Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,621
    1,765
    Feb 17, 2012
    It would cost upwards of 500k to acquire the rights to such a fight so I'd have my doubts about terrestrial coverage.
     
  10. Big Dunk

    Big Dunk Rob Palmer Full Member

    13,522
    0
    Oct 25, 2010
    Sky's remit for 2012 was to keep 100,000 customers that try to leae.

    Having Haye on PPV is not more important than that.
     
  11. gasman

    gasman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,159
    4
    May 16, 2009
    It was widely reported after their last PPV that they would be moving away from PPVs indefinitely.

    There are two clear reasons for them to be interested in the Haye-Vitali fight:

    1. £££
    2. A defensive strategy to prevent other channels receiving a much needed boost from PPV sales.
     
  12. gasman

    gasman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,159
    4
    May 16, 2009
    Who said it was more important than that? Lucrative PPVs have always been a part of Sky's business model.
     
  13. gasman

    gasman Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,159
    4
    May 16, 2009
    He doesnt deserve a fight with Vitali either, he should have one or two fights then Vitali, but the boxing business isnt about what anyone deserves....
     
  14. tdw

    tdw Active Member Full Member

    1,368
    0
    May 1, 2009
    I think the anti-Haye stuff Sky are pushing now is what makes it harder for them to show it. I honestly don't think they'd put it on PPV but regular Sky as a 'make-up' is possible.

    Are Primetime really a factor in boxing anymore? Will be fascinated where the Pacquaio-Bradley fight ends up because that will tell us how serious PT are and how much Boxnation are willing to spend.
     
  15. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    Haye won't care about 'making up' with anyone this is a one fight thing, I guarantee win,lose or draw he doesn't fight again.