Eddie Hearn inconsistent on PPV?

Quote:

Hearn... told The Daily Telegraph: "We want to keep Carl on Sky Box Office in the UK..."

***********.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/boxing/10137578/Carl-Froch-handed-four-superfights-by-HBO-as-defeat-of-Mikkel-Kessler-makes-America-sit-up-and-take-notice.html


Eddie Hearn previously said:

“That’s important, [Haye’s first fight with Matchroom to be on Sky Sports] especially with our mission because fan perception of what we’re doing is important, we don’t want them to think: ‘Oh, Froch-Kessler’s pay-per-view so that’s how it is going to go now,’ — it isn’t,” answered Hearn when asked if putting Haye on Sky Sports was an indication that the powers-that-be won’t milk the PPV teat dry.

“Froch and Kessler is a freak fight that comes around once in many years, especially in the U.K., so when we signed David people came out and said it would be another pay-per-view, but it isn’t — what I’m saying is that pay-per-view should be for something very, very special. Haye on normal Sky Sports will do massive numbers, and that’s paramount to what I’m trying to do on Sky.”



"Froch and Kessler is a freak fight that comes around once in many years"

"we don’t want them to think: ‘Oh, Froch-Kessler’s pay-per-view so that’s how it is going to go now,’ — it isn’t,”"

"what I’m saying is that pay-per-view should be for something very, very special"



But now they want to keep Froch on PPV? All Carl Froch fights now are "very very special"?


I got the impression from what Hearn was saying before that PPV would only be used rarely. I'm tempted to say that Hearn isn't living up to what he said, but is going down the "milk the fans" path.

I know regular Sky Sports doesn't pay that much, so it's kind of understandable that they want to use Sky Box Office. (And you can argue it's needed to make certain fights happen.)

But when Sky have cut back on their boxing anyway, and to then make you pay extra...

 

Yes, we shouldn't expect Eddie Hearn to live up to what he said...