Box Nation subscription

Just for asking that question, you should expect a letter from his solicitor.

 

I don't think it's a good idea to further marginalise an already highly marginalised sport.

Primetime might get good numbers for Khan but that's because Khan has already built up a fan base and the general public have an interest in him. Do any of Frank's fighters have a following?

I'd like to know how Frank plans to bring new fans into the sport.

 

I think it can be looked at in a few ways:

1. For the 'hardcore' boxing fan, it is a channel dedicated to the sport you love, with the opportunity to watch more live fights than has previously been on offer.

2. For up and coming fighters, it gives them exposure to the 'real' boxing fans, and could result in them being kept busy. One criticism of up and coming fighters, has been inactivity caused by commercial pressures: Box Nation may change that as it will be in the channel's interest to have more fights, rather than a few PPV a year.

3. In the long term, limiting your audience seems rather counter intuitive. If boxing viewing is restricted, that can't be good for the future of the sport as it becomes more niche.

 

They need to try and get it available on freeview rather than just Sky or Virgin.

 

That attitude of some people is shocking. Real commitment and investment has been shown by recruiting what looks like a fairly decent presenting team.
Why don't people understand that terrestrial are not interested, and that this kind of fee based channel is the way forward. I subscribe to espn for the football. I hate American football, I hate baseball and any other sport the ****ing yanks do apart from boxing. But I'll always pay for it because I love football. I love boxing even more. I want to see fights, and I think anyone who is prepared to go to tge lengths wazza has to set up a channel to bring regular bouts and classic fights, do deals with foreign promotors, invest in a good crew and presenting team, and get bunceys hour back on deserves a level of commitment from the same boxing fans who want more live fights and a presence on tv to show there is someone who understands to a point what a modern boxing fan wants

 

I will be subcribing because I am a huge boxing fan and will pay to watch pretty much any boxing, but I do not feel it's a good idea as 99% of the country are not huge boxing fans.

My main concern from a personal point of view is that the production levels will be low. No HD, poor sound quality. I do not think that Frank VVarren is the right person to be at the top when it comes to creating something new an inovative. He is frankly to old school and consistantly fails to listen to the opinions of fans. A show of his that you went to in 1990 is exactly the same as one you go to today right down to the music thats played inbetween fights. The logo's look naff and the choice of presenters (Keys/Dempsey/Rosential) sends the wrong message to the new generation of fans the sport needs to attract. Basically Frank's live shows should look like your watching the UFC but with boxing. I fear we will instead have a what looks like a dodgy youtube stream. It also looks to me like they rushed into putting this together. I would imagine VVarrens initial plan would have been to launch the channel once his Sky deal was up.

In regards to how it helps boxing and the boxers there two ways to look at it. His fighters, some of the best prospects in the country, will be fighting more reguarly. This can only help there development as fighters. In terms of exposure it can only damage them being tucked away on a niech sport channel.

The success of the channel in the short term amognts the hardscore boxing fans depends on the number of US shows its brings over that we would not have seen otherwise.

The press confrence to announce the channel was alarming. They claimed theres 5million boxing fans in this country, most of them are young people. We call know this is nonsense.

For boxing fans, I would say enjoy having a dedicated boxing channel while it lasts. It seems there allot of venture capital investment behind the channel, but in the current ecenomic climate they will need to see a return quickly and if the channel doesn't show huge potentual within a year the plug will be pulled. You have to think even if the channel gained 50,000 subscribers at £10pm it would only be generate £500,000 in revenue. Once you take away the costs of running the channel does it leave enough of a budget to fund the 2-3 live cards a week. I just don't see it.

As long as they deliver on there promises of 2-3 live shows per week it will keep the hardcare happy, but there simply not enough of us to keep a tv channel afloat.

Rob Palmer

 

Well Vano I havent really had too much to say about BoxNation since its inception mainly because I dont have the facilities to subscribe to it. I will however say this

From a hardcore fans point of view it is a good development. Basically most of the top fighters and prospects in the country that are under ******s banner will now be fighting more regularly should it all go to plan. In the short term it looks like we will get more fights both from home and abroad. The price will also be considerably less than if they were PPV's.

