British boxing needs PPV

Jack · May 24, 2013

ero-sennin said: ↑

I don't think PPV will have that kind of impact where it increases the popularity of the sport. Every casual I know who became sucked in by the hype of the Wlad/Haye and Chisora/Haye fights then went back to their merry ways. They didn't give a **** about Bellew or Barker or Brook or anything like that. What happens when they purchase a PPV but the product turns out to be ****? Now they feel ripped off as opposed to if they didn't have to pay to watch it and it turned out to be ****.

Amir Khan fought on ITV and became mainstream. You say it won't be that widely promoted if it's on terrestrial tv. Well what about the fact that more people will be watching?
Click to expand...

Several million people watched Fury beat Chisora when they fought a few years ago, yet a few fights after that, Fury was fighting in a barn in Somerset despite him being a charismatic, undefeated rising heavyweight. TV ratings are great but there's not enough money in those numbers alone for the TV companies to make money, which is why Channel 5 show a couple of fights a year and both ITV and the BBC have dropped boxing.

It's all about money. If boxing is profitable, TV companies will show it and the only way for boxing to be profitable right now is through Sky Box Office. Because Sky can make millions from boxing - and a fight like Hatton/Mayweather made Sky a massive amount - they're doing to do their all to make sure that the sport is covered in the mainstream. The bigger individual events like Froch/Kessler are, the better it is for the sport as a whole because the Sky hype for one fight has a knock on effect onto the rest of the industry.

dftaylor · May 24, 2013

Jack said: ↑

Several million people watched Fury beat Chisora when they fought a few years ago, yet a few fights after that, Fury was fighting in a barn in Somerset despite him being a charismatic, undefeated rising heavyweight. TV ratings are great but there's not enough money in those numbers alone for the TV companies to make money, which is why Channel 5 show a couple of fights a year and both ITV and the BBC have dropped boxing.

It's all about money. If boxing is profitable, TV companies will show it and the only way for boxing to be profitable right now is through Sky Box Office. Because Sky can make millions from boxing - and a fight like Hatton/Mayweather made Sky a massive amount - they're doing to do their all to make sure that the sport is covered in the mainstream. The bigger individual events like Froch/Kessler are, the better it is for the sport as a whole because the Sky hype for one fight has a knock on effect onto the rest of the industry.
Click to expand...

Oh my...

How do you find the strength to keep writing this stuff? It makes no economic sense whatsoever.

HOF · May 24, 2013

dftaylor said: ↑

Murdoch's empire is finding new media a bit of a challenge. The paywall for its news media has been a disaster, cutting readership dramatically.
Click to expand...

Yes the number of hits on The Times website must be abysmal

ero-sennin · May 24, 2013

Jack said: ↑

Several million people watched Fury beat Chisora when they fought a few years ago,

and there you have it. You want the sport to become mainstream, and if it really did those numbers, it's just become more mainstream.

yet a few fights after that, Fury was fighting in a barn in Somerset despite him being a charismatic, undefeated rising heavyweight. TV ratings are great but there's not enough money in those numbers alone for the TV companies to make money, which is why Channel 5 show a couple of fights a year and both ITV and the BBC have dropped boxing.

It's all about money. If boxing is profitable, TV companies will show it and the only way for boxing to be profitable right now is through Sky Box Office. Because Sky can make millions from boxing - and a fight like Hatton/Mayweather made Sky a massive amount - they're doing to do their all to make sure that the sport is covered in the mainstream.

Like Rico said, coverage doesn't always mean people are interested. Yeah these guys are shoving it down our throats but how many of us will buy the PPV? How many will be genuinely interested? You are now talking about what will make the most money as opposed to what will make the sport more mainstream and popular. Hatton and Mayweather...well you have to consider the fact that they are superstars. That was a genuine mega fight. Kessler Froch is nowhere close to that.

The bigger individual events like Froch/Kessler are, the better it is for the sport as a whole because the Sky hype for one fight has a knock on effect onto the rest of the industry.

PPV is not better for the sport as a whole. It may be better for Sky/Hearn/the fighters themselves but to say it's better for the sport? I don't buy that argument. Audience is reduced. Audience expects a high quality product due to having paid for it, and if the product doesn't live up to expectations?...
Click to expand...

Answers in bold mate

Uncle Rico · May 25, 2013

ero-sennin said: ↑

PPV is not better for the sport as a whole. It may be better for Sky/Hearn/the fighters themselves but to say it's better for the sport? I don't buy that argument. Audience is reduced. Audience expects a high quality product due to having paid for it, and if the product doesn't live up to expectations?...
Click to expand...

Ultimately, this.

Froch-Kessler isn't a PPV worthy event in the way Hatton-May and Hatton-Pac were. Neither fighter are superstars to merit such a status.

Laikaka · May 25, 2013

I'm more interested in the need to curb the greed and excess in boxing than paying more. Huge amounts of money going to the sanctioning bodies and mere ring announcers that get flown in and paid £20,000. An utter **** take. If boxers want more money how about the novel idea of actually fighting more than twice a year?...and raising their profile in the process.

Claypole · May 25, 2013

Laikaka said: ↑

I'm more interested in the need to curb the greed and excess in boxing than paying more. Huge amounts of money going to the sanctioning bodies and mere ring announcers that get flown in and paid £20,000. An utter **** take. If boxers want more money how about the novel idea of actually fighting more than twice a year?...and raising their profile in the process.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think it was for the Wlad fight the other week and they had Bruce Buffer as the MC. That's fine, but they felt the need to have another announcer there just to introduce Buffer.

Log in or Sign up

British boxing needs PPV

Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

dftaylor Writer, fanatic Full Member

HOF Well-Known Member Full Member

ero-sennin Boxing Addict Full Member

Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

Laikaka Active Member Full Member

Claypole Boxing Addict banned

Log in or Sign up

Forums

British boxing needs PPV

Jack Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

dftaylor Writer, fanatic Full Member

HOF Well-Known Member Full Member

ero-sennin Boxing Addict Full Member

Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

Laikaka Active Member Full Member

Claypole Boxing Addict banned