Breakdown of ppv

Who is going to pay them a mill each without ppv? U?

People just have to get on with it. I personally think a ppv should have the main fight with a title on the line. But these guys are not taking these sort of risks without a meaningful pay packet.

 

Firstly, do I think Parker-Whyte would have been made off PPV? No. Simply because Parker will have wanted over a million to make it worth his while, especially given what he earned in the Joshua fight. All that being said, who was crying out for this fight before it was made? No one and therein lies the problem. Does it help clear up the Heavyweight landscape? Not really. Was it a final eliminator for a world title? No. The reason we got it is because Matchroom told us it was happening.

THE ONLY THING THAT MADE THE FIGHT (I have to emphasise because this is key) is that Sky/Matchroom need a quota of around 6 PPVs a year and outside of AJ, Hearn doesn't have enough individual stars to headline that number on their own. So he gets creative. That is why Eddie was desperate to make his own 'eliminator for AJ' fight with Whyte v Wilder because that ticks a PPV box. Wilder told him to do one so he went the Whyte-Parker route instead. Now he will try and push Whyte-Wilder again because he can get a PPV out of that. Obviously AJ gets him two a year no matter who he is fighting.

The fact that last night was enjoyable is irrelevant, because it was garbage on paper. People will alway buy the PPVs for all sorts of reasons (because they don't care about the cost and are happy to pay, because Sky ram it down our throats, because its cheaper than a night in pub). In all fairness, everyone has the right to make their own decisions; there is no correct answer. However, the arguments of 'don't buy it if you don't want to' don't hold up. We get barely any content on Sky as it is, Ringside has been axed and its all just promos and propaganda. We have to consider we are already paying for Sky Sports. I would have no issue with the 6 PPVs if they were up to scratch but they are not. These are not fights demanded or even suggested by the public. They are created by Matchroom and then spoon fed to us. Saturday's card was a disgrace but they got away with it and have before regardless of end quality (see Bellew-Cleverley 2 or both Haye v Bellew cards).

Personally, I am sick of it. Sick of Hearn's mug because he knows he is ripping us off, sick of the fact that good domestic bouts are binned off for silver belts or equivalent, sick of the Matchroom boys biased analysis and commentary each week, sick of Sky trying to monetise the sport because they can't pay the bills v BT. I'm sick of Warren and Boxnation/BT as well.

Its a shambles.

 

Firstly, do I think Parker-Whyte would have been made off PPV? No. Simply because Parker will have wanted over a million to make it worth his while, especially given what he earned in the Joshua fight. All that being said, who was crying out for this fight before it was made? No one and therein lies the problem. Does it help clear up the Heavyweight landscape? Not really. Was it a final eliminator for a world title? No. The reason we got it is because Matchroom told us it was happening.

THE ONLY THING THAT MADE THE FIGHT (I have to emphasise because this is key) is that Sky/Matchroom need a quota of around 6 PPVs a year and outside of AJ, Hearn doesn't have enough individual stars to headline that number on their own. So he gets creative. That is why Eddie was desperate to make his own 'eliminator for AJ' fight with Whyte v Wilder because that ticks a PPV box. Wilder told him to do one so he went the Whyte-Parker route instead. Now he will try and push Whyte-Wilder again because he can get a PPV out of that. Obviously AJ gets him two a year no matter who he is fighting.

The fact that last night was enjoyable is irrelevant, because it was garbage on paper. People will alway buy the PPVs for all sorts of reasons (because they don't care about the cost and are happy to pay, because Sky ram it down our throats, because its cheaper than a night in pub). In all fairness, everyone has the right to make their own decisions; there is no correct answer. However, the arguments of 'don't buy it if you don't want to' don't hold up. We get barely any content on Sky as it is, Ringside has been axed and its all just promos and propaganda. We have to consider we are already paying for Sky Sports. I would have no issue with the 6 PPVs if they were up to scratch but they are not. These are not fights demanded or even suggested by the public. They are created by Matchroom and then spoon fed to us. Saturday's card was a disgrace but they got away with it and have before regardless of end quality (see Bellew-Cleverley 2 or both Haye v Bellew cards).

Personally, I am sick of it. Sick of Hearn's mug because he knows he is ripping us off, sick of the fact that good domestic bouts are binned off for silver belts or equivalent, sick of the Matchroom boys biased analysis and commentary each week, sick of Sky trying to monetise the sport because they can't pay the bills v BT. I'm sick of Warren and Boxnation/BT as well.

Its a shambles.

 

Someone didn't read the memo. Lol

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45000791

The war between BT and Sky is over and guess what it is not BT who won.

BT won't be competing with sky for a long time.

 

Not the point, so do your homework. Sky overpaid for Premier League and other sports like home Cricket fixtures because of BT. They have been under immense pressure to tighten up on costs. Boxing is actually a sport they can make money back outside subscriptions

 

Switch to MMA

 

this wasnt worth the money am glad for chisora but it was a trash card i mean you had two matchroom top domestic light heavys fighting trash cans instead of each on a ppv bill that was poor eddie must be laughing all the way to the bank lol