However it has to be seen ultimately as a bad thing for the sport in terms of exposure in the same way that moving boxing from ITV to SKY marginalised the sport no longer did we get the millions for big fights it was thousands. You can only assume that the same thing will occur here. Without the backing of Sky Sports News and and major national media outlet. How does boxing fare? The casual fan is alienated further if a PPV worthy fight does occur now will people go through the hassle of subscribing for a channel that may have a minimum of 3months contract on it. I doubt it. Similarly will a pub on a saturday night subscribe extra for Boxnation on a so that they can thrown on the boxing on a Saturday night? No

This will clearly have a knock on effect throughout Sky as well. With boxing availabale elsewhere they will most likely just scrap the extra dates when contracts are renewed which will mean less "free" boxing on Sky. On a bigger scale we are now further away from boxing returning to terrestrial television for big fights than ever with. Big names such as Degale Groves etc confined to a small place somwehere in the Sky listings.

 

Rob you miss some crucial points. Advertising revenue. Right being sold to other countries. There are other revenue streams available. We have to accept boxing needs to be paid for.
In regards to having an old school team. What's wrong with that? Rosenthal, keys and Dempsey are class acts, good interviewers and don't take any ****.

If it goes tits up it goes tits up. For the time being I'm going to applaud the efforts made to give us what we want. A ****ing boxing channel

 

I hear what you are saying Avid but i have to admit I do wonder about the financial viability of the project. As you mentioned there are some upsides to having your own channel you can charge for advertising revenues and keep the lot and the same again with the international rights to the shows.

HOWEVER

50k subscribers would give him a budget of per week of a Sky FFN and they arent of a top standard so I do wonder how he wil be able to fund the really big fights which he needs the world title fights and the lads on the big contracts. This is all before he pays for the production costs which must be pretty substantial and on top of that the salaries of Bunce Rosenthal Keys etc wont come cheap.

It all depends on how many people will subscribe ultimately its a big gamble 100k and he is laughing imo 10k and he is in trouble. How do you gauge how many people will pay £120 a year for just a boxing channel in a recession?

 

The advertising revenue will be limited on a subscription channel. Even in setantas heydey the advertisments were just car insurance and laywers who pay next to nothing.

In terms of rights being sold to other countries thats also a limited amount. Any deal which Fwank does for a world title fight with a forgeigner will involve them having the opponent owning there own countrys tv rights, and none of Fwanks fighters are big enough stars to attract an audience outside of the UK.

Do you mind me asking how old you are? I am 25. Its my personal belief that a major problem with boxing in this country is that its fanbase is to old and its failing to attract younger, new fans. If you look at the UFC in terms of productions its so crisp, everything outside of the in ring action is fantastic. Having a guy like Joe Rogan who relates to the audience. I honestly beleive a young 25-30 year old presenter would have been the route to go down. Lets be real theres a reason why Dempsey and Rosential were not getting the big gigs on Sky and ITV anymore. And either way why would you need all 3?

I agree with you on the final point, I just beleive theres ways of preventing it from inevitably going tits up and there not doing that right now.

 

While i wont be buying it, i can see why people like the idea of it. I mean 7 days a week boxing on tv is a good thing??


But it will do nothing to promote the sport to joe public, and will do nothing to entice a new generation of fans. The casual fan is won over by watching a popular fighter succeed in the mainstream and this will never do that. Boxing wont crossover into the mainstream on ppv or dedicated tv channels. simple

 

if the station does go ahead and get the majority of big boxing promoters on its side,

then i hate to admit it, i will be subscribe to it, not because i want to, but simply because i have to.

on the other hand. if its only frank ****** and that dodgy cross dressing ******* De La Hoya on it, then ill happily stick the channel where the sun dont shine.

 

****** tennis?

 

It seems that the MODs moved my thread here (they allow 50 threads on PAC/May ducking, and how Great the Klits are on the General). So all answers directed here please

 

Agreed, oh but make sure you broadcast it live