Sky Box Office

But how many of these attendees will be young football fans who have absolutely no clue about boxing but watch anything with AJ and young girls who also know absolutely nothing about the sport but are going because they think AJ is hot? Attendances don't mean ****. Haye-Bellew will probably do bigger PPV numbers than Brook-Spence. But which is the better fight?

 

I laugh at this attitude. Of course most boxing fans became fans to see a technical points win between two dull speakers right?

 

I thought it was clear the ISIS part was a little tongue in cheek.

I don't pay for Sky either; none of my money goes to Virgin media or anything like that either. AJ-Wlad is fine as PPV, no problem with that. But fights like Haye-Bellew is PPV simply because of the audience PPV tends to attract. "Ah look big names; I'm happy to pay extra for this" and thus encourages more fights that can sell as opposed to just good cards with world class fighters against each other.

That said, we still have it better than in the US

 

Of course you can argue with PPV. It's just a model. How do you think Klit has earnt millions without ever doing a PPV in Germany? RTL. Different model. Hearn and Sky's interest is to say if not on PPV no fight. It's called exploitation. He doesn't have the intelligence to grow boxing etc he's just drying the well out like all working class bourgeoisie capatalists. Hopefully Haye KOs AJ and Wilder and him and Schaefer get the next Sky contract. If you care about your fighters you wouldn't let Bellew go in against Haye. He can't win and could be seriously hurt. But who gives a **** as long as long as we all get rich... him and his Dad are such base morons.

 

If you think the Wlad fight is a forgone conclusion then I suggest you put whatever money you have on him at 2/1 odds.

 

How is it a unification?
VLAD lost all his belts in his last fight to Fury, he has no belts.
AJ's belt was bought off a pothead for $8m, after Fury chucked it in a bin.

This is not a unification, its a paper title fight for two of Fury's discarded baubles.

 

I will be doing don't you worry I'm just waiting for the fickle khunts to throw more money at josh I can see it possible going to 3/1
We will see

 

Klitchko had a stinker against Fury, a regular old fashioned bad day at the office. For that reason alone I think the only way is up against Joshua and he will come and perform at something close to the best of his current ability. The real question is what he has left at 40+...

I think he has a great chance of winning this fight, and I think Joshua is the underdog.

 

you wouldn't get the big fights if it wasn't for PPV.
the fights wouldn't generate enough money to pay the fighters what their promoters want them to pay.

simple.

it was made that way by the promoters not the fighters.
Hearn can be to blame but i will probably buy them all.

 

Please compare the Haye vs Bellew PPV to the CEJ vs Quinlan and justify how the Haye vs Bellew PPV is 70% more expensive yet there is minimal outrage in comparison?

 

Haye vs Bellew > CEJ vs Quinlan
In terms of meaningfulness and competitiveness the CEJ vs Quinlan fight is probably the better fight but Haye and Bellew are both big names, especially Haye

Malignaggi vs Eggington < Price vs Hammer
Who really wants to watch two feather fists when you can see Pricey go to war!!!!

Davies vs Mathews < Ryder vs Etches
Davies will annihilate the always dull Mathews, at least Ryder vs Etches was a 50/50

Selby vs Gago < Selby vs Diale
The young Selby had a step up in class, the old Selby is having a stay busy fight

Cheeseman/Taylor < Kongo/Galahad
Nuff said

 

NOT TRUE. There have been plenty of huge fights in history not on PPV. You can put it on terrestrial on sat night guaranteeing huge audiences for huge paying advertisers. PPV is a model, nothing else. Its like saying you can't have Federer v Djokovic play unless its on PPV. Its bull****. Everyone eats up everything these tosspot promoters say like its gospel. People used to say smoking was good for you....

 

The assumption that high ratings guarantees the necessary advertising revenues to pay for a fight is ridiculous.

1. It's not just the rating which appeals to advertisers but the demographic.

2. So a main even is when the ratings will peak. Now in that 36 mins of action how where is the slot for advertisers? 10 secs in between rounds?

The only way huge fights are not on ppv is if the network pays the rights fees to make the fight happen. It won't happen though!!!

 

yeah i can't see how itv ( lets face it only game in town) could get ppv revenue. 1 million buys at 16 quid a pop is for a HUGE ppv its hard to see how ITV could get that much advertising revenue AND make money on top of that.

 

huge fights back in the day. not in the last 5 to 10 years though really.

f*ck other sports tho, we're talking about boxing.
Soccer/football (the correct name) is not ppv and its the biggest sport in the world. You cant watch tennis in the uk (apart from wimbledon) without having to pay extra for the sports services, the same as football.

sky sports just about makes a card without it being on ppv, but the fights are not big money or massive fights. Usually up and comers moving their way through rankings or fighters for weaker titles/weight categories.

but as it stands they need to be on ppv. fact