Matchroom and Boxnation promoting PPV theft......Don't they know it will backfire on them!!!!

I have watched a number of interviews and podcasts etc where the likes of Hearn, Warren and Bunce have almost been gloating about the amount of fans illegally streaming ITV PPV. In some cases they have even directed fans to platforms where they can illegally stream the fight!!!!

These fans will just use the same platforms to steal their fights lol, are they this deluded that it wont happen to them??? Especially since they are promoting this illegal theft and actually directing fans to platforms where they can stream?

 

It's time fans rebel against PPV, just quit watching that rip-off. Void/Conor fight will be $100 in America, no way will I pay for that fight even if it's $10!

 

but the fights sky put on ppv are actually worth paying for, eubank abraham for the ibo belt should never be on ppv thats why so many streamed it. Sky still get hundreds of thousands of buys without the amount of tight arses that stream it.

 

There is a new mug born every day and some make it to this forum

Surely you must have noticed that 90% of Sky PPVs are stonkers and could not have missed some of the classic stinkers including

Joshua v Martin
Joshua v Breazeale
Brook v Gavin
Fury v Klitschko
Bellew v Cleverley
Haye v Fraudley
Haye v Klitschko
Khan v McCloskey
Frampton v Quigg
Mayweather v Pac

Nor forgetting some of the older classics including Mike Tyson v Julius Francis

Yes every one above worth every penny

 

Brook vs Gavin was one of the most stacked cards Britain has ever seen, not sure why you are listing that alongside shite like Frampton/Quigg, Bellew/Cleverly and Haye/Fraudley

 

Hearn is really only being propped up by Joshua PPVs - if AJ loses fast Eddie will soon be 'Darts Eddie'...

Warren is desperate to get in on the action but doesn't have the fighters yet and often can't be trusted to organise a show in the modern era like matchroom

Floyd / Connor is likely to be a joke with a rubbish undercard they don't won't to announce as its so going to be so crap - I'm expecting a major turn off from future PPVs especially from casuals if it plays out how I expect.

 

The new mug born is you mate.
- Maybe i should have been more clear but i meant matchroom ppv cards and specifically the last 2 years.
Just because it's ppv doesn't mean the fight is gonna be like ward vs gatti,
- Mayweather vs Pac: a fight which holds the ppv record and there wan't many people complaing that it shouldnt be ppv, yes the fight didnt live up but no one new that before the fight happend.
Frampton vs Quigg - a undefeated british unification fight
- Khan vs McCloskey - i don't beleive that was promoted by matchroom.
- Haye vs Klitschko - A unification heavyweight title fight involving a uk fighter isn't ppv worthy?
- Haye vs Fraudley - yes this was a disaster
- Bellew vs Cleverly - another poor fight
- Fury vs Wlad - not promoted by matchroom
- Brook vs Gavin - One of the best cards in recent years
- Joshua vs Breazele - any fight with Aj is PPV so get over it
- Joshua vs Martin - AJ chalenging for first world title. and any fight with Aj is PPV so get over it.

So yes some ppv fights are stinkers but no one knows that wil happen and its easy saying it was shite after the fight has happend. Which PPV's have been worth it?

 

I've said it many times before, a PPV cannot be judged retrospectively. Had to be judged as to how it looked on paper. PPV fights can't just be 'good' fights, the idea is that the only way (usually the main event) it can be paid for is by extra subsidising from the public. I moan about PPV a lot, but AJ-Wlad was one I think was justified in that sense. And even better, it delivered as a fight too.

 

i agree, ppv's should be judged before the fight, for example ggg vs canelo is definitly ppv worthy and everyone right now agrees on that, but if the fight was a snooze fest and the undercard was poor then there will be some people afterwards moaning that it shouldn't have been a ppv. But before the fight they would have said it should be on ppv. For example mayweather vs pac - everyone was hyped for it and paid for it, the fight was poor and then you get people like Jurgen above sayin it shouldn't be a ppv.

 

Right, exactly. Perhaps before your time on here but Jurgen very distinctively reminds of a poster called Pro Punter.

 

think that was before my time.

 

PPV is for fools, i learnt that a long tome ago and i was one of them, i remember first getting sky in the late 80s and used to watch all the boxing on eurosport, screensport probox etc then all of a sudden i would look forward to a certain fight then find out i had to pay extra for it, i did a few times under my own protest about how i pay my subscription fee etc etc, no more would i ever pay extra to watch ANY fight.

Can you imagine if boxing were to be broadcast on the BBC only to be told you can watch it but you have to pay extra for it, even if you have paid for your year long tv license subscription, not that i watch the BBC or pay that ********** corporation anything anyway.

Only Fools pay for it.

 

without ppv the big fights wouldn't happen and that's the way that it is unfortunately.

 

Of course they would take place, PPV is just another way of extracting more money out of people, the big fights went ahead many years ago without PPV, or are fighters these days too interested in ripping off the public rather than having a real fight, i understand totally that "Boxing" has changed and it is billed as entertainment or an event etc but the wealth should be spread to all fighters, not just the select who are deemed PPV worthy, which in todays climate none are worth paying for other than a bog standard subscription, it is no wonder people stream these things, and who can blame them when you consider some of the shti that has been broadcast lately.

 

When you can sell out a 90 thousand seat stadium (AJ) i think it's acceptable to be on PPV because of the level of interest there is around him