i suppose no point bitching about it saying saying its not ppv worthy as im sure they will get enough buys and thats whats it all about, will have to try get a decent stream
Was happy to pay for the Froch fight but will watch this down the pub. No way I'm paying £15 to watch Fury. Guy's not even top 5 in the division and simply doesn't deserve a big pay day.
I can understand why they've made this PPV. Like them or not, the pair of them will sell the fight and it'll do decent numbers. The interesting thing will be what impact this has on Froch. He'll want PPV again for the payday, but it will be pushing it if Sky do 2 PPV's back to back. This could force their hand in making the Groves fight as that's not PPV worthy at this stage.
Froch v Kessler 3 is not pay per view worthy imo! Kessler is shot and Froch beat a much watered down version, the Kessler that fought Calzaghe would have schooled him!
think they were starting to talk about end of nov / dec for froch next so its a bit of a gap. they are desperate to keep froch ppv and with groves they will be able to get away with it
Down the pub for me too, Already had enough interest off mates who don't usually bother with boxing so that won't be a problem. Had 3 txtx off people usually not bothered 'are we going to Fury v Haye' my answer was 'nah can't really be arsed, I'd rather go Ryder v Saunders week before'. Think that puzzled most of em!
Does anyone no what eddie/matchrooms involvement is in this?? At the press conference on the board behind them there is a hayemaker logo aswell as hennessy sports,park plaza and sky sports box office. Eddie looks invovled on twitter but matchroom is not on the boards?!?!
just actually heard its eddie that is working for hayemaker on this one! Good old david has employed eddie haha
Haye signed a 4 fight promotional deal with Matchroom at the end of April (the Charr fight was to be the first).