Boycott primetime!

If those fights only ruined Primetime because Primetime chose to charge £15 then there's no risk for anyone else. If there is no PPV outlet then my guess is Top Rank/Golden Boy/whoever would simply sell the fight to the highest bidder as far as UK TV rights are concerned, I can't see them just not allowing it to be shown in the UK if PPV wasn't an option. Surely they'd take the best offer they got rather than getting no fee from the UK at all which means that Sky and Boxnation pay whatever the fight is worth to them as a non-PPV offering and we get the card including with our subscription fee.

Primetime was handy when they were picking up cards that Sky wouldn't show, for example Froch fights in the S6, but when they start taking cards that Sky would have shown as part of standard subs and charging £15 a pop it becomes an issue. We're not getting anything better for our extra outlay here so competition in the market place is making things substantially worse as far as Primetime go.

I will pay for Boxnation if it turns out to be all it's hyped up to be because we'll be getting a hell of a lot for £10 p/m. However, £15 for one average card at 4am with largely predictable outcomes is a **** deal and I wish they'd **** off.

 

Lol thank you for the thought! But if rhyming 'venus' with '*****' and rambling about my being a 'multi' is as bad as it gets, I reckon I can batten down the hatches and get through it.

I'll have to bow to your greater knowledge of the various stages and incarnations of the Khan negotiations, but my original point holds: the presence of Primetime does not suddenly mean that other broadcasters who would otherwise have shown us a slew of great fights for free now will not. I believe that competition is good for the sport and, therefore, ultimately good for the fans even if we must go through a period of adjustment in the meantime. We used to complain that there was not enough boxing on television. Now we look like having a lot of boxing on television, and suddenly many fans simply transfer the complaint to the cost issue. Or disapproval of the choice of pundit/commentator. Or the picture quality. Or whatever. I am simply happy that the coverage exists, and would rather have it and pay for it than not have it at all. You disagree with me, that is cool too. Discussion groups - and sport, frankly - would be a lot more dull if we all agreed all of the time.

I do particularly disagree with you that McCloskey is as big an opponent as Peterson, though! A lot of people in the UK did not know McCloskey prior to the Khan fight, let alone in the States.

 

its the newer fans that tend to think this way because its what they are accustomed to, very good post :good

 

Fights*

No . I call it trying to justify the odd PPV. I felt Mayweather-Ortiz, along with the card was Pay per view worthy. I debated my argument for it, but I never said I was FOR all big cards to be PPV, but what would you know. You can barely type, let alone read.

 

Whereas the older fans remember when you didn't have to pay a Sky subscription to watch British title fights.

Times change.

 

Quite right. There are all sorts of things in life that cost more these days than they used to, or cost where they used to be free, or where we now have limits where once none existed. The world constantly moves on and changes, markets and industries grow and shrink, appear and disappear. We can't reasonably expect one aspect of life to remain in aspic simply because it suits our localized interest.

As a fight fan, of course I would rather watch everything for free. That is not on the table, so I am glad that within the modern context - where some people would simply ban boxing altogether - I have viewing options that really aren't prohibitively expensive.

 

History again shows they are quite prepared to cut the UK out, if they feel the money is not right: Whitaker/Chavez...

Boxing is a very expensive sport, if you think £15 to watch a fight is a bad deal, you living in cloud cuckoo land.

Even if you take out transport costs, Hotel fees and spending money, you would still need more than £15 to buy a ticket for the poorest seat in the house, of a so called "average card".

This is not football, the sport is very specialised and lacks mainstream appeal for all but a very, very few fights, thus it has expensive overheads that are paid for by you and me, as Promoters are in it for a profit, not the love of the sport.

Remember unlike so many other sports on SKY, boxing still takes the majority of monies it makes though those who attended the fight. Unless there is a profit to be made, why would a Promoter let a fight be shown on TV, if it is going to affect his attendance?

Boxing is not like Rugby (League and Union), Cricket or even to a point Football, that are subsidised by SKY to make up the schedule, knowing that monies made though live attendance are a bonus rather than a necessity to keep the sports going.

 

Sky ? Never not me always hated NEWS INT

Primetime : Only channel I can watch so i am right behind them.

Boxnation and Premier would subscribe but they are not on Virgin.

 

From my POV this BoxNation thing is great - the only sport I watch is boxing so I'd rather pay a tenner for a channel dedicated solely to that then for a whole heap of other **** that I'll never watch on Sky Sports.

 

Same here. I watch Liverpool games down the pub, other than that its just boxing for me.

 

I can read thanks,my writing is sloppy because i usually write it when im at work or on my htc but your a khan nuthugger and if he said by anthrax,you would buy anthrax

 

But you also think that I am venusdiablo, so your opinion has already been outed on this thread as pretty shaky.

 

Its still an opnion,end of the day loads if folk have multi,dunno.why ***** diablo would be any diffrence !

 

But given that I know that I am not a multi, I know your opinion is wide of the mark, which devalues your other posts. Indeed, anyone reading my posts and venus' would get that they are written by two different people, our prose style is entirely different. I disagree with you because I think you are wrong, not because I am a Primetime employee with an agenda. I don't know anything about venusdiablo whatsoever.

But the fact that you also call him ***** suggests that we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

Primetime=Robbing ****s